Great Western Coffee Shop

All across the Great Western territory => Across the West => Topic started by: willc on July 22, 2009, 22:45:15



Title: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 22, 2009, 22:45:15
It's official - and since the minister has broken the embargo the likes of me were told to observe I can let the rest of you know before the morning.

Lord Adonis's article in The Times is here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6723747.ece

From what I have been told, the GWML project will be in three phases, don't know how these break down yet, but perhaps Reading, Oxford, Newbury area first, then on to Bristol and finally Cardiff and Swansea. I say this because Adonis hints that the extra Thames Valley DMUs will now be EMUs instead - which may account for the delay to the order and the disappearance of 40-odd FGW vehicles from the tally Roger Ford keeps, which was mentioned in the Portsmouth-Cardiff thread. These DMUs were slated for a late 2012 or early 2013 delivery anyway, so you could probably have made some headway on wiring the Thames Valley by then ready for EMUs in their place.

At present, they are budgeting ^ ^ ^ ^1.1bn for GMWL work and Liverpool to Manchester on the classic George Stephenson route via Rainhill, so a nice nod to Brunel and Britain's other key railway pioneer.

PS One thing I did forget earlier is the age of Oxford's signals - have to wonder it would be worth immunising kit that is due to be torn out by 2015 or so.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on July 22, 2009, 23:14:56

A key item that should protect GWML (and MML) electrification against the coming 20% spending cuts is that the BCR's (Computed benefits/nett costs) are "infinite", in accountancy terms, as the nett costs are less than zero, it being cheaper to electrify over a given service life than to keep buying MTU power units.

Pity it's taken 12 years for Labour to be true to itself.

Thank you Gordon (although weren't your Blair's Chancellor?).

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IanC on July 22, 2009, 23:15:17
It was the main story of Today's (Wednesday) BBC Points West about electrification, where it was stated it would take up to 8 years to complete with the South Wales Main Line also expected to be 'converted'.

More would be revealed on Thursday's show they said.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on July 22, 2009, 23:16:53
Great news, though one can only hope that the project survives the likely change of government next year. Adonis talks of it starting immediately, though as we know, that won't mean the first support foundations being piled next week. I can't see any work starting on the ground before the election, so it would be an easy project to can (unlike Crossrail where there seems a concerted effort to start boring the tunnels early next year, making cancellation very difficult).

So what will be the most difficult bits? Tunnels presumably - I guess the work required in the Severn Tunnel would make Swindon - Kemble redoubling a done deal given the need for ST blockages. Any others need lowering? A closure at Box could mean the reinstatement of Bradford North curve.  

 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 23, 2009, 08:09:50
Great news, though one can only hope that the project survives the likely change of government next year. Adonis talks of it starting immediately, though as we know, that won't mean the first support foundations being piled next week. I can't see any work starting on the ground before the election, so it would be an easy project to can (unlike Crossrail where there seems a concerted effort to start boring the tunnels early next year, making cancellation very difficult).

So what will be the most difficult bits? Tunnels presumably - I guess the work required in the Severn Tunnel would make Swindon - Kemble redoubling a done deal given the need for ST blockages. Any others need lowering? A closure at Box could mean the reinstatement of Bradford North curve.  

The route has been survived with a HD video, which parts of this I have seen, this is giving the designers enough information so they can target areas that need more detailed surveying before outline designs are made, this HD video gave the NR team sufficient detail to give DfT the cost of the electrification.   There are a few tough areas for equipment but far fewer than when the WCML was done 40 years ago.

The work may not be done in a linear way, that is you may see foundations being put in say between Didcot and Swindon and then left and then foundation being put in somewhere else then the masts might go up.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: jakemonkfish on July 23, 2009, 09:15:20
Local news was reporting london to bristol parkway and on to Waleswith a connection to Temple Meads - if this is correct then Swindon-Bristol via Bath and the B&H will miss out. Bath as the new Melksham...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 23, 2009, 10:01:05
The report is now on the DFT Website (http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/railelectrification.pdf).



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on July 23, 2009, 10:27:28
Local news was reporting london to bristol parkway and on to Waleswith a connection to Temple Meads - if this is correct then Swindon-Bristol via Bath and the B&H will miss out. Bath as the new Melksham...

the DfT report (which has a photo of HST at Bath Spa on the front of it) shows the route through Bath and Box tunnel as part of the electrification plans


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 23, 2009, 10:49:40
(http://premium1.uploadit.org/ChrisCornwall3/News/GWML.jpg)
Planned Routes


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: bemmy on July 23, 2009, 10:58:59
Excellent news.... I didn't really believe they would do it, so for the first time in years my cynicism about something has turned out to be wrong!  ;D

The DfT have said that they are now considering extending Crossrail to Reading as it will be electrified anyway, presumably this will get the go-ahead unless they are completely crazy.

Overall though I think they are still being too cautious -- assuming London-Sheffield goes ahead, surely it would be daft not to add sensible infill projects such as Oxford - Birmingham, Bristol - Birmingham - Derby, Sheffield - Leeds and York, Transpennine routes, etc. Especially now that, by authorising Liverpool - Manchester, they've broken the rule that all electrified mainlines lead to London.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 23, 2009, 11:00:38
Lord Adonis on the BBC new website

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8164070.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8164070.stm)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Andy on July 23, 2009, 11:05:04
Very good news! Would anyone like to speculate about what side effects are likely to result from this, in terms of stock being cascaded and surplus diesel stock being made available for other/new diagrams?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: jakemonkfish on July 23, 2009, 11:14:14
Thanks for the map - but I am now wondering if John Penrose was correct to worry about trains from Weston as long term lack of wires means all trains will either finish in Bristol or need some clever solution to get to the 'sunny south west'. This assumes that the Weston-Worle redoubling occurs, increasing access for electric trains with no power supply. If you live further out ( Highbridge, Bridgewater or Taunton, or even Devon) then what?

Yes I'm a happy soul this morning - but there is more to the westcountry than Bristol and South Wales and it is good news really I just want more . What is the opposite of a NIMBY?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on July 23, 2009, 11:22:20
In the DfT statement it states the 202 DMU vehicle order is superseded and a replacement for the rolling stock plan is to be produced.

Quote
This electrification programme radically affects the requirements for rolling
stock over the next decade. There will be far less need for diesel trains and
a greater requirement for electric trains. In particular, the previously-planned
procurement by the Government of new diesel trains has now been
superseded. We will accordingly publish a new rolling stock plan in the
autumn, taking account of the changed circumstances.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/railelectrification.pdf (http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/railelectrification.pdf)


Sounds like most of the mooted new DMU vehicles won't now happen at all, so there will be plenty of internal cascades necessary just to sort out routes such as Cardiff - Portsmouth. If you recall I mentioned on Monday that Roger Ford had drawn ateention to the 44 vehicles having disappeared, and as I've posted in the past, the various RUSs include gauge clearance for use of Turbos on the Pompey route...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Wolvercote Wanderer on July 23, 2009, 11:33:53
This is great news!

But how do you think will it affect direct London services which currently terminate just beyond the new electric lines i.e. Carmarthen, Bedwyn or Weston-super-Mare?

I can't see a diesel service running 'under-the-wires' just for these relatively short extensions to mainline services.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: bemmy on July 23, 2009, 11:38:46
This is great news!

But how do you think will it affect direct London services which currently terminate just beyond the new electric lines i.e. Carmarthen, Bedwyn or Weston-super-Mare?

I can't see a diesel service running 'under-the-wires' just for these relatively short extensions to mainline services.
Why not? seeing as Virgin run diesel trains under the wires all the way from Birmingham to Glasgow.....  ::)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Wolvercote Wanderer on July 23, 2009, 12:01:41
Why not? seeing as Virgin run diesel trains under the wires all the way from Birmingham to Glasgow.....  ::)

 :) Good point, well made!

Let's hope Virgin don't get their grubby mits on Greater Western or we could see the same.  *Shudder*


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: polonia on July 23, 2009, 12:08:15
The  paper on the DFT website seems to suggest that re-furbished (with air-con added) Thameslink stock will cascade to suburban lines out of Paddington (eventually inner-surbuban will be covered by cross-rail stock) when the Thameslink upgrade is finished and their new stock delivered. It then suggests turbos (expect presumably those still needed for the branch lines) would then be sent on to the Bristol area freeing up further units for transfer North.

I presume this means the FCC Class 319s - which will be geetting on a bit by then and in serious need of an upgrade.

 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: broadgage on July 23, 2009, 12:18:08
Does "approved" actually mean that physical work will start ? Or does it mean that approval has been given for more meetings/assesments/commitess etc ?

I seem to remember crossrail being "approved" dozens of times, the first "approval" being perhaps 15 years ago.
And although the thameslink 2000 project has now started, I believe that it was so named because it was to be completed for the millenium !

Still it IS progress even if this only turns out to be only the first of many approvals.

My main concern though is with overcrowding in both the near and longer terms.
A natural cynic like me forsees even worse overcrowding in the near term since building new diesels cant be justified.
The electric trains cant run until the work is done, which is bound to take longer than expected.

Therefore FGW have a splendid excuse to do nothing about crowding for say 10 years.

In the longer term, I would have my doubts as to how suitable the electric trains will be for inter city use.
What we need is full length loco hauled trains with seats facing accross tables, luggage space, ample leg room, and a proper buffet and restaurant.
What we will probably get is high density EMU outer-suburban train with bus seats, minimal luggage space and perhaps a trolley.

I have travelled on many routes that have suffered "total route modernisation" which normally means shorter less comfortable trains with reduced luggage space and no catering.

My local service ( catford loop line) was downgraded from 8 car trains to 6 car because "the new trains have plenty of standing room"

Waterloo to Exeter services were downgraded from full length locohauled trains to short DMUs with no buffet, cramped mainly bus seats, and space for only 1 cycle. Complaints about overcrowding being answered by advising passengers to allways book a seat.

Waterloo to Bournmouth services have been downgraded from proper intercity electric trains (the Wessex electrics) to suburban trains quite unsuited to long trips.

Whilst we will no doubt be promised that it will be different this time, previous "improvements do not fill me with confidence.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on July 23, 2009, 12:19:53
It then suggests turbos (expect presumably those still needed for the branch lines) would then be sent on to the Bristol area freeing up further units for transfer North.

I presume this means the FCC Class 319s - which will be geetting on a bit by then and in serious need of an upgrade.

And of course as we know from previous discussions, in railway speak (and timetables) the 'Bristol Area' extends to Portsmouth and Cardiff.  ???

The 319s are about 20 years old now (half life?),  so a major rebuild including totally new seating and aircon on completion of their time with Thameslink would give them another 10-15 years easily.  Also AIUI the first Thameslink new trains arrive in 2012, so there might be time to have an initial batch in the works before they're needed in the Thames Valley?

What I find interesting is the turn round all of a sudden, everyone is now talking about EMU cascades all over the place, for instance outside the FGW area they are now suggesting LM 350s being used by TPX on Manchester - Scotland vice 185s for instance. Remarkable stuff...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 23, 2009, 12:24:51
I presume that the IEP order for the GWML will now be almost exclusively the hybrid variant, so once in the electrification area that it'll run on AC whilst outside Diesel traction will be used.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on July 23, 2009, 12:25:54
Waterloo to Exeter services were downgraded from full length locohauled trains to short DMUs with no buffet, cramped mainly bus seats, and space for only 1 cycle. Complaints about overcrowding being answered by advising passengers to allways book a seat.

Waterloo to Bournmouth services have been downgraded from proper intercity electric trains (the Wessex electrics) to suburban trains quite unsuited to long trips.


A bit of exaggeration there surely? The Salisbury line now sees trains of up to 9 or 10 coaches in the peaks, and the 158/159 'bus seating' is the same as in the Wessies, with plenty of tables throughout. I'm not sure about bikes, but I definitely see more than one in each unit on occasions, since the original bike store was removed...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on July 23, 2009, 12:31:06
I presume that the IEP order for the GWML will now be almost exclusively the hybrid variant, so once in the electrification area that it'll run on AC whilst outside Diesel traction will be used.


No, they say it will be mostly all electric for the main lines, with some 'bi-mode' for routes beyond. 

Bi-mode is how they refer to the dual powered diesel and electric. The 'full diesel' IEP still has hybrid power packs, the term refers to regeneration into a battery bank, like the Hayabusa trial PC for the measurement train.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on July 23, 2009, 13:04:35
It does seem a bit shorted to not go as far as Bedwyn. Also, i'd be interested to know how Weston and the very busy line to the West Country is to be served?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 23, 2009, 14:29:37
I can possibly see unit like the Hitachi ones on HS1 being used eventually on the GWML to Bristol and Cardiff, the GWML has a number of places where +125 running is feasible.  The problem with the 319's they are 20 years old now by the time electrifcation is inplace on the GWML outer suburban the units will be closer to 30 years old, I wounder if DfT mean the 321's



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on July 23, 2009, 14:31:26
Here's something that's annoying me...

GWML electrification reported on the Guardian (top billing when I looked a few minutes ago) and BBC sites this morning, along no doubt with many others.  Great news! And these are two news organizations that I have a great deal of time and respect for. But how does the BBC report it? "Minimum rail disruption pledged". The media seem to be focusing on the temporary disruption that will be caused by stringing up the knitting rather than the huge benefits this will ring long into the future. The Guardian also manages to put a negative slant on things with the sub-headline "Network Rail to transform Britain's busiest rail route, causing four years of disruption for passengers" underneath the electrification headline on the UK front page.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8164942.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8164942.stm)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/23/electric-rail-line-great-western (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/23/electric-rail-line-great-western)

Honestly.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on July 23, 2009, 14:35:24
It does seem a bit shorted to not go as far as Bedwyn. Also, i'd be interested to know how Weston and the very busy line to the West Country is to be served?

Fairly obviously, I would have thought, by diesels. Presumably any services to Exeter/Plymouth/Penzance running via the Berks and Hants will have to be diesel throughout, although it does rather raise the prospect of diesel trains running all the way under the wires to Bristol on West Country services that take the "Great Way Round". Sadly I don't suppose there's much chance of a sudden outbreak of common sense involving loco-hauled stock changing from diesel to electric traction at suitable locations.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 23, 2009, 14:39:52
Well after all the problems caused by WCML modernisation, it's perhaps not unreasonable to expect a smidgen of disruption.

As for the stock, the DafT report makes it pretty clear that the 319s - and I'm sure that's what they mean, will be given a good going over - presumably on the scale of the HST refresh - and get air-conditioning which sounds a hell of a lot better than the old 1950s Great Eastern suburban units that were the first electric trains seen in West Yorkshire when the Aire Valley was electrified.

And the IEP is an intercity train - if it ever gets built.

I was rather tickled by DafT's description of the Turbo fleet as 'modern' dmus. And no mention of them getting any refit, over and above FGW's current proposals for the fleet


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ReWind on July 23, 2009, 15:00:27
It does seem a bit shorted to not go as far as Bedwyn. Also, i'd be interested to know how Weston and the very busy line to the West Country is to be served?

Fairly obviously, I would have thought, by diesels. Presumably any services to Exeter/Plymouth/Penzance running via the Berks and Hants will have to be diesel throughout, although it does rather raise the prospect of diesel trains running all the way under the wires to Bristol on West Country services that take the "Great Way Round". Sadly I don't suppose there's much chance of a sudden outbreak of common sense involving loco-hauled stock changing from diesel to electric traction at suitable locations.

Sadly, yes!  I suspect Penzance/Plymouth to Bristol FGW services are going to stay HST, then there will be a change of train at BRI, onto electric, for onward stations to London  I doubt many people travel from Cornwall/Devon to London via Bristol anyway, when there are faster services to the B&H.

Also, I belive London - Cheltenham services will become London - Swindon sevices electric, then Swindon - Cheltenham on a west unit.  Same applies for WSM, where it will be London - Bri electric, then a west unit to WSM/TAu.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: tramway on July 23, 2009, 15:38:58
I presume that the IEP order for the GWML will now be almost exclusively the hybrid variant, so once in the electrification area that it'll run on AC whilst outside Diesel traction will be used.


Are you sure it would work out like that. There a currently many London Bristol/Swansea terminators that would be ok as pure electric, probably requiring only a limited stock of hybrids for the extended diagrams.

And voyagers are going to be with us for quite a while yet whatever the Evening Post has to say.

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/homepage/Bristol-London-line-electrified/article-1189000-detail/article.html

In fact I would bet that there will still be a requirement for the full diesel version as the benifits to be gained for having part electric on both the B&H and beyond Bristol probably don't add up.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 23, 2009, 17:02:32
Well after all the problems caused by WCML modernisation, it's perhaps not unreasonable to expect a smidgen of disruption.

The WCML was a re-electrification scheme much much more difficult to do that than electrify for the first time.  Also lessoned learned from the WCML means the selection and erection of the new OHLE will allow for renewals in the future.  With a new route it is easier to section prove the OHLE sections test and commission system control and electrical protection systems spaced over several week nights and or weekends where as when a re-electrification is done all the section proving etc has to be done in time for the first train, having been involved with both I'll opt for new electrification any day although there is something about the challenges during a re-electrification.

The days of headspan like the ECML and MML are over headspan is very unlikely to be used again, portals will be used where there are complex areas or a large span is required; the problems with a headspan system is when there is a dewirement on a line it tends to affect the other lines as the headspan comes down as well also isolations are troublesome when needed on a single track only


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: bemmy on July 23, 2009, 17:48:03
Sadly, yes!  I suspect Penzance/Plymouth to Bristol FGW services are going to stay HST, then there will be a change of train at BRI, onto electric, for onward stations to London  I doubt many people travel from Cornwall/Devon to London via Bristol anyway, when there are faster services to the B&H.
In my experience, they do on at least 3 services. The first down and last up between Paddington and Cornwall travel via Bristol so although they are slow, they are essential for many travellers to and from Devon and Cornwall. Likewise the down Torbay Express always seems to have large numbers travelling through Bristol and Weston, presumably most of them have boarded at Paddington, as it's the only through train from there to Torbay before the evening service. Of course in the long term, if passenger numbers grow, these three might be replaced with direct trains.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on July 23, 2009, 18:08:20
I find the 1737 Penzance - Paddington via Bristol a very useful service! Used it at least twice recently.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on July 23, 2009, 19:05:51
One major downside is cancellation of the 200 vehicle dmu order, on the basis that they won't be needed. Given these units were meant to be in place in 2 years, and electrification is another 7 years away, that seems to be an excuse to prevent a loss of face.

And by the time the Turbos are cascaded, as willc mentions, they will be 30 years old. 30 year old underfloor engined dmus are effectively life expired and will be fit only for scrap, not reallocation.

It does make sense though that the units released by Thameslink are reused. They will still have 10 to 15 years life left in them (assuming a 40 year lifetime), and so it helps the cost justification of the scheme.   



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on July 23, 2009, 19:24:45
Here's something that's annoying me...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8164942.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8164942.stm)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/23/electric-rail-line-great-western (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jul/23/electric-rail-line-great-western)


At least that is the secondary BBC story though, this one appeared first, although subsequently updated:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8164070.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8164070.stm)

The Times went with the disruption angle as well though:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6723888.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6723888.ece)

I agree it's annoying though, they get grief all the time from journalists, if they do nothing they are letting the system 'creak' or 'rust' or something, if they plan something useful its always 'Misery for Commuters'...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: The Grecian on July 23, 2009, 19:29:19
Hmmm. Finally a new electrification project. Got to be a good thing. I can't find it now but earlier the BBC story mentioned that a lot of the bridges and tunnels will have to be demolished. I can't really see that demolishing any tunnels is likely to help.

I suspect the line to Exeter and on to Cornwall will probably keep diesel intercity services for a long time though - it could be electrified as far as Plymouth but I doubt it'd be any further and Cornwall wouldn't want to lose its through services. Weston is probably in danger of losing at least some of its IC services but that'll probably depend on the number of IEP trains FGW gets.

Waterloo to Exeter services were downgraded from full length locohauled trains to short DMUs with no buffet, cramped mainly bus seats, and space for only 1 cycle. Complaints about overcrowding being answered by advising passengers to allways book a seat.

Waterloo to Bournmouth services have been downgraded from proper intercity electric trains (the Wessex electrics) to suburban trains quite unsuited to long trips.


A bit of exaggeration there surely? The Salisbury line now sees trains of up to 9 or 10 coaches in the peaks, and the 158/159 'bus seating' is the same as in the Wessies, with plenty of tables throughout. I'm not sure about bikes, but I definitely see more than one in each unit on occasions, since the original bike store was removed...

Paul

If you can find anyone other than enthusiasts who's disappointed that totally unreliable 50s and 47s and elderly Mk 2s were replaced with ultra-reliable new 159s which were far better suited to the stop-start nature of the route due to their quicker acceleration and braking, bringing journey times down - then I'll be impressed!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on July 23, 2009, 19:37:37
I can possibly see unit like the Hitachi ones on HS1 being used eventually on the GWML to Bristol and Cardiff, the GWML has a number of places where +125 running is feasible.  The problem with the 319's they are 20 years old now by the time electrifcation is inplace on the GWML outer suburban the units will be closer to 30 years old, I wounder if DfT mean the 321's


I think from all the existing bumph, what you'll see on Bristol and Cardiff is some variants of IEP, no need for Javelin type trains really. Commuter layout for the Bristols perhaps - which is basically as per the 2+7 HST AFAICT?

It is very definitely ex-Thameslink 319s though. The DfT electrification proposals are quite explicit on this point, also stating that they will be given a full modernisation including air con.  If the new Thameslink rolling stock all arrives as planned, (better if they go to Siemens rather than Bombardier obviously) units will probably be available for overhaul in the couple of years before they are actually needed...

Paul  


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 23, 2009, 21:00:56
Might I recommend that everyone reads the DfT report that is linked on the first page of the thread - you will find the answers to many of the points you raise contained within it, not least about rolling stock.

And you won't even have to get past the foreword to read the following from Lord Adonis:
Quote
Further work is ongoing to assess the detailed costs and benefits of electrification on other routes. The rail industry recently published for consultation its Network Route Utilisation Strategy: Electrification. The Government will carefully consider the costs and benefits of wider electrification, with particular reference to the Midland Main Line between London and Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield, as well as the routes between Manchester and Preston, and Liverpool and Preston.

The Network Rail strategy discusses going on even further, to the likes of XC, the Berks and Hants and TransPennine. Give them a chance - they're trying to roll back hostile attitudes towards railways built up over decades within DafT. 

Some of the 200 DMUs vehicles will probably still be bought, as Northern and Transpennine are going to be relying on oil for many services for quite a while yet - and they were never going to be available in two years' time. DafT always said delivery would be "by 2012" which could mean pretty much anything in their terms.

I don't imagine that transferred Turbos are necessarily going to be expected to keep going forever. If you wire XC to Plymouth and the Berks and Hants and Salisbury-Exeter, then you make wiring the likes of Bristol suburban and connecting routes like Bristol-Southampton and to Weymouth far more cost effective too - the kind of rolling electrification that NR and ATOC want and which most of the rest of Europe has been carrying through for decades, so the Turbos would tide you over in these sorts of places until the wires went up.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 23, 2009, 21:52:33
If you wire XC to Plymouth and the Berks and Hants and Salisbury-Exeter, then you make wiring the likes of Bristol suburban and connecting routes like Bristol-Southampton and to Weymouth far more cost effective too - the kind of rolling electrification that NR and ATOC want and which most of the rest of Europe has been carrying through for decades, so the Turbos would tide you over in these sorts of places until the wires went up.

I agree and todays announcement has put a push to start the ball rolling still needs a bit more kinetic energy though


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: matt473 on July 23, 2009, 22:13:06
Some of the 200 DMUs vehicles will probably still be bought, as Northern and Transpennine are going to be relying on oil for many services for quite a while yet - and they were never going to be available in two years' time. DafT always said delivery would be "by 2012" which could mean pretty much anything in their terms.


Apparently the whole order has been cancelled with the government to announce a new plan regarding stock allocations such as the cascade of turbos to other FGW services allowing the transfer of sprinters for example to Northern. I don't know how accurate it is but some people who have made accurate guesses to electrification before it was announced seem to suggest this


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 23, 2009, 22:54:34
But in a context where passenger traffic on Northern and TransPennine has skyrocketed in the past few years, creating massive overcrowding in the peaks around Leeds and Manchester, saying you'll have to hang on until 2016 for some very tired 150s and 158s from FGW, to follow the tired 150s you will get from LM in 2011 or so is not really a sensible answer - wiring the Liverpool-Manchester line via Rainhill will free up precious few DMUs, nor would the other routes in the North West Adonis mentions as electrification prospects, because you will still need diesel power to get past Preston to Blackpool and Carnforth to Barrow, to name but two of the lines with many through trains to Manchester.

I would not be surprised if the latest version of the ever-changing rolling stock plan recognises this fact and includes a modest batch of DMUs - they were planning to give the north about half of those new DMUs, on top of whatever LM 150s they are getting, and nothing DafT has come up with so far suggests how they will plug that capacity gap in the north.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: dog box on July 23, 2009, 22:59:00
only big problem with this scheme is as 40% of our electricity is generated by ageing nuclear power stations which will be closed within a few years, where is the electricity coming from? ,,because i dont see any new generation capacity being introduced apart from a few windmills


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 24, 2009, 13:22:51
Might I recommend that everyone reads the DfT report that is linked on the first page of the thread - you will find the answers to many of the points you raise contained within it, not least about rolling stock.

And a very interesting document it is too! Let's hope this isn't going to be stamped upon by the likely next Government as there are so many facets to it that make sense. Aside from the usual comments from negative observers such as the Unions and those "anti-everything-British-connected-to-the-railways-for-the-sake-of-it" comment lovers on the national press websites, there really is so much common sense in these proposals. Adonis should be congratulated for the immense positive push he has given the railway industry since his arrival. If only he'd been in place 5 years ago!

I do have some comments and observations of the proposals though (apologies if they have already been touched on in this thread):

1) Crossrail extending to Reading- And about time too. I've always said this was a no-brainer. Assuming TfL play ball, then this makes perfect sense and always has done. Here's a thought though - why not extend Crossrail to Newbury and Oxford? Perhaps not all day, but if a few of the peak hour fast trains that currently run through from Newbury and Oxford were to extend through the Crossrail tunnel then journey times for commuters working in Canary Wharf and other areas of London could be cut and they would not have the hassle of changing trains. Calling points would logically be Didcot/Thatcham/Theale and Reading - with perhaps scope for some trains to stop at Cholsey, Goring, Pangbourne and Tilehurst as well as the other Kennet Line stations. The paths through the tunnel are available by the bucket load on services from the west.

2) Use of 4-Car ex-Thameslink stock on outer Suburban services - It makes sense for half-life stock to get a good refurb and then be used on these services, there's no doubt about that (as long as they do get air-con!). There is no mention of platform extensions though. Stations east of Reading will be lengthened as part of the Crossrail project, but replacing 3-car trains with 4-car ones does present some issues at places like Culham & Appleford (3-car, except Culham in down direction), and Cholsey, Goring, Pangbourne and Tilehurst are 6-car maximums, which means that trains will not be able to run coupled up in the peak hours unless they are extended. Also, Goring on the down main line is only of 3-car length. Hopefully these extensions will be undertaken as part of the project?

3) Bi-mode IEP's for non-electrified long distance through trains - Again it makes sense that trains to/from Weston, Carmarthan, the Cotwolds and Gloucester will use the Bi-mode IEP when the wires run out, but assuming that the majority of the Penzance trains will continue to use the B&H line after Reading, the amount of time they can draw from the juice is a fraction of the overall journey time. Perhaps a full diesel version of the IEP should still be procured for these services as Bi-mode trains with their one power unit will struggle performance wise on the gradients in Devon and Cornwall, with the only benefit being gained between London and Reading (or Newbury).

4) Curtailment of the electrification at Newbury - An Oxford extension makes perfect sense. Over half of the express trains start/terminate there and the few local services that come through from Banbury can easily form a diesel shuttle service. Also, extension of the electrification beyond Oxford to the Cotswold Line would probably be a step too far financially given the number of trains on the route, but what about Newbury? The current service off-peak is an hourly Newbury-Reading shuttle service that would become electric. No problem with that, it makes sense. However, what will become of the hourly diesel service from Paddington to Bedwyn? Bedwyn, Hungerford and Kintbury stations enjoy probably their best ever service into London. Unless the plan is for these to continue to be diesel hauled, or possible IEP Bi-mode trains running as diesel trains between Bedwyn and Newbury, then perhaps the extra money to extend the electrification as far as Bedwyn (or maybe even Westbury) would be more sensible. If not, users of these stations may see their services worsen significantly!

Thoughts?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on July 24, 2009, 16:49:04
Your proposals make a lot of sense. If a sizeable proportion of commuters from Reading and Didcot exchanged the fast dash to Paddington and then onto the tube or Crossrail to a slightly slower but more comfortable journey without a change, then it could take a lot of the commuter pressure off the HSS. This would mean that the new units could be configured internally as intercity services, rather than the crammed sets we've currently got.(Sorry to re-open that old debate!) 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 24, 2009, 17:04:29
This is excellent news, although we should remember that there is a real threat of a conservative government next year!

Despite the assurances that the Tories are pro rail (e.g. the Heathrow debate), I saw on the news the Shadow Transport secretary adding her damper to the plans. Criticising them. I do hope some irreversible work is done soon - as the project could easily be "postponed" by the Tories, who of course won't benefit themselves.

Re: Oxford and Newbury. Seems very strange. Oxford seems ok, but Banbury trains will probably have to become shuttles, and there will be diesel under the wires for Cotswold trains but Newbury?

As has been mentioned, only ONE train per hour will go EMU! The money would be better spent electrifying to Weston. An alternative extension to Westbury would be good, allowing an hourly Westbury to Paddington semi-fast service.

A step in the correct direction. Good news. I'll keep my fingers crossed! :)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on July 24, 2009, 17:11:28
This is excellent news, although we should remember that there is a real threat of a conservative government next year!

Could the same not be said regarding Labour's continual  back peddling regarding every other railway announcement in recent times? There was me looking forward to some nice brand new units for Portsmouth - Cardiff!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 24, 2009, 18:14:57
Just a thought for the distant future (maybe just a pipe dream) ... Are there the necessary clearances on the Royal Albert Bridge for the Pylons and cabling? All the pictures online seem to me to show insufficient room for such an installation.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 24, 2009, 19:11:50
... and here's a link to how Railway Gazette International (http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/10/inter-city-electrification-planning-to-start-immediately.html) has covered the news. Nice to see an article stripped of the politics and 'inconvenience' elements some media sources have taken.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 24, 2009, 22:39:44
Well sorry to jump back on my sticking up for us media types hobbyhorse again, but Railway Gazette is a specialist industry publication, so a pared-down factual account of the nuts and bolts of the scheme is exactly what its readership expects.

The rest of us are serving a different audience and, whether you like it or not, the first question your average passenger (not people posting here, in the main, I would suggest) is typically going to ask, after such well-publicised fiascos as Rugby at Christmas 2007, is whether the work is going to muck up their journey over an extended period.

And one of the people saying there would be some disruption was... Lord Adonis, so is it surprising this line got picked up, one among many other strands, in the reports of the announcement? And Passenger Focus also used the d-word. It's very easy to shoot the messenger, as many of you seem keen to do, but we didn't make up the disruption line, it came from key players.

Quote
Banbury trains will probably have to become shuttles, there will be diesel under the wires for Cotswold trains

Most of the Cherwell Valley stopping service already operates Oxford-Banbury only and the DafT document says the IEP bi-mode will serve the destinations beyond the wires, so no diesel under wires, always assuming the thing can ever be made to perform on diesel power to the level they claim.

As for going to Bedwyn, it may maintain the status quo operationally but it will never get past the Treasury, as the numbers just won't stack up without it being part of a full Berks and Hants wiring scheme - unless the quarry operators around Westbury suddenly decide to fall out of love with big GM diesels and cough up for 25kv power instead. In this connection, I have to say I'm still slightly amazed Adonis got Cardiff-Swansea included, when it will have next to no benefit for ATW services.

If you have 319s and Turbos aplenty available, then it's surely cost-effective to run a 30-minute electric frequency to Newbury with a Turbo ready and waiting for a cross-platform connection for everywhere to Westbury (or even going on alternately to Frome/Warminster - I leave it to someone else better qualified to determine if you can create a workable timetable for something like this) - if you dug up a strip of the car park at Newbury and created a west-facing bay. Not ideal, as you would lose the through trains, but exchanging them for a 30-minute interval all day might be a fair swop - and electric acceleration would keep overall journey times to places west of Newbury much the same. You could even build a Parkway station for Devizes on the Andover road.

If no-one will stump up for platform extensions - and why not, given that they are doing so across the SWT suburban network - then with the amount of work they indicate will be done on the 319s, then surely they could fit SDO while they're at it.

II's suggestion of Crossrail to Oxford echoes the broad concept of the Superlink plan from 2004 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4096667.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4096667.stm) but the government set its face against that idea straight away. Maybe in the brave new world of Andrew Adonis there might be a further outbreak of common sense at DafT, putting paid to the nonsense of turning back dozens of trains at Paddington and doing something useful with them west of London.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 24, 2009, 22:50:28
Has anyone considered that having empty Crossrail trains turning around at Paddington might be quite useful for the streams of commuters thundering down from the FGW HSSs? ;)

And in order to keep the service in the central tunnel reliable (it will need to be with such a high frequency) they won't want the trains straying onto fast lines, or going too far out of London where they can pick up delay. The minute there's a delay - bang goes the Tube style frequecies.

How will hybrids manage on the Cotswold line? All that extra weight plus one less power car actually running... ???


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 24, 2009, 23:41:46
So what do you suggest? A sealed system shuttling back and forwards from Paddington to Liverpool Street? No delay issues there...

One of the key points of Crossrail (and Superlink) was to ease the pressure on the London termini and the Underground by taking people direct from stations further out right into the centre of London. GWML punctuality is up with industry standards now, with Reading rebuilding and resignalling (and Cotswold Line redoubling) in hand to address some of the key causes of delay on the route, so why shouldn't it be capable of delivering trains from as far out as Oxford into the tunnel on time? If you're going to Reading with Crossrail anyway, as now seems a certainty, then why not go all the way to Didcot and Oxford too if the wires are there, then people wouldn't need to change trains at all?

The Paris RER system seems to work pretty well, as does Thameslink, which has a sight more complicated network of feeder routes south of the Thames, as far out as Brighton, than Crossrail will, so why shouldn't Crossrail be able to cope, especially in the context of an electrified GWML?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Oxman on July 25, 2009, 00:06:49
I believe SDO would require guards - existing services are DOO. Can't see that happening!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 25, 2009, 10:19:39
I believe SDO would require guards - existing services are DOO. Can't see that happening!

Do not need guards, a transponder is fitted to the station and trains, the station transponder tells the train the permitted door opening.

Newbury as the end of electrification I suspect is to do with power supply and boundary with signal box areas and all the immunisation that would be required, hopefully the wires will continue from Newbury quite quickly to Exeter or Plymouth.

Bunbury would be part of the "infill" to Brum and the Chiltern Line electrification both of which I suspect is wait for the results of the Oxford Cambridge East West Rail project


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 25, 2009, 10:53:32
I think it's pretty clear from what Network Rail and others have said in the past and from the DfT saying this week that MML is under further scrutiny that once you have MML and GWML wired, doing XC is the next big step, as it stitches together so much of the network, and the Berks & Hants comes after that, once an XC scheme gets you wires to Paignton and Plymouth. XC also frees up many recently-built DMUs for a cascade, hopefully ending with 142s, 143s and 144s disappearing.

The age of its DMU fleet is one of the factors in Chiltern being quite far down the queue for electrification, plus its relatively limited benefits south of Banbury as a diversionary route, since it doesn't go anywhere except London.

Indeed it could even be behind the likes of Southampton-Salisbury-Westbury-Bath, which is being looked at as a diversionary route (via Bristol) to the West Midlands for container trains from Southampton. Even a wired and fully redoubled Cotswold Line offers diversion possibilities for container trains and XC if Oxford-Banbury-Leamington is shut, although oddly the Network Rail electrification RUS ignored this possibility - even though BR used to run XC services this way in the 1990s.

Quote
I believe SDO would require guards - existing services are DOO. Can't see that happening!

Not if you have a system controlled by the on-board computers, like that fitted by Bombardier on Southern's 377 emus, which run DOO on London suburban duties. See below for the relevant sections from Southern's most recent safety certificate application.

The crew (there are conductors on board 377s beyond the suburban area) have nothing to do with the opening process - the system says 'open the doors on however many coaches will fit on the platform at this station', so can't see any reason why you could not fit something similar if you're going to strip the 319 coaches pretty much back to the bare metal during overhaul.

B15.1.4 Rolling stock used on services where some platforms may be shorter than
the train length are equipped with Selective Door Opening (SDO). Classes
377 / 1, 377 / 2 and 377 / 4 units have automatic selection, controlled by the
on-board computer system using a database of platform lengths.  Class 171
units have a manually selected system controlled by the Train Crew.  A list of
stations in Appendix B3 shows those with short platforms. These are the
locations where SDO will be operated if required.

B15.1.5 Routes in the Southern Metro area of operation are approved for Driver Only
Operation (DOO). Class 377 units used on these services have external
CCTV to give the Driver a view of each doorway. On other classes of unit,
the Driver is able to look out of the cab window.  However, the majority of
platforms (including all those on a curve)  are equipped with monitors or
mirrors to assist the Driver.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 25, 2009, 16:07:34
The Paris RER system seems to work pretty well...

I was in Paris a few weeks ago, and the RER system was abysmal. Even at peak times, there were 5+ minutes between trains. And that's with a relatively simple network. And if there are longer distance Crossrail trains on the fast lines, where's the space going to come from? At this rate, 6 tracks will be needed to Reading!

The main purpose of Crossrail is to reduce the pressure on the Tube. Namely the Central, H&C/Circle and Jubilee.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 25, 2009, 19:12:52
Well you're entitled to your opinion. I'm entitled to mine. I've often waited a lot longer than five minutes for any kind of a train on the Circle Line platforms at Paddington on a supposed 'metro' frequency route and you clearly never went anywhere near RER Ligne A in Paris, where the peak frequency is every two-three minutes - pretty much the same as Crossrail's 24tph target.

You wouldn't necessarily need to be on the fast lines from Oxford, not with 90mph and high-acceleration electric units available on the relief lines. I remember riding in a 90mph Class 312 EMU from Birmingham to Stockport put on as a substitute when a CrossCountry train had expired somewhere outside Birmingham in the mid-1980s and it easily kept to time on a duty booked for a 100mph Class 86 - the acceleration from stations was like something flying off a shovel. You could even revive a bit of Victorian thinking and rebuild some stations to put in platform loops to allow faster services to overtake stoppers - rather cheaper than six tracks. And with Reading remodelled and resignalled, along with electric trains, you will have more capacity and paths available anyway.

I don't think anyone is suggesting huge numbers of Crossrail services all the way out to Oxford, but if Oxford and Didcot commuters were able to get a direct train closer to where they worked in central London - and I'll bet most of them travel on beyond the Paddington area - you might very well find yourself able to switch one fast path an hour from Oxford to a train going into the tunnel, with the other fast path being used by a Cotswold Line working ending at Paddington. Or you could just ask Hitachi to build you some more Class 395s if you're that worried about out-and-out top speed.

If all you can think of is replicating current operating patterns but with electric trains, then why bother? Electrification and Crossrail present opportunities to do new things as well. If BR had never developed Thameslink, then Eurostar would probably not have been able to go to St Pancras, as the station would still be needed as the terminus for suburban trains from Bedford, which instead drop down into the Widened Lines and take people straight into the City.

Thameslink 2000 (now 2015) adds trains from the Great Northern lines, Ashford and the Sussex coast to the mix across central London and it will have... 24 trains per hour. This is the map showing where all those the trains will be coming from http://www.thameslinkprogramme.co.uk/cms/pages/view/31 (http://www.thameslinkprogramme.co.uk/cms/pages/view/31) but you seem to be suggesting that a far simpler Crossrail system, fed from the GWML at one end and the GEML and a branch to Kent at the other, can't work reliably.

The Norwegians completely transformed long and short-distance operations around Oslo when they bored a main line tunnel under the city centre. It operates at a maximum capacity of 24tph, with everything from local cross-city stoppers, through medium-distance regional expresses and cross-city airport express services to long-distance expresses to Bergen (which used to take a different route out of the city but are now able to serve the main towns to the west before swinging north into the mountains) and Stavanger. Different scale to London maybe, but it shows what can be done if you start with an open mind and a blank sheet of paper to plan your timetables and service patterns.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 25, 2009, 20:47:16
Willc, you've persuaded me! IMNO (in my new opinion) Crossrail should extend out like the Thameslink proposals.

Let's get some Euston trains into Crossrail at Old Oak Common, freeing up more space for VT HSS or HS2 services.

Lets take the pressure off Clapham Junction/Waterloo with some SWT services being diverted (via Airtrack?).

Let's go to Airports like Stansted. A Heathrow to Stansted Express service...

Let's get the Cotswold Line trains into Crossrail. :P

PS: I used said RER line and it was just as bad! The station dwells were often the best part of 5 minutes. The Metro was quicker....


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 25, 2009, 20:48:39
A la http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superlink_(railway_network)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on July 25, 2009, 20:49:53
Regarding Crossrail, will there be an interchange where Thameslink and Crossrail meet?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Andy on July 25, 2009, 21:20:38
There is nothing in London to compare with the RER system in Paris. London doesn't have a suburban/urban network through/under the city centre yet. That said, Ligne A is about 30 years old and the service is beginning to deteriorate - probably a combination of aging infrastructure and it being stretched to capacity. Moreover, the Paris metro is also streets ahead of the London underground. London is way behind Paris when it comes to public transport.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 25, 2009, 21:35:39
Regarding Crossrail, will there be an interchange where Thameslink and Crossrail meet?

Yes at Farringdon ... details from londonconnections.blogspot.com (http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/2008/03/how-farringdon-crossrail-will-work.html)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 25, 2009, 23:08:31
They should meet at St Pancras International - poor choice of route!

I would say that the LU is far better than the Paris Metro. The PM had no announcements or screen on the trains. It was also far dirtier and full of "beggars". (the annoying type) Signage was far worse at all stations, esp at Chatelet les Halles - the biggest interchange in the world.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 25, 2009, 23:21:38
St P would be virtually impossible how would you get a mainline railway at a reasonable level below ground to connect there? It's a rabbit warren underground as it is. It'd defeat the object of a Central line as well.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 25, 2009, 23:23:42
St P would be virtually impossible how would you get a mainline railway at a reasonable level below ground to connect there? It's a rabbit warren underground as it is. It'd defeat the object of a Central line as well.

I suppose it is quite "busy" there. But it seems mad to bypass the biggest interchange in London just to keep a straight route.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on July 25, 2009, 23:25:25
St P would be virtually impossible how would you get a mainline railway at a reasonable level below ground to connect there? It's a rabbit warren underground as it is. It'd defeat the object of a Central line as well.

I suppose it is quite "busy" there. But it seems mad to bypass the biggest interchange in London just to keep a straight route.

But its too far from the City - why anybody would want to go there, I don't know ;) ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on July 25, 2009, 23:32:22
One of the main aims of Crossrail is a commuter railway not a means of connecting between termini as well. It's convenient that two termini are on the route as it is. Remember also that KC/STP IS on the route of the proposed Crossrail 2 too.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 25, 2009, 23:40:53
You raise a valid point D/M the Farringdon station is of course the stop for the City commuters.

Crossrail 2? With a Tory major and PM? :D


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Andy on July 26, 2009, 00:19:04
They should meet at St Pancras International - poor choice of route!

I would say that the LU is far better than the Paris Metro. The PM had no announcements or screen on the trains. It was also far dirtier and full of "beggars". (the annoying type) Signage was far worse at all stations, esp at Chatelet les Halles - the biggest interchange in the world.

You're right that there are plenty of beggars in the metro but in my opinion beggars are a reflection on a society rather than a metro system. There is a screen on every platform at Chatelet. The signage is as good as in London but inevitably when you are a foreigner, you need a little time to understand the system. The trains are faster, more reliable and the service more intensive than in London. They are also much cheaper. What is more, in Paris, there aren't those annoying pointless whiteboards everywhere which tell you that on such and such a line the service is "good"; "Good" is just about the most unscientific and uninformative word in the English language.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 26, 2009, 00:58:41
... the Paris Metro ... was also far dirtier and full of "beggars". (the annoying type)

In my (admittedly limited) experience of train travel in Paris, the trains were clean, ran on time (and frequently) - and they were patrolled by some rather scary CRS types with crew-cuts, wearing riot overalls and guns, who caused annoying beggars, accordian players and (probably) any fare-dodgers to disappear instantly, as soon as they entered a carriage ...  ::)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 26, 2009, 08:57:37
They should meet at St Pancras International - poor choice of route!

The route of the Crossrail tunnels was planned and safeguarded 20 plus years ago when St Pancras was not the station it is today.  Farringdon was seen as the interchange for cross London travel along with TCR.  To change the Crossrail tunnel routing through London would a nightmare due the amount of tunnels - tubes, swere, water, electricity, telecoms, building foundations and basements.

The more practical solution to trains to serve St Pancras would be a Heathrow via the Poplar's at Acton Main Line and then onto the NNL


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 26, 2009, 16:02:47
PS: I thought the PM was far better than the RER! (in terms of speed, frequency)

As for me not understanding the signage because I'm British - it was the LACK of signs, their positioning (e.g. facing the wrong way fro the last sign so I missed it) and the way a signposted route just stopped.

I think the white boards in the LU are good. (no pun intended) They allow experienced users to quickly calculate their best route avoiding snarled up lines. No such thing in Paris, so instead I had to wait for ages on an RER at Chatelet les Halles wondering whether I should risk another route...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Andy on July 26, 2009, 18:52:58
The Paris Metro is better than the RER in terms of frequency, you're quite right. As far as I understand it,  the RER is not seen as an alternative high-speed metro but a suburban network, so the frequency tends to vary in tune with the commuter flows in and out of the city centre. Frequency has been increased in recent years, though - and that has caused a few problems in terms of reliability.
 
Fair enough if you feel there is a lack of signage; it's your perception. I don't share it, that's all. Maybe you need more signage than me or maybe I'm more familiar with the station than you are and therefore insensitive to this problem.

I don't recall saying you didn't understand the signage because you're British. The station is very large, with few architectural points of reference and, as a result, it is easy to get lost or disorientated. People who are new to it, be they French from the provinces or foreigners, take time to find their bearings and are not familiar with the signage (which is overhead, but also on the walls around the edges of the station). In such circumstances, it is natural to want to check more often.


As it's possible to enter the station from several points, the "wrong" way for you was undoubtedly the "right" way for someone walking in another direction. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on July 27, 2009, 00:40:14
It looks as though the suburban component has been justified by a good old fashioned "cascade" of the Thameslink 319's, of which there are 85 sets (340 cars - a saving of c0.4Bn Stlg). As these are dual voltage, they can commit trespass on the Southern lines, perhaps allowing a proper Reading - Gatwick service. Waterloo's Junipers were also built to have pantographs and transformers (look at the roof line) so might venture West eventually, so perhaps we can look forward to a single railway at Reading. Who remembers the sign on the mess room on platform 4, "Southern Region Motormen only" or the PA announcements, "This is a Southern Region train and not for public use!"?

The inclusion of Newbury and Oxford is marvellous for Reading; it will gain 3 high capacity commuter routes allowing a major shift from out of town car commuting.

The Liverpool to Manchester wiring is an odd one (and has annoyed the Yorkshiremen). It could be a political Lancastrian sop or a cute tipping of the balance towards future Trans-Pennine and Cross Country schemes. The dual voltage 319's (if there are enough) could even work on Merseyrail as single sets.

Good news,

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 27, 2009, 11:49:53
As for going to Bedwyn, it may maintain the status quo operationally but it will never get past the Treasury, as the numbers just won't stack up without it being part of a full Berks and Hants wiring scheme - unless the quarry operators around Westbury suddenly decide to fall out of love with big GM diesels and cough up for 25kv power instead. In this connection, I have to say I'm still slightly amazed Adonis got Cardiff-Swansea included, when it will have next to no benefit for ATW services.

If you have 319s and Turbos aplenty available, then it's surely cost-effective to run a 30-minute electric frequency to Newbury with a Turbo ready and waiting for a cross-platform connection for everywhere to Westbury (or even going on alternately to Frome/Warminster - I leave it to someone else better qualified to determine if you can create a workable timetable for something like this) - if you dug up a strip of the car park at Newbury and created a west-facing bay. Not ideal, as you would lose the through trains, but exchanging them for a 30-minute interval all day might be a fair swop - and electric acceleration would keep overall journey times to places west of Newbury much the same. You could even build a Parkway station for Devizes on the Andover road.

Well, we're talking about less than 14 miles to extend to Bedwyn. The route has only 11 overbridges (which, to put in context, is one less than on the short stretch from Maidenhead to Twyford), is virtually all plain double track with the exception of a loop at Hungerford, and has no significant structures to bridge save for a couple of river bridges. To retain the quite sensible operational status-quo, I am still a little surprised that if electrifying to Newbury could get past the Treasury, then the remaining section to Bedwyn couldn't.

Assuming that the grand plan also includes full B&H electrification as a logical next step (even if it is in 15-20 years time), then I would argue that Bedwyn is the logical terminus of this first stage rather than Newbury. West facing bays at Newbury with shuttles to Bedwyn and Westbury/Frome/Warminster are all very well, but even if they are in the pipeline, it's hard to see how that will be sold to those living in the area as anything other than a backwards step and missed opportunity.

ElectricTrain's comments on the decision being made due to the boundary with signalling and power supplies might well be the actual reason behind the decision.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: grandsire on July 27, 2009, 15:08:28
I'm surprised that "on the cushions" thinks the Liverpool-Manchester scheme is odd - it seems to me to be a brilliant solution to the lack of diversionary routes for the WCML - offering alternatives for WCML Pendolinos to get to Manchester, Liverpool and Preston. Also of course allows the TPE Manchester-Glasgows to go electric. I do agree with "on the cushions" however that the scheme does give a possible jumping off point for an eventual electrification through to Leeds.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 27, 2009, 17:28:41
How does the Manchester - Liverpool electrfication allow FTPE Scotland services to go electric? What about the Manchester to Preston via Bolton line... ::)

Indeed, in Bedwyn locals will not be happy at the moment, as their direct trains to London will probably end for a period of 20ish years.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: grandsire on July 27, 2009, 18:17:14
Manchester-Liverpool line interconnects with WCML at Newton-le-Willows/Earlestown


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 27, 2009, 18:21:10
Manchester-Liverpool line interconnects with WCML at Newton-le-Willows/Earlestown

So they're diverting the route? I wonder what the time penalty will be, not to mention the loss of journey opportunities for Bolton and other places.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 27, 2009, 20:10:59
Any time penalty would be pretty limited, if not non-existent, as trains would be likely only to call at Wigan between Manchester and Preston, so lots of 100mph running on the WCML leg, and the Chat Moss route is pretty straight and fast too. The DfT document makes clear that the Manchester-Bolton-Preston line is among those under consideration for an early go-ahead along with MML, and Liverpool-Preston, which I take to be the line via Prescot and St Helens.

I'm afraid logic has never had a lot to do with the Treasury's decision-making. If it did, then many more miles of the network would have been wired years ago. After all, what we're talking about here is exactly the kind of thing BR proposed in the 1980s.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on July 28, 2009, 00:16:34
I'm surprised that "on the cushions" thinks the Liverpool-Manchester scheme is odd - it seems to me to be a brilliant solution to the lack of diversionary routes for the WCML - offering alternatives for WCML Pendolinos to get to Manchester, Liverpool and Preston. Also of course allows the TPE Manchester-Glasgows to go electric. I do agree with "on the cushions" however that the scheme does give a possible jumping off point for an eventual electrification through to Leeds.

It's only odd from the point of understanding the mindset that tagged it alongside GWML. I'm with you in calling it brilliant. Perhaps it was thrown in to soak up the remaining 319's and to free up Diesel Desiros. In this case, the pair of schemes boil down to a rolling stock cascade.

The mirror image is of course Leeds - York (actually Neville Hill - Colton Jn/ Hambleton Jn). Neither route needs new feeder stations, with the three year+ wait for NG to connect up, both are short and could be done using marginal time with the piling/wiring trains, like Crewe - Kidsgrove.

The problem with just going for high return big schemes is that you get (in England and Wales) four very long, fast electrified sidings, connected only at the London hub.

Adonis is probably impatient to make his mark with Brown's Nemesis drawing near. He tried recently (and unsuccessfully) to rush Gospel Oak - Barking wiring approval. Good luck to him; he can have his statue next to Brunel's.

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 28, 2009, 08:40:32
Certainly has a lot to do with freeing up 185s from running to Scotland, which always seemed bonkers in the first place.

But it has limited value in terms of Manchester-Liverpool services, as Chat Moss is effectively only served by a local stopping service at present, ever since Transpennine services were diverted on to the former Cheshire Lines Committee route through Warrington, so any local electric service will initially be little more than a shuttle, or, if it can squeeze through Oxford Road-Piccadilly along with everything else, a Liverpool-somewhere just across Manchester.

And doing Leeds to places out in the countryside on the ECML on its own makes sense only if you want to run ever more Leeds-London trains, as GNER proposed - but with a fall in traffic taking its toll on NXEC, you've to wonder if the numbers would still stack up for that.

Even Crewe-Kidsgrove, a very handy diversionary route, has allowed a new regular service, with the LM Desiros running up the Trent Valley to Stoke, then across to Crewe. Can't really see any thing similar you could develop the other side of the Pennines.

Leeds-York wires make far more sense if they are part of an XC or Transpennine scheme, because almost every service running on that route goes on beyond those two points.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: northwesterntrains on July 28, 2009, 10:46:43
I think the media's publication of this has been very misleading.  They've been saying they'll be new trains for FGW Paddington Mainline services, Manchester to Liverpool services and Manchester to Scotland services, which in fact the new electric trains are going to Thameslink services and London Midland's Euston services, with the old electric trains going to the newly electrified routes.

The 319s that are going to run Manchester Airport to Liverpool are the same age as the 156s that currently run the service and I think the 319s are smaller than doubled up 156s.  Although, 319s should be an improvement on the mainly 142s running Manchester Victoria to Liverpool and Warrington Bank Quay to Liverpool.

The 350/1s and 185s are about the same age and bascially electric and diesel versions of the same train.  (I hope they aren't planning to send 350/2s with 3+2 seating to run Manchester Airport to Edinburgh and neither do I think London Midland should be using 350/2s on Liverpool to Birmingham services.)

In the near future TransPennine Express are expected to run an extra Manchester to Selby train very hour (extending to Hull at peak times), so will need the 185s released for that.  So I don't know if they'll have enough stock to reinstate the regular Manchester Airport to Windermere via Bolton service they cut back to have enough 185s to run Scotland services.

The main issue with the current document is a lack of electric diversionary routes.  Manchester Airport to Liverpool services run by electric trains can't be diverted via Warrington Central during engineering works under the current plans.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: northwesterntrains on July 28, 2009, 10:53:29
But it has limited value in terms of Manchester-Liverpool services, as Chat Moss is effectively only served by a local stopping service at present, ever since Transpennine services were diverted on to the former Cheshire Lines Committee route through Warrington, so any local electric service will initially be little more than a shuttle, or, if it can squeeze through Oxford Road-Piccadilly along with everything else, a Liverpool-somewhere just across Manchester.

Manchester Airport to Liverpool has run via that line on a semi-fast basis for a few years now.  The time that service takes to get between Manchester and Liverpool is almost identical timing to the amount of time the Liverpool to Norwich and Liverpool to Scarborough via Warrington Central services.

If just Manchester to Liverpool via Warrington Central was electrified there would be less electric trains able to use the overhead wires (just Manchester Oxford Rd to Liverpool stopping services) unless there's further electrification on cross Pennine routes.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: brompton rail on July 28, 2009, 16:18:03
Leeds - York fill in electrification would be useful for diverting NXEC electric  when the direct route Doncaster to York is blocked during engineering work, as NXEC have never hired in diesel drags and often prefer buses to fill the gap with the occasional HST to run through via Leeds. Their drivers are not signed by any other route (except Leeds / Hambleton).  However given more rolling stock Aire Valley electrics could be extended to Micklefield and York.

More useful would be Midland MainLine first from Bedford to Sheffield, Doncaster and South Kirkby Junction (on Doncaster / Leeds line), then Leeds - York followed by either XC Bristol - Derby or (and!) Trans Pennine from Guide Bridge to Leeds would enable use of electric rolling stock and freeing up of diesels for those places unlikely to be electrified this side of the apocalypse!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on July 28, 2009, 16:29:42
Whilst Liverpool Manchester seems an odd line to elctrify it is actually a very sensible start to further electrification.

With the triangular junctions either side of Newton le Willows are already elctrified to allow North South traffic elctrifying the whole line gives a diversionary route to both Manchester and Liverpool from the South should either of the current usual routes be blocked.

It also gives, as others have said, a chance to run an electric service from both Liverpool and Manchester to Glasgow.

What I am not clear of is this line being electrified in parallel  with or before or after the GWML? If it's before it gives the electrification team a relatively easy line to electrify before tackling the GWML, if it's in parallel then that's very good news as it means Network rial will have a team in the North to do Manchester Preston, Preston Blackpool, Liverpool Wigan etc and then Trans pennine.

If it's after it means the team won't be disbanded as soon the GWML is finished.

It does seem a pity in the GWML line that the Greenford Windsor Marlow and Henley  branches weren't included to eliminate DMUS on all local services East of Reading, but although it would be a relatively small cost especially rolled into one big programme, it would scare the Treasury half to death.

With the Greenford branch, doing from OOC via Park Royal as well, would give an opportunity for BAA to turn their Heathrow Express units to even wheel wear under their own power.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: northwesterntrains on July 28, 2009, 17:09:31
Transport minister Sadiq Khan said when he visited Liverpool last week that work would start immediately on Manchester to Newton-le-Willows and then follow on Newton-le-Willows to Liverpool.  But what transport ministers usually mean by 'immediately' isn't the same as what passengers mean.  Probably there's no rush in getting the whole Manchester to Liverpool line done if Northern have to wait around for the 319s to be replaced on their existing routes and then to be refurbished before getting brought in to service.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 28, 2009, 17:22:29
What I am not clear of is this line being electrified in parallel  with or before or after the GWML? If it's before it gives the electrification team a relatively easy line to electrify before tackling the GWML, if it's in parallel then that's very good news as it means Network rial will have a team in the North to do Manchester Preston, Preston Blackpool, Liverpool Wigan etc and then Trans pennine.

The following quotes are from the DfT document:

On the GWML: It is currently expected that early works will take place between 2012 and 2014, with the bulk of the construction between 2014 and 2016. Electric services will be introduced progressively: London to Oxford, Newbury and Bristol by the end of 2016, and London to Swansea by the end of 2017.

On the Liverpool-Manchester route: Electric train services will be able to operate within four years.

So from that you can deduce that the northern route will be finished first, and before the major parts of the GWML work starts.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on July 29, 2009, 09:59:15

So from that you can deduce that the northern route will be finished first, and before the major parts of the GWML work starts.

So, will it be the same team doing both?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 29, 2009, 10:10:47
Probably more a good opportunity to get wiring teams trained up to use their 'factory' trains on a quieter line than the GWML, for details of these and assorted video clips see http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=4549&NewsAreaID=2&SearchCategoryID=2 (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Content/Detail.asp?ReleaseID=4549&NewsAreaID=2&SearchCategoryID=2)

Plus the line offers some challenging ground conditions on Chat Moss, which is a huge peat bog, with the embankment sitting on lots of stone and timber tipped in by the Stephensons.

I don't dispute Leeds-York, etc might come in handy for diversions, but if you're going to spend all this money, then it shoud be on something that has value 365 days a year, not just a few weekends along the way. With Transpennine, Northern and XC, who use the routes east of Leeds all the time, still running on diesel, it would be a waste of money.

And that's why I have my doubts about the point of Manchester-Bolton-Preston without doing other lines in the North West that connect with it, otherwise, apart from the EMUs to Scotland, it would still be a diesel railway most of the time.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: northwesterntrains on July 29, 2009, 11:04:49
A lot of people in the north of England think Manchester-Bolton-Preston and the four North TransPennine routes (Liverpool to Scarborough, Manchester Airport to Newcastle/Middlesbrough and Manchester to Hull) should be high on the list of electrification priorities.  The four North TransPennine routes all run between Manchester and Leeds via Huddersfield, with all but the Hull trains continuing to York, so that would mean 4 express trains an hour in each direction and many local services could be switched to electric with bigger, newer diesel trains available to replace 2 car 158s on express routes that don't get electrified.

Manchester-Bolton-Preston electrification would see 3 trains in a 2 hour period in each direction be able to switch to electric without re-routing (Hazel Grove to Preston and Manchester Airport to Glasgow/Edinburgh.)  Then electrifying Preston to Blackpool would increase that to 5 trains in a 2 hour period. 

When TP Express took over the Manchester to Scotland service there was criticism as they had to make Manchester Airport to Windermere a limited service to have enough units, the 185s are smaller than the 220s that Virgin had been using and the 185s are slower.  TP Express also had to reduce times that trains were stopped at stations, like Preston to keep the timings competitive as the 185s can only go at 100mph, which can increase the chance of a late running train being unable to make up time.  So the re-routing of the Scotland service can overcome some of these problems, but does disadvantage the people of Bolton.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 29, 2009, 14:07:34
I was particularly thinking of going on to Blackpool - three trains out of eight or so in two hours off-peak isn't too compelling a case - and TPEx is an obvious route to do - think of the performance bonus from electrification on the climbs to Standedge tunnel


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on July 29, 2009, 14:52:14
RE Manchester Bolton Preston keep forgetting XC are DEMUs still thinking of when I took the Sussex Scot from Reading to Penrith. Wondered why 47 not changed at Coventry or New Street, forgiot it went via Stockport and  Bolton. Loco changed at Preston.

Now if XC were loco hauled a lot more lines become immediately viable.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on July 29, 2009, 19:07:34

Returning to the question of what to do when the wires end - North of Oxford and West of Newbury, the options would seem to be:

1. Diesels under the wires - unattractive on a list of criteria.

2. More intensive diesel shuttles beyond the wires - gives more services but needs a change and you only get a 165...never a Mk3.

3. Hauling the 319's to Bedwyn/Westbury or Worcester - possible with a 210 type power car, or perhaps a Voyager version, (being DEMU). Are the auto-couplers reliable enough for frequent splitting? The Southern managed with buck-eyes and manual jumpers at places like Staines and Ascot, for years.

Thoughts?

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 29, 2009, 20:39:37

Returning to the question of what to do when the wires end - North of Oxford and West of Newbury, the options would seem to be:

1. Diesels under the wires - unattractive on a list of criteria.

2. More intensive diesel shuttles beyond the wires - gives more services but needs a change and you only get a 165...never a Mk3.

3. Hauling the 319's to Bedwyn/Westbury or Worcester - possible with a 210 type power car, or perhaps a Voyager version, (being DEMU). Are the auto-couplers reliable enough for frequent splitting? The Southern managed with buck-eyes and manual jumpers at places like Staines and Ascot, for years.

Thoughts?

OTC


It will be option 1, option 2 is far too train and train crew intensive and option 3 will require something built and interfaced with cascaded stock.

Option 1 is simple and practical, the only risk is the through Padd to the areas past the end of the wires might end up with a reduced frequency but that may happen anyway


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 29, 2009, 22:47:25
I suppose they'll be a kind of Didcot - Morteon shuttle for the southern Cotswolds using cascaded 166s, and HSTs/IEPs on the Malvern/ Herefords.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Mookiemoo on July 29, 2009, 22:51:08
I suppose they'll be a kind of Didcot - Morteon shuttle for the southern Cotswolds using cascaded 166s, and HSTs/IEPs on the Malvern/ Herefords.

ha ha

you and I wish

What ir probably means is HST/IEP electrics end at oxford and we get some sort of shuttle beyond - cos we aint important like


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Mookiemoo on July 29, 2009, 22:51:51
I suppose they'll be a kind of Didcot - Morteon shuttle for the southern Cotswolds using cascaded 166s, and HSTs/IEPs on the Malvern/ Herefords.

ha ha

you and I wish

What ir probably means is HST/IEP electrics end at oxford and we get some sort of shuttle beyond - cos we aint important like

Yes I'm a scouser - hence the like

Oh sorry - I see loads of scouser jibes in the light of recent issues


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 29, 2009, 22:57:25
What ir probably means is HST/IEP electrics end at oxford and we get some sort of shuttle beyond - cos we aint important like

I thought that was what you were advocating as a sensible way forward a few weeks back? Apart from those trains that you use of course...  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Mookiemoo on July 29, 2009, 22:58:43
What ir probably means is HST/IEP electrics end at oxford and we get some sort of shuttle beyond - cos we aint important like

I thought that was what you were advocating as a sensible way forward a few weeks back? Apart from those trains that you use of course...  ;)

No - I still think there should be peak express through trains with off peak stoppers and peak shuttles for the shacks

HOWEVER - I forsee NO through trains under electrification


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 29, 2009, 23:02:13
HOWEVER - I forsee NO through trains under electrification

Hmmm - I foresee you'll be returning that crystal ball back for a refund in 2017.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Mookiemoo on July 29, 2009, 23:03:19
HOWEVER - I forsee NO through trains under electrification

Hmmm - I foresee you'll be returning that crystal ball back for a refund in 2017.

Hope you are right - and you may be as long as the SAS are still based at hereford


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on July 29, 2009, 23:08:20
They'd be mad. There is a large market waiting to be tapped into. The poor London - Worcestershire/ Herefordshire road links increase this, making a 2 hour through rail journey vital for the region.

Meanwhile Chiltern just sucks up the custom. You would think the 1025 and 1100 arrivals at Marylebone to be peak services! The 1700, 1800 etc. evening departures are equally rammed - and that's even with a relief service which drops off the pre Banbury commuters! Many of these people are coming from Warwick Parkway. I wonder where a percentage of these come from?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 30, 2009, 00:27:20
Maybe you should all, as I said previously, read the DfT report, but I'll save you the trouble, so here's the relevant bit:

"The proposed fleet for an electrified Great Western Main Line to Swansea will include a proportion of ^bi-mode^ trains, so that destinations including Worcester, Gloucester, Cheltenham, Carmarthen and the South West
beyond Bristol continue to enjoy through trains while also gaining the benefits of electrification. These bi-mode trains have a diesel generator vehicle at one end and an electric transformer vehicle at the other end. This
allows bi-mode trains to operate ^off the wires^ to maintain through services and provide diversionary services."
Someone I spoke to on Tuesday suggested that proportion could be as high as 50 per cent.

I remain sceptical about the ability of a 10-car version to climb Campden bank, or get over the Malverns on diesel power in the same time as an HST, while having just one engine, but 2X5 cars, with two diesels, like a certain train we all know, shouldn't have any trouble.

Why on earth do you think they would return to turfing everyone out at Oxford? Though of course that's okay for those of us living at the 'shacks' that actually produce the revenue to pay for Worcester's services, however slow they are. You don't put in ^62m - and probably more once they've finished - redoubling a route and then chuck that investment away.

Please spare us the paranoia and stick to complaining about journey times and telling us how great Chiltern is - that way, we all know where we stand. And if a fast service is so vital for Worcester, why were you having a go at people from Plymouth wanting the same for their considerably larger city?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on July 30, 2009, 00:50:52
i find this interesting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFg0EOUJNrc&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk%2FContent%2FDetail.asp%3FReleaseID%3D4549%26NewsAreaID%3D2%26SearchCategoryID%3D2&feature=player_embedded


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 30, 2009, 02:00:00
Maybe you should all, as I said previously, read the DfT report ...

To be fair, willc, the link posted originally by RailCornwall on this topic no longer works (due to some belated tinkering by someone at the DfT, no doubt?)  ::)

However, as I write, this link does work - http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf  ;) :D ;D


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on July 30, 2009, 09:48:34
Interesting piece in Maidenhead Advertiser today.

Maidenhead councillor moaning that extending the wires West of Maidenhead will mean Crossrail will no longer terminate at Maidenhead and, therefore, Maidenhead will lose fast trains to Padd, thus Maidenhead will get a worse service as Crossrail is all stations.

Think he's a bit muddled Crossrail from Maidenhed was always going to be stoppers, with wires from Reading/Oxford/Newbury it opens up the possibility of of semis from Reading et al, as now,  to Padd (or down the tunnel).

Presumably semis down onto Crossrail can't be done because of the two separate funding streams.  I paid for this bit you can't run your trains on my bit. Hopefully full electrification will mean freight can still run on the Relief, and, therefore, Crossrail could save money and not build the flyover/diveunder at Acton or am I being stupid?

Cookham councillor also quoted saying he fears if Marlow not electrified it will be a diesel shuttle all day with no through trains to Padd. He's got a point.

Windsor branch is an obvious case for slinging a bit of surplus wire. It could be possible to run a two train ten minute shuttle.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on July 30, 2009, 10:48:14
Maybe you should all, as I said previously, read the DfT report ...

To be fair, willc, the link posted originally by RailCornwall on this topic no longer works (due to some belated tinkering by someone at the DfT, no doubt?)  ::)

However, as I write, this link does work - http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf  ;) :D ;D

But DafT is so proud of the announcement that there's been a link straight to it from their homepage for the past week - not too hard to find.

I should think someone, somewhere in Network Rail is now hard at work with a calculator trying to make the numbers - never mind the logic - of wiring the Thames Valley branches stack up. But would the sky really fall in if they lost all of two peak through trains - and if you live in Marlow, you have to change to and from these trains at Bourne End anyway, as the branch Turbo is locked in during the peaks, while if you're going home to Henley at about 6pm, an 18.05 PAD departure with a change at Twyford gets you back at 18.43, while the 18.12 through train arrives at 19.13 - which would you take?

And it's probably unfair to characterise Crossrail as all stoppers, I think they have always intended to mix in some semis as well. But why would FGW stop making Maidenhead calls with peak fasts to or from Didcot or Oxford, which is what happens at present? I'm not aware there's anything saying Maidenhead would have become the exclusive domain of Crossrail.

I think in the cold light of day that logic will prevail on the sort of trains going into the tunnel - if it can work north-south on Thameslink, then why not east-west too? And Adonis did explicitly say he was going to talk to Boris about the possibilities.

The DfT report adds the following: "Electrification west of Maidenhead also makes it possible to extend Crossrail services through to Reading. This could bring significant benefits, giving Reading and the wider Thames Valley (my italics) direct rail access to London and the City, while also creating extra capacity in the existing Paddington terminus for longer distance services. The costs and benefits of this option will be considered by the Government and its project partners in Crossrail."


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 30, 2009, 10:59:25
Cookham councillor also quoted saying he fears if Marlow not electrified it will be a diesel shuttle all day with no through trains to Padd. He's got a point.

He has got a point, and presumably he's been saying it since Crossrail was given the go-ahead, as the through Marlow trains have been threatened ever since. In my opinion it's a small price to pay as long as the branch connects in with something nippy both ways at Maidenhead. Though I'm sure my opinion would change if I was a commuter on the route! I can't blame him from being worried - and it's worth recognising that there are inevitably going to be a few losers as a result of Crossrail and the wider GWML electrification, as well as many, many winners.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 30, 2009, 11:20:29
The through trains from Bourne End if the did cease as the result of Crossrail well there will still be one change of train to get to central London instead of Padd it will be Maidenhead ...... Problem ???

DfT may well be looking at the Crossrail

As for the wires on the TV branches that will I suspect become inevitable in the longer term the TOC will not want the odd diesel sets to maintain.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on July 30, 2009, 12:47:43
As for the wires on the TV branches that will I suspect become inevitable in the longer term the TOC will not want the odd diesel sets to maintain.

You may well be right. Though in the shorter term there's 18 2-car Class 165's in FGW's fleet. If you cascade most of the 3-car 165/6's further west, then a fleet of 18 2-car's would be just about right to operate the remaining non-electrified LTV routes:

West Ealing to Greenford - 2 units
Slough to Windsor - 1 unit
Maidenhead to Marlow - 2 units (3 in peak)
Twyford to Henley - 1 unit (2 in peak)
Reading to Basingstoke - 2 units
Oxford to Banbury - 2 units
Moreton to Didcot - 2 units
TOTAL = 14 maximum diagrams for 18 trains. Just about right.

It assumes that the suggested Moreton-Didcot shuttle plan still goes ahead despite partial electrification of the route, and that the Bicester route is using shiny new units as EWR and Chiltern plan. 2-Car trains (strengthened to 4-car on some peak services) would be adequate capacity wise.

Then you'd want to probably keep some 3-cars for the Gatwicks (assuming that's not been electrified), and possibly some units for the service beyond Newbury to Bedwyn - say a total of 10 - that would mean around 20 3-car Turbos could be off to 'modernise' the West fleet.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 30, 2009, 13:30:52
Then you'd want to probably keep some 3-cars for the Gatwicks (assuming that's not been electrified),
Reading Gatwick electrification is seen as an infil, some long bits of infil but in reality not to many substations required as the nonelectrifed sections cross plenty of electrified routes also there is a 33kV feeder route through Dorking put in in the 1980's

But you are right the fossil fuel powered units will be around in the TV patch for a while after electrification


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on July 30, 2009, 23:29:01
Then you'd want to probably keep some 3-cars for the Gatwicks (assuming that's not been electrified),
Reading Gatwick electrification is seen as an infil, some long bits of infil but in reality not to many substations required as the nonelectrifed sections cross plenty of electrified routes also there is a 33kV feeder route through Dorking put in in the 1980's



It's a pity that NR's Electrification RUS prioritised this route as Tier 4 (i.e. bottom) when it is in fact an "International Gateway" and is supposed to have priority, to stop Johnny Foreigner getting early poor impressions of the UK. The dozy Local Authorities and SEEDA couldn't be bothered to support it. In my experience it is well used all day and is very unsuitable for the heavy luggage of the air travellers alongside crowds of school children, even if the Tadpoles were worse.

An Institution contact at NR told me that they had a number of serviceable dc substations in store as a result of the Southern PUG, looking for a home....also as previously observed, the 319's are dual voltage.

OTC



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 31, 2009, 14:21:23
An Institution contact at NR told me that they had a number of serviceable dc substations in store as a result of the Southern PUG, looking for a home....also as previously observed, the 319's are dual voltage.

OTC
The kit in store at Luggershal from PSU is not as complete as some may think, otherwise we in II SPC E & P would not be placing orders with manufactures for the existing renewals we are currently doing, we have used a lot of the items either for emergency replacement of kit that has failed in service or for renewals.  Also a lot of the kit PSU bought was for a specific task eg adding an addition rectifier to a substation therefore not all the feeder breakers are fitted with the right protection and retro fitting can be very costly compared with buying new from scratch.
The biggest project in the SE apart from Thameslink is power supply upgrade on the Brighton Main Line, the separation of LUL traction from NR thereby allowing NR to raise its London area traction voltage from 660 to 750 and then there is the Wessex power supply upgrade to run 12 car trains and to improve performance on the Pompy main line, all of this is not event taking into account the upgrading that is planned for Kent


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on August 17, 2009, 12:11:35
An addition to the UK Electrification Agenda (albeit out of the FGW area) was announced today by Network Rail and Transport Scotland. The plans cover electrification of Glasgow - Edinburgh and other lines in the Central belt of Scotland ...

BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/8204902.stm)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on August 17, 2009, 16:02:47
Good news, but I have comments about the proposed 13 tph!

Where did they get 13 tph from? Are they including the local services via Bathgate? if not, then where is the platform space at Queen Street?

Hopefully this will start a rolling programme for Scotland, nest on the list must be the route to Aberdeen (and Fife Circle), allowing the elimination of hybrid IEPs from the ECML, and to encourage the electrification of the XC routes.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on August 17, 2009, 18:33:59
Good news, though I can't see Aberdeen being electrified anytime soon - haven't FirstScotrail taken delivery of a brand new diesel fleet for many of its services over the last few years? There's certainly nothing on its last legs like in other areas of the UK. The handful of trains operated through to Aberdeen from London would never stand as a business case - especially given the Bi-mode IEP's usefulness on such a service, i.e. 75% electric hauled and the remaining 25% on diesel. XC hardly touch Aberdeen either. In my mind there are literally dozens of better prospects for electrification.

I also love the article stating that for every minute taken off the Glasgow to Edinburgh journey time, there is a net worth of ^60m to the wider economy. How the hell can you calculate that to such a specific number?! What a load of pie-in-the-sky nonsense!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on August 17, 2009, 19:12:07
I also love the article stating that for every minute taken off the Glasgow to Edinburgh journey time, there is a net worth of ^60m to the wider economy. How the hell can you calculate that to such a specific number?! What a load of pie-in-the-sky nonsense!

They probably calculated that the scheme will bring ^600 million of overall benefits - which works out at ^60 per minute saved.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on August 17, 2009, 23:30:46
This would eliminate a lot of the remaining diesel working in the Central Belt, bar longer-distance trains, so it offers the prospect of a good few 170s moving to the Highland lines and the Glasgow & South Western area, which in turn would release a number of 158s and 156s for work south of the border.

Before there is any prospect of going to Aberdeen, the logical next step would be to wire the remaining suburban routes out of Glasgow Central (Paisley Canal, East Kilbride and Barrhead - or all the way to Kilmarnock), probably leaving only the GSW main line to Carlisle and the Stranraer line to diesels.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on August 19, 2009, 21:25:29
Something is puzzling me about the Scottish announcement. 3 days later and there is not a jot about it on scotland.gov.uk, transport scotland or network rail sites. What does 1Bn pay for as well? It must include expected rolling stock (no cast off Class 319s there then) and probably maintenance value of a contract for rolling stock as well. I expect the short spur to link the Falkirk route with the proposed Gogar station is thrown in as well for good measure.

Agree with Willc re future priorities. I've been trying to estimate how much stock might be released and cascaded. Ed - Glasgow needs 8 diagrams of 3 car 170s, but many are doubled up in peak. If all are then that would be 48 vehicles. Alloa/Dunblane and local workings to Cumbernauld and Falkirk need about 12 units, say 24 vehicles. Add in cover for availability and it could be around 80 vehicles, some of which would be used for growth on diesel services and the proposed Waverley route. So maybe 60 to 70 available for other operators?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on August 19, 2009, 22:04:02
Something is puzzling me about the Scottish announcement. 3 days later and there is not a jot about it on scotland.gov.uk, transport scotland or network rail sites. What does 1Bn pay for as well? It must include expected rolling stock (no cast off Class 319s there then) and probably maintenance value of a contract for rolling stock as well. I expect the short spur to link the Falkirk route with the proposed Gogar station is thrown in as well for good measure.

Agree with Willc re future priorities. I've been trying to estimate how much stock might be released and cascaded. Ed - Glasgow needs 8 diagrams of 3 car 170s, but many are doubled up in peak. If all are then that would be 48 vehicles. Alloa/Dunblane and local workings to Cumbernauld and Falkirk need about 12 units, say 24 vehicles. Add in cover for availability and it could be around 80 vehicles, some of which would be used for growth on diesel services and the proposed Waverley route. So maybe 60 to 70 available for other operators?

I expect they'll use them on Inverness - Aberdeen and perhaps Far North duties, allowing 158s to go to Highlands and 156s to be off loaded. Scotrail will want to keep air conditioned units!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on August 21, 2009, 17:01:52
The best thing about Adonis's plan is that he has linked electrification to rolling stock replacement and cascading which noone in power has done for a long time.  If you electrify a route run by clapped out desiels which would otherwise need to be replaced by very costly desiels rather than cheaper electric trains then your business case for electrification looks much better.  He has also been very clever or lucky with fitting the timing to the release of Thameslink EMUs

GWML, then MML then cross country makes a lot of sense (with some fill-in and shorter routes alongside,  Ie Manchester-Preston and one of more of the Transpennine routes)   Scottish local electrification may stack up as might the valley lines in Wales but I am not convinced by taking the wires to Aberdeen or Inverness - both comparatively small places.     


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on August 22, 2009, 09:28:56
The NR business case for electrification put the MML ahead of the GWML.  The GWML came out ahead by DfT due to the rolling stock on the GWML needing replacement, the cascade of the old Thameslink stock and that much of the re-signaling is planed to be replace as part of Crossrail, Reading remodeling and programed renewals.   

Also despite the views of some about the difficulties of Severn Tunnel and Bath area there are very few major civil obstacles or complex junction on the GWML, even these are not that complex compared to some locations where tunnels have had to be re-bored etc


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on August 22, 2009, 10:07:32
The GWML rolling stock (presumably you mean the venerable 43s and Mk3s) may well need replacing, but what odds some of it turns up elsewhere on the network before being consigned to history? CrossCountry - or Cinderella if you prefer! - would be favourite, as well as existing and new 'Open Access' operators. Maybe ATW and Scotrail, or their sucessors, could find a use for some of 'em.
Or, strategic reserve anyone?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on August 24, 2009, 00:47:46
The GWML rolling stock (presumably you mean the venerable 43s and Mk3s) may well need replacing, but what odds some of it turns up elsewhere on the network before being consigned to history? CrossCountry - or Cinderella if you prefer! - would be favourite, as well as existing and new 'Open Access' operators. Maybe ATW and Scotrail, or their sucessors, could find a use for some of 'em.
Or, strategic reserve anyone?

I'd hope that the MML is electrified too before too long and that XC gets their old Meridians.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on August 24, 2009, 10:07:14
I believe that some hsts will be going to crosscountry once they are withdrawn by FGW. It is expected that the Midland Mainline between Bedford & Sheffield will be electrified after the great western together with the crosscountry route between Bristol & Birmingham menaing that some crosscountry services from bristol will be able to be worked by electric trains.

It is expected that the following routes will be electrified in time:

Great western Mainline ( London - Swansea & London - Exeter St Davids Via Bristol & Westbury) - FGW are pushing for the wires to be put all of the way to exeter.

Midland Mainline ( Bedord - Sheffield)

Bristol - Birmingham New St ( Meaning that is the gw is electrified to exter then all the Exeter - Manchester services can be worked by emu's)

Cardiff Valley Lines

North Wales coast

Wrexham - Bidston



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on August 24, 2009, 10:46:31
Great western Mainline ( London - Swansea & London - Exeter St Davids Via Bristol & Westbury) - FGW are pushing for the wires to be put all of the way to exeter.

Well done first (their franchise will end before electrification so they don't have to do this)

Does anyone know the rational for only wiring to Newbury.  More Turbos terminate at Bedwin (only about 10 miles further).  Wiring to there would mean getting rid of teh turbos completely.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: vacman on August 24, 2009, 13:00:54
Great western Mainline ( London - Swansea & London - Exeter St Davids Via Bristol & Westbury) - FGW are pushing for the wires to be put all of the way to exeter.

Well done first (their franchise will end before electrification so they don't have to do this)

Does anyone know the rational for only wiring to Newbury.  More Turbos terminate at Bedwin (only about 10 miles further).  Wiring to there would mean getting rid of teh turbos completely.
To be honest, they may aswell wire to Westbury then Westbury-Bath, the Bedwyn services could then continue to westbury (to cover Pewsey), then westbury-cardiff Stoppers could be EMU's and also gives a diversionary route for padd-bristol.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on August 24, 2009, 13:58:26
Great western Mainline ( London - Swansea & London - Exeter St Davids Via Bristol & Westbury) - FGW are pushing for the wires to be put all of the way to exeter.

Well done first (their franchise will end before electrification so they don't have to do this)

Does anyone know the rational for only wiring to Newbury.  More Turbos terminate at Bedwin (only about 10 miles further).  Wiring to there would mean getting rid of teh turbos completely.
To be honest, they may aswell wire to Westbury then Westbury-Bath, the Bedwyn services could then continue to westbury (to cover Pewsey), then westbury-cardiff Stoppers could be EMU's and also gives a diversionary route for padd-bristol.

You are absolutely right.  I guess these  things need to be done one step at a time through and getting rid of teh TV turbos by taking the wires to Bedwin or Pewsey would seem a sensible first step.  Then take the wires to cardiff and Pompy when the cascaded turbos on those routes are due to be scrapped.

My fear is that they will decide that stopping the wires at Newbury will be an excuse to buy loads of expensive bi-mode IEP trains.  I'd much rather that we had a few years of a few deisels under the wires than bi-mode trains cos once they are delivered they will be arround for 40 years and act as a disincentive to expand electrification duringtheir life.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on August 24, 2009, 18:17:18
Does anyone know the rational for only wiring to Newbury.  More Turbos terminate at Bedwin (only about 10 miles further).  Wiring to there would mean getting rid of teh turbos completely.

A couple of reasons, between Newbury and Bedwin is the boundary between Reading PSB and Westbury PSB to extend past this boundary will require immunisation of signaling and telecoms at Westbury Box, to go past Newbury would need another grid site, the GWML will have one at Old Oak Common the next will be at Didcot going past Newbury will go beyond the feed limit.  Once the Reading remodeling is complete I suspect there will be a change to the service pattern on the Berks n Hants irrespective of electrification.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on August 24, 2009, 18:23:59
Does anyone know the rational for only wiring to Newbury.  More Turbos terminate at Bedwin (only about 10 miles further).  Wiring to there would mean getting rid of teh turbos completely.

A couple of reasons, between Newbury and Bedwin is the boundary between Reading PSB and Westbury PSB to extend past this boundary will require immunisation of signaling and telecoms at Westbury Box, to go past Newbury would need another grid site, the GWML will have one at Old Oak Common the next will be at Didcot going past Newbury will go beyond the feed limit.  Once the Reading remodeling is complete I suspect there will be a change to the service pattern on the Berks n Hants irrespective of electrification.

I was under the impression that Reading had control until just east of Lavington.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on August 24, 2009, 18:36:25
Does anyone know the rational for only wiring to Newbury.  More Turbos terminate at Bedwin (only about 10 miles further).  Wiring to there would mean getting rid of teh turbos completely.

A couple of reasons, between Newbury and Bedwin is the boundary between Reading PSB and Westbury PSB to extend past this boundary will require immunisation of signaling and telecoms at Westbury Box, to go past Newbury would need another grid site, the GWML will have one at Old Oak Common the next will be at Didcot going past Newbury will go beyond the feed limit.  Once the Reading remodeling is complete I suspect there will be a change to the service pattern on the Berks n Hants irrespective of electrification.

Thanks for the explanation.  I am glad that it has all be thought about and reassured that there is a sensible engineering rather than political or penny-pinching explanation.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on August 28, 2009, 22:38:26
My fear is that they will decide that stopping the wires at Newbury will be an excuse to buy loads of expensive bi-mode IEP trains.  I'd much rather that we had a few years of a few deisels under the wires than bi-mode trains cos once they are delivered they will be arround for 40 years and act as a disincentive to expand electrification duringtheir life.

I fear the same. Also note the ECML, and the fact that bi mods will be used on services beyond Leeds and Edinburgh.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on August 28, 2009, 22:59:41
One important factor missing from this debate is the role of freight. A lack of infill electrification is a major hindrence to FOCs moving away from diesel haulage. It's no surprise that no new electric freight locos have been built since the introduction of the Class 92s in the early 1990s. Electrification that solely benefits passenger operations will cause major pathing issues for FOCs with their reliance on diesel traction.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on August 29, 2009, 07:46:05
One important factor missing from this debate is the role of freight. A lack of infill electrification is a major hindrence to FOCs moving away from diesel haulage. It's no surprise that no new electric freight locos have been built since the introduction of the Class 92s in the early 1990s. Electrification that solely benefits passenger operations will cause major pathing issues for FOCs with their reliance on diesel traction.
The former chairman and owners of EWS (possibly the largest of the FOC's) had a policy of diesel traction, DB Schenker may have a different view after all the FOC's need to make their case and a commitment to use electrification, which I am sure they will.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on August 29, 2009, 15:16:30
My fear is that they will decide that stopping the wires at Newbury will be an excuse to buy loads of expensive bi-mode IEP trains.  I'd much rather that we had a few years of a few deisels under the wires than bi-mode trains cos once they are delivered they will be arround for 40 years and act as a disincentive to expand electrification duringtheir life.

I fear the same. Also note the ECML, and the fact that bi mods will be used on services beyond Leeds and Edinburgh.

Although the whole train is correctly referred to as 'bi-mode', in fact 9 of the 10 cars (or 4 of the 5) are exactly the same build as the full electric version. So they don't have to be around for 40 years in the as delivered condition, as long as further electric end cars can be built.  I think it is important to remember that the diesel end isn't really a 'power car' like in an HST, it is just a generator car for the distributed traction on the rest of the train, ie it cannot move on its own.  Even the full diesel IEP is really an 8 car EMU, sandwiched between its two diesel generator cars.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: drandles on August 29, 2009, 17:42:46
My fear is that they will decide that stopping the wires at Newbury will be an excuse to buy loads of expensive bi-mode IEP trains.  I'd much rather that we had a few years of a few deisels under the wires than bi-mode trains cos once they are delivered they will be arround for 40 years and act as a disincentive to expand electrification duringtheir life.

I fear the same. Also note the ECML, and the fact that bi mods will be used on services beyond Leeds and Edinburgh.

Although the whole train is correctly referred to as 'bi-mode', in fact 9 of the 10 cars (or 4 of the 5) are exactly the same build as the full electric version. So they don't have to be around for 40 years in the as delivered condition, as long as further electric end cars can be built.  I think it is important to remember that the diesel end isn't really a 'power car' like in an HST, it is just a generator car for the distributed traction on the rest of the train, ie it cannot move on its own.  Even the full diesel IEP is really an 8 car EMU, sandwiched between its two diesel generator cars.

Paul

Unfortunately, as I understand, the performance of the bi-mode IEP when in diesel mode will be significantly inferior to present day HSTs, so that services worked by these trains are likely to be slower than present day services. While this may not matter for short extensions from eg Bristol to Weston or Swansea to Carmarthen, it becomes a more serious issue for Newbury-Penzance or Oxford-Hereford, or Swindon-Cheltenham.  So I anticipate that Devon and Cornwall will continue to be served by HSTs for many years. The all diesel version of the IEP has apparently been dropped.

Incidentally, I am told that the plan is to use bimode IEPs on a semi-fast service from Paddington to serve Hungerford, Bedwyn and probably Pewsey and Westbury. On the other hand, it seems that electrification from Newbury to Bedwyn in the inital phase  is not entirely ruled out.

A further downside of the electrification plan is that the new dmus for the Bristol area which were due to enter services from 2011-12 have also been cancelled and it will now be 2017-18 or so before any significant improvements are made to the Cardiff-Bristol-Portsmouth services, using second hand turbos from the Thames Valley.

David


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on August 29, 2009, 18:38:46
One important factor missing from this debate is the role of freight. A lack of infill electrification is a major hindrence to FOCs moving away from diesel haulage. It's no surprise that no new electric freight locos have been built since the introduction of the Class 92s in the early 1990s. Electrification that solely benefits passenger operations will cause major pathing issues for FOCs with their reliance on diesel traction.
The former chairman and owners of EWS (possibly the largest of the FOC's) had a policy of diesel traction, DB Schenker may have a different view after all the FOC's need to make their case and a commitment to use electrification, which I am sure they will.

I think you can take it for granted the Germans in particular will back wider use of electric traction where possible. The latest issue of rail says that DB Schenker is taking over haulage of Stobart Rail trains from DRS and will use Class 92s on the Daventry-Scotland services.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on August 30, 2009, 11:10:10
Ian Walmsley writing in September's Modern Railway suggests what he calls a "schizo-Voyager" basically a Voyager with additonal panto graph/transformer car for running  electric under the wires and diesel off the wires. Given their over provision of power the addition of another 40 tonnes of train weight hardly dents the HP/tonne ratio on diesel. Plus there would be more seats or perhaps reinstate the buffet.

He reckons it would be 5 better overall from Bristol to Penazance with 13*90 second stops and 5 at Plymouth, than the current 225 minutes for an 8 car HST. Whereas an IEP bi mode would be 8 worse.

On a further question, if suitable balises were fitted could Super Voyagers tilt in Cornwall?



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on August 31, 2009, 16:53:26
Another snippet from Roger Ford's column in Sept Modern Rail is that electrification of the Severn Tunnel will use rigid bar conductor. The firm he mentioned is Furrer & Frey, if you look down this page of their 2007 news:
http://www.furrerfrey.ch/web/furrerfrey/en/news/news-2007.html (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/web/furrerfrey/en/news/news-2007.html)
...there is an item about Sunderland North tunnel, this is where NR replaced the previous system with rigid bar because there were corrosion issues with the previous OHLE, which only dated from the Sunderland extension, somewhat less than ten years.  I think the same kit is used in the recently electrified tunnels between Waverley and Haymarket.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on August 31, 2009, 19:27:12
Another snippet from Roger Ford's column in Sept Modern Rail is that electrification of the Severn Tunnel will use rigid bar conductor. The firm he mentioned is Furrer & Frey, if you look down this page of their 2007 news:
http://www.furrerfrey.ch/web/furrerfrey/en/news/news-2007.html (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/web/furrerfrey/en/news/news-2007.html)
...there is an item about Sunderland North tunnel, this is where NR replaced the previous system with rigid bar because there were corrosion issues with the previous OHLE, which only dated from the Sunderland extension, somewhat less than ten years.  I think the same kit is used in the recently electrified tunnels between Waverley and Haymarket.
Paul
The rigid bar system is used on the Trowse Bridge (Norwich) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Trowse_Bridge.jpg)(image from Wikipidia) when it was electrified in the 80's  A swinging cantilever system using the rigid conductor was installed in North Pole Depot to allow the road that was used for lifting could also be used for normal maintenance.
From what the OLE design engineers has told be the plan is to install portal type structures inside Seven Tunnel to support the contact system, also classic Booster Transformer or return conductor system will be used where as the rest of the GWML will be Auto Transformer system.  There are train speed limitations with rigid contact equipment


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on September 01, 2009, 00:03:37
These limitations would be what exactly? The Furrer & Frey system has been tested up to 260kmh (that's 161mph for all those who seem to think using metric measurements is some kind of sinister European plot) in a tunnel in Austria, as I pointed out more than a year ago, when several people were busy insisting that the Severn Tunnel could never be electrified.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on September 01, 2009, 11:44:22
Getting back to rolling stock...

Based on a quick skim of the GWML RUS draft I linked to earlier, the bi-mode trains will be pairs of 5 cars, with splitting and joining. If this is the correct interpretation it seems to remove the problem of underpowered trains off the wires, but with the knock on effect of the 10 car train only having 8 x 26m passenger coaches...

This supports something I posted a while back, where I pointed out that the initial plans for IEP had most of the 10 car bi-mode trains on the ECML...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on September 01, 2009, 19:19:04
Section 8.7 of the RUS, starting on page 165 lays out a potential programme of future wiring for the region.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on September 01, 2009, 20:59:31
These limitations would be what exactly? The Furrer & Frey system has been tested up to 260kmh (that's 161mph for all those who seem to think using metric measurements is some kind of sinister European plot) in a tunnel in Austria, as I pointed out more than a year ago, when several people were busy insisting that the Severn Tunnel could never be electrified.
Not sure that a rigid OHLE contact system has been used in the UK at any thing approaching high speed.  I've never seen the Seven Tunnel as an impossible to electrify it is quite a large diameter tunnel a little damp in places but not the wettest of tunnels that have had 25kV run through them and lets face it 25kv runs through carriage washing plants  ;D

Furrer & Frey is the system being used to rewire the GE between Liverpool St and Shenfield / Southend, having seen some of it in the sky it looks a bit light weight compared to it predecessor but apparently it is performing very well.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: drandles on September 02, 2009, 07:42:12

Unfortunately, as I understand, the performance of the bi-mode IEP when in diesel mode will be significantly inferior to present day HSTs, so that services worked by these trains are likely to be slower than present day services. While this may not matter for short extensions from eg Bristol to Weston or Swansea to Carmarthen, it becomes a more serious issue for Newbury-Penzance or Oxford-Hereford, or Swindon-Cheltenham.  So I anticipate that Devon and Cornwall will continue to be served by HSTs for many years. The all diesel version of the IEP has apparently been dropped.

David

After some further reading, I have to correct myself here. It seems that a 2x5car IEP bi-mode train working on diesel will have much higher power at the rail (2x2MW) than a 2+8 HST (1x1.3MW) so that there should be no performance loss compared with present day services. Moreover there is very little performance difference on electric between the bi-mode and all electric versions which have the same power at the rail, although the bi-mode unit is slightly heavier and has fewer seats.
David




Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on September 02, 2009, 11:28:03
Having digested both the facts and learned arguments put forward about GW Electrification, my conclusions are:

1. It's the rolling stock, stupid.

2. New diesels aren't viable, replacement stock is (if it's electric).

3. Modernish emu's are cascadable for lives of at least 50 years (like HST's!).

4. Diesels under the wires are doubly wasteful, when they are needed elsewhere.

5. No one knows what to do when the wires end. This is what bothers people most.

I suspect that we'll end up with the new all-electric IEP's being hauled by the class 67's, beyond the wires. There are 30 of them, looking for a home, can put down about 1.9MW at rail and have high top speed if they can reach it. They are however only BoBo and weigh in at only 88t - could they climb the Devon banks?

For the 319's, either we terminate at Turbo shuttles beyond Oxford, Newbury and Swindon or use Turbos under the wires when they are needed elsewhere. The class 210 power car comes idly to mind....

( http://www.anteater.freeuk.com/MUgallery/demu/210oxf.htm)

All this is a long time ahead of course.

OTC



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: grahame on September 02, 2009, 12:14:16
Having digested both the facts and learned arguments put forward about GW Electrification, my conclusions are:

4. Diesels under the wires are doubly wasteful, when they are needed elsewhere.

All this is a long time ahead of course.


Can I take it that you also consider weekday diesel services that are on 3rd rail lines throughout are also wasteful ... and that would apply equally from next May as from 'a long time ahead'?   I'm trying to get my head round the logic of transferring the 158 that's been running the morning TransWilts to Swindon servivce  onto the Lymington branch.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: FlyingDutchman on September 02, 2009, 13:22:20
I would like to see the electrification extended to Exeter from Bristol.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on September 02, 2009, 13:28:36
After some further reading, I have to correct myself here. It seems that a 2x5car IEP bi-mode train working on diesel will have much higher power at the rail (2x2MW) than a 2+8 HST (1x1.3MW) so that there should be no performance loss compared with present day services.

Have you seen this David?

http://www.agilitytrains.com/assets/pdf/AT-090205-Key_Facts-Released-1_5.pdf (http://www.agilitytrains.com/assets/pdf/AT-090205-Key_Facts-Released-1_5.pdf) Hitach Data Sheet

I think I may have posted it before, but it gives all the figures needed. You seem to have worked out (as I did) that the 'power problems' are really only applicable to a 10 car bi-mode.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on September 02, 2009, 13:54:59
I would like to see the electrification extended to Exeter from Bristol.



It will be eventually, as far as Plymouth, according to the earlier NR electrification strategy. IIRC it is one of the phases of the XC NE/SW route, to follow on from Bromsgrove - Bristol.  Once it is done they intend to do Newbury - Taunton, which will allow Paddington - Plymouth. 

In other words the business case comes more from XC pax than locals.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on September 02, 2009, 13:58:43
Having digested both the facts and learned arguments put forward about GW Electrification, my conclusions are:

4. Diesels under the wires are doubly wasteful, when they are needed elsewhere.

All this is a long time ahead of course.


Can I take it that you also consider weekday diesel services that are on 3rd rail lines throughout are also wasteful ... and that would apply equally from next May as from 'a long time ahead'?   I'm trying to get my head round the logic of transferring the 158 that's been running the morning TransWilts to Swindon servivce  onto the Lymington branch.

Absolutely. Reading - Gatwick is my (local) hobbyhorse, only 3 substations needed....then lots of Turbos for TransWilts....

In the context of a rolling stock crunch, appropriating a dmu of 158 quality is appalling.

Surely there's a 507/8 or two sitting in a siding, somewhere.

MP (try Adonis' PPS), ORR, Audit Commission or Select Committee?

Good Luck

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on October 07, 2009, 23:51:35
Plans to run electric trains between Bristol and London have been thrown in to doubt after the Tories refused to commit to the ^1billion scheme.Last week Transport Secretary Lord Adonis gave a "cast-iron" guarantee the major overhaul, which would shave 12 minutes off journey times between Bristol and London, would go ahead under a Labour government.

But in an interview during the Conservatives' annual party conference, Shadow Transport Secretary Theresa Villiers told the Evening Post that was a pledge she would not make.
http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Electric-trains-Bristol-doubt/article-1397493-detail/article.html
What do you think?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: signalandtelegraph on October 08, 2009, 07:30:37
No change there then, the tories sold it and will want to wash their hands of it as much as they can if they become 'responsible' for it again. :(


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: moonrakerz on October 08, 2009, 08:19:31
or..........

perhaps she was telling the truth - we can't afford it !


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 08, 2009, 15:23:24
Why are you surprised? ::)

Of course the Tories won't do it! Say goodbye to Crossrail as well, that has not been confirmed by the Tories (Boris doesn't count, as he shares very little in common with his Westminster colleagues!) of course, Boris himself cut several transport projects proposed by Labour's Ken. That's what they do!

Their claim of "we can't afford it" is rubbish. We can't afford NOT to do it. The HSTs need replacing, and if the GWML is not electrified, we'll be confimed to DMUs for the next 40 years. The other benefit is the way Labour have planned a good rolling stock cascade, which co-incides with the Thameslink programme being completed.

But the Tories won't bother making the investment, despite the fact that the benefits will pay for it in the long term. And the fact that it is greener and reduces our reliance on foreign fossil fuels.

And they have the cheek of posting a video on their transport policy website saying that "passengers have had a bad deal under Labour".


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on October 08, 2009, 15:32:39
There might be changes and savings availble (I am yetto be convinced that the IEP is good value), but bottom line is that electrification would save money (ie more than pay for itself when you factor the cost of an HST replacement into account.  Even the dubious cost-benefit analysis calculations which are often baised against investment have a result which is described by DfT as "technically infinate".  Mathematically this is because the benefit/cost involves a divsion by zero because over a 40 year time-scale the cost is nil because electrification will actuallly save money.

If the Tories don't think that the government should pay for it it should let private capital build it. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on October 08, 2009, 15:37:38
This is slightly puzzling.

If you read the previous edition of RAIL, Theresa Villiers is quoted as saying that a Tory government would not squish plans for high-speed rail construction because it was a necessity, not an option. I would have assumed that the same would apply to electrification given it's hugely lower relative cost, but perhaps that's naive of me.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: grahame on October 08, 2009, 17:29:15
But the Tories won't bother making the investment, despite the fact that the benefits will pay for it in the long term. And the fact that it is greener and reduces our reliance on foreign fossil fuels.

And they have the cheek of posting a video on their transport policy website saying that "passengers have had a bad deal under Labour".

Hmmm ... your comment about the Tories "not bothering" is, I think, conjecture.  And in our neck of the woods, passengers HAVE had a bad deal under Labour.  We see places like Workington (population 19,000, labour marginal) with an hourly service, yet Melksham (20,000+, no hope of a labour gain) being cut back to just two trains a day, and they're running at [understatement ahead ...] less than ideal times of day.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: moonrakerz on October 08, 2009, 19:58:57
That's what they do!
Of course - nasty Tory cuts, good Labour "investment" !

But the Tories won't bother making the investment, despite the fact that the benefits will pay for it in the long term. And the fact that it is greener and reduces our reliance on foreign fossil fuels.


Most of our power station run on imported fossil fuels - don't quite get that one !!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 08, 2009, 20:23:42
But the Tories won't bother making the investment, despite the fact that the benefits will pay for it in the long term. And the fact that it is greener and reduces our reliance on foreign fossil fuels.

And they have the cheek of posting a video on their transport policy website saying that "passengers have had a bad deal under Labour".

Hmmm ... your comment about the Tories "not bothering" is, I think, conjecture.  And in our neck of the woods, passengers HAVE had a bad deal under Labour.  We see places like Workington (population 19,000, labour marginal) with an hourly service, yet Melksham (20,000+, no hope of a labour gain) being cut back to just two trains a day, and they're running at [understatement ahead ...] less than ideal times of day.

But if you look at the UK as a whole, I would say there has been an improvement. (esp in things like rolling stock quality)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on October 08, 2009, 20:53:54
Look, I am no fan of the Tories, but Labour hardly has a sparkling record on railways - going even further in cuts than Beeching proposed in the 1960s, eg closing Oxford-Cambridge.

All of the pre-Class 168 and 170 DMU fleet was authorised under the Tories, so that in the late 1980 and early 90s, after the painful lesson of the Pacers had been learned, the 150s, 155s and 156s, followed by 158/9s and Turbos, produced a vast improvement on ageing DMUs and Mk1 coaches on routes all over the country.

They also authorised ECML electrification - because BR produced a sound business case for doing it, rather like what Network Rail has set out to do with its electrification plan.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 09, 2009, 10:45:49
When I talk about improved rolling stock, I mean post 168s!

I would rather have mark ones than 150s, and rather Turbostars than both!

And in the 60s, people thought the day of the railway was over, and the day of the car had come.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 09, 2009, 11:39:28
When I talk about improved rolling stock, I mean post 168s!

Voyagers for example?  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: moonrakerz on October 09, 2009, 15:22:50
Look, I am no fan of the Tories, but Labour hardly has a sparkling record on railways - going even further in cuts than Beeching proposed in the 1960s, eg closing Oxford-Cambridge.

I have just finished reading a book on the railways. The author says in it, quite reasonably I think, "John Major had a plan, it may have been a **** plan, but he had one. The following Labour Governments never had a plan".


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 09, 2009, 15:54:15
When I talk about improved rolling stock, I mean post 168s!

Voyagers for example?  ;)

I mean getting rid of all the slam door stock in the South East, getting rid of most Mark 2s on Intercity runs, Electrostars, Turbostars.... even Desiros are better than what was on offer before.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 09, 2009, 16:37:24
Look, I am no fan of the Tories, but Labour hardly has a sparkling record on railways - going even further in cuts than Beeching proposed in the 1960s, eg closing Oxford-Cambridge.

I have just finished reading a book on the railways. The author says in it, quite reasonably I think, "John Major had a plan, it may have been a **** plan, but he had one. The following Labour Governments never had a plan".
There was and still is a plan, the plan sold to the Labour Government by the Board of Network Rail on the crash of Railtrack was - phase 1 stop the rot, Phase 2 build a better railway, we are now entering into phase 2, phase 3 is run an affordable and sustainable railway.

Anyone who works or has worked in the rail industry will know of the neglect due to lack of coherent investment over the last 40 years.  There is a real risk no matter who wins the next General Election that funding in large public projects will be cut or reduced, I know which Party will invest the most in the railways and it not the Party who just appointed a General!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on October 09, 2009, 17:24:19
... I know which Party will invest the most in the railways and it not the Party who just appointed a General!

Yeah, what an own goal.  ::)  After all, the current lot elevated an Admiral to the Lords to deal with security didn't they...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 09, 2009, 17:34:41
To get a sense of the railways under the Tories, just look at the film "Old, Dirty and Late" on YouTube.

Poor rolling stock, falling apart signal boxes etc. Well, I'm not sure about Dartford signal box (perhaps a signalman on here may know), but the rolling stock in Kent/Sussex is A LOT better now!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on October 09, 2009, 17:44:33
Let's just wait and see, shall we? Who knows how the Tories will run the railways if they win the next general election. If they do they may be a totally different party to previous Tory administrations. The current Labour Party bears little resemblence to previous Labour administrations.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on October 09, 2009, 17:57:44
To get a sense of the railways under the Tories, just look at the film "Old, Dirty and Late" on YouTube.

Poor rolling stock, falling apart signal boxes etc. Well, I'm not sure about Dartford signal box (perhaps a signalman on here may know), but the rolling stock in Kent/Sussex is A LOT better now!

You mean under a nationalised system? The Tories support privatised systems and the current system is far better.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 09, 2009, 19:15:40
That video doesn't criticise a nationalised railway, it's the lack of funding that is the problem!

If anything, the video shows how well BR managed under the circumstances.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: moonrakerz on October 09, 2009, 22:24:46
I didn't know that a Labour state run monopoly built our railway system    ::)  Always thought it was nasty, grasping, greedy capitalists - sort of like, ......well, ....... Tories !





Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on October 12, 2009, 16:20:16

My impression of the Tories' railway policy so far is they they are for high speed lines but possibly at the expense of the 'classic' railway. Selling the GW electrification as HSGW might help.

Looking at big ticket items the GW electrification is significant at 1Bn but much less so than Crossrail at 16Bn. GW electrification also depends on Thameslink 2000 for cast-offs. It is also important electorally.

GW electrification is a long time ahead but its book value implies spending on new IC trains. New technology (such as the French AGV) will be along by then  so it makes no sense to develop a small obsolescent class of IC stock (the IEP) of greater cost and lower performance than other European (by then) proven products. The sensible option is to just plan refurbishment (again) of the Mk3's and provision of about 35 class 89/91 locos and DVT's. This carves at lot off the Treasury book cost for the next c7 years, as required.

Then, nearer the time,  a business case will find that AGV + HSGW makes more sense (like Mk4 did over Mk3 on the EC) and so we can have non-stoppers to Bristol and S Wales. Everyone is happy.

Just a thought,

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 12, 2009, 18:50:09
From the Corporate Infrastructure briefing that have been running over the last week or so in NR the Board are extremely confidant that the future Government past the next general election will continue with the funding of the GWML electrification.  The Board have had many meetings with all the major political parties.

But as will things to do with the illustrious UK government I am not counting my chickens until they hatch


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on October 19, 2009, 23:49:11
Atoc is doing its bit to keep up the pressure, producing a top 10 list of extra wiring schemes it wants to see, including Bristol-Birmingham, Swindon-Gloucester and Basingstoke-Reading-Oxford-Banbury-Birmingham.
See http://www.atoc-comms.org/dynamic/atoc-press-story/997937/Electrify-more-train-lines-between-cities-to-cut-carbon-and-congestion (http://www.atoc-comms.org/dynamic/atoc-press-story/997937/Electrify-more-train-lines-between-cities-to-cut-carbon-and-congestion)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: stebbo on October 20, 2009, 20:39:36
There has to be a case for some public spending (on really worthwhile projects) after the next election to sustain the economy and railway electrification seems a no brainer. The HSTs, great though they have been, need replacing and I'm not sure the IEP does it.

Perhaps that way too, we can let the spending on banks subside gently without causing an almighty crash. Divert money into other areas of the economy.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on October 21, 2009, 13:30:54
The Oxford electrification has been scrapped, and is now "planned" rather than "definite" scheme.

This link is to an ATOC map. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ZIki7YXUWV4/StyHa8grNDI/AAAAAAAAA48/0RTNZ4im0bo/s1600-h/ATOC+sparks+map+16-10-09+.jpg


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on October 21, 2009, 14:44:31

It has been reported in one of the mags (you can look it up) that the HST's are being considered for life-extension until 2030, as suggested a few posts above......

The wires, however, are certain as they reduce spending but maintain service in an electorally sensitive region.

OTC



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: caliwag on October 21, 2009, 16:19:25
Excellent, they'll see me out. ;D


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on October 21, 2009, 17:28:34
The Oxford electrification has been scrapped, and is now "planned" rather than "definite" scheme.

This link is to an ATOC map. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ZIki7YXUWV4/StyHa8grNDI/AAAAAAAAA48/0RTNZ4im0bo/s1600-h/ATOC+sparks+map+16-10-09+.jpg

No it hasn't! ATOC cocked up a map, that's all. See elsewhere.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on October 21, 2009, 18:17:56
It has been reported in one of the mags (you can look it up) that the HST's are being considered for life-extension until 2030, as suggested a few posts above......
Sounds good to me as nothing yet that has been built for IC services comes anywhere near the quality of an HST. Ohhh okay maybe class 91 and MK4, they're not bad either.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: stebbo on October 23, 2009, 21:57:38
Mk III coaches are good. Don't knock them - especially when you've got a few more tables in like the good ole days.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on October 25, 2009, 11:46:55
I donmt see the concervatives scrapping the lectrification swcheme for teh great western simply because it will allow them to reduce the amount of subsidy they have to pay out as the electric trains are cheaper to operate.

also i have noticed that maybe the wires should be extended from Bristol to exeter st davids as this will mean that the Cardiff - Taunton & Weston Super Mare - Bristol Parkway services will be able to be operated using a few EMU'S thus meaning that FGW will be able to save at least 8 dmus which could help to boost capacity elsewhere


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on October 25, 2009, 12:20:47
also i have noticed that maybe the wires should be extended from Bristol to exeter st davids as this will mean that the Cardiff - Taunton & Weston Super Mare - Bristol Parkway services will be able to be operated using a few EMU'S thus meaning that FGW will be able to save at least 8 dmus which could help to boost capacity elsewhere
If you are going to electrify as far as Exeter St Davids you may as well continue though to Plymouth assuming the Dawlish Sea Wall does not prevent this.  Most intercity trains do not terminate at Exeter but continue through to Plymouth so if the electrification did end at Exeter diesel would be required for the section from Exeter to Plymouth.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: stebbo on October 25, 2009, 21:06:22
Which neatly brings us back to a topic I raised earlier/in another thread ie whether the old Southern route over Datmoor should be looked at or the old GWR route around the back of the coast?

The coastal route is great - and I spent many happy journeys on it in the late 50s and early 60s with steam - but I'm not sure it's good for long term electrification.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: XPT on April 23, 2010, 19:22:55
When it was announced back in July last year that the GWML was to be electrified, on the news reports I watched it said that the work to begin electrifying the Great Western mainline would begin immediately. That was on BBC, ITN, and Sky News. Now I didn't expect that to mean the work would begin that day or even that month.   But we are now some 9 months later in April, and there is still no sign of the physical work of the GWML actually being electrified.  So what's happening?   Is electrification of the GWML another of those things which never ends up actually going ahead?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on April 23, 2010, 19:30:41
Suggest asking that question after the general election but me thinks it could be kicked into the long grass for a few more years now IEP looks dead in the water. So another refurb/refit for the GW HST fleet in a few years time?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on April 23, 2010, 21:05:51
Work in the drawing office is still progress. It was always going to be ages ( a couple of years) before any masts started appearing beside the track IMHO.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on April 24, 2010, 08:11:37
Paul is correct there is a team working on the development, the process still has to follow GRIP at each GRIP stage there are number of deliverables that have to be meet to secure funding for the next stage.  The GWML is being developed at the same time as the other routes announced.  There is also collaboration between the GWML project and Crossrail.

My guess is, provided GWML electrification gets the funding it will do the Crossrail electrification area first.

Post election may have an effect of the whole scheme, part of the scheme or have no effect at all as has been the case since the First World War the UK railway is in the hands of the vagaries of the politicians


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on April 29, 2010, 14:08:30
I have heard the welsh assembly have said they would be willing to put some money forward to have the wires through to Swansea.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on April 29, 2010, 15:57:49
The approved scheme includes wiring as far as Swansea.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on June 16, 2010, 15:07:36
Well, the investment roller-coaster continues. 

GWML electrification now looking in some doubt: http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/06/16-electrification-looking-increasingly-unlikely-soon.html (http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/06/16-electrification-looking-increasingly-unlikely-soon.html)

Whilst Crossrail which was looking in some doubt (in terms of its full scope) now appears to be safe: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/10323035.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/10323035.stm)

Whatever happens, for goodness sake let's get Crossrail extended to Reading!

We'll see what the situation is next week...  ::)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 16, 2010, 15:54:09
Interesting... I'm sure I read in the last issue of RAIL (well, possibly the last but one because it takes them a few weeks to find their way into my mailbox Stateside) a quote from Phillip Hammond in which he indicated that they were committed to GWML electrification.

What seems to be the prevailing attitude of "HS2 at all costs and b*gg*r the rest of the network" seems to be utterly ludicrous to me. If there are limited resources available (which there most certainly are!) why on earth are huge sums being p*ssed up the wall on a "nice-to-have" vanity project like HS2 which will benefit a relatively limited number of people when that same amount of money could be making vast improvements for millions of passengers on the existing rail network?

Easy solution: ditch HS2 for now: it's not as if it was ever going to be in action quickly anyway, and what appears to be the current plan just to build London to Birmingham would result in a pretty vestigial high-speed line that just duplicates one of the country's fastest and most frequent rail services anyway. Instead, spend the money on GWML electrification/new rolling stock/RDG and BHM upgrades. Is this really that complicated? HS2 is a project that we can always come back to in due course when the money's actually available.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: brompton rail on June 16, 2010, 16:07:46
A similar comment from the Press Association casting severe doubt on GW electrification, and I guess too on North West fill in electrification.

HSTs and DMUs for ever it seems with Crossrail getting no further west than Maidenhead.

Happy times ahead!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: brompton rail on June 16, 2010, 16:08:52
Whoops - link here
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gfGpowdYRyv4vzIDAZAxhpMZD5SA (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gfGpowdYRyv4vzIDAZAxhpMZD5SA)

Sorry


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 16, 2010, 16:10:15
NR's self financing of the GWML electrification is reliant on two things cascaded Thameslink 319's  and the IEP, Coucher has said in Railnews that GWML only has a low per kM rate if the whole route to Swansea is done.  The cascade of 319's is under threat because the procurement of the second tranche of new Thameslink stock is frozen and the IEP is also frozen and is subject to review.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 16, 2010, 16:20:39
As various industry bigwigs and journalists have pointed out, the IEP becomes more or less pointless in the wake of GWML electrification because there then won't be a need to replace a bulk fleet of intercity diesel trains. The majority of HSTs could ultimately be replaced using variations on "out of the box" designs like the Pendo or Javelin, rather than the bizarre fleet of over-specified IEP trains that was proposed.

Must say the IEPs have always reminded me of a Mitchell and Webb sketch, where a customer walks into a shop and gives his requirements for a suit jacket. The aloof shop assistant replies "A business suit that is also a dinner suit, which is also a tailcoat and a pair of pyjamas... [and then on hearing the customer's budget] ...which is fashioned from sackcloth and string"!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 16, 2010, 16:33:24
As various industry bigwigs and journalists have pointed out, the IEP becomes more or less pointless in the wake of GWML electrification because there then won't be a need to replace a bulk fleet of intercity diesel trains. The majority of HSTs could ultimately be replaced using variations on "out of the box" designs like the Pendo or Javelin, rather than the bizarre fleet of over-specified IEP trains that was proposed.

Must say the IEPs have always reminded me of a Mitchell and Webb sketch, where a customer walks into a shop and gives his requirements for a suit jacket. The aloof shop assistant replies "A business suit that is also a dinner suit, which is also a tailcoat and a pair of pyjamas... [and then on hearing the customer's budget] ...which is fashioned from sackcloth and string"!
Absolutely  ;D

The GWML given is extremely good build by Brunel would suit the Javelin trains with a better internal fit out than the SE Trains have, not much need for Pendo's.  The West Country would be best served as now with HST's or a modern diesel only replacement


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on June 16, 2010, 17:50:08
Whatever happens, for goodness sake let's get Crossrail extended to Reading!

And run all the HS services non-stop through Reading to make people use Crossrail? 

(I appreciate that comment may be a repeat...)  ;D

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Mookiemoo on June 16, 2010, 17:56:15
Whatever happens, for goodness sake let's get Crossrail extended to Reading!

And run all the HS services non-stop through Reading to make people use Crossrail? 

(I appreciate that comment may be a repeat...)  ;D

Paul

What happens if you are AT Reading and need one of those HST's


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on June 16, 2010, 18:53:11
I know - wasn't the plan for some IEPs to run Northampton - London express commuter trains?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on June 16, 2010, 20:43:19
You could have HS speed trains that pick up only at Reading on their outward run and set down only on the inward.

But you need some pretty agile TMs to get through the train and surcharge all the people with Reading Padd tickets.

In a way i wish Crossrail wasn't around because it detracts from the obvious solution of wires to Plymouth (at least and Swansea all routes (i.e Berks Hants, Westbury to Taunton and Bristol, Bristol Taunton, Swindon Trowbridge and North curve Bradford and Swindon Gloucester Newport. Through trains to be  West of Plymouth and Swanswea to be loco hauled with change of loco at end of the wires.

Linking as Crossrail does in the East with already electrified mainlines there seems to me to be no reason why you couldn't run a Bristol Norwich IC stoping Reading Padd inner London Crossrail and then Chelmsford or Colchester first stop on GE. Or with a dual voltage set what about Oxford Canterbury/Dover.

With fill in electrification through to Salisbury and Southampton? Eastleigh. Virtually all FGW services could be electric.

The trouble is we've got no Brunels in this country being ruled by bean counters and pratitioners of the dismal art who have absolutely no imagination. Most of Brunels projects overspent by very large sums but look at legacy he left behind.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on June 16, 2010, 22:13:13
THE chances of electrification of the Great Western Main Line and several key routes in the north west in the foreseeable future appear to have dwindled to almost zero. The House of Lords has been told that the national financial situation poses difficulties.
http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/06/16-electrification-looking-increasingly-unlikely-soon.html
 Also I think Angel and Porterbrook has been asked to price two options to life extend the HSTs to 2025 and 2035 and that is where I think we are going on this one personally.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on June 17, 2010, 19:33:43
The only crumb of comfort is that electrification wasn't included as part of today's announcement about the hit list of projects cancelled or under review. Though there's a steady drip feed of announcements at the moment, so probably best not to read too much into it.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on June 17, 2010, 23:04:22
The only crumb of comfort is that electrification wasn't included as part of today's announcement about the hit list of projects cancelled or under review. Though there's a steady drip feed of announcements at the moment, so probably best not to read too much into it.

Today's list is all post Jan 2010 'electioneering announcements' according to most reports. Comparable with the ^50m for marginal constituencies, nearly all in the NW, oops, should have said station improvements...    ::)

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 18, 2010, 04:09:56
I'm getting increasingly annoyed about this. Why the hell does the ^657 bazillion* that will be necessary to build the thoroughly pointless HS2 seem to be ring-fenced and sacrosanct, when projects that will benefit far more people like GWML electrification (and at a much more modest cost) are being cut? Do we really need a new high-speed London-Birmingham line at the moment? No!

For heaven's sake just ditch HS2 (or at least put it on the back burner until the country can actually afford it). Another one of my stretched analogies, but it's rather like this situation: your current, modest car is falling to bits, but you're not going to spend money upgrading it. Instead you're going to let it continue disintegrating whilst spend several times the cost of repairing is purchasing a top of the range Porsche which will be delivered in ten years' time. The only problem is that it won't actually have much of a range, or take you to any of the places you actually want to go. Aaaaaarrrrrrgh!  >:(

*possibly not strictly accurate but I lose track every now and again


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on June 18, 2010, 10:21:10
I agree with Inspector Blakey its really bazarre when all you here from the new coalition government is every project rail and non rail is under review including Great Western Electrification and new trains,everything that is except HS2.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on June 18, 2010, 10:22:33
Agreed, HS2 is a waste of time.

I think it's more a case of political point scoring and not going back on election promises, I believe all 3 major parties had committed to HS2.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on June 18, 2010, 17:06:06
Totally agree with all that has been said about HS2. Waste of money when the rest of the network needs investment.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 18, 2010, 17:10:04
GWML electrification is about now therefore about committing money now, HS2 is still a pencil line on a map is years away from any major money so a Government can back it.

Also in 4 years time on the work up to the next general election the ConDem or is it LibTory can wave a big banner and say ain't good we are building a new railway.

If only you all knew how close GWM electrification is / was to be being a reality you would spit feathers


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Henry on June 18, 2010, 22:41:47
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10355547.stm

 In my opinion any promises made by the previous administration can now be ignored.
 It seems that there is now no cash available to even maintain our fragile network west of Exeter.

 Makes you wonder, if at the end of FGW's franchise, would any TOC take on this 'crumbling' network ?
 Fortunately I am only reliant upon 'public transport' for another couple of years.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 18, 2010, 22:57:08
Where on earth does the BBC article say there is no cash for maintaining the network west of Exeter? The only substantive point in that article referring to rail is that XC's voyagers aren't going to run on the sea wall in bad weather because of design flaws that have been known for nearly ten years.

There's actually a fair bit of money being spent on the network in the south west at the moment, with the major work on the Royal Albert Bridge just one example. Let's not grumble or get unduly pessimistic without some actual facts to back things up.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on June 19, 2010, 10:19:23
GWML electrification is about now therefore about committing money now, HS2 is still a pencil line on a map is years away from any major money so a Government can back it.

Also in 4 years time on the work up to the next general election the ConDem or is it LibTory can wave a big banner and say ain't good we are building a new railway.

If only you all knew how close GWM electrification is / was to be being a reality you would spit feathers

The problem is that all the work has been out of sight. It's a shame that NR could not have found a nice long stretch of simple plain line and aimed to get overhead masts up before the election. Probably very inefficient, but it's more difficult to can a project once there are visisble signs of progress (eg Crossrail....), so if it saved the project then worth the additional cost. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on June 19, 2010, 10:51:47
Where on earth does the BBC article say there is no cash for maintaining the network west of Exeter? The only substantive point in that article referring to rail is that XC's voyagers aren't going to run on the sea wall in bad weather because of design flaws that have been known for nearly ten years.

There's actually a fair bit of money being spent on the network in the south west at the moment, with the major work on the Royal Albert Bridge just one example. Let's not grumble or get unduly pessimistic without some actual facts to back things up.

Unfortunately the perception of rail travel particularly among the business community west of Exeter/Newton Abbot is dominated by the relatively poor rail infrastructure as this reader comment (May 26th) about the current sale of Plymouth in my local paper highlights "If Plymouth loses its airport this city is dead in the water and confined to being in a backwater existence. We cannot rely in our roads, no motorway to mention and a railway stuck in Stevenson's Rocket times where it takes 50mins to get to Exeter for heavens sake. Who would want to do business with anybody in Plymouth if you cant get here".Yes a bit OTT but there is a message there for the Devon and Cornwalls railways and Government.
 With the ongoing financial clampdown on rail projects that situation can only get worse as the 21st century unfolds.
 The BBC says the current economic difficulties in the UK threaten planned projects to improve the transport infrastructure in Devon and Cornwall.
The Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) has categorised the region's infrastructure as "at risk".
Severe weather and congestion on major routes can "effectively cut off Devon and Cornwall", it said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/10355547.stm


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Henry on June 19, 2010, 18:14:35

  I admit to being pessimistic,  standing in the stairwell of a 142/143 does not help.
 
  Or watching the passenger bridge at Teignmouth gradually rotting away, perhaps one day they might repair the German
 Luftwaffe shell holes in the roof at Newton Abbot.
 

 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: grahame on June 19, 2010, 19:36:48
.... my local paper highlights "If Plymouth loses its airport this city is dead in the water and confined to being in a backwater existence. We cannot rely in our roads, no motorway to mention and a railway stuck in Stevenson's Rocket times where it takes 50mins to get to Exeter for heavens sake. Who would want to do business with anybody in Plymouth if you cant get here".

There is a very serious case for any town / city with relatively poor communications.  In our (IT, but with customers visiting us) business, there's a line somewhere around Taunton that we really shouldn't be to the west of ... west of Cardiff would probably hurt too.

There's a difference between a "will it make money / pay for itself with the income it generates" case, and a "will it do the area economic good beyond what it costs" case.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on June 19, 2010, 19:44:21
The Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) has categorised the region's infrastructure as "at risk".
Severe weather and congestion on major routes can "effectively cut off Devon and Cornwall", it said.
Indeed, in 2002 we were told the A303 was to be upgraded to dual carriageway standard between the M3 and Ilminster with the A358 also upgraded to dual carriageway from Ilminster to link to the M5 at Taunton to give a second high quality route to the South West.  This would have also relieved congestion in the Bristol area as many people use this route due to delays on the A303.  This was cancelled as was the dualling of the last two sections of the A30 (Temple to Higher Carblake and Carland Cross to Chiverton Cross) that needed upgrading.  The A380 Kingskerswell bypass may also be axed later this year.

In terms of railways the situation is not much better, large areas of North Devon have no network at all thanks to Beeching and journey times on the existing lines west of Newton Abbot are slow.  A journey from Exeter to Bodmin by train takes 1 hour 40 minute by train, on the A30 you would get there in 1 hour.  Exeter does benefit from an hourly service to Waterloo but any further double tracking of the route seems to have been ruled out for now.

Road and rail links to the South Coast remain poor, the A35 from Honiton is slow and the direct Penzance to Portsmouth train no longer runs.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 20, 2010, 03:41:21
Dragging this thread back round onto the topic of GWML electrification, rather than nebulous, non-specific and (in my view) ill-founded paranoia about the future of the railway in Devon and Cornwall, how sure are we really that electrification has been canned? I will freely admit that I may be slightly out of date, since living out of the country doesn't always make it easy to keep abreast of developments as they happen.

However, I have in front of me issue 645 of Rail Magazine, in which the SoS for Transport Philip Hammond is quoted as saying, on 20 May 2010:
Quote
We are committed to a high-speed rail network and will take that to Birmingham. Having abandoned the third runway it is right and proper that high-speed rail should link to Heathrow. There is a renewed commitment to Great Western Main Line electrification and Crossrail.
My emphasis in bold.

That seems like pretty unequivocal language, especially coming from a politician who could more easily have made an evasive, non-committal statement. So has this commitment been superseded by subsequent events, or does it still stand, in which case we may be getting out knickers in a twist prematurely here.

The same issue also mentions on p.11 that the order for new Thameslink rolling stock is "not thought to be at risk" from DfT budget cuts. So it would seem from reading this magazine that, at least a couple of weeks ago, GWML electrification and the rather ingenious Thameslink rolling stock cascade were still on the agenda.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 20, 2010, 08:10:32
The GWML electrification design is still being worked on, the funding is there to do this, when this is complete this will be a very detailed "Form A" design sufficient to go out to tender.

The likely blockers to the scheme as Iain Coucher said in his Railnews article is the Government's freeze on ne rolling stock specifically the second (and largest) tranche of new Thameslink stock and the total reevaluation of the IEP, the whole concept of the GWML scheme is to do a "factory train build" in effect a production line from Airport Junction to Swansea; to do it peace meal will not get the per kM cost down to what the ORR were expecting.  In effect what Iain Coucher is saying if Mr DfT you only want to do as far as Oxford & Newbury it will cost a lot more, even Crossrail's costs will increase if they now take the Airport Jcn to Maidenhead wiring.

The team working on the GWML electrification design a little disappointed on the news that it may be delayed or stopped.

We all know and accept that the Country is in serious debt, schemes like the GWML and Thameslink stock can sit on hold but only for a short while these schemes need a Government decision one way or the other and in the next few months.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on June 20, 2010, 09:32:56
I wonder how Brunel would of handled the situation if he were still around today,probably turning in his grave now I expect.Lets hope wiser council prevails on this one and government takes the longer rather than the shorter terms view of this once in a generation opportunity to move Great Western foreward rather than sideways.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on June 20, 2010, 10:42:04
Quote
a railway stuck in Stevenson's Rocket times where it takes 50mins to get to Exeter for heavens sake

Maybe that person should try driving between the two cities then. I doubt you would get much under 45 minutes on a good day on the A38 (it's not short of twists, turns and climbs itself) and even the AA gives a centre to centre time by road of 58 minutes (and probably more on a summer Saturday), so what was that person on about? Or is there an air service between the two I don't know about?

Might it not be better to hang fire until the Budget this week, when the Government's plans may become clearer? And lest anyone forgets, many of the dmus that everyone is fighting to get their hands on were ordered and built under the Tories, who also authorised the ECML electrification.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: John R on June 20, 2010, 11:21:04
Continuing the speculation, if the govt announce the cancellation of IEP and replaces it with a vanilla build of coaches, DVT, and some off the shelf electric locos (just enough to form the Bristol and Swansea services) then that will result in a fairly substantial headline saving. Maybe take off the Newbury branch of the project as well, and there would be enough savings to enable it to continue.

There still remains the problem of what to use on the local services if Thameslink doesn't involve the cascade of units expected. If I were the govt I would scrap the Thameslink procurement and build just enough bog standard electrostars or desiros to give the required increase in capacity.   


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on June 20, 2010, 11:33:45
I think that remark about Stevenson's Rocket was more a reference to the disproportionately longer journey time of the Plymouth /Exeter part of longer distance journeys to Paddington.ie Paddington to Exeter (172) miles can be done in as little as 2 hours while most Paddington trains take about an hour to cover the mere 52 miles between Exeter and Plymouth because of the slow and sinuous rail route west of Exeter/Newton Abbot with its 55/60mph line speeds.If you were driving up the A38/M5 you would be at Taunton in the same time from Plymouth given that most traffic seems to regard 80mph as the norm even on the A38,its a question of perception really west of Newton Abbot railwise.The reality is that if rail links are important to your business then you probably would think twice about re-locating a business west of Exeter/Newton Abbot now,a point that FGWs plan to introduce an an earlier direct Paddington train targetting Exeter/Newton Abbot/Paignton rather than the much bigger Plymouth in December 2010 bares out.
 Dont get me wrong I am not knocking FGW after all they have a business to run and do the best they can with the limitations of the trains and the infrastructure they have,but limitations they do have hence the concern of some people in the far southwest over the possible loss of Air links.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 20, 2010, 11:47:00
Continuing the speculation, if the govt announce the cancellation of IEP and replaces it with a vanilla build of coaches, DVT, and some off the shelf electric locos (just enough to form the Bristol and Swansea services) then that will result in a fairly substantial headline saving. Maybe take off the Newbury branch of the project as well, and there would be enough savings to enable it to continue.

There still remains the problem of what to use on the local services if Thameslink doesn't involve the cascade of units expected. If I were the govt I would scrap the Thameslink procurement and build just enough bog standard electrostars or desiros to give the required increase in capacity.   
Would not mess about with "vanilla" coaches and loco's - Javelins are the answer for the Bristol / S Wales.  The TV routes could work by knocking out the Newbury section, but there is not much cost in doing that route compared to the whole GWML but would make a "political" saving


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: vacman on June 20, 2010, 12:07:13
you never know, they may include Westbury in the electrification to make it better value for money all over, all the Bedwyns AND the current Westbury's could be 319's meaning less DMU's and a more standard fleet.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: matt473 on June 20, 2010, 20:12:57
I think the situation is going to get real confusing as there are rumours flying about that we may be returning to some form of set up similair to BR so there may be delays as the structure of the rail system for the ear future is decided upon  :o

This was in the Sunday Times so may have an element of truth as they would not be the usual source for demanding nationisation of industries. Interesting times may be ahead whether good or bad for rail


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 20, 2010, 20:44:07
Would be interested to read that article Matt, would you be able to post a link?

Wouldn't there be a delicious irony thought in an essentially tory government restoring the structure of BR...? Are we talking pre- or post-sectorization?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on June 20, 2010, 22:48:52
Quote
Would be interested to read that article Matt, would you be able to post a link?

Not unless you want to sign up to Mr Murdoch's new paywall.




Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: matt473 on June 20, 2010, 23:19:25
Would be interested to read that article Matt, would you be able to post a link?

Wouldn't there be a delicious irony thought in an essentially tory government restoring the structure of BR...? Are we talking pre- or post-sectorization?

Sadly I can't as it was in the business suppliment within the actual newspaper. No doubt there will be snippets floating about but the jist of it was many feel Coucher leaving network rail is a result of upcomming restructuring bringing it back under full public ownership as opposed to the government being the only shareholder as is currently the case. It may however be a case of creating a more verticalally intergrated system as has been hinted at for a long time with the break up of network rail possibly for a privatised BR as such. Either way the feeling is that there will be major structural change to the way teh railway is run in the near future (Supported by the delaying of re-letting the NXEA and C2C franchises whilst a review of franchising takes place)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on June 21, 2010, 01:27:41
Not unless you want to sign up to Mr Murdoch's new paywall.

Aah, how irritating. I knew that Murdoch was about to squirrel away the Times and Sunday Times websites behind a paywall at some point, but hadn't realized that is had gone live yet.

Not exactly a great loss, I suppose, except for the odd occasions like this when there's a specific article of interest. Must say it strikes me as a curious business decision given the huge amount of free, high-quality news coverage out there, but this is wandering well off topic and is very much a discussion for elsewhere so I'll nip it in the bud!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on June 28, 2010, 23:43:36
From today's FT:

'The government may also reconsider the ^1bn electrification of the
Great Western line. Network Rail had been expected to borrow to
finance electrification of the key route. "Frankly, that is not an
option any more," said Mr Hammond.

Instead, he said, he was examining the case for compelling rail
companies to contribute to the costs of electrifying certain lines as
a condition for winning longer franchises.

"We're committed to electrification as part of the carbon agenda but
it has to sit within the fiscal constraints we face," he said. That,
however, would suggest further upward pressure on train fares to help
operators pay for the added costs.'


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: brompton rail on June 29, 2010, 15:48:13
The cost of GW electrification has also to include the cost of new rolling stock. Even a 25 year franchise to include electrification and stock (both intercity and local and covering those sections not electrified) isn't going to pay much of a premium to DfT. Plus, of course, franchisee running GW would be free to build / lease their own design of trains. In that situation each franchise could have its own design of new trains and little or no inter availability with other TOCs. Smallish fleets of Pendolinos for West Coast, Seimens DMUs for FTP Ex, old BR designed and built stock for East Coast, Class 180s for .. ??  any TOC desperate enough. And so on.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 29, 2010, 15:54:06
The cost of GW electrification has also to include the cost of new rolling stock. Even a 25 year franchise to include electrification and stock (both intercity and local and covering those sections not electrified) isn't going to pay much of a premium to DfT. Plus, of course, franchisee running GW would be free to build / lease their own design of trains. In that situation each franchise could have its own design of new trains and little or no inter availability with other TOCs. Smallish fleets of Pendolinos for West Coast, Seimens DMUs for FTP Ex, old BR designed and built stock for East Coast, Class 180s for .. ??  any TOC desperate enough. And so on.
Just as unity in the rail industry was starting to happen a Government with dogma has to mess it up 1995 here we come again!!!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on June 29, 2010, 21:24:01
why not create jobs within england by developing hydrogen electric trains, not only for use within the uk but for export.... could be done in partnership with the motor industry to get the fuel delivery infrastucture in place

no need for wires, trains can go on any route well with no wires anyway, would help the environment cut down maintanace costs (less working parts), being alot lighter should cause less wear on rails... or am i just dreaming


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on June 30, 2010, 15:40:18
why not create jobs within england by developing hydrogen electric trains, not only for use within the uk but for export.... could be done in partnership with the motor industry to get the fuel delivery infrastucture in place

no need for wires, trains can go on any route well with no wires anyway, would help the environment cut down maintanace costs (less working parts), being alot lighter should cause less wear on rails... or am i just dreaming

You need a fuel tank 4x the volume of a diesel but capable of withstanding 700 atmospheres, so very very thick and heavy.

The fuel cell costs .....c$20M per loco.

For gas safety think Ais Gill or Hawes Jn Crashes on the Midland. A lot less to clear up after.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_economy

Electrification is still the best.

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on June 30, 2010, 18:30:29
humm after reading that im scared ticking timebombs comes to mind


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: XPT on June 30, 2010, 19:25:39
What gets me is that it still looks uncertain as to whether the GWML electrification will ever actually get built.  Yet 11 months ago when it was announced in the press and media that the GWML was to electrified, it mentioned that it would begin immediately!!   Looking forward to say 5 years in the future, will the physical work of the electrification of the GWML be visible yet?  Wouldn't surprise me atall if not!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on June 30, 2010, 19:37:50
What gets me is that it still looks uncertain as to whether the GWML electrification will ever actually get built.  Yet 11 months ago when it was announced in the press and media that the GWML was to electrified, it mentioned that it would begin immediately!! 
Work in fact commenced ahead of the public announcement.  Power supply design options are in place as is most of the OHLE outline design for the complex and environmental locations all of which is on target for the next GRIP stage and there lies the problem with the change in Government.

Looking forward to say 5 years in the future, will the physical work of the electrification of the GWML be visible yet?  Wouldn't surprise me atall if not!
The Government transport spending review and how they deal with TOC franchises will determine this


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Henry on July 07, 2010, 16:25:53
http://www.dft.gov.uk/press/speechesstatements/statements/hammond20100706

 A bit long winded, but I suppose we will have to wait until October.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: caliwag on July 23, 2010, 08:41:15
From Rail News...

http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/07/23-new-doubts-over-great-western.html


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on July 23, 2010, 16:29:12
Mr Hammond explained: ^I don^t think a full cost-benefit analysis was carried out before Lord Adonis made the announcement in the run-up to the election. (http://Mr Hammond explained: ^I don^t think a full cost-benefit analysis was carried out before Lord Adonis made the announcement in the run-up to the election.)

Presumably by "in the run up to the election" he means "almost a full year before the election". Clown. And I was under the distinct impression that the electrification plans had been based on a reasonably thorough analysis anyway.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on July 23, 2010, 16:58:45
Mr Hammond explained: ^I don^t think a full cost-benefit analysis was carried out before Lord Adonis made the announcement in the run-up to the election. (http://Mr Hammond explained: ^I don^t think a full cost-benefit analysis was carried out before Lord Adonis made the announcement in the run-up to the election.)

Presumably by "in the run up to the election" he means "almost a full year before the election". Clown. And I was under the distinct impression that the electrification plans had been based on a reasonably thorough analysis anyway.

Quote
We^ve made it very clear that we^re not going to allow our approach to Network Rail to be driven by artificial accounting practices.
Surely he doesn't he mean the same type of accounting the John Major Government used when all of a sudden depreciation was allowed to be accounted for by BR on its HST fleet, something BR had not previously been allowed to do despite asking the Government.

To the Torys the railways a like a rash they just can not resist scratching it until it bleeds


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on September 04, 2010, 21:57:29
This from another forum http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.railway/browse_thread/thread/bc2e6dd1b90f2e83#
"According to the latest issue of the Railway Magazine, the government
looks set to promote East Midlands electrification to the top of the
queue over GW electrification.

Apparently, confusion over HST replacement, the remodelling at Reading
and the simple fact that EM electrification would be a lot cheaper,
during a period of austerity, are the factors that appeal.

Surely, the Achilles heal of the GW, unlike other routes, is the way
everything fans out after Reading, then again after Swindon.

It^s all just too messy for politicians to get their heads round
because it^s not a line, more a whole series of lines."


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on September 04, 2010, 22:15:00
Yeah - all the routes need o be done to make it worthwhile (except perhaps North of Oxford and Swindon).

If this is true, I hope it means the Meridians and HSTs are displaced and sent to XC asap and/or moved to the Liverpool - Norwich route.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on September 05, 2010, 09:05:41
Surely, the Achilles heal of the GW, unlike other routes, is the way
everything fans out after Reading, then again after Swindon.

It^s all just too messy for politicians to get their heads round
because it^s not a line, more a whole series of lines."
Or there are more Tory votes to secure in the Midlands than they are ever likely to get from South Wales, with Berks, Wilts, Oxon being blue through and through.

There was always a close run race within the NR team which route to tackle first, the priority was left to the Secretary of State obviously the new one has a different view


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: smokey on September 05, 2010, 10:14:33
why not create jobs within england by developing hydrogen electric trains, not only for use within the uk but for export.... could be done in partnership with the motor industry to get the fuel delivery infrastucture in place

no need for wires, trains can go on any route well with no wires anyway, would help the environment cut down maintanace costs (less working parts), being alot lighter should cause less wear on rails... or am i just dreaming

hydrogen Electric cells use more power to convert to Hydrogen than you get back.

Hydrogen fuel cell cars running off a totaly renewable energy source is a very green option.

However Electric trains running of O/H wires far more green option.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on September 05, 2010, 11:00:21
This from another forum http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.railway/browse_thread/thread/bc2e6dd1b90f2e83#




Surely, the Achilles heal of the GW, unlike other routes, is the way
everything fans out after Reading, then again after Swindon.


I have always thought this myself.Maybe it time to start thinking the unthinkable if the Great Western is to eventually move foreward instead of sideways or even backwards as has been happening.Beeching proposed sending all West of England services via Bristol,this would have concentrated scarce resources(electrification for one)on one single route from Paddington to the west with the added benefit to X Country west of Bristol.Carrying on as we are is a road to nowhere.Austerity does have an up side as it forces us to face up to reality.Since the 1955 modernisation plan and through privatisation its been a case financially of "easy come easy go".Vast sums of public money have disappeared up the swannny instead of producing comprehensive modern electric railway.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on September 05, 2010, 13:05:08
(a) Is there capacity via Bristol?

(b) Can Exeter to London be achieved 2 hours or less via Bristol?

If the answer to (a) is no, then would it be worth it?. If the answer to (b) is no, then under no circumstances should services be diverted! Journey time is the single number one priority. The trains are slow enough as it is.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on September 05, 2010, 14:22:46
The route to Exeter / Plymouth does not enter into the GWML electrification, not in the current planning.  The crucial justification for GWML electrification is the outer TV services with the justification for going onto Bristol and South Wales being manly economies of scale and for South Wales a politically / socio-economic one as well.

The MML electrification is part done as far as Bedford, a new 400kV Grid site at Boreham Wood is being built as part of Thameslink it is an Auto Transformer system supply with the capability of feeding North.  There is no need to provide suburban rolling stock as this provided already by Thameslink so the only trains that are needed are those for intercity which compared to what FGW would need is quite small, indeed some of MML services could make use of refurbished former Thameslink EMU's there could be the potential of say a through Derby / Sheffield to Brighton service.

The MML also give the possibility of connections to the ECML and WCML for diversions of these routes, the GWML is fairly isolated in that respect. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on September 05, 2010, 17:31:21
Journey time is the single number one priority. The trains are slow enough as it is.

Btline, we're well aware that journey time is your single, number-one priority. Bear in mind though that there are a few people out there who may have different opinions every now and again though!

And whilst the trains are, debatably, already somewhat slow, that's largely caused by the limp through Devon and Cornwall stopping at many of the lamp-posts along the way. Electrification to Exeter won't do a great deal to speed that up, I would guess.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: matt473 on September 05, 2010, 17:46:39
Journey time is more often than not the most important factor for commuters or people travelling for business. Comfort, scenery and a few other things are what are more important to leisure travellers. Given the nature of the GWML there needs to be a balance between the two so speed is not the be all and end all


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Btline on September 05, 2010, 18:41:47
This is not about my priorities, as I live near nor use often, that line.

The prospects of speeding up the line in Devon and Cornwall look low, therefore the competitiveness of the route with planes and cars depends on 2 hr schedules to Exeter and then 1 hr to Plymouth. Therefore, I would argue that speed is a priority. Slap on an extra hour, and people can drive there quicker and cheaper. People are paying more for the speed.

And I would also argue that many leisure travellers would want fast journey times as well - e.g. holiday makers.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on September 05, 2010, 19:13:04
Not everyone has a car as an alternative, so comparing the speed of one versus the other is irrelevant for them. Competing with air travel maybe relevant for some but not every part of the FGW served area has easy access to an airport, and when you may need to take the train to get to the airport then it may make sense just to stay on the train.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: matt473 on September 05, 2010, 19:25:08
And I would also argue that many leisure travellers would want fast journey times as well - e.g. holiday makers.

You need to look at how lines are advertised, and I'm pretty sure a major selling point of the South Western part of the GWML is the scenic nature of it. That and for holiday makers, you'd be surprised how many view travelling as the biggest part of the fun of a holiday which is another reason why more tables are needed on long distance services but that's another topic. There is too much obsession with the railway today to shave off the od 10-15mins when it would be more beneficial to improve the overall experience (which would probably be cheaper to achieve as well in many areas)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on September 05, 2010, 19:55:08
Heritage railways sell their routes on the scenic value the national network has to sell it self on ticket price, journey time, punctuality and reliability.

The judgment to electrify the MML over the GWML is I suspect to do with the capping of replacement rolling stock for Thameslink, it was this stock that was going to be refrub'd and cascaded to the GW TV routes, defer GWML electrification the 165/6 have at least 10 or 15 years life HST's can be sweated for another 10, the 165/6's are getting augmented by Crossrail in 2017 thereby releasing capacity for outer TV services, even I dear say replace HST's on most of the Oxford and Cotswold services thereby releasing HST's for other services or to retire them.

Remember this Government is about austerity.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on September 05, 2010, 22:24:12
(a) Is there capacity via Bristol?

(b) Can Exeter to London be achieved 2 hours or less via Bristol?

If the answer to (a) is no, then would it be worth it?. If the answer to (b) is no, then under no circumstances should services be diverted! Journey time is the single number one priority. The trains are slow enough as it is.
Sorry to disagree but in the age of austerity we now live value for taxpayers money is now the number one priority on the railways not journey times.Change may not be welcome by some people but it is sometimes necessary for survival as all government spending will have to be drastically reduced whether we like it or not and if that means changes to the way FGW operate their services to get the maximum benefit for the minimum money available then so be it.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on September 05, 2010, 23:29:07
Quote
Journey time is the single number one priority.

Not according to a lot of passengers surveyed by Passenger Focus it isn't

http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/news-and-publications/press-release.asp?dsid=4537


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on September 06, 2010, 09:03:20
IMHO, the sensible approach to electrification in this age of autstery, would be to do Manchester-Liverpool and Paddington to Oxford and Bedwyn/Newbury.  Allow the ex-Thameslink EMUs to be used and ease the DMU shortage, but replace the HST with more diesel and then in 10/20 years time when there is more money, transfer the HST replacements to cross country (releasing the voyagers for interegional) and electrify the GWML in small steps (it will of cource already be done to Didcot).

Advantages - money spent relatively slowly, all existing stock used and nothing scrapped prematurely, no need to order new DMUs which run into emission regulation problems (as will the HST replacement, but the technical issues must be easier to solve when there is more space for the new engines), and, polically, the tory commuter belt gets improvements first.   
 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: broadgage on September 06, 2010, 13:12:58
I can certainly see the merits of electric trains with regards to reducing oil imports and reducing pollution, but why does everyone assume that passengers would prefer an electric train?
I would much prefer a 30 year old HST with legroom and a restaurant, to a new EMU with no catering and high density bus seats.
Faster journies would be appreciated by some but not if it means high density seats without tables, no view, and no catering.
Partial electrification would probably extend times owing to the need for changing.

Electrification also means 10 years of delays and buses at weekends, and no Christmas services.
Got to be faced eventualy, but I for one do not look forawrd to it.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on October 20, 2010, 17:12:43
I hate to be pessimistic, but from reading the details of Osborne's speech this morning it's not looking good for GWML electrification. It would seem that the Fact Compiler's reading of Osborne's words is the same as mine:

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-and-new-trains-or-lack-there-of.html (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-and-new-trains-or-lack-there-of.html)
http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-reading-between-lines.html (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-reading-between-lines.html)

I suppose we'll have to wait until next week for the confirmation of all the details, but I'm not holding out too much hope anymore. Does just make you wonder just how much longer the government seems to think the HST fleet will stagger on for before something radical has to be done (i.e. squadron replacement)! I don't give it too many more years.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: autotank on October 20, 2010, 18:01:52
What really winds me up about the current situation is the number of highly paid consultants and engineers that have wasted their time and our money on detailed plans for something that will now probably not happen. This money (probably several millions for planning the GWML electrification) could have been much better used aquiring a few more DMU's which are desperatley needed.

A lot has been wasted on something which a lot of us on here have known for a while is very unlikely to happen until at least 2020.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: standclearplease on October 20, 2010, 18:56:36
Will the HSTs last until 2020, or will we see them disintegrate through overuse in the meantime?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 20, 2010, 19:20:57
What really winds me up about the current situation is the number of highly paid consultants and engineers that have wasted their time and our money on detailed plans for something that will now probably not happen. This money (probably several millions for planning the GWML electrification) could have been much better used aquiring a few more DMU's which are desperatley needed.

A lot has been wasted on something which a lot of us on here have known for a while is very unlikely to happen until at least 2020.

Not really the team was quite small, also all the data collected is there waiting and the design would make a good bases in the future.  The GWML had not been survived for electrification before, BR only had very broad concept with approx locations for substations, also the cost of the development was bourne by NR


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 21, 2010, 11:17:09
I hate to be pessimistic, but from reading the details of Osborne's speech this morning it's not looking good for GWML electrification. It would seem that the Fact Compiler's reading of Osborne's words is the same as mine:

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-and-new-trains-or-lack-there-of.html (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-and-new-trains-or-lack-there-of.html)
http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-reading-between-lines.html (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-reading-between-lines.html)

Yup, I concur. He mentioned electrifying some lines in the NW, but nothing in this neck of the woods.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on October 21, 2010, 11:45:15
A sensible, low cost, low risk, cut down electrification scheme would electrify just enough to allow all the displaced Thameslink EMUs to be used.  Am I correct in thinking that the NW scheme(s) don't do that on their own? 

It would be a huge shame if not progress at all was made on the ground for the  route.  Electrifcation to Reading and then Oxford/Bedwinish would seem to be a sensible comprimise.   Useful stock would be used rather than scrapped, DMUs would be released for low cost capacity increases elsewhere and HSTs would soldier on for a decade or so longer and when they finally die, the wires will already be up as far as Didcot so taking them further would be lower cost.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 21, 2010, 11:51:39
A sensible, low cost, low risk, cut down electrification scheme would electrify just enough to allow all the displaced Thameslink EMUs to be used.  Am I correct in thinking that the NW scheme(s) don't do that on their own? 

This will fill in a number of gaps up there that will allow DMUs currently in use on those lines to be swapped out for some EMUs. Which will free up a few, not many, DMUs.

Quote
It would be a huge shame if no progress at all was made on the ground for the  route.  Electrifcation to Reading and then Oxford/Bedwinish would seem to be a sensible comprimise. 

That *is* the proposal as it stands currently, not a compromise of something larger.  Any talk of anything larger was just that, talk, not Govt proposal, as I understand it.



Edit note: Quote marks amended, for clarity. CfN.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on October 21, 2010, 12:54:07
The initial DfT announcement about electrification, the one that took everyone by surprise, included a map of the GWML encompassing Maidenhead to Oxford, Bristol, Bath, Swansea and Newbury at para 39 and at para 77, this:

Quote
It is currently expected that early works will take place between 2012 and 2014,
with the bulk of the construction between 2014 and 2016. Electric services will be introduced progressively: London to Oxford, Newbury and Bristol by the end of 2016, and London to Swansea by the end of 2017.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf)

In that announcement there was only to be one line in the NW, which allowed for Liverpool to Manchester only.  A further announcement in Dec 2009 suddenly added other NW routes to Preston and Blackpool.  This followed various surprising Adonis speeches that seemed to imply more than the earlier announcementrs had mentioned, IIRC.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 21, 2010, 13:25:51
I blame my memory - thanks for the reminder!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 21, 2010, 13:50:18
From the BBC:

Quote
An ^850m revamp of Reading railway station has been confirmed in the Spending Review but other schemes are still in doubt.

Transport minister Theresa Villiers visited the town to confirm the project but no decision has been made on a ^15m roads revamp around the station.

...

In Reading, the major revamp of the town's station was confirmed but decisions on the electrification of the Great Western Main Line, which will run through Berkshire, and a new fleet of intercity trains were absent from the review.

...

The Department for Transport said it was still assessing a number of projects following the Spending Review, including the electrification of the western line and the roads improvement plan for Reading.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on October 21, 2010, 14:27:06
Odd that in all the spending review bumph it reads "the Government is supporting investment to improve journey reliability on Great Western Main Line services to Wales."  I just presumed (or hoped?) this actually meant the overall Reading redevelopment. 

They could have been so much more specific and avoided loads of debate if they'd been precise like earlier in the same section, where, for example, they wrote "station upgrades at Birmingham New Street".

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 21, 2010, 14:49:08
I think the detail comes in the DfT-specific announcement - due next week?

Anyone know which day next week yet?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on October 23, 2010, 20:40:31
An interesting and optimistic take from the Financial Times:

Will Hammond find the money for more big transport schemes?

October 22, 2010 6:10pm by Jim Pickard

There is something curious in the way that several key transport decisions were left out of the CSR on Wednesday. The four missing announcements were: the big order for Intercity Express trains from the Hitachi-led Agility consortium, the electrification of the Great Western line, another order for about a thousand train carriages and the Thameslink upgrade.

Sources in the Department for Transport insist that these interconnected upgrades are genuinely going to the wire. They depend, for example, on Agility^s ability to reduce its original ^7.5bn cost by a significant margin.

Yet the DfT^s budget is now settled, albeit at 9.30pm on Tuesday, last of all the departments. Its capital spending is hardly taking a dent (down from ^7.7bn to ^7.5bn) although programme spending will fall from ^5.1bn to ^4.4bn (a rise in train fares will help to compensate).

Crossrail will go ahead, as George Osborne announced on Wednesday. What of the other four programmes? If they were being universally ditched, wouldn^t it make sense to have bundled that bad news up in Wednesday^s tsunami of cuts?

Philip Hammond is meant to be clarifying the decision in a few weeks. At which point the coalition is supposed to be into its period of ^growth stories^, a narrative which will involve a sequence of uplifting tales about renewed investment and spending to help UK plc. One might expect good news on rail projects to be part of this jolly grid. If not it would be a surprisingly bad piece of news management.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 23, 2010, 21:00:51
What of the other four programmes? If they were being universally ditched, wouldn^t it make sense to have bundled that bad news up in Wednesday^s tsunami of cuts?
My feeling is that upgrades and electrification will be wrapped up in franchises, longer franchise in exchange for committed investment from the TOC's with some coming from the public purse, I suspect that Network Rail will be reformatted in how it operates I am not convince that it will be carved up and handed to the TOC's because the sound of Ladbrook Grove, Hatfield, Potters Bar and Southall still rings loud in the public ear.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 23, 2010, 21:17:03
Thameslink & GW electrification to go, the other two to go ahead with cost cutting.

That's my bet.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: mjones on October 24, 2010, 19:35:28
Thameslink & GW electrification to go, the other two to go ahead with cost cutting.

That's my bet.

But as major Thameslink schemes are already under construction, Blackfriars' Bridge in particular, what is left that could sensibly be cancelled?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 24, 2010, 20:22:22
The rolling stock?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 24, 2010, 21:31:54
Thameslink & GW electrification to go, the other two to go ahead with cost cutting.
That's my bet.
But as major Thameslink schemes are already under construction, Blackfriars' Bridge in particular, what is left that could sensibly be cancelled?
The rolling stock?
The next part of the scheme Key Output 2 is London Bridge; Key Output 1 Blackfriars and the central core will not work correctly without this stage.  The next batch of rolling stock has been frozen pending the CSR it is likely the full order of rolling stock will be cut with the train lengths being reduced from the proposed 12 cars this would save an lot of platform extensions and traction power supply upgrading and hence money, Thameslink is I believe over spent in Key Output Stage 1 and Key Output Stage 2 is under the hammer to get it back on budget.

With GWML electrification one would hope HMG would look holistically at the TV, KV and Crossrail services but that is a big ask


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: XPT on October 24, 2010, 21:44:55
It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if the GWML electrification gets axed.  But it would annoy me though, especially after all that fuss about it in the press and TV news back in JULY 2009 that the GWML was to be electrified and that work on it would so say start "immediately"!!  When in fact no work was started on it, and it gets axed.

Maybe the title of this thread in the meantime should lose the "gets go-ahead" untill we know what's happening for sure.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: mjones on October 24, 2010, 21:49:49
It would look pretty poor for one of the country's main inter city routes to still be running diesel trains if huge resources are being spent on building HS2...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 24, 2010, 21:52:22
Maybe the title of this thread in the meantime should lose the "gets go-ahead" untill we know what's happening for sure.

That's a fair comment, XPT.

However, just out of courtesy, I'll invite the OP to comment, before making such a change?

CfN.  :-\


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 24, 2010, 22:03:29
I suspect the GWML electrification will not be canceled, it will be placed on hold pending re-franchise of the route with electrification being part of the bid.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 24, 2010, 23:11:19
I suspect the GWML electrification will not be canceled, it will be placed on hold pending re-franchise of the route with electrification being part of the bid.

Yup, that wouldn't surprise me at all - hinted at by the DfT over the summer.  Might be the best solution?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 25, 2010, 10:12:28
Hmm - wouldn't that make for an expensive bid? Surely in these hardened times, HMG would be looking for Premia payments rather than requiring subsidy?
You might get Maidenhead to oxford being offered, but I doubt a bidder would offer much more. How much oes it cost a mile?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 25, 2010, 11:49:47
Yes, it certainly has its drawbacks.

Perhaps the next bidder for the Greater Western franchise would agree to fund say 50% of the costs in return for a long franchise of 15-20 years?  After all the current deal originally was to result in premium payments from FGW to the Government of ^1.131 billion over the 10-year length, which I think is more than the GWML electrification was slated to cost? 

I know the financial outlook was a little brighter back then, but with repayments spread over 20-years perhaps it would be a realistic way of getting the job done?  First Group (or another winning bidder) would benefit from the effects (cheaper running costs, faster journeys, more capacity) for many years allowing them to justify the expense perhaps?  I do worry about ever more complex funding arrangements though!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 25, 2010, 11:52:47
ONe of the things that came out of the DfT Franchise consultation meeting that I attended, was that there are major difficulties, caused by EU legislation, in offering franchises longer than 15 years. The detail wasn't spelt out, but I understood that they'd get a better return overall if they were kept to 15 years or less.

The DfT are therefore realistically looking at terms of 12-15 years going forward.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on October 25, 2010, 11:57:38
Bloody EU legislation!  Though with a construction period of around 5 years (assuming the design work already would still be valid, and construction could start pretty much as soon as the franchise is let), would still mean 10 years to reap the harvest.  I am just speculating of course, but the Government (and I think Mark Hopwood) are on record as saying that it's an approach they've looked at.

As ever, time will tell.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on October 25, 2010, 11:59:25
I'm sure it'll be part of their renewal bid - if they wish to do so, of course!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on October 25, 2010, 20:28:04
Maybe the title of this thread in the meantime should lose the "gets go-ahead" untill we know what's happening for sure.

I would be inclined to leave it alone for now. The current situation is that electrification received the go-ahead last summer. Although there's a strong argument to be made that it might be cancelled or diluted, all suggestions to that effect are, for the moment, pure conjecture, no matter how well informed the source.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on October 25, 2010, 20:48:23
Maybe the title of this thread in the meantime should lose the "gets go-ahead" untill we know what's happening for sure.

I would be inclined to leave it alone for now. The current situation is that electrification received the go-ahead last summer. Although there's a strong argument to be made that it might be cancelled or diluted, all suggestions to that effect are, for the moment, pure conjecture, no matter how well informed the source.
Indeed the NR team are still working the GWML electrification up to GRIP stage 3 (Option selection)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on November 04, 2010, 20:17:39
According to the Financial Times - the go ahead for GWML electrification together with the next stage of Thameslink is expected next Thursday - albeit a curtailed electrification scheme:

'Thameslink case pressed by business

By Jim Pickard, Political Correspondent Financial Times

Published: November 4 2010 00:02 | Last updated: November 4 2010 00:02

Business leaders in London have written to the government urging ministers to give the all-clear to order 1,000 carriages for the Thameslink north-south rail scheme.

Lady Valentine, head of London First, has urged Philip Hammond to make a commitment to the whole project when the transport secretary authorises a wider package of transport initiatives next Thursday.

It is widely expected that the second phase of the ^5.5bn Thameslink scheme ^ including the trains order ^ will be approved in the announcement, which forms part of the coalition^s attempt to shift the narrative on to economic growth.

Yet Labour figures say they will be watching the announcement closely for signs of cost-cutting and delays in the small print.

Lady Valentine is concerned that the ^1.1bn order could be scaled back from its original 1,000 carriages to make savings. There are also industry expectations that the estimated ^500m upgrade of London Bridge station ^ part of Thameslink ^ will be reduced to cut costs.

^Thameslink, the ^north-south Crossrail^, will bring precious new capacity to London^s congested core before 2020, and relief to millions of rail commuters who start their journeys outside the capital,^ wrote Lady Valentine. ^A decision to proceed with the modernisation of Thameslink would be met with relief by hard-pressed commuters and would be welcomed by businesses across and beyond the capital.^

The group is concerned that if fewer carriages were ordered it could have an impact on Network Rail^s attempts to alleviate congestion on London^s public transport network.

The Department for Transport won a better-than-expected settlement in the comprehensive spending review, with capital spending falling only slightly from ^7.7bn this year to ^7.5bn in four years^ time. Crucial to that decision was George Osborne^s belief that transport schemes were a key component of economic growth.

The chancellor said in the review that four crucial rail projects were still under review, including the entire Thameslink upgrade and a separate order for hundreds of carriages. The schemes include the electrification of several lines and a ^7.5bn order for Intercity Express trains from Agility Trains, an Hitachi-led consortium.

Officials are likely to approve the electrification of the Great Western line, a ^1bn scheme announced by the Labour government last year. However, the project is no longer expected to go as far west as Swansea, as previously envisaged.

Meanwhile, the Agility consortium is under pressure to cut the costs of its bid to build a new generation of intercity carriages, with ministers using the threat of alternative options to extract a better deal.

The alternatives, set out in Sir Andrew Foster^s review of the scheme, in-clude ^re-engineering^ the existing Intercity 125 trains or buying cheaper electric trains.'


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 04, 2010, 22:22:18
Which is presumably a roundabout way of saying they expect the Welsh Assembly Government to cough up a hefty contribution if it wants wires under and west of the Severn...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 05, 2010, 10:17:33
Officials are likely to approve the electrification of the Great Western line, a ^1bn scheme announced by the Labour government last year. However, the project is no longer expected to go as far west as Swansea, as previously envisaged.

Eh? I thought it was only going to Newbury / Oxford in the original announcement?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 05, 2010, 10:47:09
I don't think anybody's officially announced anything have they?  That's why all this speculation is rife, contradictory, and not very helpful.  There is almost certainly frantic deals being struck behind closed doors, and If we end up with GWML electrification only to Bristol/Newbury and Oxford rather than Swansea as well then I think that would still be a massive result.  To say Mr. Hammond's speech is eagerly anticipated is something of an understatement!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 05, 2010, 10:58:09
I was referring to the plans of the previous Government. Did they not announce GW electrification plans as I mentioned?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 05, 2010, 11:07:17
Bristol and Swansea with spurs to Newbury/Oxford.  Various NR quotes have been made saying that just doing Newbury/Oxford would not be as cost effective.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 05, 2010, 17:15:05
Bristol and Swansea with spurs to Newbury/Oxford.  Various NR quotes have been made saying that just doing Newbury/Oxford would not be as cost effective.
That is true, however I suspect that NR would still cease the opportunity if the GWML electrification only did the services to Oxford and Newbury.  If the wires only went to say Oxford there would not need to be a grid intake at Didcot (or at least only lower capacity one) 

The National electrification team have been working on the Reading station area lately, more than just check that the remodeling is electrification friendly.  There is a thought that the MML may steal the march on the GW for intercity electrification


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 05, 2010, 17:23:14
That is true, however I suspect that NR would still cease the opportunity

I guess you mean sieze.....


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 05, 2010, 17:33:03
Officials are likely to approve the electrification of the Great Western line, a ^1bn scheme announced by the Labour government last year. However, the project is no longer expected to go as far west as Swansea, as previously envisaged.

Eh? I thought it was only going to Newbury / Oxford in the original announcement?

No, it was Bristol, Swansea, Oxford and Newbury.   You were wrong on this on the 21st as well - which I think you then acknowledged in post #267...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on November 05, 2010, 17:33:13
More likely seize, I suspect ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 05, 2010, 18:34:58
That is true, however I suspect that NR would still cease the opportunity

I guess you mean sieze.....
More likely seize, I suspect ;)
...... and take hold of

The speed at which the GWML will be electrified will be a lot slower than Lord Adonis proclaimed, I would expect it to be a roll on program from Crossrail if it happens


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on November 05, 2010, 18:38:30
How much would it be likely to cost to extend the wires from Cardiff to Swansea.?

 The WAG do want to electrify the valley lines network which has been quoted as costing ^250 million so maybe it could be done with the extension of the wires through to swansea providing the WAG can raise the money


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on November 05, 2010, 22:40:21
You might just about put the knitting up for 250m, but I'm guessing that doesn't include the cost of a brand-new fleet of electric trains to take advantage of it...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 06, 2010, 11:06:30
What? Just from Cardiff to Swansea? And why would the Welsh need their own stock? :-)

(Don't answer that!)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on November 06, 2010, 18:22:04
Read the post above mine ;)

I was referring to the hypothetical Valley Lines electrification which anthony215 was asking about - I think should it ever happen that it's likely to require not only knitting but also new trains, since I don't think it's possible to bolt a pantograph onto the roof of a Pacer or 150 with much success  ;D


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on November 06, 2010, 20:37:26
Even if you could fit a pantograph to a pacer, i thought they were not allowed to operate beyond 2020?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TerminalJunkie on November 06, 2010, 20:55:31
I don't think it's possible to bolt a pantograph onto the roof of a Pacer or 150 with much success  ;D

A 150 with a pantograph is a 317, isn't it? :P

Oh, and Google threw this up: http://boingboing.net/2008/11/03/electric-pacer.html (http://boingboing.net/2008/11/03/electric-pacer.html)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2010, 12:18:17
I thought that the big statement from Mr. Hammond concerning rail was supposed to be today?  There's no sign of any such statement in the House of Commons schedule today, and a government minister has just stated that the statement will be made soon!  Clearly the detail is still being thrashed out and it's going to the wire (no pun intended!).

When questioned as to whether the electrification will only go as far as Bristol and not Swansea, the minister said he was sure there was no substance to those rumours - whatever that means!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2010, 12:24:54
Probably only going to Swindon!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 11, 2010, 14:56:32
When questioned as to whether the electrification will only go as far as Bristol and not Swansea, the minister said he was sure there was no substance to those rumours - whatever that means!

The original plan - which is still the current plan unless an announcement is made otherwise, was staged wiring to Bristol and ultimately Swansea, with Oxford and Newbury earlier limits of the staging.

All else is just media fuelled rumour, as was the 'fact' that a DfT announcement would be made today?

It may be recalled that a few months ago, it was widely presumed nearly everywhere you read that Crossrail would be seriously scaled back - remember all the press reports about cutting 2 or 3 of the branches, and IIRC I made the point that there were only three branches to be built anyway as Heathrow alrready exists.

ISTM that the media policy at the moment is just to think of a worst case then publish it as fact...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 11, 2010, 21:48:27
GRIP 3 (option selection) work on the GWML electrification is still on going


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 11, 2010, 22:46:30
I suspect the non-announcement today may have something to do with the announcement that did happen about benefits changes, which has rather tended to grab the headlines all day.

Wales Online (aka Western Mail) carried a report today which says the electrification verdict will be within 10 days, so next week looks a fair bet now.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/welsh-politics/welsh-politics-news/2010/11/11/decision-near-1bn-great-western-upgrade-but-will-electrification-go-west-of-bristol-91466-27638214/

Quote
ISTM that the media policy at the moment is just to think of a worst case then publish it as fact...

Or it could of course be the old one of someone in government having a word in someone's ear about what they are supposedly thinking of doing (they don't employ the likes of Andy Coulson and Alastair Campbell for no reason), so that when the announcement is made, it doesn't look half as bad. And people here and on other forums are just as capable of speculation as "the media".


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2010, 22:56:59
Thanks for the link, Will.  A long article with some nonsense statements including "One drawback of the Great Western electrification as a whole is that large parts of the route use old signalling, which would have to be replaced for compatibility with electric trains. However, that complication does not apply in Wales, where Network Rail is midway through a ^400m resignalling programme."


What the heckers is that supposed to mean!?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 11, 2010, 23:50:12
Perhaps an attempt to indicate that the new signals in South Wales are immunised against 25kv interference? At least I hope they are, or are capable of being easily immunised should the need arise. Which may well not be the case for much existing GWML signal kit this side of the Severn. Perhaps electric train knows?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 12, 2010, 15:42:44
Perhaps an attempt to indicate that the new signals in South Wales are immunised against 25kv interference? At least I hope they are, or are capable of being easily immunised should the need arise. Which may well not be the case for much existing GWML signal kit this side of the Severn. Perhaps electric train knows?
I am not fully up to speed with all of the signaling on the GWML, whole sale resignaling is not so essential as it was years ago because there are modern sub systems eg axle counter system that can be installed and connected to existing interlockings if it is a track circuit immunity problem.  The GWML is due for resignaling as part of CP4 / 5 Didcot, Exeter, Newport being some of the key parts of the process

The article in Western Mail is I suspect making a political point that the South Wales line is not as expensive to do as some parts of England because of the investment already made and that Wales should not loose out because of the cost electrifying east of the Seven.

An OHLE design engineer has told me that they see no significant problems wiring through Seven Tunnel, some clever engineering yes but no major show stoppers


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 16, 2010, 01:50:26
Wales Online (aka Western Mail) carried a report today which says the electrification verdict will be within 10 days, so next week looks a fair bet now.

Then again, maybe not: http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/11/thursday-is-cancelled.html (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/11/thursday-is-cancelled.html)  :-\


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 16, 2010, 18:23:04
The BBC are now suggesting an announcement will be made 'before the end of November' - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11758780

Quote
The Transport Secretary Philip Hammond told the BBC that he would soon set out government plans to address the overcrowding issue. He insisted that reform will ensure Britain's railways do more, for less.

"We need to look at the whole structure of the industry, how the franchises are let, we need to look at train operators' work, we need to look at how Network Rail does its work and delivers efficiency in its programme," he said.

"We need to look at the role of my department. At the moment I have got civil servants here specifying which trains and which carriages have to be used at which times on which franchise. That does not seem to be the most obviously sensible way to run a railway.

He acknowledged that making the railway "fit for the future and affordable for passengers and taxpayers" was the "number one challenge" facing his department.

He is expected to announce detailed proposals before the end of November.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 16, 2010, 20:18:12
The BBC are now suggesting an announcement will be made 'before the end of November' - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11758780
Quote
The Transport Secretary Philip Hammond told the BBC that he would soon set out government plans to address the overcrowding issue. He insisted that reform will ensure Britain's railways do more, for less.
"We need to look at the whole structure of the industry, how the franchises are let, we need to look at train operators' work, we need to look at how Network Rail does its work and delivers efficiency in its programme," he said.
"We need to look at the role of my department. At the moment I have got civil servants here specifying which trains and which carriages have to be used at which times on which franchise. That does not seem to be the most obviously sensible way to run a railway.
He acknowledged that making the railway "fit for the future and affordable for passengers and taxpayers" was the "number one challenge" facing his department.
He is expected to announce detailed proposals before the end of November.
Does not say which November though  :P


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on November 19, 2010, 16:14:01
http://rail-news.com/2010/11/19/great-western-to-be-electrified/

It has been reported that an announcement will be made next week that Paddington to Cardiff is to be electrified but MML electrification is to be shelved.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on November 20, 2010, 22:37:33
Christian Wolmer on Twitter says "I barely dare say this but rail announcement promised for Tuesday."

Also no decision yet on IEP.
Mr Hammond has told a meeting of the North-East Economic Forum: ^We are talking about a matter of weeks rather than months before we announce a way forward.^
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/8676597.Frustration_at_lack_of_decision_on_rail_work/


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on November 21, 2010, 12:13:06
Today's Sunday Times says Thursday for the announcement.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: caliwag on November 21, 2010, 12:27:41
The appalling Sunday Express seems to have stumbled across a leak, or has Phil Space been at work?

Sice when have 125s been mass commuter movers? and plainly they would merely be decanted rather than the emotive "scrapped".

Bah

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/212752/Green-light-for-new-trains


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on November 21, 2010, 18:15:56
Sice when have 125s been mass commuter movers?
HSTs are used on Paddington to Oxford commuter trains.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on November 21, 2010, 18:29:19
Sice when have 125s been mass commuter movers?

Erm, that would be more or less ever since their inception, when the high-speed, frequent service made longer distance commuting to London from places like Swindon, Chippenham, Bristol, Peterborough, Newark etc etc a viable proposition!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 21, 2010, 18:51:12
So , the Express is actually right!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: caliwag on November 21, 2010, 21:55:56
Peterborough/Newark a mere handful compared with real commuting. I use to commute from  York to KX and I do not recall them piling on...that's not real commuting.

Oxford and Bristol OK, but does all that justify 8 billion investment?



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on November 21, 2010, 22:39:52
I have no idea what you mean, but I suspect you're barking up the wrong tree here. I'm guessing the Express's article is about the Intercity express programme, to replace the HST fleet en masse.

Whether or not you would consider that HSTs are used by commuters is utterly immaterial. They're excellent trains but increasingly long in the tooth, heavily utilized, won't be able to last for ever and are due for replacement. Believe it or not, HSTs are not just used by commuters from Bristol and Oxford.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: caliwag on November 21, 2010, 23:05:22
I'm not barking up any tree...I am merely pointing out that the dreadful Sunday Express is wasting space and getting people excited about the bleeding obvious...plainly the 125s, considered long in the tooth or not, will be replaced at some point.
Generally they are long distance trains...not commuter services as implied by the pathetic article.
They will certainly not, as implied as well we know, be scrapped.
It is just typical sensationilist rubbish reporting and since nothing will be announced until Tuesday at the earliest, complete speculation


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 21, 2010, 23:21:18
The current HSTs (that is, 125s) will be with us for at least another ten years.

(Source: Very Senior Management, FGW.)

CfN.  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: SDS on November 22, 2010, 00:14:00
10 years at least, and then they will try and squeeze some more years after that.

After all haven't the engines all been replaced recently anyway?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 22, 2010, 09:49:28
House of Commons Business for Thursday (Westminster Hall, not the main chamber)

2.30pm - 5pm   
Impact of the Comprehensive Spending Review on the Department for Transport


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: standclearplease on November 22, 2010, 10:11:53
HSTs may have not been designed as commuter trains, but that's how they've turned out in certain areas.. obviously across the FGW network too when used at peak times.

To be fair, they do a pretty good job of providing extra seats and capacity during rush hour.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on November 22, 2010, 10:46:01
Would imagine some sort of re-engineering/refurbishment would still be needed in the mean time to keep them going reliably for another 10years plus.Life extension of HSTs was one option being considererd along with IEP. When Brush fitted new MTU engines and Cooler groups to FGW HST power cars they merely addressed the HSTs main weakness from new,the Valenta engine and its tendency to overheat because of an under-specified cooler group.East Coast HST power cars had a more extensive overhaul at Brush with a much bigger radiator and new control electronics fitted at the same time as new MTU engines as they were expected to stay in service longer than FGWs power cars.Perhaps someone with more technical knowledge could enlighten me on this one.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 22, 2010, 23:30:00
Have it on fairly good authority that the announcement will now be tomorrow - Tuesday. Sorry, can't disclose source.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 22, 2010, 23:48:22
From the Parliament website:

Quote
Tuesday 23 November
The House will sit in Westminster Hall between 9.30am-2.00pm

Westminster Hall Private Members^ Debates:

09.30-11.00 ^ High Speed 2 rail programme ^ Steve Baker



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 23, 2010, 10:15:52
Quote
Tuesday 23 November
The House will sit in Westminster Hall between 9.30am-2.00pm

Westminster Hall Private Members^ Debates:

09.30-11.00 ^ High Speed 2 rail programme ^ Steve Baker


That's a Chilterns Tory mp whingeing about high-speed rail.

Source now tells me Mr Hammond will be opening his mouth on Thursday... so some time this week at least looks a safe bet. An 11.30am announcement on Thursday (that day's slot for ministerial statements in the Commons) would fit in nicely with the afternoon Westminster Hall debate on transport and the spending review.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 23, 2010, 10:32:35
Rail was featured on 'File on 4' BBC Radio 4 programme over the weekend - you might find it again on iplayer. Thursday would fit in with Stephen Hammonds comments on that programme.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on November 23, 2010, 11:21:18
Rail was featured on 'File on 4' BBC Radio 4 programme over the weekend - you might find it again on iplayer. Thursday would fit in with Stephen Hammonds comments on that programme.

See:

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=8001.msg80309#msg80309


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 23, 2010, 14:08:29
An article in today's Bristol Evening Post supports Thursday as the expected announcement date and suggests a "larger scale project" is being looked at...

Quote from: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/PM-fuels-electrification-link-speculation-grand-plan/article-2924152-detail/article.html
PRIME Minister David Cameron has fuelled speculation over the future of electrification of the rail link between Bristol and London by revealing he is looking at a "larger scale project".

The Government will make an announcement on Thursday about the ^1 billion scheme to upgrade the Great Western Line and the new InterCity trains planned to run on it. The two are interlinked and both have been in doubt.

But Mr Cameron hinted that the plans may be wrapped up in an even bigger project.

He told the Evening Post: "On the issue of electrification, we are looking at this extremely closely. There's got to be a good business, economic and environment case.
Click here for more

"You can't sign off projects unless you have that case but we are actually looking at 'can we solve this problem by making it bigger?' ^ can we look at a larger scale project or a different project that can help to deliver a good business case ^ so we are working very hard to try to make that happen."

Full story on This Is Bristol (http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/PM-fuels-electrification-link-speculation-grand-plan/article-2924152-detail/article.html)

TLM


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 24, 2010, 11:35:29
Hmmm. may be worth keeping an eye on this. The Transport Select Committee are having Philip Hammond appear before them today to discuss the Comprehensive Spending Review.

Quote from: http://services.parliament.uk/calendar/#/calendar/Commons/SelectCommittee/2010/11/24/events.html
3pm   Transport
Subject: Transport and the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review
Witness(es): Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP, Secretary of State, Department for Transport
Location: Committee Room 8, Palace of Westminster

TLM


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 24, 2010, 11:59:30
The idea of making it part of  a bigger package?

Could we actually be talking about a steady rolling programme of electrification (funded by the franchisees in return for longer franchises)?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 24, 2010, 17:10:35
I listened in to a bit of the committee meeting today. Nothing to write home about, but the minister did confirm there would be an announcement on rolling stock etc. When pressed, the minster said he couldn't breech parliamentary protocol and say when but it would be "very, very, soon"...

TLM


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on November 24, 2010, 18:09:37
A humorous aside from the Fact Compiler over at the Railway Eye (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/11/petrol-head-rail-expenditure-handicap.html) blog, offering odds on the likely runners for forthcoming rail expenditure, to be announced tommorow (25/11/2010).

Quote
Runners and riders
Cockney Link - 4/7 (Fav)
Western Voltage - 3-1 (may be pulled up short)
Juniper's Revenge 5-1
Northern Capacity 100-1 (outsider)
HLOS Commitment 75-1
Kipling's Folly 3-1
Tutu X 3-1
Permatan Fleet 34-1
Sheffield Juice - Scratched

3-1 are good odds for 'Western Voltage'. Worth a punt?  ;) :P ;D


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on November 24, 2010, 20:05:20
In the Times this morning, it stated that Hammond was to make an announcement to the Stock Exchange about Rolling stock - if that's tomorrow, release will be at 0730.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on November 24, 2010, 20:13:45
In the Times this morning, it stated that Hammond was to make an announcement to the Stock Exchange about Rolling stock - if that's tomorrow, release will be at 0730.


Confirmed by Captain Deltic on Twitter - he says announcement at 7.00am with comments from CD on the radio (radio 4?)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 24, 2010, 22:15:08
Northern Capacity 100/1?

That was a winner in the October CSR stakes... 

Someone isn't keeping up with the announcements...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 24, 2010, 22:37:45
All systems go for tomorrow morning, with transport ministers out and about in FGW-land.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 24, 2010, 22:42:52
A humorous aside from the Fact Compiler over at the Railway Eye (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/11/petrol-head-rail-expenditure-handicap.html) blog, offering odds on the likely runners for forthcoming rail expenditure, to be announced tommorow (25/11/2010).

Quote
Runners and riders
Cockney Link - 4/7 (Fav)
Western Voltage - 3-1 (may be pulled up short)
Juniper's Revenge 5-1
Northern Capacity 100-1 (outsider)
HLOS Commitment 75-1
Kipling's Folly 3-1
Tutu X 3-1
Permatan Fleet 34-1
Sheffield Juice - Scratched

3-1 are good odds for 'Western Voltage'. Worth a punt?  ;) :P ;D
Staying with the fine traditions of the GWR with its 7' gauge diesel hydraulics my guess is it will be 3000 volts 16 2/3 Hz


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 24, 2010, 23:12:30
All systems go for tomorrow morning, with transport ministers out and about in FGW-land.

Thanks, willc  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on November 25, 2010, 00:20:31
All systems go for tomorrow morning, with transport ministers out and about in FGW-land.

Leccyfication it is then...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 25, 2010, 07:33:33
BBC reporting that electrification of Grest Western is still on hold. Are we expecting another announcement later?

Quote from: BBC News http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11834531
It is buying about 2,000 new carriages to tackle overcrowding, electrifying some lines and pressing ahead with the Thameslink programme.

But plans to modernise the London-Swansea line are still on hold and it will be the end of the decade before the investment is complete.

Quote
Some 400 of them are for Crossrail (the new line being built east-west across London), 800 for Thameslink (the north-south link across London) and 650 will be given to different franchises around the country.

 :(

TLM


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 07:58:42
From Rail News:

http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/11/25-major-railway-investment-gets-green.html (http://"http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/11/25-major-railway-investment-gets-green.html")

Quote
THE government has confirmed this morning that it's going ahead with new rolling stock orders and electrification worth ^8 billion, including 2,100 new vehicles for Thameslink, Crossrail and other operators.

The transport secretary Philip Hammond is authorising 1,200 vehicles for Thameslink and the infrastructure upgrade of their route across central London, at a cost of ^6 billion.

He has also confirmed the already-announced electrification of the 'north west triangle', and electrification of the Great Western Main Line between London and Oxford and Newbury. This route had already been set to be electrified as far as Maidenhead as part of the Crossrail programme.


That bit in bold (not yet mentioned by the BBC) fits in well with the proposed use of Thameslink cascaded 319s on the GW.  Having OK'd Thameslinks full rolling stock order, Oxford and Newbury logically follow on to use the existing stock, even if Bristol and Swansea still require an IEP decision.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 08:11:42
And the DfT statement to the stock exchange:

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=10722933
Quote

...The Thameslink programme will require a fleet of around 1,200 new
electric vehicles. The Department is currently considering bids from two
consortia led by Siemens PLC and Bombardier Transportation UK Ltd.  The
Department intends to make an announcement regarding the preferred
bidder in spring 2011. Existing electric trains from Thameslink will be
able to be deployed elsewhere on the rail network and therefore the
lines between London and Didcot, Newbury and Oxford as well as between
Liverpool, Manchester, Preston and Blackpool will be electrified.


On 6 July 2010, the Department published Sir Andrew Foster's review of
the Intercity Express Programme (IEP). The Department has evaluated
possible alternatives to the original IEP proposal and has narrowed the
consideration to two leading options; a revised bid from Agility Trains,
and an alternative for a fleet of all electric trains  which could be
coupled to new diesel locomotives where the overhead electric wires end.

The Government will continue to assess the two remaining alternatives,
alongside a consideration of the extent of electrification on the Great
Western route, and will make a further statement in the New Year...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on November 25, 2010, 08:12:48
BBC reporting that electrification of Grest Western is still on hold. Are we expecting another announcement later?
Speaking on BBC Breakfast News this morning Philip Hammond said there should be an announcement in the next few weeks (meaning New Year) regards IEP and Electrification of the GWML. They are still finallising financial, legal and technical issues of the project.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on November 25, 2010, 08:23:31
http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/11/25-major-railway-investment-gets-green.html

Electrification from Paddington to Oxford and Newbury confirmed.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 09:49:20
http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2010/11/25-major-railway-investment-gets-green.html

Electrification from Paddington to Oxford and Newbury confirmed.

I posted this earlier...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: broadgage on November 25, 2010, 11:19:53
More reports here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11834531 (ftp://http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11834531)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on November 25, 2010, 11:26:01
 Dft press release
http://www.dft.gov.uk/press/speechesstatements/statements/hammond20101125
 
HSTs to be replaced by bi-mode IEP or diesel haulage of electric stock beyond the wires.

Final decision on IEP, and on further Great Western electrification, in the New Year


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 25, 2010, 11:32:36
In the circumstances a good decision I think especially if some of the cascaded Thames Turbos DMUs stay within the FGW area*

Electrification is and always was about rolling stock and to let the old Thameslink stock go unused would be a crime.

* is it true that they have a slightly wider loading gauge which would make them more suitable for ex-GWR lines than elsewhere? 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 11:42:26
* is it true that they [Turbos] have a slightly wider loading gauge which would make them more suitable for ex-GWR lines than elsewhere? 

Yes, but all the appropriate NR route plans and RUSs include an item to undertake the necessary gauge clearance to allow them to run if they were to become available, eg Portsmouth - Cardiff.

A bit chicken and egg, until a decision is made, similar to platform lengthening in the SWT area for 10 car trains...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 11:51:12
More reports here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11834531 (ftp://http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11834531)

The BBC have a link to the expected rants from South Wales, but both the main site and 'BBC Wales' stories conveniently fail to mention the GW wiring to Oxford, Didcot and Newbury, but do emphasise that Crossrail and Thameslink will happen.

I guess they don't see the bigger picture, which is that wires to Didcot being confirmed also makes it more likely that an extension will occur than before?

What percentage of the necessary route mileage does Didcot provide?

All told I find the BBC's written reports persistently negative on this announcement, but IMHO I expect that when the details are teased out out over the next few weeks we might just find there is a lot more confirmed than anyone ever expected back in May...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: mjones on November 25, 2010, 11:55:05
It was a pity the BBC report missed out the Oxford and Newbury electrification, that made all the difference to how it came across, so I don't blame people for being very concerned. Indeed, I found the interview with Hammond on Today quite disappointing: the interviewer didn't really ask him about GW electrification, and didn't press him at all on the IEP situation, which is so controversial an example of bungled government procurement that they should have picked up on it.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 12:15:11
The interviewer on the BBC Breakfast show seemed to have his one key question lined up, and it went a bit like this.

Hammond:  Blah blah, rolling stock introduction, 650 carriages across the country by 2014

Interviewer: So nothing til 2019 then?  ???

Hammond: Did you not listen to what I just said...   ;D

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: mjones on November 25, 2010, 13:24:42
And that, sadly, still seems to be what is being reported now on the BBC. The mid-day updates still seem to be unware of the Oxford/Newbury electrification.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 25, 2010, 15:02:02
Luckily, a certain Mr William Crossley is keeping his local readers fully updated with the news:

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/8687765.BREAKING_NEWS__Oxford_rail_electrification_gets_green_light/ (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/8687765.BREAKING_NEWS__Oxford_rail_electrification_gets_green_light/)

Overall, what a great day for the railways given the recent spending cuts.  I'm reminded by a post from Btline (what's happened to him lately?!) regarding the Great Western Electrification scheme after it was first announced and the fact that an incoming Tory government could scupper it all:

Why are you surprised? ::)

Of course the Tories won't do it! Say goodbye to Crossrail as well, that has not been confirmed by the Tories (Boris doesn't count, as he shares very little in common with his Westminster colleagues!) of course, Boris himself cut several transport projects proposed by Labour's Ken. That's what they do!

Their claim of "we can't afford it" is rubbish. We can't afford NOT to do it. The HSTs need replacing, and if the GWML is not electrified, we'll be confimed to DMUs for the next 40 years. The other benefit is the way Labour have planned a good rolling stock cascade, which co-incides with the Thameslink programme being completed.

But the Tories won't bother making the investment, despite the fact that the benefits will pay for it in the long term.

Well, the Tories haven't committed to Bristol/South Wales electrification yet, but just about everything else has survived the cull, and I think everything points to the fact we'll see wires at least as far as London to Bristol Temple Meads/Parkway, hopefully on to Cardiff and perhaps even as originally envisaged, Swansea.  We'll have to wait for a little longer to find out though...

For the time being though, I'm very relieved and pleased as punch!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 25, 2010, 15:12:31
Hmmm, I've been giving some thought over lunch to the recent announcements. I suspect I've added 2 & 2 and got 5,324 but....

- The PM talking to the press about a "much bigger" scheme being considered... and
- The DfT seriously considering to replace the HSTs with an all electric fleet from Bombardier plus new diesel locos for when the wires run out (rather than the expected mix of bi and electric versions from Hitachi)

The original electrification proposal was for the wires to only go as far as Newbury on the B&H and Bristol on the GW Main Line. With all an electric fleet, that would require the locos to be attached at Reading or Newbury for all SW services. Reading would surely be a non starter for shunting locos around, even with the increased capacity currently going in & I can't see every train stopping at Newbury. The alternivite of running every train via Bristol is I suspect also not going to be an option for obvious reasons.

So... could they seriously be contemplating now running the wires into Devon? Exeter SD would be an option but I think Plymouth would be the more lightly choice if it were to happen (note the very big if):

  • With travel times in Cornwall less than ideal anyway due to geography, would a few extra minutes at Plymouth hooking up a loco matter so much? At the very least, I suspect the delay would be effect fewer people.
  • With fewer though trains, platform occupations times much less of a issued at Plymouth rather than Exeter SD.
  • Laira is already in Plymouth - with the extensive facilities it has it would be an ideal base for a diesel fleet. I suspect they would need a new depot at Exeter if they were going to be based there as the DMU is fairly cramped.
  • If the wires weren't going to Plymouth, Laira would need to be replaced elsewhere as it's not sensable to have a major depot in a location that can't be accessed by the fleet running under their own power.
  • Simple economics. If you've got an 100% electric fleet, it makes sense to run it with electricity as much as possible.

Pie in the sky?

TLM

Edit: Of course, I meant to include the South Wales line as far as Swansea was in the original proposal as well.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 15:55:25
A few weeks ago someone (not necessarily here) wondered why IEP and Thameslink decisions were being linked by the Government.  It seemed to me that it was pretty obvious, because the business case for the wires to Newbury, Didcot and Oxford must depend to a significant extent on whether you buy new, or cascade existing rolling stock. Without the Thameslink go ahead, what's been announced today would not stack up. But once you have wires at Didcot, presumably the GWML-IEP business case gets much better, everything sort of pulls something else along...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 25, 2010, 15:56:09
And that, sadly, still seems to be what is being reported now on the BBC. The mid-day updates still seem to be unware of the Oxford/Newbury electrification.

It's there now near the top of the piece. At last...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 25, 2010, 16:17:10
The original electrification proposal was for the wires to only go as far as Newbury on the B&H and Bristol on the GW Main Line. With all an electric fleet, that would require the locos to be attached at Reading or Newbury for all SW services.

If electrification stops at Newbury, it just means that local commuter services will be EMU and that long distance services to the SW will be desiels running under the wires.

My prediction is that GWML electrifcation will be extended to Bristol and possibly Swansea and that those services will be electric (with possible loco haulage from Cardiff if the wires stop there).  FGW will retain a desiel fleet for Paddington- SW services.  Wires beyond Newburby only make sense once you start thinking about XC electrification which is not going to happen for a while at least not until the current electrification is sucessfully completed and the XC stock needs replacing.

GWML electrification beyond Didcot and Newbury will only happen when the project to string wires closer to London is wel advanced and only when the HSTs need replacing.  They will need replacing eventually, but I predict that they will be kept going until 2020 ish.

The secret to makimng electrifcation affordable is to allow it to be driven by rolling stock replacement needs.  A;l this silly talk of bi-mode EIPs is an attempt to make the rolling stock fit the infrastructure rather than ungrading the infrastructure as and when it is needed to enabkle it to take cheaper electric stock.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: stebbo on November 25, 2010, 17:19:11
Totally agree that it's nuts to make the rolling stock fit the infrastructure but on the Great Western lines there's the problem of the services beyond Cardiff (although I think it would be a no-brainer to go to Swansea) and the "express" services from Paddington to stations beyond Exeter/Plymouth, to Cheltenham and to Worcester/Hereford. Building on the earlier comment, diesel motive power could be kept at Plymouth, Swindon and Oxford.

Of course, to go back to a point raised months ago in another post, the question of electrification to the south west begs the question of whether, taking the longer view, an alternative to the run along the sea wall at Dawlish/Teignmouth needs to be considered.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: TheLastMinute on November 25, 2010, 17:54:27
But the IEP plan has to replace all the HSTs. I agree that they'll almost certainly be around in 2020 but they'll be on the last legs - by 2020 the oldest will be almost 45 years old and the youngest 38.

We know the DfT are considering an all electric fleet. I just can't see DfT contemplating this with a significant number being dragged around the South West by a fleet of new locos. Besides, is there capacity at Paddington have these locos attach and detach? Of course, you could use some sort of DVT arrangement, but if your going to do that then surely it would be better to go for a bi-mode or a full on diesel design in the first place?

I also agree with Tim about needing to make the infrastructure fit the stock and it's for that reason I think behind the scenes, the DfT is seriously considering the option of taking the knitting into Devon.

Thinking about it, there might be an argument for doing the Swindon/Cheltenham section as it's the diversion route for the tunnel. Then you'd only need the locos for the Newport(or Severn Tunnel Junction) to Gloucester section.

I'm getting a bit carried away here - I think I need a lie down in a darkened room!  :o

TLM


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: mjones on November 25, 2010, 19:14:54
Does confirmation of electrification to Oxford mean that there will be some re-thinking on Crossrail? It would surely be a good opportunity to make better use of the Crossrail tunnel, reducing the number of trains that will terminate at Paddington from the East, and free up some platform space at Paddington.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on November 25, 2010, 20:11:13

What good news, Paddington Suburban Electrification (PSE) approved at last. Under the BR modernisation plan it was due for completion in 1980.

Didcot Pway is 53m11ch from Paddington and the supergrid (440kV) supply point is there (at the power station). This makes wiring to Bristol TM,  only 65m20ch further on, much more attractive as its costs are therefore now marginal rather than full.

The announcement (as observed by a previous poster) is based on rolling stock decisions - untangling IEP
is bound to take longer, so we'll have to wait, probably more than a few weeks.

We might now expect more integration of Crossrail and PSE, freeing up more 319's for use elsewhere.

Bid for it FGW!

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 25, 2010, 21:05:05
What I think the current Government have done is applied a much more realistic time frame to the GWML electrification.  I suspect that what will happen is the team that electrify from Hayes to Maidenhead for Crossrail will continue west, perhaps with Crossrail extending to Reading as the first stage who knows it is very early stages in the whole process.

The extension to South Wales I am sure will follow there is a lot of political pressure for it to happen Bristol will be done as part of this.

The Grid feeds are planned to be Ladbrook Grove, Didcot both from the 400kV grid electrification using the 25kV-0-25kV auto transformer system if the extension west of Didcot does not happen then the classic 25kV booster transformer system as it is cheaper but may not provide for the future without a power supply upgrade,  if  the system goes west of Didcot there is another 400kV grid intake planned near Bristol Parkway with the Seven tunnel and South Wales being wired to the classic 25kV booster transformer system with I believe 2 grid sites between Swansea and the Tunnel

The options of going west of Didcot or not have been put together in a paper for the Government


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 25, 2010, 22:26:52
Hopefully, whatever happens, the otherwise usually amusing Railway Eye, drops their references to 'Petrol Head' when talking about the SoS for Transport.  It's becoming a little tiresome...  ::)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 25, 2010, 22:35:12
In terms of new express rolling stock, the Stock Exchange statement first thing today contained the following:

Quote
The Department has evaluated possible alternatives to the original IEP proposal and has narrowed the consideration to two leading options; a revised bid from Agility Trains, and an alternative for a fleet of all electric trains  which could be coupled to new diesel locomotives where the overhead electric wires end.

"Leading options" is quite telling, as Hitachi/Agility was previously the clear preferred bidder for IEP, with Bombardier+Siemens very much the reserve. Slightly surprising that DafT seem to have ruled out the Voyager with an electric transformer coach idea which Bombardier has been pushing hard, in particular as a way to speed up MML wiring.

The new issue of Modern Railways contains a report about a speech given by a Bombardier director to the Rail Freight Group's Welsh members in which he said that they are looking at ways to introduce the Traxx family of locos (available as diesel or electric) in a UK-gauge version, as well as ways to meet the latest EU emissions rules for diesels from 2012.

Might have nothing to do with the all-electric plus diesels option, then again... and Bombardier also has a new high-speed train to sell, see http://innotrans.bombardier.com/en/3_0.jsp for details of this and the latest Traxx diesel - and some dual-power diesel and electric monster being built for US commuter trains, 131 tonnes on four axles! Think that would give Network Rail's track engineers a fit.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 26, 2010, 09:39:03
Does confirmation of electrification to Oxford mean that there will be some re-thinking on Crossrail? It would surely be a good opportunity to make better use of the Crossrail tunnel, reducing the number of trains that will terminate at Paddington from the East, and free up some platform space at Paddington.

Makes sense to me.  But I suspect that the Government will want to complete crossrail as it is currently planned first and draw a line under that and then work-up any changes as a separate project.  Crossrail funding is complicated and altering the project befor eit is comepleted might risk some of the contributions. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 26, 2010, 10:08:45
Slightly surprising that DafT seem to have ruled out the Voyager with an electric transformer coach idea which Bombardier has been pushing hard, in particular as a way to speed up MML wiring.

That hasn't really been proposed as an IEP option though has it. Adding a pantograph to various Voyagers and Meridians is a way of allowing the existing fleet to run under wires where their routes currently allow them to, such as on the ECML or south of Bedford, and at the same time lengthen to 5 or 6 coaches long.

That would be a huge benefit to those fleets, but they'd still be used in their current areas AFAICT...

Paul 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 26, 2010, 10:23:27
Slightly surprising that DafT seem to have ruled out the Voyager with an electric transformer coach idea which Bombardier has been pushing hard, in particular as a way to speed up MML wiring.

That hasn't really been proposed as an IEP option though has it. Adding a pantograph to various Voyagers and Meridians is a way of allowing the existing fleet to run under wires where their routes currently allow them to, such as on the ECML or south of Bedford, and at the same time lengthen to 5 or 6 coaches long.

That would be a huge benefit to those fleets, but they'd still be used in their current areas AFAICT...

Paul 

I think that you are right Paul.  Although it is not completely clear to me that the governemnt will choose one of the EIP options on the table at the moment.  They might choose something else.  One option for them would be to choose an electric fleet for the routes that are wired and a diesel  fleet for the non-wired routes.  The temptation must be to choose DMUs rather than proper deisel locos and the voyager/pantagraph argument could be used to justify that decision. 

I can't get too excited about running diesels under the wires.  If the wires only get to Cardiff and Bristol then I cant see that running diesels from paddington to Penzance and from Paddington to carmarthern or Swansea is all that terrible.   And when the wires do reach Swansea the deisel stock will find work elseware I am sure. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on November 26, 2010, 11:00:40
I can't get too excited about running diesels under the wires.  If the wires only get to Cardiff and Bristol then I cant see that running diesels from paddington to Penzance and from Paddington to carmarthern or Swansea is all that terrible.   And when the wires do reach Swansea the deisel stock will find work elseware I am sure. 

I am afraid I disgree with you completely on this one.

One of the stupidist things the current regime has given us is HSTs on the ECML running Newcastle and Leeds services entirely under the wires because of lack of suitable electric stock.

Go to KX around 10:00 and there are (were) 4 HSTs in under an hour. Inverness, Sunderalnd Leeds and Newcastle, two of which are under the wires all the way.

I also don't think freight should be diesel hauled under the wires. An electrified railway should use electric traction for all trains.

OK so you have a loco change at the end of the wires but Cambridge (and other places) used to do it in under three minutes on the Kings Lynn through trains. As the wires are likely to end at a reasonably large town the 3 minute dwell time would not really affect the overall journey time it would disappear if excessive padding was removed.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: standclearplease on November 26, 2010, 11:23:05
Would the argument be that having a bi-mode train would add too much weight?

Lugging around a transformer when not under the wires, and lugging around a diesel engine when under the wires doesn't sound efficient. Saying that, neither does running an electric train being pulled by a diesel train whilst not under wires.

But there we go.  :D


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Henry on November 26, 2010, 11:50:55
http://www.rmt.org.uk/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=140772


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on November 26, 2010, 12:06:31





OK so you have a loco change at the end of the wires but Cambridge (and other places) used to do it in under three minutes on the Kings Lynn through trains. As the wires are likely to end at a reasonably large town the 3 minute dwell time would not really affect the overall journey time it would disappear if excessive padding was removed.

Yep.

They could replace a XC Cl47 at Coventry or Birmingham NS with a Cl86 in 4 minutes.

Very good when you think of two sets of screw couplings, brake hoses and ETH jumpers and two shunting movements (and oil lamps).

It took 22 minutes at Preston, for a Blackpool train.

OTC




Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: stebbo on November 26, 2010, 13:29:45
This assumes that the electric stock will be driven by a locomotive at one end. If an emu type stock, then the diesel has to haul the whole lot.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 26, 2010, 13:39:15
This assumes that the electric stock will be driven by a locomotive at one end. If an emu type stock, then the diesel has to haul the whole lot.
Technically there is no reason why an eclectic loco could not couple to a DMU or a diesel loco to an EMU it just needs for them both to have the same type auto couplers, this would make for a very flexible system and would not mean the dead hauling of equipment for long distances however it would mean stabling points etc


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 26, 2010, 13:48:50
I do take your point, Running "under the wires" without electric traction is not good and more of the trains leaving kings cross shoudl be electric, but I don't think you can too much of a purist about it.  If you look at the GWML after the currently promised electrification is complete, a train from London to Plymouth or Penzance will only be running under the wires for a small proportion of its journey.  To make that train bi-mode with the extra cost and reliability issues, and the performance and energy efficiency penalty caused by dragging the weight of two sets of equipment arround or the time penalty caused by coupling a loco on and off does not seem worth it.  I think it is a no brainer to make those journeys with deisel traction the whole way.   Especially as we want to keep things simple and affordable.

If the wires go up to Cardiff but not Swansea then the facts change.  Running lots of diesels every day all the way from Paddington to Swansea/Carmarthen doesn't look so sensible as a higher proportion of the route is electrified.  The business case for buying deisel trains for that route are also less clear cut as their is a reasonable chance that the wires will eventually get to Swansea.   I am still not convinced that bi-mode is the answer, because you would be talking an expensive and complex train as a solution to what might be a tempory problem.  Loco haulage might be an answer (especially if the class 67s can be used as they are short of work) as well as changing the calling patterns off peak and terminating more trains at cardiff with more of the manchester or Pompy trains extended to Swansea.  
I can't get too excited about running diesels under the wires.  If the wires only get to Cardiff and Bristol then I cant see that running diesels from paddington to Penzance and from Paddington to carmarthern or Swansea is all that terrible.   And when the wires do reach Swansea the deisel stock will find work elseware I am sure. 

I am afraid I disgree with you completely on this one.

One of the stupidist things the current regime has given us is HSTs on the ECML running Newcastle and Leeds services entirely under the wires because of lack of suitable electric stock.

Go to KX around 10:00 and there are (were) 4 HSTs in under an hour. Inverness, Sunderalnd Leeds and Newcastle, two of which are under the wires all the way.

I also don't think freight should be diesel hauled under the wires. An electrified railway should use electric traction for all trains.

OK so you have a loco change at the end of the wires but Cambridge (and other places) used to do it in under three minutes on the Kings Lynn through trains. As the wires are likely to end at a reasonably large town the 3 minute dwell time would not really affect the overall journey time it would disappear if excessive padding was removed.

I do take your point, Running "under the wires" without electric traction is not good and more of the trains leaving kings cross shoudl be electric, but I don't think you can too much of a purist about it.  If you look at the GWML after the currently promised electrification is complete, a train from London to Plymouth or Penzance will only be running under the wires for a small proportion of its journey.  To make that train bi-mode with the extra cost and reliability issues, and the performance and energy efficiency penalty caused by dragging the weight of two sets of equipment arround or the time penalty caused by coupling a loco on and off does not seem worth it.  I think it is a no brainer to make those journeys with deisel traction the whole way.   Especially as we want to keep things simple and affordable.

If the wires go up to Cardiff but not Swansea then the facts change.  Running lots of diesels every day all the way from Paddington to Swansea/Carmarthen doesn't look so sensible as a higher proportion of the route is electrified.  The business case for buying deisel trains for that route are also less clear cut as their is a reasonable chance that the wires will eventually get to Swansea.   I am still not convinced that bi-mode is the answer, because you would be talking an expensive and complex train as a solution to what might be a tempory problem.  Loco haulage might be an answer (especially if the class 67s can be used as they are short of work) as well as changing the calling patterns off peak and terminating more trains at cardiff with more of the manchester or Pompy trains extended to Swansea.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 26, 2010, 13:52:45
This assumes that the electric stock will be driven by a locomotive at one end. If an emu type stock, then the diesel has to haul the whole lot.

If we have diesel locos hauling electric trains or EMUs will those diesels need to run arround at the end of their journeys?  Is the trackwork in place in Swansea and other places for them to do this?  Is this still feasible on a busy railway? Of are we going to need more complicated stock capable of driving a diesel loco from an EMU cab? Doesn't complexity add to cost and risk?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 26, 2010, 15:21:50
This assumes that the electric stock will be driven by a locomotive at one end. If an emu type stock, then the diesel has to haul the whole lot.

If we have diesel locos hauling electric trains or EMUs will those diesels need to run arround at the end of their journeys?  Is the trackwork in place in Swansea and other places for them to do this?  Is this still feasible on a busy railway? Of are we going to need more complicated stock capable of driving a diesel loco from an EMU cab? Doesn't complexity add to cost and risk?
Or run it in effect as a DVT no need to decouple the loco at the remote end


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on November 26, 2010, 15:23:50
That was exactly what the Southern Region did from1967 until the conductor rails reached Weymouth.

A 4 REP pushed 1 or 2 4 TCs to Bournemouth where a 33 came on the front and took 1 or 2 of the TCs down to Weymouth. Pushing them back to Bournemouth where the coupled onto a waiting REP.

Couplings were buckeye with a brake pipes and  and a standard control cable to couple.

Each individual 4 car set REP or TC had a driving cab at each end as did the 33. Worked beautifully.
 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: brompton rail on November 26, 2010, 15:38:22
Yes, but it didn't travel at 125 mph though.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on November 26, 2010, 16:25:45
But surely a modern version could travel at 125 mph?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 26, 2010, 16:50:27
Yes, but it didn't travel at 125 mph though.
But surely a modern version could travel at 125 mph?
Exactly the ECML have operated 125 plus with loco's and DVT's for nearly 20 years


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on November 26, 2010, 17:00:57
Yes, but it didn't travel at 125 mph though.

Not legally anyway.............

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 26, 2010, 17:49:49
One of the stupidist things the current regime has given us is HSTs on the ECML running Newcastle and Leeds services entirely under the wires because of lack of suitable electric stock.

One of the problems with the ECML is that most trains cannot do an out and back run in the same day.  Once you accept the concept of through trains from Inverness or Aberdeen to/from Kings Cross a few times a day, to get full utilisation of the stock they have to do additional 'short' runs to employ them fully.  So for example (theoretically cos I haven't got real diagrams) an EC HST might do Leeds > Aberdeen > Kings Cross > Newcastle over a day.   

If they hadn't already had the HSTs in service with a 25 yr remaining life at the time the electrification happened, maybe diesel haulage of Mk 4 coaching sets north of Edinburgh would have been introduced instead.

Paul

 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on November 26, 2010, 19:18:55
One of the stupidist things the current regime has given us is HSTs on the ECML running Newcastle and Leeds services entirely under the wires because of lack of suitable electric stock.

One of the problems with the ECML is that most trains cannot do an out and back run in the same day.  Once you accept the concept of through trains from Inverness or Aberdeen to/from Kings Cross a few times a day, to get full utilisation of the stock they have to do additional 'short' runs to employ them fully.  So for example (theoretically cos I haven't got real diagrams) an EC HST might do Leeds > Aberdeen > Kings Cross > Newcastle over a day.  

You're both partly-right. There are some diagrams posted at http://www.thejunction.org.uk/ (http://www.thejunction.org.uk/). If you look at the East Coast HST ones, there are 11 - of which 3 are wholly under the wires.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 26, 2010, 20:14:52
I remember there was a time when there were no ECML HST diagrams fully under the wires, but increased services in recent years, such as the additional Leeds services have also led to more HST use, probably as they were all that was available. I expect the 91/HST balance was just about right in the nineties...

Paul 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 27, 2010, 00:04:40
Slightly surprising that DafT seem to have ruled out the Voyager with an electric transformer coach idea which Bombardier has been pushing hard, in particular as a way to speed up MML wiring.

That hasn't really been proposed as an IEP option though has it. Adding a pantograph to various Voyagers and Meridians is a way of allowing the existing fleet to run under wires where their routes currently allow them to, such as on the ECML or south of Bedford, and at the same time lengthen to 5 or 6 coaches long.

That would be a huge benefit to those fleets, but they'd still be used in their current areas AFAICT...

Paul 

I think that you are right Paul.  Although it is not completely clear to me that the governemnt will choose one of the EIP options on the table at the moment.  They might choose something else.  One option for them would be to choose an electric fleet for the routes that are wired and a diesel  fleet for the non-wired routes.  The temptation must be to choose DMUs rather than proper deisel locos and the voyager/pantagraph argument could be used to justify that decision. 

The options the Government is now considering were made quite clear by DafT yesterday, which I posted on the previous page:

Quote
The Department has evaluated possible alternatives to the original IEP proposal and has narrowed the consideration to two leading options; a revised bid from Agility Trains, and an alternative for a fleet of all electric trains  which could be coupled to new diesel locomotives where the overhead electric wires end.

The bi-mode element of the revised bid from Hitachi/Agility, according to Modern Railways, now has underfloor diesel engines - sound familiar? - hence my surprise that a Voyager-type train with a transformer car was out of the running when the Japanese are now offering the exact same concept for IEP.

And note new diesels, not 67s or anything else, so I would imagine it would be easy enough to design them to be driven from the cab of the electric train they are coupled to, if this is the way they choose to go.

 
Quote
I think it is a no brainer to make those journeys with deisel traction the whole way.


And have a load of diesels with different performance characteristics sharing the fast lines from Paddington to Reading with electrics off to Bristol and Cardiff? That would be fun for the timetablers...

Quote
Does confirmation of electrification to Oxford mean that there will be some re-thinking on Crossrail? It would surely be a good opportunity to make better use of the Crossrail tunnel, reducing the number of trains that will terminate at Paddington from the East, and free up some platform space at Paddington.

There won't be any rethinking, at least not until the 319s need replacing. Using secondhand emus is critical to making the numbers stack up for Oxford and Newbury electrification. Crossrail and the extended Thameslink network are both intended to shove 20 or so trains per hour through the tunnels in the peaks, which implies lots of doors, like a Tube train, to get people on and off sharpish, which is why the 319s need to be replaced on Thameslink duties. Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: standclearplease on November 27, 2010, 09:52:46
Just out of interest, do the government have any plans to use North Pole depot for CrossRail or the new electric IEP?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 27, 2010, 14:54:55
Just out of interest, do the government have any plans to use North Pole depot for CrossRail or the new electric IEP?

Crossrail definitely not, that's Old Oak Common, but GW IEP maybe, according to the GW RUS. 

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 27, 2010, 15:08:40

The options the Government is now considering were made quite clear by DafT yesterday, which I posted on the previous page:

The bi-mode element of the revised bid from Hitachi/Agility, according to Modern Railways, now has underfloor diesel engines - sound familiar? - hence my surprise that a Voyager-type train with a transformer car was out of the running when the Japanese are now offering the exact same concept for IEP.

As I see it, a 'Voyager type train' as an IEP alternative is currently a totally separate debate to Bombardier's existing proposal for alterations to Meridians and Voyagers. All that has been proposed in the rail press is additional intermediate carriages with pantographs etc to stick in the existing fleet.  That's really all I was pointing out.

I'm not sure Bombardier are yet in a position to officially tout it as an alternative to Hitachi's offering of an underfloor engined bimode 5 car unit - until (and if) such time as the competition is reopened.  So as of now, the DfT cannot bring an extended Voyager into the running - however this may change in future.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 27, 2010, 15:54:47
Quote
All that has been proposed in the rail press

It is a bit more than a proposal in the rail press. It is a deadly serious idea, which Bombardier has been doing development work on with the support of other UK rail manufacturers, the leasing companies which own the Voyagers and Meridians, and XC, Virgin and EMT. It is detailed enough that there is a figure for new-build pantograph coaches, 123, plus 21 converted from existing coaches.

And DafT can bring anything into the running it likes, whenever it likes - and has, in the shape of an all-electric train plus diesel locos as a rival to the latest variant of the IEP concept, having ruled out diesel drags previously.

If all Hitachi ends up being offered is a contract to replace FGW and East Coast's HSTs, rather than all the other things IEP was supposed to do, will they still be interested, or be willing to build an assembly plant in the UK?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on November 27, 2010, 18:40:04
Please no more underfloor engined long distance Intercity services. If changing from electrified to diesel traction using locos works in mainland Europe on routes where they wires end, why not here?

Still with the speed that this is all not happening at least I know there are a good few years yet of travelling on HSTs :)  I find it staggering that for a build of train that was meant to be temporary before the release of APT, that no one has come up with a better train than the good old HST.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: XPT on November 27, 2010, 19:51:27
I haven't read through this massive thread, but the rumours that the replacement to the HST's *could* be 5-car Voyager like trains doesn't sound good.  I thought lessons would have been learnt after the fiasco of using those 4 or 5 car Voyagers on the long distance cross country routes where the trains are usually packed out.  Longer trains are needed.   With expected further growth in train passengers this decade, running 4/5 car trains on Intercity route is not a good idea.  And please let's hope these new trains have decent comfortable seating including seats that line up with the windows!  Here is a good example of what comfortable seating SHOULD be like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIMre6BKos


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on November 27, 2010, 22:45:56
There was another interesting DMU story tucked away in Modern Railways. A piece about Chiltern (p9) looking at loco haulage, which said that they're finding it difficult to finance new DMUs, partly because of the scarcity of finance, but also because "financiers are wary of putting money into new diesel trains with a 30-year life due to uncertainties surrounding the oil supply".

Perhaps someone should tell DfT.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: broadgage on November 28, 2010, 09:48:51
I haven't read through this massive thread, but the rumours that the replacement to the HST's *could* be 5-car Voyager like trains doesn't sound good.  I thought lessons would have been learnt after the fiasco of using those 4 or 5 car Voyagers on the long distance cross country routes where the trains are usually packed out.  Longer trains are needed.   With expected further growth in train passengers this decade, running 4/5 car trains on Intercity route is not a good idea.  And please let's hope these new trains have decent comfortable seating including seats that line up with the windows!  Here is a good example of what comfortable seating SHOULD be like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIMre6BKos

It is very early days as yet, but if other new trains are anything to go by, we will end up with some variety of 4/5 car multiple unit, with high density bus seats, minimal luggage space,and no buffet.
In theory multiple units are a good idea on account of the flexible train lengths. In practice though any seasoned and cynical traveller will know that flexible=shorter. Remember the adelantes ? flexible train length indeed, but normally 5 car replacing an HST.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 28, 2010, 09:51:16
Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.

Yes, can someone please announce that!  I thought it might have been included in Thursday's announcement given that electrification of Reading station was approved.  It is just such a logical thing to do given the passenger flows in the area!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 28, 2010, 09:54:16
It is very early days as yet, but if other new trains are anything to go by, we will end up with some variety of 4/5 car multiple unit, with high density bus seats, minimal luggage space,and no buffet.
In theory multiple units are a good idea on account of the flexible train lengths. In practice though any seasoned and cynical traveller will know that flexible=shorter. Remember the adelantes ? flexible train length indeed, but normally 5 car replacing an HST.

Ah, yes.  I remember the Adelante's.  Comfortable seats that line up with windows, a reasonable amount of luggage space, and a buffet.  Oh, and a train designed to supplement the HST fleet on quieter services off peak between Paddington and Cardiff (where a 5-car train would still be adequate, and certainly was 10 years ago), and the option to run them in 10-car formations to provide more seats than the current high density HST sets.  Yes, I remember the Adelante!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 28, 2010, 12:34:16
Some of the replacement trains may well be five-car - that was part of the IEP plan in its previous incarnation - but there were lots of longer trains too, to replace the HSTs, as there will be in whatever fleet is ordered - remember MML ordered some Meridians as nine-car sets and others as four-car. Now they run four, five and seven-car sets.

And a little flexibility in the fleet would not hurt, eg an all-electric unit running coupled to a electric-diesel set between Oxford and London to meet the demand on that leg, with the dual-powered one then going on along the Cotswold Line to Worcester, Malvern or Hereford - and probably a rather more elegant solution than messing around with diesel locos in Oxford station!

A similar arrangement for Cheltenham and Gloucester services past Swindon would also make sense most of the day and Berks & Hants off-peak semi-fasts don't need a full HST either.

Some of you may not like under-floor engines but short trains dragging around a diesel power-car under the wires makes no sense at all, as people kept pointing out to DafT during the IEP development process. And my pet hate about Voyagers/Meridians is not the engines, it's the cramped interiors, due to the tilt body shape, which will not be an issue on anything being built for the Great Western and East Coast routes with a 26m straight-sided body.

Quote
Remember the adelantes ? flexible train length indeed, but normally 5 car replacing an HST.

When exactly did they replace HSTs? As Insider notes, they were built to provide extra services to Bristol and Cardiff - and were themselves replaced by HSTs when the 180s got moved to Oxford & Cotswold work at the end of 2004. Where they were then replaced by HSTs which are too big for off-peak work on the Cotswold Line, where we would quite like to see some InterCity-quality five-car trains again - especially off-peak instead of the Turbos we ended up with again due to the gross over-capacity on an HST. In the meantime, there will be five unemployed 180s looking for a new home in fortnight's time....

Quote
There was another interesting DMU story tucked away in Modern Railways. A piece about Chiltern (p9) looking at loco haulage, which said that they're finding it difficult to finance new DMUs, partly because of the scarcity of finance, but also because "financiers are wary of putting money into new diesel trains with a 30-year life due to uncertainties surrounding the oil supply".

Perhaps someone should tell DfT.

They know all about it, as was discussed here some time back, when they ditched the plan to buy 200 new dmu coaches, including a good number for FGW, because no-one wanted to fund diesel trains with a 30-year life if electrification was on the way.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on November 28, 2010, 15:00:09
Ah, yes.  I remember the Adelante's.

There's a poem in there somewhere.

Yes, I remember the Adelantes -
The name because one afternoon
Of heat / faulty doors / lack of fuel / malfunctioning PIS / staff shortages the express-train drew up
Unwontedly. It was late June.

- E.J. Thomas, aged 4 and 8 1/2 months


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: RailCornwall on November 28, 2010, 15:38:51
Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.

Yes, can someone please announce that!  I thought it might have been included in Thursday's announcement given that electrification of Reading station was approved.  It is just such a logical thing to do given the passenger flows in the area!

A new TWA would be required to do that as Crossrail is not an operating service at present. An extension beyond the scope of the enabling Act would add many months, if not years to the project, remember the Thameslink madness.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on November 28, 2010, 15:43:09
Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.

Yes, can someone please announce that!  I thought it might have been included in Thursday's announcement given that electrification of Reading station was approved.  It is just such a logical thing to do given the passenger flows in the area!

A new TWA would be required to do that as Crossrail is not an operating service at present. An extension beyond the scope of the enabling Act would add many months, if not years to the project, remember the Thameslink madness.

Nothing to stop them extending the service 6 months after Crossrail starts, though.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on November 28, 2010, 15:45:47
Some of the replacement trains may well be five-car - that was part of the IEP plan in its previous incarnation - but there were lots of longer trains too, to replace the HSTs, as there will be in whatever fleet is ordered - remember MML ordered some Meridians as nine-car sets and others as four-car. Now they run four, five and seven-car sets.


I thought the current cut-price IEP plan was for 5 coach electric and 5 coach bi-mode (similar to a Meridian with a pantograph car) trains.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 28, 2010, 16:23:11
Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.

Yes, can someone please announce that!  I thought it might have been included in Thursday's announcement given that electrification of Reading station was approved.  It is just such a logical thing to do given the passenger flows in the area!
The route between Maidenhead and Reading has been "safeguarded" for Crossrail that was done by the previous Government has after the Crossrail Bill received Royal assent.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on November 28, 2010, 17:57:41
There's a poem in there somewhere.

Yes, I remember the Adelantes -
The name because one afternoon
Of heat / faulty doors / lack of fuel / malfunctioning PIS / staff shortages the express-train drew up
Unwontedly. It was late June.

- E.J. Thomas, aged 4 and 8 1/2 months

Excellent.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on November 28, 2010, 19:19:34
The route between Maidenhead and Reading has been "safeguarded" for Crossrail that was done by the previous Government has after the Crossrail Bill received Royal assent.

Does that mean the TWA hurdle that RailCornwall says would get in the way, would actually not get in the way?  Or is there a realistic chance that all the facilities at Maidenhead will have to be built for no reason at all in the long term?  I was kind of hoping that the extension would be announced along with last Thursday's statements, but perhaps it will be announced with the statement on further GWML electrification in the new year?

This passage is a quote from the Rail Electrification publication from the DfT released in July 2009, which hints at no such obstacle:

"With electrification now to be extended to Reading, it would be possible for Crossrail to operate to Reading, rather than Maidenhead, from the outset, and this option will now be considered by the Government and Transport for London."

The full document is available here:  http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 28, 2010, 20:28:45
The route between Maidenhead and Reading has been "safeguarded" for Crossrail that was done by the previous Government has after the Crossrail Bill received Royal assent.
Does that mean the TWA hurdle that RailCornwall says would get in the way, would actually not get in the way?  Or is there a realistic chance that all the facilities at Maidenhead will have to be built for no reason at all in the long term?  I was kind of hoping that the extension would be announced along with last Thursday's statements, but perhaps it will be announced with the statement on further GWML electrification in the new year?
This passage is a quote from the Rail Electrification publication from the DfT released in July 2009, which hints at no such obstacle:
"With electrification now to be extended to Reading, it would be possible for Crossrail to operate to Reading, rather than Maidenhead, from the outset, and this option will now be considered by the Government and Transport for London."
The full document is available here:  http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf)
There are quite a few years yet to go before the turn around is built at Maidenhead so it is possible the final solution would be Reading provided there are no further delays in the GWML TVL electrification.  The sidings at Maidenhead may get built anyway as construction depot for electrification trains


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 29, 2010, 00:42:12
Quote
An extension beyond the scope of the enabling Act would add many months, if not years

Why? If a government wants to, and has the votes in Parliament to do it, it can ram through legislation in a day. An extension of Crossrail to Reading would not require such tactics, as it would be a very simple piece of legislation, that is hardly likely to generate much, if any, opposition, since it makes such obvious good sense. And would probably have happened in the first place were it not for Crossrail's promoters being determined to steer clear of any responsibility for or investment in sorting out the problem of Reading, which Network Rail has now taken care of.

If you want to build an electrification depot, surely somewhere like Moreton cutting, near Didcot, with a large expanse of level, wide-open railway-owned land available, would make rather more sense than a cramped site in the middle of a town.

Some of the replacement trains may well be five-car - that was part of the IEP plan in its previous incarnation - but there were lots of longer trains too, to replace the HSTs, as there will be in whatever fleet is ordered - remember MML ordered some Meridians as nine-car sets and others as four-car. Now they run four, five and seven-car sets.


I thought the current cut-price IEP plan was for 5 coach electric and 5 coach bi-mode (similar to a Meridian with a pantograph car) trains.


The basic 'building-block' train is five coaches, but shoving in extra powered or unpowered trailers or transfomer cars to make up a longer, more powerful formation is easy enough to do - just like the various lengths of Voyagers and Meridians out there now.

I don't think anyone operating either the GWML or ECML is going to accept having fleets of nothing but five-coach trains foisted on them, given the current capacity issues (EC operating 2+9 HSTs, FGW talking about ways they might provide some), never mind coping with projected growth.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on November 29, 2010, 08:50:41
Quote
An extension beyond the scope of the enabling Act would add many months, if not years

Why? If a government wants to, and has the votes in Parliament to do it, it can ram through legislation in a day. An extension of Crossrail to Reading would not require such tactics, as it would be a very simple piece of legislation, that is hardly likely to generate much, if any, opposition, since it makes such obvious good sense. And would probably have happened in the first place were it not for Crossrail's promoters being determined to steer clear of any responsibility for or investment in sorting out the problem of Reading, which Network Rail has now taken care of.

If you want to build an electrification depot, surely somewhere like Moreton cutting, near Didcot, with a large expanse of level, wide-open railway-owned land available, would make rather more sense than a cramped site in the middle of a town.
To change the Crossrail Act would take up Parliamentary time the Government would argue they have more important uses for that time.
Morton Cutting is a possibility for a construction depot for GWML electrification it is to far out of the reach of Crossrail, Maidenhead would be a stabling depot for the main one at OOC.
Crossrail will reach Reading I believe it will be part of the TVL electrification with a remodeling of all TVL services


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 29, 2010, 09:43:44

And have a load of diesels with different performance characteristics sharing the fast lines from Paddington to Reading with electrics off to Bristol and Cardiff? That would be fun for the timetablers...


hadn't thought about that.  But Paddington-Reading is only a short distance and if we talking about new diesels maybe the preformance characteristsics could be made to match (at least as much as bi-mode versus electric)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on November 29, 2010, 12:44:21
Legislation wise, I think service extension to Reading (if it was already electrified) would simply be a service pattern alteration - I'd be surprised if that needed primary legislation at all.

However would the removal of thereby redundant facilities such as the Maidenhead sidings have to be legislated for, because the Crossrail Act requires them to be built?  In other words legislation is required to reduce Crossrail infrastructure plans rather than increase service?

That seems to have been a constant problem with the early railway Acts IIRC - you'd think they would have included some get out clause if works became unnecessary in a 'modern equivalent' Act though...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on November 29, 2010, 14:03:28
However would the removal of thereby redundant facilities such as the Maidenhead sidings have to be legislated for, because the Crossrail Act requires them to be built? 

Look at it this way.  If redundant faciliies don't get build even if this is technically illegal under the act what is the result of this illegality.  It isn;t a crime so its not like anyone will go to jail.  Someone migth get sued but what would be the damages?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on November 29, 2010, 21:54:24
There is a piece in Modern Railways December saying Crossrail is limited to ^14 billion down a billion.

They seem to be looking for things to cut (or build cheaper) so not building the Maidenhead turnback sidings would seem an obvious saving.

Especially as hopefully Reading remodelling will be finished, unless it turns into another Leeds for those of you old enough to remember, before the wires arrive. Hopefully without new signal structures with insufficient headroom as per Newport.

I always thought Crossrail should electrify the Greenford branch with an interchange at North Acton (not Greenford) with the Central Line. That would enable 4tph currently terminating at Paddington to run round the loop. It would also enable Heathrow Express and Connect to turn threir units round and prevent excesive wheel wear on the tight one way curves at Airport Junction


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on November 29, 2010, 23:48:34
Quote
To change the Crossrail Act would take up Parliamentary time the Government would argue they have more important uses for that time.

If any further legislation is required, and as Paul says, it may not be needed anyway, it could be done quickly as a private bill, for which time is set aside in Parliament. There are about 10 or so such bills currently going through, including some from TfL, which is in charge of Crossrail.

Quote
Morton Cutting is a possibility for a construction depot for GWML electrification it is to far out of the reach of Crossrail, Maidenhead would be a stabling depot for the main one at OOC.

Moreton is nearer to London than Wellingborough, where engineering trains for London Underground modernisation are marshalled, or, er, Taunton, where the GWML track renewal train and high-output ballast cleaner are stabled, so face a bit of a trip to do any work in the Thames Valley area. And if they decide that Crossrail is going to go to Reading, they won't be spending a penny piece on sidings at Maidenhead.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on November 30, 2010, 08:17:35
"And if they decide that Crossrail is going to go to Reading, they won't be spending a penny piece on sidings at Maidenhead."

Let's hope you are right willc!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on December 01, 2010, 00:22:39
I think that the Home Secretary might have something to say about them shelling out money for sidings that wouldn't be needed right in the heart of her constituency. And Theresa May is a staunch advocate of Crossrail going right through to Reading, as Twyford is also in her constituency.

I should add, after our discussion above, that her website's Crossrail page, though oddly not updated for about two years, contains the following ministerial assurance, given to her in 2008:

Quote
Importantly, he confirmed that the line could be extended under existing legislation and it would not have to go through the same lengthy parliamentary procedures as this Bill.More

See http://www.tmay.co.uk/news/?c=crossrail


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on December 01, 2010, 12:50:08
This part of the government's statement last Thursday caught my eye:

"In total the Government will deliver more than 2,100 new rail carriages onto the network by May 2019. Of these, 1,800 will be for new Crossrail and Thameslink services. This will in turn free up hundreds of existing electric carriages to be deployed onto the newly electrified lines by franchised train operators. In total, there will be at least 1,850 net additional carriages on the network by 2019. The Government will now enter into commercial negotiations with the franchised operators about the allocation of the unallocated element of 650 further carriages for delivery before 2014. Subject to those negotiations, the Government expects additional carriages to be added on services into Leeds, Manchester, Sheffield, Liverpool, Newcastle, Birmingham, Bristol, London Paddington and London Waterloo."

Does anybody know exactly why they've mentioned London Paddington?  Obviously, extra capacity will be provided by transferred Class 319's and whatever form the HST replacement takes, but that paragraph specifically mentions the extra 650 carriages allocation and Paddington in one sentence.  Are there going to be other capacity improvements or am I missing something?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on December 01, 2010, 17:25:09
Your guess is probably as good as anyone's.

Await Roger Ford's disection of the figures with interest.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on December 01, 2010, 19:39:52
Taking the 5 spare 180s into use with FGW would count as extra capacity into Paddington.

How is that relevant to new stock, I hear you all ask?

How about new 172 to LM, 150 to FGW, 142 back to Northern, releasing 180 to FGW...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on December 02, 2010, 00:50:54
How about new 172 to LM, 150 to FGW, 142 back to Northern, releasing 180 to FGW...

I'm sure if the DfT really worked it out they could factor the Class 483's on the Isle Of Wight into that cascade somewhere!  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on December 14, 2010, 11:30:35
Article in todays western mail suggesting thet the DFT have decided to only electrify as far as Bristol with Dual fuel trains being used on London -  Swansea services.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/12/14/network-director-says-high-speed-link-is-off-the-rails-91466-27820336/


Big mistake in my opinion if it does turn out to be true


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on December 14, 2010, 13:40:15
... But on the plus side there is the suggestion that electric wires may eventually reach Plymouth. 

They were always going to do the bit closest to London first anyway so I won't be too disappointed.   


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on December 14, 2010, 15:17:05
Article in todays western mail suggesting thet the DFT have decided to only electrify as far as Bristol with Dual fuel trains being used on London -  Swansea services.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/12/14/network-director-says-high-speed-link-is-off-the-rails-91466-27820336/


Big mistake in my opinion if it does turn out to be true

Unless they're playing a game which involves trying to get the Welsh Assembly to stump up for wiring south Wales...imagine the fuss across the Severn if the wires ran out just before the border.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on December 14, 2010, 16:24:55
... But on the plus side there is the suggestion that electric wires may eventually reach Plymouth. 

Plymouth has always been a future proposal in the Electrification RUS, like the majority of other extensions people suggest will never happen.  NW and GW are not supposed to be the last or only lines to be electrified, they are intended to be the first of the rest...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on December 14, 2010, 17:02:51
We need to get on with putting the wiring up rather than worrying about where they will end.  NR need a chance to demonstrate that they can do it properly and efficiently (they better not blow it) and with each mile strung up the business case for the next mile improves.   


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on December 14, 2010, 18:59:53
We need to get on with putting the wiring up rather than worrying about where they will end.  NR need a chance to demonstrate that they can do it properly and efficiently (they better not blow it) and with each mile strung up the business case for the next mile improves.   
Exactly.  NR want to get to grips with a "new" electrification scheme on an operational railway, up until now it has only done renewals.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on December 14, 2010, 20:15:15
IMHO it should be easier to put up new electrifcation than do renewals and alterations.  A new installation doesn't have to be returned to working order at the end of every weekend possession, which was apparently one of the main issues with the rebuild at Rugby, where they were continually trying to do track alterations and reposition previously working wires at the same time...

In any case, the usual contractors (such as Balfour Beatty) will be practicing by doing new installations in Scotland long before they get going down here...   ::)

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Maxwell P on December 15, 2010, 12:45:51
Taking the 5 spare 180s into use with FGW would count as extra capacity into Paddington.

How is that relevant to new stock, I hear you all ask?

How about new 172 to LM, 150 to FGW, 142 back to Northern, releasing 180 to FGW...

Paul

I believe that the 180s are heading north, I think to Grand Central and that 3 HSTs will come the other way.   My info dates back to early October and I have heard nothing else since, but it was an FGW director who mentioned this during a visit west.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on December 15, 2010, 23:50:06
Article in todays western mail suggesting thet the DFT have decided to only electrify as far as Bristol with Dual fuel trains being used on London -  Swansea services.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/12/14/network-director-says-high-speed-link-is-off-the-rails-91466-27820336/


Big mistake in my opinion if it does turn out to be true

I think that this probably refers to the subdivision of the project for appraisal purposes.

Generally this involves costing  options of do nothing, do everything and several points in between.
The suburban  part would have optional terminations of Reading, then Oxford finally Newbury. With re-used stock the solution is quick and in this case favourable.

For the IC section, options costed would be Bristol (3 possible routes), Cardiff and Swansea.
Evidently there's no problem with Bristol but the South Wales loadings may be more marginal. There's the added complication of what trains to purchase which may also affect the outcome of the marginal sections.

The simplest rolling stock solution IMHO would be 5 x 23m  car EMU's (Class 342?) of 125 mph.
The best would be TGV's/ICE's but the infrastructure would need more work but not too much thanks to IKB.

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on December 17, 2010, 17:13:43

The 2007 Station Entries and Exits gives the following approx (Mpax/yr):

Swindon                   2.5
Chippenham             1.4
Bath Spa                  4.2
Bristol TM                 6.5
Bristol PW                1.8
Newport                   2.0
Cardiff                     9.1
Bridgend                  1.2
Port Talbot               0.35
Neath                      0.57
Swansea                  1.6

Not all of the footfalls are FGW of course.

Cardiff wiring looks safe but Swansea????

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on December 17, 2010, 18:48:50
Those Cardiff figures will have a hefty component from the Valley lines. Swansea hasn't got an equivalent suburban network.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on December 17, 2010, 22:38:08
Article in todays western mail suggesting thet the DFT have decided to only electrify as far as Bristol with Dual fuel trains being used on London -  Swansea services.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/12/14/network-director-says-high-speed-link-is-off-the-rails-91466-27820336/

Big mistake in my opinion if it does turn out to be true

Indeed it might be, but I thought we'd all learn not to trust a damn word of these so called exclusives - no matter who's been misquoted this time -  following all the nonsense leading up to the Comprehensive Spending Review statement, and follow-up statement from Philip Hammond.

I can't be bothered to drag up all the links, but we all remember being told that Crossrail was either going to terminate at Heathrow and/or the the Abbey Wood extension was to get axed.  Then there was the removal of ATO or other cuts to the Thameslink project.  Then there was the cancellation of the IEP project with HST being life-extended.  Then there was the GWML electrification to be completely shelved in preference to electrifying the MML.  Need I go on?  I don't remember a single article getting anywhere near being correct in what's been announced so far!

Let's just wait and see...  8)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 17, 2010, 23:46:02
Thanks very much for your 'words of wisdom', IndustryInsider!

I've heard some rather more encouraging opinions recently, from very senior staff at FGW.  While I obviously can't reveal my sources, I'm now rather inclined to follow IndustryInsider's suggestion: let's just 'wait and see', shall we? ...  ;) :D ;D

CfN.  :-X


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on December 18, 2010, 08:56:11
Article in todays western mail suggesting thet the DFT have decided to only electrify as far as Bristol with Dual fuel trains being used on London -  Swansea services.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2010/12/14/network-director-says-high-speed-link-is-off-the-rails-91466-27820336/

Big mistake in my opinion if it does turn out to be true

Indeed it might be, but I thought we'd all learn not to trust a damn word of these so called exclusives - no matter who's been misquoted this time -  following all the nonsense leading up to the Comprehensive Spending Review statement, and follow-up statement from Philip Hammond.

I can't be bothered to drag up all the links, but we all remember being told that Crossrail was either going to terminate at Heathrow and/or the the Abbey Wood extension was to get axed.  Then there was the removal of ATO or other cuts to the Thameslink project.  Then there was the cancellation of the IEP project with HST being life-extended.  Then there was the GWML electrification to be completely shelved in preference to electrifying the MML.  Need I go on?  I don't remember a single article getting anywhere near being correct in what's been announced so far!

Let's just wait and see...  8)
The mode of operation of the current Government is to "fly a kite" in other words the group doing the reviewing will send out questions to seek opinions to alsorts of stake holders, these questions or opinion seeking do get leaked to the press may be deliberately at times


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Lee on January 17, 2011, 16:51:09
From Railnews: (http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/general/2011/01/17-new-bid-for-gw-electrification.html)

Quote from: Railnews
New bid for GW electrification to Wales

A group of political and business leaders in South Wales is urging the Department for Transport to extend the electrification of the Great Western Main Line to Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea.

One councillor said the issue was a ^critical^ one for the Welsh capital.

The transport secretary Philip Hammond announced partial electrification of the Great Western route on 25 November.

This will take the wires on from their present termination on the main line at Airport Junction, near Hayes and Harlington, as far as Newbury and Oxford.

After the announcement in November, Welsh First Minister Carwyn Jones branded the news ^disappointing^. Transport minister Ieuan Wyn Jones was also critical, accusing the DfT of ^sidelining^ the Principality.

Mr Hammond^s plan to include Oxford would also mean the electrification of the main GW line as far as Didcot Parkway but the group, of about 80 community leaders, says continuing electrification across the Severn to South Wales would provide an essential economic lifeline.

The group, the Great Western Partnership, includes local authorities as well as the South East Wales Economic Forum.

The leader of Cardiff council Rodney Berman said: ^Electrification of the main line is a critical issue for the Cardiff city-region which is why we, along with Bristol and Swindon councils, formed the Partnership.^

The electrification announced so far by the DfT would cater for commuter and regional services between London and the Thames Valley, but leaves the question of intercity trains undecided. The DfT said: ^The extent of further electrification for intercity services is dependent on the intercity train option we choose.^

This will hinge on the eventual fate of the delayed Intercity Express Project. Hitachi was named as preferred IEP bidder almost two years ago, but the programme has stalled since then, partly because of economic problems but also because the extent of future electrification is still under review.

A wider assessment of railway spending is in progress, which will be informed by Sir Roy McNulty^s ^Value for Money^ report, due to be published this year.

Another factor is the recent go-ahead for High Speed 2 between London, Birmingham, Manchester, the East Midlands and Leeds, which would influence the case for and against electrifying the Midland Main Line between Bedford and Sheffield.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on February 03, 2011, 15:17:45
This has been released in the last day or so:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5iJOfrNsWyFJD2dAspCiUZdt44hhw?docId=N0512321296653692392A

. There another article which i will have a look for now which stated that HST's would continue to work London - Plymouth/Penzance services for anothee decade before some  Bi-mode class 222 's are displaced from the Midland mainline which is also looking like it will be electrified in the near future


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on February 03, 2011, 17:32:45
There another article which i will have a look for now which stated that HST's would continue to work London - Plymouth/Penzance services for anothee decade before some  Bi-mode class 222 's are displaced from the Midland mainline which is also looking like it will be electrified in the near future
A 222 all the way from Paddington to Penzance?  :o I don't think the good people of the Southwest are going to like that very much and with good reason. Just think of the summer holiday traffic and luggage cramming onto a 222. No bad idea if that is what Daft are thinking IMHO.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on February 03, 2011, 18:10:39
You'd be surprised, they're much better than Voyagers, although not necessarily the best possible solution for PAD-PNZ in the summer.

But what's a "bi-mode" 222...? Was it a slip of the keyboard or are Bombardier still muttering about the feasibility of making the 22x series electric or bi-mode by bolting a pantograph onto the roof? Think that will require some fairly major surgery on the bodyshells since to the best of my knowledge they're all monocoque pre-stressed car bodies that don't have pantograph wells.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: rogerw on February 03, 2011, 18:26:15
The idea is to build an additional coach with pantograph and transformer, at the same time increasing seating capacity.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on February 03, 2011, 21:07:11
You'd be surprised, they're much better than Voyagers, although not necessarily the best possible solution for PAD-PNZ in the summer.
Yes they are better than Voyagers but they are still noisy underfloor engined trains not ideal for travelling the long distances involved from London to the West of England.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: vacman on February 03, 2011, 21:10:48
Long distance London to the Southwest? your having a laugh, currently there is a Voyager that runs Aberdeen to Penzance! you'd have to pay ME to travel on that lol!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on February 03, 2011, 22:09:41
IEP deal 'close to completion' http://www.railpro.co.uk/news/?idArticles=694
Quote from said article "This deal was largely finalised in the last few days, and is now ready for political approval."
Electrification to Bristol only using Bi-mode IEP to Bristol/Southwales and refurbished HSTs for another 10 years to the South West followed by Midland Mainline Electrification,Meridians fitted with additional pantograph cars could then be cascaded as bi-mode trains to the Plymouth and Penzance services run on electric power as far as Newbury.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on February 03, 2011, 22:17:41
From that article:

Quote
It^s hoped the new trains will enable four trains an hour between Paddington and Bristol, with two running via Bath.

I would bleedin' well think so, seeing as that's the current service level.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on February 04, 2011, 06:24:01
Meridians fitted with additional pantograph cars could then be cascaded as bi-mode trains to the Plymouth and Penzance services run on electric power as far as Newbury.
Pretty pointless really as Padd-Newbury is what less than a quarter of the length of the journey from Padd-Penzance? It would also mean every Southwest service having to call at Newbury for the transfer of traction from electric to diesel to take place.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on February 04, 2011, 06:51:36
Would the bi-mode trains really have to stop at the end of the wires? Surely there is sufficient technology to allow a seamless switchover.

If not then it would be sensible to switch at Reading rather than add a stop to every service at Newbury.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on February 04, 2011, 09:30:58
Coming so soon after the decision to axe air links from Plymouth to Gatwick this proposal to eventually replace HSTs to the South West with Meridians wont be favourably recieved by the regions Political and Business leaders but given the "Value for money" remit now dominating the Rail agenda I am not surprised.
 Personally I avoid Voyagers like the plague and will only tolerate them for short journeys.Meridians may be better but they are still not equal to a HST from the passengers point of view.In short the best that FGW or whoever will be able to offer their customers to the South West tomorrow is what XC offer their customers today and we know that many people already choose to travel via London to avoid the "Voyager" experience.There seems to be a premier league of Rail routes developing in investment terms and the South West is clearly not in that league.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on February 04, 2011, 09:43:49
Personally I avoid Voyagers like the plague and will only tolerate them for short journeys.Meridians may be better but they are still not equal to a HST from the passengers point of view.

I agree with you about Voyagers. But disagree totally about Meridians vs HSTs : the East Midlands Meridians are vastly superior to FGW's HSTs. But I'm travelling in steerage.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on February 04, 2011, 11:01:36
Not everyone wants to sit on top of an engine for 5 hours but then even if we'd got the IEP down here we'd still have to put up with that as they are basically going to be E/DMUs with pantographs and underfloor engines.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on February 04, 2011, 11:29:16
The initial proposal from Agility was a diesel engine in a power car not underfloor, generating electricity and feeding that to traction motors under the carriages. This should be much quieter than underfloor diesel engines.

Having said that, Phillip Hammond, in his statement to parliament on 25th November 2010 mentioned, "...a mixed fleet: some all-electric trains, and some electric trains which are also equipped with underfloor diesel engines." He was referencing the Andrew Foster's review of the IEP, published on 6th July 2010. The annex to that report does conclude that travel times may increase where the majority of the journey is away from the wires. That may explain why Phillip Hammond now prefers a distributed power diesel option.

Guess it depends how far the knitting stretches......


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on February 04, 2011, 11:34:51
http://www.railpro.co.uk/news/?idArticles=694

It seems loco haulage of EMUs off the wires has been ruled out and it will indeed be underfloor engines.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: qwerty on February 04, 2011, 11:41:00
Coming so soon after the decision to axe air links from Plymouth to Gatwick this proposal to eventually replace HSTs to the South West with Meridians wont be favourably recieved by the regions Political and Business leaders but given the "Value for money" remit now dominating the Rail agenda I am not surprised.
 Personally I avoid Voyagers like the plague and will only tolerate them for short journeys.Meridians may be better but they are still not equal to a HST from the passengers point of view.In short the best that FGW or whoever will be able to offer their customers to the South West tomorrow is what XC offer their customers today and we know that many people already choose to travel via London to avoid the "Voyager" experience.There seems to be a premier league of Rail routes developing in investment terms and the South West is clearly not in that league.

Personally, as someone who may have to work said trains. Meridians would provide a step change for the better. HST's just aren't a sensible choice for the long term.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on February 04, 2011, 12:14:26
Meridians would provide a step change for the better. HST's just aren't a sensible choice for the long term.

They would be lengthened as well presumably because a pantograph vehicle would be added as well which is good for capacity,  but I can't help thinking that underfloor engines would be a step backwards in terms of comfort.  Mind you acceleration over the Devon banks would be much better than an HST.

They would presumably only be relased idf the MML was electrified


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on February 04, 2011, 12:21:10
They would be lengthened as well presumably because a pantograph vehicle would be added as well which is good for capacity,  but I can't help thinking that underfloor engines would be a step backwards in terms of comfort.  Mind you acceleration over the Devon banks would be much better than an HST.
What else is there though?  The only trains available off the shelf to run off the wires are underfloor engine DMUs.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Richard Fairhurst on February 04, 2011, 13:31:11
I agree with you about Voyagers. But disagree totally about Meridians vs HSTs : the East Midlands Meridians are vastly superior to FGW's HSTs. But I'm travelling in steerage.
+1. Meridians are superb trains (and that's from someone who can't abide Voyagers), in first as well as standard. (EMT is quite good at offering cut-price advance FC tickets. :) )


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on February 04, 2011, 14:38:17

If not then it would be sensible to switch at Reading rather than add a stop to every service at Newbury.

Regardless of technology for switching power source on the move.  Surely it is better to do it at a station for when something goes wrong like the engine not starting or the pantograph not raising and the train has to be CAPED,


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on February 04, 2011, 15:16:18

If not then it would be sensible to switch at Reading rather than add a stop to every service at Newbury.

Regardless of technology for switching power source on the move.  Surely it is better to do it at a station for when something goes wrong like the engine not starting or the pantograph not raising and the train has to be CAPED,
Eurostar's managed to raise their third rail shoe and raise their pan and vice versa quite successfully. 

Who is to say the vision for Cornish / Devon trains in the future is via the B & H this Governments view may be electric between London and Bristol and diesel Bristol west with the B & H a DMU semi fast rural service.  With this current Government you can not rule anything out or in, they are politically dogmatic verging on maverick



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Deltic on February 04, 2011, 15:41:52
While I abhor the practice of running diesel trains under the wires for 400 miles from London to Edinburgh, before continuing on non-electrified lines to Aberdeen or Inverness, I don't think it makes sense to have a mode change on the London - Plymouth / Penzance route until electrification reaches at least Exeter.  The additional complexity and operational risks from the change-over would not be worth it.  Nor would the time penalty and potential overcrowding issues of going via Bristol.

If we could get the wires extended from Bristol to Taunton, then the whole Cardiff to Taunton and Bristol Parkway to Weston-s-M service could be turned over to EMUs.  Peak hour / Saturday extensions to W-s-M or Taunton could also continue without a change of mode or running diesels under the wires.  Once an electrification programme gets started, these "fill-in" schemes become more viable and skilled teams can be kept working efficiently.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on February 04, 2011, 16:09:06
While I abhor the practice of running diesel trains under the wires for 400 miles from London to Edinburgh, before continuing on non-electrified lines to Aberdeen or Inverness, I don't think it makes sense to have a mode change on the London - Plymouth / Penzance route until electrification reaches at least Exeter.  The additional complexity and operational risks from the change-over would not be worth it.  Nor would the time penalty and potential overcrowding issues of going via Bristol.
With line speed improvements Paddington to Bristol and Bristol to Exeter, going via Bristol wouldn't really be a time penalty.  The Berks and Hants route is not suited for higher speeds.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on February 04, 2011, 16:37:57
Once an electrification programme gets started, these "fill-in" schemes become more viable and skilled teams can be kept working efficiently.
Only one problem with this theory, as UK railway history has proved, the problem is called HM Government; they just keep interfering and every few years with a change of rosette colour as they say at a terminus all change


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on February 04, 2011, 16:53:04

Eurostar's managed to raise their third rail shoe and raise their pan and vice versa quite successfully. 

good point.  Mind you they were the most complex and most expensive (and least intensively used) trains in the country.

Personally,  I can't see the issue with desiel all the way from Paddington to Penzance, the proportion under the wires is a small fraction of the journey and the energy wasted in carting arround two sets of traction equipment for the whole journey will cancel out any environmental benefit of the small electric portion of the journey.  We would be much better using bi-mode Meridians on the ECML or perhaps TPE or XC routes for example. Bi-mode on the B and H only makes sense when the wires start to get to Exeter or Plymouth.   



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on February 04, 2011, 21:54:01
Can the Meridians be fitted with tilt actuators like their Virgin class 221 cousins and the Paddington/Penzance route fitted with TASS (Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision) to speed things up.If ever there was a route that would benefit from tilt then this is it given the track geometry particularly west of Exeter.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on February 05, 2011, 01:10:19
Quote
Can the Meridians be fitted with tilt actuators

Not that straightforward, as the bogies on the 221s are a different design to the 220s and Meridians, with heavy-duty outside frames.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Worcester_Passenger on February 05, 2011, 10:43:29
Can the Meridians be fitted with tilt actuators like their Virgin class 221 cousins and the Paddington/Penzance route fitted with TASS (Tilt Authorisation and Speed Supervision) to speed things up.If ever there was a route that would benefit from tilt then this is it given the track geometry particularly west of Exeter.
The tilt mechanism adds a lot of weight to the 221 Voyagers. They weigh 56.6 tons per coach, whereas the non-tilting 220s weigh 46.4 tons per coach. That's an awful lot to carry around, with all that that implies about fuel consumption. West of Plymouth it would make no difference - the number of stops means that acceleration is more important than going round curves at a higher speed.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on February 05, 2011, 10:49:05
It's much more the bogie frames than the actual tilt kit when it comes to the weight penalty. A lot of extra metal to cart around.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on February 08, 2011, 10:22:34
 Reference the latest Daft proposals for FGW what a dogs dinner of half baked and half hearted half measures.If only the government had the same appetite for the here and now as it does for HS2.Great Westerns misfortune is that renewel has come during the worst economic and financial crisis facing the country since the 1929 wall street crash the inevitable result being the Dafts latest compromise solution of half measures aka botch up.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: devon_metro on February 08, 2011, 11:19:26
For a second there I thought I had stumbled across the Daily Mail website...!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on February 13, 2011, 18:43:26
We can expect and annoucement from the Governement on the electrification and IEP in the next 2-3 weeks if reports on the other forums are to be beieved.

Sad to say it looks like the idiots in the DFT have gone for the Bi-mode option   and the wires are only going to Bristol  (unless the WAG can come up with at least ^100 million) that said if the WAG could come up with the money they would be better off spending in on the valley lines electrfication which needs to be done asap.

Reports are suggesting that a deal has been done with the japaneese government  where the governemnt have got a large discount on the cost of the trains by selling some of the new eurofighter aircraft to the japaneese airforce


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on February 14, 2011, 10:37:55

DfT electrification approvals over the years seem to have majored on getting as much of the benefits as possible consonant with minimum track miles wired, minimum new stock and maximum cascaded.

Now MML needs c125 route miles wired compared to Wootton Basset - Cardiff's c108 miles. Hence dropping the latter would mostly pay for the former. If, in addition, MML's Meridians could come to FGW after the 125's are allowed to finally expire, then the Hitachi IEP order could also be sharply reduced.

Mix the lot up with a nice defence aerospace order to Japan..........

Remember Pearl Harbour?

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on February 14, 2011, 11:28:48
I don't think Pearl Harbor is at all relevant to this discussion.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on February 14, 2011, 22:52:24
Apologies for my uncharitable quip.

I had in mind Roger Ford's MR comment about, shall we say, "unequal trading".

Railway workshops turned into outlet centres depress me.

Will stick to OP.

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on February 17, 2011, 09:07:12
 
   

Political and commercial will needed for rail electrification  and HS3,an interview with Mark Hopwood

Read More http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business-in-wales/business-news/2011/02/16/political-and-commercial-will-needed-for-rail-electrification-91466-28177887/#ixzz1ECmhIyk0


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on February 17, 2011, 09:46:28
Here is another aticle from todays south wales evening post:

http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/news/Rethink-calls-fears-grow-rail-line-upgrade/article-3234144-detail/article.html

To  be honest i would be happy if it even comes to Cardiff


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on February 17, 2011, 15:16:47
I await the official announcement with interest, although with all the different rumours and contadictory press stories posted above I'm losing track of what's likely to be announced.

My impression was that HMG was likely to pitch for a half-arsed scheme in which the wires ran out at Bristol Parkway and bi-mode trains fired up their diesel engines to continue from there. But now there are WAG members saying they'll be disappointed if the scheme "only" makes it to Cardiff rather than all the way through to Swansea. What a mess.

One thing I would not be surprised to see though is WAG forking out the necessary to make sure the knitting does make it to Swansea - they seem to be very good at finding money from somewhere to fund various schemes in Wales e.g. free prescriptions, and not least the WAG Express!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on February 17, 2011, 16:10:07
One thing I would not be surprised to see though is WAG forking out the necessary to make sure the knitting does make it to Swansea

I am not so sure.  I suspect that if WAG had the kind of serious money for electrfication they would rather use it to electrify the valley lines and get rid of the "tin-trucks".  Especially if they have just got the English to splash out on some part new bi-mode trains to Swansea. 

Personally. I don;t have a problem with teh electifcatio stopping at Cardiff for now.  I expect the business case for electrifying the MMl is stronger than taking the wires to Swansea. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on February 17, 2011, 16:42:49
IMO opinion bi-mode is a waste of money.

 140 mph 4 MW electric loco push pull change to 2MW diesel at end of wires.

As the wires expand less diesel running.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Deltic on February 17, 2011, 17:29:26
I quite agree.  The changeover could take place at Bristol Parkway, Cardiff or Swansea as the electrified network expands.  Surely we have the railway skills and infrastructure to undertake a loco-change on a remove the pusher and add the puller basis without excessive delays, thus obviating the need to drag the diesel engine around under the wires.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on February 17, 2011, 17:37:11
I quite agree.  The changeover could take place at Bristol Parkway, Cardiff or Swansea as the electrified network expands.  Surely we have the railway skills and infrastructure to undertake a loco-change on a remove the pusher and add the puller basis without excessive delays, thus obviating the need to drag the diesel engine around under the wires.

That is what a lot of people in the industry are saying. I do agree that it is stupid to have a Bi-mode EDMU

personally maybe the governemnt should have just overhauled the MK3 carriages and bought some of the chineese Polaris Bi-mode locomotives (Would have saved the governemnt a bit of money)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on February 17, 2011, 18:01:47
Maybe not as much as you think - there comes a point when the overhaul that would be required to turn out a vehicle that's fit for another 30 years' service (like a new train would be) is so extensive that it would end up costing much the same as a new vehicle. Overhauling mark 3s yet again doesn't solve any problems, it just buys time. Now, a new build of vehicles based on the mark 3 and incorporating modern requirements like power doors and suitable wheelchair access is a different story...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on February 18, 2011, 11:05:15
IMO opinion bi-mode is a waste of money.

 140 mph 4 MW electric loco push pull change to 2MW diesel at end of wires.

As the wires expand less diesel running.

I tend to agree with you.  Everything else being equal, I would favour diesel loco drags beyond, Cardiff, Bristol or wherever the electrification ends on the S Wales and BRI routes.  Your suggested power requirements seems about right too.  A slightly slower speed and acceleration to Swansea and Weston-SM would be OK because of line speed issues and stopping patterns anyway and overall journey times might still be lower if the electrified line speeds are decent.

For the route to Plymouth/Penzance, the fraction likely to be electrified is relatively small, so I think it could be diesel all the way.

BUT there is a wrinkle regarding making the MML Meridians bi-mode.  Although I am not generally in favour of bi-mode I think that this project might make some sense.  Is this proposal not at least as much about finding a use for Meridians after the MML is electrified and also about increasing capacity as it is about getting a bi-mode vehicle for its own sake?  The average Meridian is too short.  There are too many Meridian cab-vehicles and not enough intermediate vehicles.  MML has tried to remarshall its fleet, but the trains are still to short for the predicted future capacity to places like Cardiff.  You would be right in calling, bi-mode vehicles a waste of money if we were building them from scratch, but we are not, the Meridians are already available (in fact if the MML is electrified they will be redundant) and if adding pantograph vehicles provides bi-mode AND extra capacity at a sensible cost it might be the best option. 

Isn^t the current government^s cut-back scheme a sensible incremental approach?  AIUI, the far-west is to be served by refurbished HSTs.  That can only be a temporary solution because those trains cannot last for ever.  One day they will need to be replaced and the candidate train to replace them is surely the bi-mode meridian displaced from the SW line which by that stage (2025-ish) will be electrified to Swansea one hopes.   

By sticking new electric on the lines to Bristol and the MML,  making far west refurbed HSTs and S Wales bi-mode Meridians which can transfer to far west in due course when S Wales goes all electric, the plan does have advantages of requiring only one new train design (the all electric train)  which is much simpler than the EIP proposals. 

As for making the Meridians Bi-mode it is my understanding that this is relatively simple because the train is already a DEMU.  A new pantograph trailer is, one hopes not that much more heavy or complicated or expensive than a new trailer vehicle and I suspect that it might actually be cheaper than a new Meridian vehicle with an engine in it. 

If the lengthening of the Meridians is a sensible thing to do in its own right.  And I would argue that it is on capacity grounds alone, then we need to ask what do we lengthen them with.  The options would be: 1) a new Diesel-engined vehicle, 2) a new trailer or 3) a pantograph trailer.

Option 1 would be expensive and would result in a fleet with different engine ages in the same unit.

Option 2 would be cheap but would give a performance penalty especially in terms of acceleration.

Option 3 might be the best overall.  Hopefully no more expensive than option 1, and although there would be a performance penalty as with option 2 it would only apply away from the wires (which are likely to be lower line speeds anyway) so would be less of an issue. 


DaFT seems to have
Finally realised that electrification isn^t really about electrification.  It is about provision of rolling stock.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on February 18, 2011, 15:03:56
There is a view in the UK that MU's are so urban only fit for low speed commuter routes when in reality the rest of Europe already has a high speed MU railway, I can not see much in the way of new build loco haul anything being adopted for passenger operation, TOC's like fixed formation MU's if you went for a loco haul for only part and went with the idea of coupling / uncoupling at an intermediate point there is added expense of stabling sidings and train crew facilities.   There is little technical difficulty in using diesel engined MU's the gear boxes isolate the engine when it not providing power moder traction motors could be fitted to axles that are not engine driven, modern 25kV transformers and traction control equipment is not that heavy.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: broadgage on February 18, 2011, 19:11:35
A great many passengers are opposed to the use of multiple units on intercity routes for two reasons, firstly most MUs are DMUs and underfloor engines produce noise and vibration.
Secondly MUs are linked in peoples minds with new shorter trains containing high backed, high density bus seats, without luggage space or catering facilities.

Cross country loco hauled trains used to have seats at tables, and often a buffet, they were replaced by new shorter multiple units.

Waterloo to Exeter services used to be operated by full length loco hauled trains with tables, luggage van, spacious seating etc. Then replaced by 3 car multiple units with higher density seating.
It was widely reported that the introduction of new trains meant standing on journies when a seat would have been available on a "real train"
One could of course build a new 12 car multiple unit with facing seats at tables, luggage space, a restaurant, and Victorian seat spacing.
Not likely to happen though is it ! Multiple units invariable mean shorter and less comfortable trains.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on February 18, 2011, 19:25:31
That's a "problem" (depending on one's point of view of course) with the way modern stock tends to be specified, not an inherent issue with MUs themselves. And whoever thought that public perception of MU stock would play any part in the government's decision?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on February 18, 2011, 23:18:23
Quote
One could of course build a new 12 car mulitple unit with facing seats at tables, luggage space, a restaurant, and Victorian seat spacing.
Not likely to happen though is it !

Why not? The Germans have them, they're called the ICE3 (eight coaches, and can run paired in 16 car formations) and they knock the socks off anything running here, including the Mk3 coach, which, fine vehicle though it may be, is now nearing its 40th birthday, won't go on forever and, in FGW-land at least, was ruined by those stupid too-tall tombstone seats.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on February 19, 2011, 15:44:14
was ruined by those stupid too-tall tombstone seats.

Toast racks we call them.   ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on February 20, 2011, 10:32:59
A great many passengers are opposed to the use of multiple units on intercity routes for two reasons, firstly most MUs are DMUs and underfloor engines produce noise and vibration.


A taxi driver I know who worked the Plymouth station taxi rank called Voyagers "rattlers"


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: eightf48544 on February 20, 2011, 11:49:08
Don't know whether it's been referred to before but Ian Walmsley in February's Modern Railways has a fantastic article on train comfort and using his own scoring system ranks most current British trains. With the ICE3 added for fun.

Guess the scores for standard ICE3  as a opposed to standard Voyagers?

ICE3 90.7 (1st 93.9)

Voyagers 220 37.8 (1st 51.9)

Highest British is Mark 4 First 89.3

You can obviously disagree, with his measurement criteria, the  scores he gives for each criterion and subsequent weighting in the overall score, but by and large he seems to have got most trians in roughly the right bracket.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: vacman on February 20, 2011, 13:02:07
12 car trains=platform extensions, higher track access charges, the fact that everyone will still try to cram into the two coaches nearest the station entrance (i.e. Padd-Reading commuters on HST's now who all cram into D and E and then moan that they have to stand rather than rubbing their two brain cells together to create a spark that will say "oh, lets move down to the front where it's empty...").
In a perfect world we would all love to be truly British and not have to sit next to anybody or within 7 feet of them and to have three spare seats next to you, one for your case, one for your coat and one for your lunch box but this is the real world! ............... it's strange how you become more cynical as you get older lol


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: The Grecian on February 20, 2011, 15:15:56
A great many passengers are opposed to the use of multiple units on intercity routes for two reasons, firstly most MUs are DMUs and underfloor engines produce noise and vibration.
Secondly MUs are linked in peoples minds with new shorter trains containing high backed, high density bus seats, without luggage space or catering facilities.

Cross country loco hauled trains used to have seats at tables, and often a buffet, they were replaced by new shorter multiple units.

Waterloo to Exeter services used to be operated by full length loco hauled trains with tables, luggage van, spacious seating etc. Then replaced by 3 car multiple units with higher density seating.
It was widely reported that the introduction of new trains meant standing on journies when a seat would have been available on a "real train"
One could of course build a new 12 car multiple unit with facing seats at tables, luggage space, a restaurant, and Victorian seat spacing.
Not likely to happen though is it ! Multiple units invariable mean shorter and less comfortable trains.


[/quote]
There is a view in the UK that MU's are so urban only fit for low speed commuter routes when in reality the rest of Europe already has a high speed MU railway, I can not see much in the way of new build loco haul anything being adopted for passenger operation, TOC's like fixed formation MU's if you went for a loco haul for only part and went with the idea of coupling / uncoupling at an intermediate point there is added expense of stabling sidings and train crew facilities.   There is little technical difficulty in using diesel engined MU's the gear boxes isolate the engine when it not providing power moder traction motors could be fitted to axles that are not engine driven, modern 25kV transformers and traction control equipment is not that heavy.



I don't think MUs should necessarily only be used as commuter vehicles. It's more about the internal layout - Meridians are more pleasant than Voyagers even though they're still DMUs.

There is a follow-up point to the fact that loco hauled trains have been replaced by DMUs on Crosscountry routes and Waterloo-Exeter, which is that the loco hauled trains were notoriously unreliable. My experience certainly on Waterloo-Exeter has  been that the 159s are more popular than the 50s and 47s simply because they normally turn up on time and aren't prone to breaking down. Granted the older trains arguably had a more pleasant interior, but that's no consolation if they can't get you from A to B on time. They normally run as 6 or 9 car services and overcrowding isn't normally a problem.

Crosscountry is obviously slightly different, but the Voyagers are more reliable (mostly) than the 47s - I think a greater objection passengers have is how frequently they're overcrowded. There seem to be more luggage racks these days but it's difficult to keep an eye on your things most of the time.

A problem for any route which requires high-ish speeds of at least 90-100mph but also frequent stops is that most high speed locos have been designed to run at high speeds for long periods of time, not for frequent braking and acceleration. This is something DMUs seem to be better suited for. However I don't work in the rail industry so I may not know what I'm talking about!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: stebbo on February 20, 2011, 16:15:34
Reference the latest Daft proposals for FGW what a dogs dinner of half baked and half hearted half measures.If only the government had the same appetite for the here and now as it does for HS2.Great Westerns misfortune is that renewel has come during the worst economic and financial crisis facing the country since the 1929 wall street crash the inevitable result being the Dafts latest compromise solution of half measures aka botch up.

But there's a lot to be said for some capital spending in a recession. It's the revenue spending that needs cutting back.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on February 20, 2011, 17:06:55
I await the official announcement with interest, although with all the different rumours and contadictory press stories posted above I'm losing track of what's likely to be announced.

I hear that there's not much longer to wait.....


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: broadgage on February 21, 2011, 11:06:40
Don't know whether it's been referred to before but Ian Walmsley in February's Modern Railways has a fantastic article on train comfort and using his own scoring system ranks most current British trains. With the ICE3 added for fun.

Guess the scores for standard ICE3  as a opposed to standard Voyagers?

ICE3 90.7 (1st 93.9)

Voyagers 220 37.8 (1st 51.9)

Highest British is Mark 4 First 89.3

You can obviously disagree, with his measurement criteria, the  scores he gives for each criterion and subsequent weighting in the overall score, but by and large he seems to have got most trians in roughly the right bracket.

Yes, agree, a most interesting article.
Says largely what I have been saying for years ! "you cant keeping cramming another 4 seats into the same vehicle and calling this an improvement"
And that in general, the newer the train the worse it is WRT legroom, tables, luggage space and catering.
Indeed the views expressed are so similar to my own, that someone suspected that "broadgage" IS an assumed name of the author of the article ! Most flattering, but quite untrue.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on February 23, 2011, 17:22:49
Reports on WNXX suggesting that the government has gone for the 5 carriage IEP  option.

I am crossing my fingers hopping that this isnt true, if it is i seriously wonder what in the world those people in the DFT are .

I can understand  the 5 carriage IEP option  for the London - Oxford - Worcester - Hereford service with sets being doubled to 10 carriages during peak hours.

if they wanted 5 carriages sets then they should have just ordered some ac versions of the seimens class 444 at least then you would be able to move  between the sets


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on February 23, 2011, 17:32:55
As someone who regularly travels on class 444s, I would be very happy to see an ac version operate London-Bristol/Swansea services.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on February 23, 2011, 18:01:09
As someone who regularly travels on class 444s, I would be very happy to see an ac version operate London-Bristol/Swansea services.

I  travelled on a class 444's from Southampton Central to Brockenhurst last may  when i went on a day trip from Cardiff to the Isle of wight  via Lymington pier so i could get a trip on the slammers before traveling back on the hovercraft from Ryde to Southsea where i caught the bus back to Portsmouth Hbr station before getting a FGW service to Cardiff.

 I cannot fault the ride comfort on the class 444's and the air con certainly kept the carriage nice & cool on what was a very hot day.

But would an AC version of the class 444's be allowed to travel at 125 mph or would it be limited to 110mph?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on February 23, 2011, 19:28:21
General rule of thumb is that 125 mph requires a degree of streamlining. As far as I'm aware anything with a gangway end on the front of it is limited to 100 mph.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on February 26, 2011, 18:43:29
From the man 'in the know' (JP) on the UK Railways site regarding the new trains for GWML:


Quote
The IEP is being tightly specified by the DFT. The latest re-specification see's the design frozen round 5 car Voyager type trains intended to replace 8 and 9 coach HSTs. The DFT see's these trains as their own project and they will specify how they are used, crewed and maintained.

Very few EMU versions will be built under the DFT plans for the old WR. A large number of expensive to buy, expensive to maintain EDMUs will used. HSTs to be rebuilt (again) for services to the South West. The extra cost of these two aspects of the project would electrify many more miles of railway making vastly cheaper pure EMU working possible across more of the region.

The next bit will result in possibly the most stupid aspect of the project. The MML will be electrified, good. Pantograph cars will be inserted into the 222 fleet, okay, but pricey since Bombardier have cut up the jigs in Bruge. The 222s will then be transferred to OC and Laira to take over services to the South West allowing HST to be withdrawn.

Those expensive pantograph cars being used as far as Newbury, where the diesels take over. In fact the engines will be switched on at Reading as they need time to warm at idle according to Cummins. This now introduces a very mixed fleet operating on the old WR, requiring two new depots. (Hitachi building two to maintain IEP)  ABSOLUTELY BLOODY MAD!!

All this after Bombardier/Siemens and Alstom were forbidden to put variations to the spec. on the bids they submitted, the Japanese, no problem. The offer to build a "flat pack" factory in the North East ignores the threat to British HIGHLY SKILLED jobs in Derby, Stafford,Crewe and other places where we do already take part in multi-national train projects. The IEP orders will see people employed for perhaps 10-12 years building the wrong train for the UK, and very unlikely to win orders elsewhere in the EU, who quite rightly look to their own already competitive train industry to supply their needs. NOTE-The Japanese do not buy European built trains.

The IEP hit all sorts of problems quite early on, the sheer cost and complexity of what was being proposed should have killed it off in favour of a properly planned progressive electrification and replacement train programme. At every turn this one small department within the DfT headed by this "Hitachi" loving Civil Servant has changed the rules. The Japanese we are now hearing are offering to take on some Eurofighter Typhoons that were destined for the RAF to allow the MOD to make zero cost defence cuts, and then part pay for the trains.

Any journalist asking awkward questions is then banned from Hitachi/ Civil Service briefings, heads of TOCs are summarily summoned to the DFT to be told what they will have to do to with regards to the IEP, it is as if Stalin is having a role in replacing the HST!

Rolling electrification is cheaper, creates skilled jobs and allows high quality trains to operate at much lower cost. Whole life costs are much lower. Energy security is also improved, what will the cost of diesel be in 6 weeks, let alone 10 years?

The pure EMU with loco haulage at the "edges" was considered but rejected, the reasons for rejection were not disclosed, but we understand one of them was that there is 'No domestic loco building capability." Really?   HST rebuilding was originally rejected as too expensive, then suddenly became cheaper when the latest option was unveiled. The corrosion issues on the Mk3 coaches has somehow become a non-problem according to the DFT. If that is the case then the low cost rebuilding of those HST power cars to act as EMU haulers (2 power cars with new cabs coupler gear overhauled and coupled back to back) should also be a "non-problem".

The question must be asked,  why is the DFT, or should I say, this person within the DFT going to so much trouble to see that the Japanese get to build the wrong type of train for the UK? A train that we will have to live with for the next 40 odd years.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on February 26, 2011, 19:01:37
Yes, I'm following that thread.

How many 222s are in the current fleet?

It might not be too long before the DafT make an announcement over all this.....


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on February 26, 2011, 22:23:52
How many 222s are in the current fleet?
27 in four, five and seven carriage formats. I just cannot believe DafT are planning to use them for services all the way from Paddington to Penzance...Actually I can believe it. When they finally leave the Western region, the HSTs will take with them the last true Intercity standard that they were originally built for to be replaced by a DMU. How sad.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on February 26, 2011, 23:41:37

It seems to me that DfT's object with the ED IEP is to avoid creating an electrified network, (as Hitachi would be quite happy to sell Javelins). The stretches of the GW that DfT want to avoid wiring (Swansea and perhaps Cheltenham) are those shared with XC.

Equally, the MML wiring would stop at Sheffield and so not connect (at Doncaster and Moorthorpe) to the North.

Long, electrified sidings....

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Rhydgaled on February 27, 2011, 16:41:33

It seems to me that DfT's object with the ED IEP is to avoid creating an electrified network, (as Hitachi would be quite happy to sell Javelins). The stretches of the GW that DfT want to avoid wiring (Swansea and perhaps Cheltenham) are those shared with XC.

I think there are no XC services Swansea and Cardiff. Javelins might be a good idea for the Oxford services, but a proper Intercity train with end, rather than 1/3 and 2/3, doors is needed for the Bristol and Swansea routes.
I have started a protest campaign against the bi-mode and 26m coaches ideas, please see this topic. (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=8516.0)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on February 27, 2011, 16:55:58
I think the idea is to persuade the Welsh Government to pay for the Cardiff-Swansea section.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chafford1 on February 28, 2011, 19:10:54
Announcement tomorrow?

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business-in-wales/business-news/2011/02/28/rail-electrification-decision-to-south-wales-expected-tomorrow-91466-28251462/


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on February 28, 2011, 19:16:56
Quote
A strong business case, supported by the Western Mail, has been made to the Minster
I am sure their support will make all the difference  ;D

I do hope the Government commit to at least to electrify to Cardiff but hopefully to Swansea


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: onthecushions on February 28, 2011, 19:27:50

Hard to imagine any politician using St David's Day to announce a decision unfavourable to Wales.

A sting in the tail (or perhaps daffodil) is another thing.

I guess that at best, we'll have full approval to Cardiff and conditional approval to Swansea if WAG will pay for the notional extra for wiring over ED IEP operation.

Cymru am byth

OTC


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on February 28, 2011, 21:11:11
Hmmm - could be....

I suspect they're right here.....
Quote
It is possible that Mr Hammond will announce electrification only as far Cardiff. Work on electrification would not start until 2014 at the earliest, during which time agreement could be reached between the UK Government and the Welsh Assembly Government over electrifying around 40 miles of track from Cardiff to Swansea.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on February 28, 2011, 21:57:29
Travel Watch SW say get on with it. I actually agree with Chris Irwin on this one:
http://www.thisisbath.co.uk/news/electrification-says-travel-watchdog/article-3274074-detail/article.html
Quote
A transport watchdog has said the ^dithering^ must end over plans to electrify the main rail line between London and the West Country.

TravelWatch SouthWest has urged ministers to press ahead with the scheme, saying their failure to make a decision is hampering economic growth in the region. It is calling for a decision to be made in the first week of March, saying the Conservative Party Spring Forum at the Welsh Conference in Cardiff would be an ideal opportunity.

Chris Irwin, chairman of TravelWatch SouthWest said: ^We have been waiting more than a year and a half since the previous Government said the line from London Paddington to Swansea via Bristol would be electrified.

^The coalition confirmed the plan to electrify the Thames Valley part of the route but decided to review the case for electrification all the way to Swansea.

^This delayed approval for electrifying the route from London to Bristol is despite it having an overwhelmingly strong business case.^



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on March 01, 2011, 06:23:34
Theres a TravelWatch meeting this weekend so may get more details hopefully, although I expect the announcement before then.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on March 01, 2011, 07:53:41
I will be keeping an eye out on the news today


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on March 01, 2011, 08:21:03
I suspect that they will not want to break bad news to Wales on St David's day (1 march)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 14:50:33
Announcement expected bewteen 3:30 and 4:30 PM.  Watch live on BBC Parliament.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on March 01, 2011, 15:07:04
Due at 1630, I'm hearing.....


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 15:08:02
Due at 1630, I'm hearing.....
I'll put BBC Parliament on just in case they get to it early though.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 16:32:50
Live now on BBC Parliament.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 01, 2011, 16:34:25
See http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=7728


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on March 01, 2011, 16:36:21
For those of us unable to connect to this - what'd he say??!!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on March 01, 2011, 16:38:56
I'm following the Fact Compiler's twitter feed which is giving real-time updates!

http://twitter.com/thefactcompiler (http://twitter.com/thefactcompiler)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on March 01, 2011, 16:42:59
Wires to Cardiff plus Valley Lines!

IEP looks like it's gone to Hitachi, with the factory at Newton Aycliffe.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 16:44:13
Frequency from London to Swansea of only 1 tph resulted in not having sufficient business case for electrification.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on March 01, 2011, 16:46:25
Apparently a journey time of 100 minutes from Cardiff to London quoted post-electrification...


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 16:47:51
Apparently a journey time of 100 minutes from Cardiff to London quoted post-electrification...
Intersting to know if any of that time saving will be from removing station calls.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:01:56
Temple Meads to London to be increased to 4 tph due to electrification from Temple Meads to Bristol Parkway.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 17:02:21
Knitting to Temple Meads via Chippenham and Bath, as well as the 'branch line' (as referred to by one MP) to Cardiff. Also BPW to BRI to be wired.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:03:53
'branch line'
Technically anything divering from the main Paddington to Penzance via Bristol line is leaving the Main Line.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 17:05:21
Temple Meads to London to be increased to 4 tph due to electrification from Temple Meads to Bristol Parkway.

Pathing is going to be interesting up Filton Bank. Four tracking as well?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 01, 2011, 17:06:02
Hammond 3-0 Eagle...

in the public speaking competition, I reckon...

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Brucey on March 01, 2011, 17:07:23
Also Barry Island line to be electrified.  I would assume that trains from Barry to Llantwit Major and then Bridgend will still be diesel.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:07:27
He hasn't confirmed the HST life extension yet and seeing as the plan seemed to be for Devon and Cornwall not to get IEP units this was quite important.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 17:11:53
Agility Trains press release following the SoS's statement:

http://www.agilitytrains.com/assets/pdf/AgilityTrains_press_statement-20110301.pdf


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 17:13:32
He hasn't confirmed the HST life extension yet and seeing as the plan seemed to be for Devon and Cornwall not to get IEP units this was quite important.

Yes. It's about time a Somerset, Devon or Cornwall MP piped up.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 01, 2011, 17:13:44
IEP looks like it's gone to Hitachi, with the factory at Newton Aycliffe.

It went to Hitachi ages ago surely?  The debate recently has been about whether the bidding should be re-opened if the train required was substantially altered.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:19:01
Westcountry services to retain HSTs, no plans for replacement at this time but bi-mode IEP is a possibility.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Brucey on March 01, 2011, 17:22:35
Westcountry services to retain HSTs, no plans for replacement.
He also said "my successor", so no plans for considering replacement in the next few years.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:24:27
He also said "my successor", so no plans for considering replacement in the next few years.
Also note that he didn't confirm life extension.  This would be required of the HSTs were to remain in service from 2020.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on March 01, 2011, 17:24:44
even a mp asking abouut electrifying the severn beach line


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Brucey on March 01, 2011, 17:24:55
Stephen Williams asked what we were all thinking: SVB line electrification!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 17:25:26
Knitting to the 'Beach? Gets my vote!!!


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:26:30
That's it, they are talking about BBC World Service now.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on March 01, 2011, 17:29:57
wiring to Severn Beach, weston super mare & taunton if they do these streches of track then it will be a good idea, plus maybe new EMU's could be ordered on the back of the crossrail order if the electrification of those  bits of line  were  given the go ahead.

Nice to hear about the cardiff valley lines as well


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 01, 2011, 17:36:38
From the DfT press release (http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=418338&SubjectId=36):

Quote
Green light for new trains and rail electrification

Scotland, Wales, northern and south west England are to get a fleet of new trains and more reliable rail links to London, creating thousands of jobs, boosting the economy and improving services for passengers, Transport Secretary Philip Hammond announced today. He gave the go-ahead for the ^4.5bn Intercity Express Programme (IEP) and the ^704m plans to electrify the Great Western Main Line (GWML) between Cardiff, Bristol and Didcot.

The Government announced today it has decided to resume the IEP procurement and proceed with the Agility Trains (Hitachi and John Laing) consortium's plans for replacement for the nation's fleet of ageing intercity high speed trains. This will mean 500 new carriages which will provide 11,000 more peak-time seats for passengers, every day on the GWML and ECML

Hitachi had previously announced its intention to build a new train factory in County Durham to build the new order, creating more than 500 new jobs and securing thousands of additional jobs in sub-supplier industries in north east England, giving a further boost to Britain's manufacturing industry. This factory is expected to be operational by 2013.

The announcement to electrify the sections between Cardiff, Bristol and Didcot builds on November's announcement of electrification between London Paddington, Didcot, Newbury and Oxford, and will give Wales its very first main line electrified railway, cutting 17 minutes from Cardiff to London journeys and 22 minutes from Bristol to London journeys. Electric trains are not only quicker, but quieter, smoother and more reliable than diesels. They are also cleaner - producing no emissions at their point of use.

Philip Hammond said:

"This is good news for jobs, passengers and the economy. Our decision to buy a new fleet of trains and electrify new lines will allow rail passengers along the Great Western and East Coast corridors to benefit from massive improvements to journey times, more seats and more reliable services.

"Alongside our plans for High Speed Rail, it completes a picture of massive upgrades to our intercity rail corridors over the coming years.

"Whilst this is, of course, subject to the Government continuing to be satisfied that the proposal offers value for money as the commercial negotiations are concluded and that the final arrangements are compliant with the United Kingdom's EU obligations, I expect that the first of the new trains will be in service by 2016."

"Extending electrification westwards to Bristol and Cardiff will also bring all the benefits of electric trains - faster acceleration, greater comfort and cleaner, greener travel - to rail passengers in Wales and the south west.

"We have also established that a strong high-level case may exist for electrifying some of the Valley lines north of Cardiff. My Department will now work with the Welsh Assembly Government to develop a business case for the electrification of the Cardiff Valley lines."

The ^4.5bn programme will see the building of a combination of around 100 electric trains and bi-mode - diesel and electric - intercity trains which will run to Great Western Main Line stations including Oxford, Swindon, Reading, Cardiff, Swansea, Bath and Bristol and to East Coast Main Line stations such as Peterborough, York, Doncaster, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Inverness.

The train operating companies will contribute to the design and specification of the new fleet of IEP trains in greater detail than they had before. As soon as the trains become operational passengers will see improvements to reliability and comfort.

Notes to Editors

1. Benefits of electric trains over diesel
Electrified railways are essential to getting maximum efficiency and capacity from a modern railway.

Compared to non-electrified railways, electrified railways are:
* Faster;
* Quieter;
* Greener as they produce less CO2 and emit no air pollution at the trackside;
* More reliable;
* Lighter and cause less wear and tear on the tracks;
* More cost-effective for carrying freight loads; and
* Cheaper to buy, operate and maintain.

2. Greener journeys
Rail electrification is an important part of the Department's carbon strategy. Typically an electric train emits between 20% and 35% less carbon per passenger mile than a diesel train. This benefit will only improve as the electricity generation industry reduces its carbon levels. Electric trains also have zero emissions at the point of use, of particular benefit for air quality in pollution hot spots like city centres and mainline stations such as London Paddington.

3. Rail investment
Today's announcement is part of a wider Government rail strategy to meet future increases in passenger demand, promote a move from other transport modes to rail and ensure Britain has the world-class infrastructure it needs. Major projects on the agenda include the ^16bn Crossrail scheme, the ^5.5bn Thameslink modernisation and the new high speed rail link between London and the West Midlands and beyond.

The electrification of Great Western Main Line now creates the option of extending Crossrail further to Reading, with Reading station also getting a ^425m major upgrade which will cut bottlenecks and delays.

The Department for Transport and Network Rail will work closely with the Welsh Assembly to develop a business case for the electrification of the Cardiff Valley Lines and to ensure that plans for electrifying the Great Western Main Line are coordinated with the Assembly's own plans for rail rolling stock in the future Wales and Borders franchise.

4. Minimising disruption
Electric trains are more reliable than diesels. An electric intercity train will travel 40% further than an equivalent diesel train before a technical failure and an electric commuter train will travel well over twice as far.

Network Rail will use newly developed construction techniques which minimise the inconvenience to passengers for work on the Great Western line through utilising high-tech factory trains and extensively using overnight closures of less than eight hours. Passenger Focus will be given a key role in representing travellers' views throughout the work.

5. Intercity Express Programme
The Intercity Express Programme (IEP) has been led by the Department for Transport, with assistance from across the rail industry, since November 2005.

The Programme seeks to replace the distinctive "Intercity 125" High Speed Train (HST) diesel fleet procured by British Rail during the 1970s and 1980s with a new, higher capacity, more environmentally friendly train.

The Intercity Express Programme is independent of "High Speed 2", which was set up to explore options for a new high speed line along the Intercity West Coast corridor.

The original Invitation To Tender, Train Technical Specification and associated procurement documents can be found on the Department for Transport's website, http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/iep/.

In 2009 Agility Trains (a consortium comprising of John Laing and Hitachi) was announced as the preferred bidder. No contracts have yet been signed.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 17:36:56
wiring to Severn Beach, weston super mare & taunton if they do these streches of track then it will be a good idea, plus maybe new EMU's could be ordered on the back of the crossrail order if the electrification of those  bits of line  were  given the go ahead.

Actually, WSM and TAU makes a fair bit of sense. CDF-TAU could be EMU'd. Weston's Paddington services can be under the knitting the whole way and services that head south-west via BRI could be bi-mode.

But I suspect that will all be for another day, when there is more money in the pot.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 01, 2011, 17:47:06
I see the press release version mentions the C word...

Crossrail extension to Reading.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 17:57:49
Crossrail extension to Reading.
Only an option though, the current plan is still to terminate at Maidenhead.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 01, 2011, 18:01:11
I see the press release version mentions the C word...

Crossrail extension to Reading.

Paul
It was an inevitable consequence, makes the TV service pattern more sensible, will reduce the number of 319's needed so they can be cascaded elsewhere the only downside if the Crossrail "Metro" style service is still adopted Twyford and Maidenhead will have an all stops service to London.  A further possibility with the 319's is they are tunnel rated so in theory could run and Oxford / Newbury to Shenfield and even Abbey Wood (if the shoes are left on) service


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 18:02:56
A further possibility with the 319's is they are tunnel rated so in theory could run and Oxford / Newbury to Shenfield and even Abbey Wood (if the shoes are left on) service
Can the 319s have ATO installed?  I'm not sure mixing ATO and non-ATO trains in the tunnel section is a good idea.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 01, 2011, 18:06:27
A further possibility with the 319's is they are tunnel rated so in theory could run and Oxford / Newbury to Shenfield and even Abbey Wood (if the shoes are left on) service
Can the 319s have ATO installed?  I'm not sure mixing ATO and non-ATO trains in the tunnel section is a good idea.
Sure it could be done but realistically I doubt there would the will to do it


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on March 01, 2011, 18:12:14
Hammond's statement in full is transcribed on the Railway Eye blog. I'm not going to copy and paste because it's quite long, but you can find it here (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2011/03/statement-from-philip-hammond-on-iep.html).


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: inspector_blakey on March 01, 2011, 18:14:08
IEP looks like it's gone to Hitachi, with the factory at Newton Aycliffe.

It went to Hitachi ages ago surely?  

I think it's fair to say that the Foster review created reasonable doubt, at the very least.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 01, 2011, 18:27:45
Why would  they [319s] need shoes? There'll be wires to Abbey Wood.  Not likely to be relevant anyway though.  What is a valid point is that the Crossrail fleet will have to be increased if it is used to Reading, as it will have been sized exactly for the original planned timetable.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 01, 2011, 18:33:01
IEP looks like it's gone to Hitachi, with the factory at Newton Aycliffe.

It went to Hitachi ages ago surely?  

I think it's fair to say that the Foster review created reasonable doubt, at the very least.

Agreed, but contracturally Hitachi were always preferred bidder.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 01, 2011, 18:34:25
It was decided a while ago that the Crossrail Abbey Wood branch would be third rail to keep the costs down


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 01, 2011, 18:35:08
Hammond's statement in full is transcribed on the Railway Eye blog. I'm not going to copy and paste because it's quite long, but you can find it here (http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2011/03/statement-from-philip-hammond-on-iep.html).

For completeness, it's also available on the DfT website, at http://www.dft.gov.uk/press/speechesstatements/statements/hammond20110301  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on March 01, 2011, 18:40:53
We'll see how today's announcement shakes out over the coming months, but overall a hugely positive day of announcements for the railway industry.

No mention of the MML and building of a new pantograph fitted carriage for the Class 222's?  Was that all ill-founded rumour, or is there a further announcement to be made?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 18:49:00
No mention of the MML and building of a new pantograph fitted carriage for the Class 222's?  Was that all ill-founded rumour, or is there a further announcement to be made?
HSTs will remain in service on the MML for now.  A decision on the MML is dependent on the outcome of the HS2 consultation.  It should also be noted that bi-mode IEP units are future possibility for Westcountry services so there would then be no need for a 222 cascade.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 19:48:27
Looking back to the first post on this thread in July 2009, I have to say that there is little difference in the electrification plans as announced then excepting that Cardiff is in from the start.

So, should the coalition Government be getting all the plaudits here? We also owe a great deal of thanks to Andrew Adonis.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 19:57:06
We still don't know the exact form the IEP will take though.  Either the original EMU with generator car concept or the more recent underfloor engine DMU with pantograph to power the traction motors when under the wires plan.  The future of the Westcountry services is also still undecided long term.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 20:00:24
I was pointing out that the electrification plans are little changed. No mention of the IEP rolling stock in the OP.

One major change in the IEP side of things is the number of jobs being created at Newton Aycliffe. Agility originally announced 2500 jobs in February 2009 (http://www.hitachi.com/New/cnews/090212c.html). That number has dropped to 500 following today's announcement (http://www.hitachi.co.uk/about/press/2011/11mar01_01.html).


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 20:39:26
From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-12606470):

Quote
London-Cardiff rail electrification, but not to Swansea

A ^1bn electrification of the main rail line between London and Cardiff is to go ahead, it has been confirmed. However, the Welsh Assembly Government had been lobbying the Westminster coalition to electrify the Great Western line as far as Swansea. But the UK government said it had found "no evidence of a pattern of demand" and trains will switch to diesel power between Cardiff and Swansea from 2017.

Electrifying the valleys commuter lines remains a future possibility.

A plan to electrify the line was announced by the previous Labour government in 2009. Ministers in the assembly government were pressing the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition in Westminster to stick to the plan. A decision on whether to electrify the line was postponed last November.

Supporters say electrification could cut journey times from Cardiff to London by about 20 minutes, and argue electric trains are cleaner and cheaper.

In a statement to MPs, Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said he had looked carefully at the arguments in favour of electrifying the line as far as Swansea. He said the business case was heavily dependent on the frequency of service.

'No evidence'

"Services between London and Swansea currently operate at a frequency of only one train an hour off-peak," he said. "There is no evidence of a pattern of demand that would be likely to lead imminently to an increase in this frequency. Consequently, I regret to say that there is not, at present, a viable business case for electrification of the main line between Cardiff and Swansea."

Trains will switch automatically to diesel power as they leave Cardiff.

Mr Hammond said that because of speed limits dictated by the geometry of the line "there would be no time saving benefits from electrifying the line from Cardiff to Swansea".

A plan to electrify the Great Western line from London to Berkshire and Oxfordshire has already got the go-ahead.

Mr Hammond said London-Cardiff journey times would come down to 1hr 42 min, while 22 minutes would be saved off London-Bristol journeys.

Welsh Secretary Cheryl Gillan said the announcement was vital to the recovery of the Welsh economy and that the case for electrification to Swansea remained under review. She said her department will work with the assembly government on a business case to electrify commuter lines north of Cardiff to Treherbert, Aberdare, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney, and to Penarth and Barry in the Vale of Glamorgan.

'Economic lifeline'

"On St David's Day, this is excellent news for all parts of south and west Wales," she said. Mrs Gillan said the previous government had 13 years to electrify the line "but failed to do anything beyond headline-grabbing stunts".

But Labour claimed businesses and passengers living west of the Welsh capital had suffered a "St David's Day disappointment" as the electrification would not extend as far as Swansea.

Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones said he was pleased the UK government had recognised the strength of the case to electrify lines in the valleys, but was disappointed Swansea had been left out of today's announcement.

"This is a blow to our aspirations to see economic benefits flow to the whole of Wales and will be a particularly damaging to the south west of Wales," Mr Jones said. He told BBC Radio Wales it would be more cost effective to include Swansea at the same time as Cardiff, rather than trying to upgrade the line in two stages.

First Great Western managing director Mark Hopwood said: "This is great news for our customers and the railway industry as a whole as it will bring reductions in journey time and a more reliable, environmentally friendly service."

CBI Wales director David Rosser welcomed "an excellent announcement", adding: "The Great Western main line is an essential economic lifeline for the south Wales economy. Today's announcement from the UK government will reinforce Cardiff as a 21st Century city, enabling it to play a key role in creating a more balanced UK economy with wealth creation more evenly spread across the nations and regions of the UK."

Although it was disappointing that the scheme would not go as far as Swansea, he added: "It would have been completely unacceptable for Wales to have been left out of the UK's rail modernisation plans".

Cardiff council leader Rodney Berman - who lobbied for electrification of the Great Western line with Swindon and Bristol councils - said: "Today's decision has followed a lot of effort stressing the benefits electrification will bring."

Plaid Cymru parliamentary leader Elfyn Llwyd said: "Labour left Wales as the only country in Europe alongside Albania and Moldova without a single mile of electrified track."

Peter Black, Lib Dem AM for south Wales west, said the announcement was a big step forward, but added: "This decision sends the wrong message to business investors about the south west Wales economy."
Also included with the story is a video news report as seen earlier on BBC Wales Today.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: grahame on March 01, 2011, 20:58:41
Quote
Plaid Cymru parliamentary leader Elfyn Llwyd said: "Labour left Wales as the only country in Europe alongside Albania and Moldova without a single mile of electrified track."

Andorra?  Vatican? 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Timmer on March 01, 2011, 21:04:17
Looking back to the first post on this thread in July 2009, I have to say that there is little difference in the electrification plans as announced then excepting that Cardiff is in from the start.
From what I can see the only difference is Swansea is removed from receiving the wires. Gosh that's going to save soooooo much money in the grand scheme of things isn't it...not!

Whats the bet that in the end the Network Rail electrification team will continue beyond Cardiff to Swansea because all of a sudden the money has been found to finish the job. You heard it here first if it does happen  ;)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 21:17:14
Quote
Plaid Cymru parliamentary leader Elfyn Llwyd said: "Labour left Wales as the only country in Europe alongside Albania and Moldova without a single mile of electrified track."

Andorra?  Vatican? 

Northern Ireland?


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 21:33:44
Northern Ireland?
That would count as part of the UK.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 01, 2011, 21:36:16
The Plaid AM referred to Wales as a country, so Northern Ireland is a fair comparison.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 01, 2011, 21:39:05
The Plaid AM referred to Wales as a country, so Northern Ireland is a fair comparison.
Plaid want independence so they consider themslves their own country.  Northern Ireland would remain part of the UK in that event.  Confusingly though all the home nations with the UK can be referred to as countries even though the UK itself is a country.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on March 01, 2011, 22:21:26
Statement in the Commons (video):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_commons/newsid_9410000/9410594.stm




Edited to correct weblink. CfN.  :)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris2 on March 02, 2011, 09:16:59
In general I believe that the announcement is good news for the great western main line, even though they are only initially going to electrify as far as Cardiff. As more wiring is put up the business case for ordering new diesel rolling stock is weakened, because of environmental benefits associated with electric rolling stock.At the same time the business case for extending the wiring is strengthened as commuter services between Cardiff and Bristol could be swapped to electric rolling stock. Which then strengthens the case for wiring to Taunton and then to Exeter. As long as a rolling programme of electrification is established eventually the wires may even reach Penzance but that could be a very long time away.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on March 02, 2011, 09:49:42
They'll never go beyond PLY. PLY-PNZ will unfortunately end up the same as Cardiff-Swansea.

However, they have left it open to announce further knitting towards PLY before the HST replacement, so bi-mode may replace the HST eventually.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Brucey on March 02, 2011, 12:25:37
Oh dear, the PM seems to think the West Coast Main Line runs to Cardiff :o


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on March 02, 2011, 14:29:44
Oh dear, the PM seems to think the West Coast Main Line runs to Cardiff :o

I think we all had a bit of a laugh about that (Ok when can i see a pendolino at cardiff then? lol)


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 02, 2011, 15:29:21
Which then strengthens the case for wiring to Taunton and then to Exeter. As long as a rolling programme of electrification is established eventually the wires may even reach Penzance but that could be a very long time away.
If you are going to wire Bristol to Exeter then continue to Plymouth.  Ending the wires at Exeter would be a bit pointless.  Very few trains from the north terminate at Exeter, almost all continue to Plymouth.  Services to Plymouth could then go over to EMU operation.  As noted by ChrisB though, Plymouth is as far as the wries will ever go so you'd still need bi-mode from Plymouth to Penzance.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Chris2 on March 02, 2011, 17:58:23
Which then strengthens the case for wiring to Taunton and then to Exeter. As long as a rolling programme of electrification is established eventually the wires may even reach Penzance but that could be a very long time away.
If you are going to wire Bristol to Exeter then continue to Plymouth.  Ending the wires at Exeter would be a bit pointless.  Very few trains from the north terminate at Exeter, almost all continue to Plymouth.  Services to Plymouth could then go over to EMU operation.  As noted by ChrisB though, Plymouth is as far as the wries will ever go so you'd still need bi-mode from Plymouth to Penzance.
Being realistic I have to agree with both of you that Plymouth is as far as the wires will go. But eventually when a certain percentage of the network or franchise is wired. It becomes sensible to extend the wiring to cover the entire franchise area. This therefore avoids the problem of diesels under the wires. But is extremely unlikely to occur.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on March 02, 2011, 18:08:20
 I now think serious consideration should be given to eventually sending all West of England express services via Bristol in the future perhaps retaining a limited diesel operated Paddington/Taunton/Exeter service on the Berks and Hants with further electrification from Bristol on to Exeter/Plymouth thus concentrating these services and future investment where possible on the core Great Western route via Bristol equipped with European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS).This would be the best use of scarce resources longer term.With say mostly 125mph running Paddington to Bristol and  Bristol to Bridgewater and limited stop say Reading/Bristol/Taunton/Exeter and electric  acceleration journey times should be at least as good as todays Berks and Hants timings using a standard fleet of trains.Electrification would also benefit X country services from Bristol to Plymouth.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 02, 2011, 18:24:59
I now think serious consideration should be given to eventually sending all West of England express services via Bristol in the future perhaps retaining a limited diesel operated Paddington/Taunton/Exeter service on the Berks and Hants with further electrification from Bristol on to Exeter/Plymouth.
Where is the logic in ending the wires at Exeter?  I don't even see why it should be a possibility unless you really want trains to switch to diesel for the short run to Plymouth.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: woody on March 02, 2011, 21:40:47
I now think serious consideration should be given to eventually sending all West of England express services via Bristol in the future perhaps retaining a limited diesel operated Paddington/Taunton/Exeter service on the Berks and Hants with further electrification from Bristol on to Exeter/Plymouth.
Where is the logic in ending the wires at Exeter?  I don't even see why it should be a possibility unless you really want trains to switch to diesel for the short run to Plymouth.
A simple misunderstanding here I think Zoe.I did mean electrify to Plymouth to Bristol not just Exeter to Bristol.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 02, 2011, 22:35:59
Optimistic thoughts of wires to Plymouth either of the route has not had any consideration, there has been not feasibility study or outline power supply study.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 02, 2011, 22:54:35
Optimistic thoughts of wires to Plymouth either of the route has not had any consideration, there has been not feasibility study or outline power supply study.
Well the decision to retain HSTs for now has at least given a few years for this to be considered so a decision can be made on electrification, bi-mode or DMUs.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on March 02, 2011, 22:55:32
Optimistic thoughts of wires to Plymouth either of the route has not had any consideration, there has been not feasibility study or outline power supply study.

Doubt network rail would put wires along the dawlish seawall


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 02, 2011, 22:57:27
Doubt network rail would put wires along the dawlish seawall
It's not as much of a problem as people think and has already been done at Saltcoats.  Even if it was a problem you could always put the line between Dawlish Warren and Teignmouth inside a shelter.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 03, 2011, 06:53:39
Optimistic thoughts of wires to Plymouth either of the route has not had any consideration, there has been not feasibility study or outline power supply study.

Doubt network rail would put wires along the dawlish seawall
Nothing like a challenge  ::)  With the right selection of equipment and perhaps a higher level of maintenance it is possible.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 03, 2011, 12:21:34
It was decided a while ago that the Crossrail Abbey Wood branch would be third rail to keep the costs down

I did recall a suggestion last year that they'd use DC to avoid rebuilding the Connaught Tunnel, but then discussions in other forums suggested this was during the 'silly season' where all sorts of scope reductions were being widely discussed - remember all the talk of cancelling Abbey Wood, or Maidenhead, or both?   

Eventually they announced that Crossrail would go ahead completely.

So I just asked Crossrail, and here's their reply:

Quote
Crossrail Ref: CLR-00-031177
 
Thank you for your enquiry dated 1st March  2011 which has been passed to me for attention.
 
25kV electrification wil be used for all Crossrail trains including the section to Abbey Wood. The Connaught Tunnel will be re-built to accommodate the larger clearance for the overhead line equipment.
 
It is probable that if the route was extended beyond Abbey Wood then the trains would still use 25kV overhead electirication as it would be uneconomic to have dual voltage trains for that section, however there are currently no plans to extend the route

Unless you know different.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 03, 2011, 14:51:40
New installations of third rail are not allowed, only extensions of existing systems.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 03, 2011, 16:07:41
New installations of third rail are not allowed, only extensions of existing systems.

Yes, but as 'extensions' are allowed to include such mileages as Basingstoke to Exeter, Southampton to Salisbury, or Reigate to Guildford, they have a lot of leeway in the matter. 

In any case, Crossrail's route through the Connaught Tunnel to Woolwich is as much a replacement of an existing third rail route as the ELL's extension between Shoreditch and Highbury was.  Another way of looking at it is as an extension of existing third rail from Abbey Wood towards Canary Wharf - which would also be allowed.

All in all I think the 'no new installations' excuse is irrelevant.

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Zoe on March 03, 2011, 16:13:14
Basingstoke to Exeter
I believe the NR plan for this route should it ever be electrified is to use 25 kV OHL.  By your arguments above it would be possible to electrify all of Great Britain with third rail as you could just keep extending it.  It seems the rules would only prevent you installing third rail on the Northern Ireland network.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 03, 2011, 19:38:21
It was decided a while ago that the Crossrail Abbey Wood branch would be third rail to keep the costs down
I did recall a suggestion last year that they'd use DC to avoid rebuilding the Connaught Tunnel, but then discussions in other forums suggested this was during the 'silly season' where all sorts of scope reductions were being widely discussed - remember all the talk of cancelling Abbey Wood, or Maidenhead, or both?   
Eventually they announced that Crossrail would go ahead completely.
So I just asked Crossrail, and here's their reply:
Quote
Crossrail Ref: CLR-00-031177
Thank you for your enquiry dated 1st March  2011 which has been passed to me for attention.
25kV electrification wil be used for all Crossrail trains including the section to Abbey Wood. The Connaught Tunnel will be re-built to accommodate the larger clearance for the overhead line equipment.
It is probable that if the route was extended beyond Abbey Wood then the trains would still use 25kV overhead electirication as it would be uneconomic to have dual voltage trains for that section, however there are currently no plans to extend the route
Unless you know different.
Paul
Thanks for this Paul, I have not had much contact with the Crossrail Project team lately.

The "extension" of third rail is as said a bit open, but I believe the current philosophy is not to do major route where it does not meet another third rail line. A Basingstoke / Exeter electrification would be 25kV as it would likely to be cheaper, but North Downs line would be third rail but as these 2 routes are not even on the list to even think about who knows, as a point of interest the last great third rail extension Bournemouth / Weymouth is in need of enhancement also the power equipment is a poorer state than equipment elsewhere on the network twice its age.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: paul7575 on March 03, 2011, 20:28:13
The "extension" of third rail is as said a bit open, but I believe the current philosophy is not to do major route where it does not meet another third rail line. A Basingstoke / Exeter electrification would be 25kV as it would likely to be cheaper, but North Downs line would be third rail but as these 2 routes are not even on the list to even think about who knows...

Yes I'd agree Exeter would be AC and use dual voltage stock, but the main point is that it would be for cost reasons, not because third rail is banned.  The wording used in the electrification RUS was:

"In view of the route length and service density, AC electrification is considered likely to be the more cost effective option for this route. This would be further examined in the detailed development of a scheme."

Paul


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: JayMac on March 18, 2011, 01:10:54
I'm wondering whether the recent sad events in Japan are likely to have any effect on the building of the new trains?

I'd imagine that Hitachi were in the process of re-tooling their factory to begin the new build. I'm sure the Japanese government want to get their industrial capacity back to full strength as quickly as possible, but would they not be concentrating on domestic production ahead of export orders?

Material, workers and resources are likely to be prioritised toward domestic rebuilding so this could have a knock on effect for the delivery date of the Super Expresses.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on March 18, 2011, 05:22:39
I suspect power generation for factories is the first concern


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Tim on March 18, 2011, 09:04:27
Hitachi's factopry is in Kasado which is to the south of Japan and not effected by the quake.   I work in the law and we have  a number of law firms we work which are based in Tokyo.  We have had a stream of rather moving emails and faxes this week saying that it is business as usual in Tokyo whcih is much closer to the distruction.  I suspect that all sectors of the economy are keen to carry on working as much as possible to keep the economy afloat.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 18, 2011, 14:26:50
The earthquake, tsunami and the nuclear power plant disaster will effect Japan as a whole for a few weeks but this is a very well structured and wealthy country they will get the vast majority of their industry and commerce working very quickly


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Rhydgaled on March 19, 2011, 01:05:07
New installations of third rail are not allowed, only extensions of existing systems.
Why is this? I think that, on routes where IC stock would never venture, 3rd rail should be considered as it might be cheaper (though the stock would need to be dual-voltage to allow through running onto sections that would be shared by IC trains). It's not like 3rd rail shoes and pantographs weigh very much, or do they? 3rd rail might also be a better solution in rural areas as OHLE adds visual impact of a railway on anything scenic (though with photos I've seen of HS1 it's often more the light grey that breaks the countryside than the OHLE, using weathered balast might have helped).


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on March 19, 2011, 07:53:19
New installations of third rail are not allowed, only extensions of existing systems.
Why is this? I think that, on routes where IC stock would never venture, 3rd rail should be considered as it might be cheaper (though the stock would need to be dual-voltage to allow through running onto sections that would be shared by IC trains). It's not like 3rd rail shoes and pantographs weigh very much, or do they? 3rd rail might also be a better solution in rural areas as OHLE adds visual impact of a railway on anything scenic (though with photos I've seen of HS1 it's often more the light grey that breaks the countryside than the OHLE, using weathered balast might have helped).
This restriction on "new" exposed top contact third (and forth) rails systems put in place about 25 or 30 years ago by the Dept of Transport (as was) also for infrastructure owners like Network Rail they also have to consider the "The Electricity at Work 1989 Regulations" made under the 1974 HSW Act.  On the national network the option to use a shrouded bottom as used on the DLR is not a practical option.

All recent rolling stock is dual voltage its just that both collection systems are only fitted in areas where both are used.

Third rail infrastructure is not cheap as a member of the traveling public you only ever see the conrail or the OLE masts and wire which compared to con rail looks expensive, however 750v third rail needs a 2 to 4 MW substation very 4 miles and a track paralleling hut (TPH) in between in high density area the TPH's are often replaced with substations.  The substations have transformer rectifier units 2 to 4 MW some have two, high voltage switchgear 33kV and 750v dc switchgear, then there is the high voltage (33kV) cables between substations (we do not take the power direct from a nearby street 4 MW is a larger demand than most housing estates) where as 25kV OLE has a substation every 25 miles on the old systems but on the new systems like HS1 and the plan for GWML every 50 miles with track sectioning cabins every 7 miles. 


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: willc on March 29, 2011, 20:45:57
Network Rail is seeking tenders for overhead line installation work for the GWML and North West projects.

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Press-Releases/PLANS-TO-ROLL-OUT-ELECTRIFICATION-GATHER-PACE-16f8/SearchCategoryID-2.aspx


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on April 01, 2011, 17:56:10
David cameron has said that electrification to Swansea could happen:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/04/01/rail-electrification-to-swansea-still-being-considered-says-prime-minister-91466-28442719/

Hope it is true although i have my doubts


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 01, 2011, 20:20:34
Interesting that he should mention it specifically in a speech.  I don't think it's dead in the water quite yet, though of course the phrase 'active review' was used when the Cardiff electrification was announced, so he isn't actually saying anything new.


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Electric train on April 02, 2011, 14:39:08
Interesting that he should mention it specifically in a speech.  I don't think it's dead in the water quite yet, though of course the phrase 'active review' was used when the Cardiff electrification was announced, so he isn't actually saying anything new.
And with the new Network Rail Wales Route this should ensure the funds are found.



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on April 02, 2011, 15:43:09
I know there has been talk about using tram-trains, a mention of this was in current issue of modern railways.

 I hope the wires do come through to Swansea, so that means the governemnt can order more EMU'S  and less of the Bi-mode. That said the only places i think would really need the Bi-mode options are the London Paddington - Hereford/Cheltenham/Weston Super Mare/Exeter St Davids services.

If the wires also went to Westbury/Taunton, that could mean a increase in capacity on the Cardiff - Bristol - Taunton corridor as the trains could be worked by some class 319's or maybe some new units ordered on the back of the crossrail order.

Hopefully we will have further electrification projects after the great western is finished, ideal routes i would do are:

  • Coventry - Oxford - Reading - Bassingstoke

  • Thames Branches including Greenford & fill in on the North Downs Line
  • Cardiff Valley Lines & Newport - Crewe & Severn Tunnel Jct/Bristol - Birmingham

  • Exmouth - Exeter St Davids - Okehampton/Barnstaple ( be done as part of electrification of the Bassingstoke to Exeter line
  • Lines around Romsey ( This will free up class 158/159 units to go to ATW & East Midlands Trains)
  • London Marylebone-Aylesbury/High Wycombe/Banbury
[/list]


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: ChrisB on April 02, 2011, 15:50:53
  • London Marylebone-Aylesbury/High Wycombe/Banbury

Not sure I agree with your list - Thames branches?? There are many more sensible options to do first! - but watch the bids for the next franchise on this one....


Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: anthony215 on April 02, 2011, 15:52:34
  • London Marylebone-Aylesbury/High Wycombe/Banbury

Not sure I agree with your list - Thames branches?? There are many more sensible options to do first! - but watch the bids for the next franchise on this one....

I meant the lines from Twyford - Henley on thames etc and make these part of crossrail .



Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
Post by: Rhydgaled on April 02, 2011, 15:57:18
    I know there has been talk about using tram-trains, a mention of this was in current issue of modern railways.

     I hope the wires do come through to Swansea, so that means the governemnt can order more EMU'S  and less of the Bi-mode. That said the only places i think would really need the Bi-mode options are the London Paddington - Hereford/Cheltenham/Weston Super Mare/Exeter St Davids services.

    If the wires also went to Westbury/Taunton, that could mean a increase in capacity on the Cardiff - Bristol - Taunton corridor as the trains could be worked by some class 319's or maybe some new units ordered on the back of the crossrail order.

    Hopefully we will have further electrification projects after the great western is finished, ideal routes i would do are:

    • Coventry - Oxford - Reading - Bassingstoke

    • Thames Branches including Greenford & fill in on the North Downs Line
    • Cardiff Valley Lines & Newport - Crewe & Severn Tunnel Jct/Bristol - Birmingham

    • Exmouth - Exeter St Davids - Okehampton/Barnstaple ( be done as part of electrification of the Bassingstoke to Exeter line
    • Lines around Romsey ( This will free up class 158/159 units to go to ATW & East Midlands Trains)
    • London Marylebone-Aylesbury/High Wycombe/Banbury
    [/list]

    London to Reading is only a very small portion of the routes to Taunton/Exeter/Plymouth/Penzance so I really don't think it's worth having bi-mode just for running on electric power for that bit, especially as the extra weight makes a bi-mode running on electric power 15%-20% more expensive than running an Intercity 125 under the wires. On diesel power, bi-mode IEP will probablly have worse fuel ecconomy than Voyagers (which are awful in this respect too). Keeping the 125s on the route would also add presure to electrify it. Severn Tunnel Junction, and Swindon, to Cheltenham would each convert 1tph to electric power, and allow divertions of PAD - CDF/SWA trains. This leaves the only route bi-mode IEP makes any sence at all on as Paddington - Worcester/Great Malvern/Hereford, and I'd still suggest keeping the 125s on those trips for the reasons outlined above. One idea I had is to take the mark 3s from the 125s replaced by electrics and put them between new EMU driving cars on the Portsmouth - Waterloo route to replace 450s which would go to send SWT 158s on Lymington and some currently un-electrified lines to Wales.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 02, 2011, 19:05:48
    Quote
    This leaves the only route bi-mode IEP makes any sence at all on as Paddington - Worcester/Great Malvern/Hereford, and I'd still suggest keeping the 125s on those trips for the reasons outlined above.

    There you go again. Do you ever actually take in anything anyone else says?

    The Cotswold Line needs through trains to and from London - they are why the line has been so successful for the past couple of decades. It wouldn't surprise me if more people travel on the Cotswold Line on a typical weekday than use those Saturday trains to Tenby and Pembroke Dock you think are so important over an entire summer season.

    For large parts of the day, the HSTs have far too many seats for the traffic on offer west of Oxford, which is why, for lack of anything better after the 180s left, the 166s have returned on so many off-peak services.

    Once the lines south of Oxford are wired, no-one in their right mind is going to allow DMUs like turbos out there, because their performance characteristics will be no match for 319s and whatever trains Crossrail finally orders, never mind the IEP.

    Making people change at Oxford for much of the day is simply a commercial non-starter, so the only game in town for this route for a long time to come is the bi-mode IEP. The Cotswold Line will never be wired until Birmingham-Bristol and the Birmingham-Worcester lines get electrified and wires to Worcester are many years away now that LM is getting a brand new fleet of 172s for services via Kidderminster and the Birmingham-Herefords via Bromsgrove are in the hands of Class 170s that are only 10 or 12 years into their lives.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 02, 2011, 20:04:36
    London to Newbury is only a very small portion of the routes to Taunton/Exeter/Plymouth/Penzance...

    Fixed your comment.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 02, 2011, 20:07:02
    Quote
    This leaves the only route bi-mode IEP makes any sence at all on as Paddington - Worcester/Great Malvern/Hereford, and I'd still suggest keeping the 125s on those trips for the reasons outlined above.

    There you go again. Do you ever actually take in anything anyone else says?

    The Cotswold Line needs through trains to and from London - they are why the line has been so successful for the past couple of decades. It wouldn't surprise me if more people travel on the Cotswold Line on a typical weekday than use those Saturday trains to Tenby and Pembroke Dock you think are so important over an entire summer season.

    For large parts of the day, the HSTs have far too many seats for the traffic on offer west of Oxford, which is why, for lack of anything better after the 180s left, the 166s have returned on so many off-peak services.

    Once the lines south of Oxford are wired, no-one in their right mind is going to allow DMUs like turbos out there, because their performance characteristics will be no match for 319s and whatever trains Crossrail finally orders, never mind the IEP.

    Making people change at Oxford for much of the day is simply a commercial non-starter, so the only game in town for this route for a long time to come is the bi-mode IEP. The Cotswold Line will never be wired until Birmingham-Bristol and the Birmingham-Worcester lines get electrified and wires to Worcester are many years away now that LM is getting a brand new fleet of 172s for services via Kidderminster and the Birmingham-Herefords via Bromsgrove are in the hands of Class 170s that are only 10 or 12 years into their lives.

    I did take it in, I've stopped suggesting a change might be acceptable on the 166 workings and am now saying that bi-mode IEP does make a bit of sence for that particular route but would perfer to maintain the through services using IC125s rather than new trains. I'll say it again, I am no longer suggesting that the through services be stopped.

    Those 170s and 172s, could they be re-geared to 75mph (as I think the London Overground ones are) fairly easily? If so they could be used on 150 routes to casscade the 150s onto pacer routes to allow the pacers to be withdrawn. That could leave the lines in question open for electric trains. It isn't likely to happen for several years, but the new stock doesn't necessarilly mean electrification is many decades away.

    EDIT: If a 2+8 IC125 is too many seats, maybe you could shorten them, which would probably make their fuel economy even better.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 03, 2011, 09:54:21
    On great, we can keep through services operated by trains that are already 35 years old and counting. I first travelled on an HST when they had been in service for two or three weeks in October 1976. If someone had told me then that they would still be in front-rank service in 2011 and people would be suggesting keeping them on for some further indeterminate period, I would have thought they were mad.

    And if I lived in Devon and Cornwall, I would be seriously concerned that no-one in government, or the railways, seems to have a clue about how to provide new express trains for the region. No matter how good the life extension work, no matter how much tlc the trains get, there is no getting away from the fact the HSTs are geriatric in railway terms, let alone for front-rank express trains.

    Quote
    If a 2+8 IC125 is too many seats, maybe you could shorten them, which would probably make their fuel economy even better.

    A 2+7 HST is too many seats off-peak, as for the idea that HST operation on the Cotswold Line is fuel efficient, you must be joking. There is an average running time between stops of about seven minutes on a typical service. The HST was designed 40 years ago for long-haul, high-speed running, not stop-and-start. That's why Turbos have returned in place of HSTs on lightly-loaded services here. As for shortening them, 4,500 horsepower for a five-coach train is a grotesque over-excess of power and a five-coach train which cannot be coupled to anything else would not be a lot of use on fast trains between Oxford, Reading and London in the peaks.

    Quote
    It isn't likely to happen for several years, but the new stock doesn't necessarilly mean electrification is many decades away

    Bit more than several years. First there's the Great Western main line, North West England and central Scotland to wire. Then, if the sums add up, the prospect of much of the South Wales network, Midland main line and HS2, which, if they all happen, are likely to tie up electrification capabilities for a decade and more. After that, the TransPennine routes would seem a sensible next step, to remove overweight dmus from steep climbs through the Pennines, and only then might you look at CrossCountry, to tie all the bits together.

    As well as all LM's shiny new 172s, Chiltern also has a relatively young dmu fleet, which has plenty of years left in it (and in the case of the 165s is also of limited use elsewhere, like their FGW cousins), so the Snow Hill/Moor Street lines around Birmingham won't be touched until rolling stock replacement falls due and Worcester will have to wait a very long time to see electrics - electric signals would be a novelty there, never mind electric trains. Remember that rolling stock replacement is a key factor in GWML and North West wiring going ahead and the same will apply in the case of the Valley Lines, should that happen.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 03, 2011, 10:37:39
    If you don't like old trains that brings me back to where I was before, suggesting a diesel loco to drag the IEP, I think I'd actually perfer that to keeping 125s on the route as it allows more spare parts for the 125s on the services to the south west. However last time I suggested that I was told you couldn't attach a loco at Oxford due to an unsuitable station layout. I've also been told that bi-mode for just the route in question wouldn't be a big enough order, but bi-mode only makes sence for this route, it makes no sence at all anywhere else. Therefore I think it's a choice of an IEP drag or an IC125 (if a 3-car DMU can handle the loadings, a 2+5 IC125 shouldn't be a problem in that respect). Having plenty of excess power should mean they don't need to use all of it very often, which should help fuel ecconomy a bit, a DMU like a 180 or Voyager would be better in theroy, but in practice their fuel ecconomy figures are grim reading. I want to avoid anymore trains like that, which bi-mode IEP would be, being built. You see how long the IC125s are dragging on for, introducing bi-mode IEP in 2017 and giving them a 35 year life would mean we're still running diesel trains on INTERCITY services in 2052, rather than having IC services diesel free in 2040 going by 35 years on the class 222s. Given that 2050 is the year set for some of the co2 emmision targets I think bi-mode IEP is very important to avoid, and what will happen to oil supplies in that time?

    What's to stop there being multiple electrification teams? More job creation, opertunity for some politics perhaps? I guess that probablly would be a no starter due to an increase costs greater than what I expect.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 03, 2011, 12:10:28
    I'm sorry, i must be missing something here. On the one hand, putting diesel engines under the floor of  trains for part-time use is wrong, yet buying large numbers of new high-power, high-acceleration, therefore high fuel-consumption, diesel locos (and providing the servicing facilities they would need) for use on just part of a train's journey makes more sense?

    On the Cotswold Line, with constant stops and starts, which big diesel locos don't like (just the same issues as with using the HSTs here - and I seriously doubt an HST's fuel economy doing such work is anything to write home about, however many coaches it has, compared with a supposedly thirsty 180 or Voyager) you would need perhaps six locos to maintain a basic hourly service between Oxford and Worcester, and allow cover for delays and failures, and maybe more to allow for the extra running time taken by services to Malvern and Hereford.

    That's an awful lot of expensive locos to move around five-coach trains for much of the day. In those circumstances, I think your average First Group board member would find obliging people to change at Oxford a far more attractive proposition than footing the running costs for all those locos for years to come. The passengers - and their MPs - would not find such a situation an attractive proposition.

    Quote
    but bi-mode only makes sence for this route, it makes no sence at all anywhere else

    So what about Harrogate, Hull, Lincoln, Sunderland, Inverness and Aberdeen? All unlikely prospects for electrification for many years too.

    Quote
    if a 3-car DMU can handle the loadings, a 2+5 IC125 shouldn't be a problem in that respect

    Did you read the bit about the leg of journeys made by Cotswold Line trains between Oxford and London, where they form about half the express services each day? A 2+5 would be a serious capacity problem there for chunks of the day outside the traditional peaks - you can't just couple another HST on. That's why they use full-length HSTs or couple/detach Turbos at Oxford.

    Quote
    giving them a 35 year life would mean we're still running diesel trains on INTERCITY services in 2052

    No it doesn't. If wiring proceeds with some sort of gradual, logical pattern over coming decades, then you can simply stop using the diesel engines and remove them when they are no longer needed.

    I would love to see a proper long-term national elecrification programme but despite Lord Adonis's best efforts, something of this sort has yet to emerge, so we have to do the best we can in the circumstances, and if that's the bi-mode, so be it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 03, 2011, 12:35:16
    I'm sorry, i must be missing something here. On the one hand, putting diesel engines under the floor of  trains for part-time use is wrong, yet buying large numbers of new high-power, high-acceleration, therefore high fuel-consumption, diesel locos (and providing the servicing facilities they would need) for use on just part of a train's journey makes more sense?

    On the Cotswold Line, with constant stops and starts, which big diesel locos don't like (just the same issues as with using the HSTs here - and I seriously doubt an HST's fuel economy doing such work is anything to write home about, however many coaches it has, compared with a supposedly thirsty 180 or Voyager) you would need perhaps six locos to maintain a basic hourly service between Oxford and Worcester, and allow cover for delays and failures, and maybe more to allow for the extra running time taken by services to Malvern and Hereford.

    That's an awful lot of expensive locos to move around five-coach trains for much of the day. In those circumstances, I think your average First Group board member would find obliging people to change at Oxford a far more attractive proposition than footing the running costs for all those locos for years to come. The passengers - and their MPs - would not find such a situation an attractive proposition.
    You see, that's why I jumped to that conclusion before. Perhaps you could double service frequency with the turbos (and/or make passengers change at Reading rather than Oxford), it would probablly still be better to have a direct services as you say though. I never said new diesel locos should be bought, use the stacks of 47s, 37s and 60s we have lying around. They won't last forever of course, but hopefully the Chiltern line will get wires so 90s (or new electric locos) can be used to make Chiltern's 67s available. Any diesel locomotive geared for 90 or 100mph should be a bit more efficent than a DMU geared for 125mph/

    Quote
    Quote
    but bi-mode only makes sence for this route, it makes no sence at all anywhere else
    So what about Harrogate, Hull, Lincoln, Sunderland, Inverness and Aberdeen? All unlikely prospects for electrification for many years too.
    Drag them with diesel locos of course, that way you're not wasting loads of electricity carting diesel fuel and engines around under the wires. Sunderland (and most of the Hull services) are open access anyway, so they'll need to make their own arangements for stock, not the government. The further you go under the wires the worse having diesel engines, whether they are powering the train or not, becomes. I am finding it really hard to come up with a good solution for the services beyond Oxford, they occupy the middle ground with a fair amount of both wired and unwired track, so everything is a rather poor compromise. A few bi-modes for this route only does in some respects sound like a good idea, perhaps because it would only be a small number you could swap some XC class 220 Voyagers for class 180s and put the debated pantograph cars into the Voyagers. Only problem is getting the open access operators to buy new stock to release the 180s.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on April 03, 2011, 13:24:32
    Are you really serious about using almost life expired class 47 locos to do drags? As for 37s, well no FOC is currently using them so they're at best in warm store, at worst slowly rotting away. Both these classes will be over 50 years old come GWML electrification and would require major expensive work to make them compatible with the new stock.  :o

    Then you mention Class 60. A heavy, route limited, freight only loco geared to 60mph.  ::)

    I get that you don't agree with bi-mode, but your alternatives keep moving from crackpot idea to another. The only alternative is electrification of all relevant routes. And that's not happening.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on April 03, 2011, 21:51:49

    I think that the IEP problem can be traced back to a ^one size fits all^ solution for the HST replacement and  ^falling between two stools^ phrase may be appropriate.

    It must surely be replacement for the 125^s ^ they were designed for a 15 year first line service life and entered service in late 1976. The same is even more true for the 47^s and 37^s - modernisation plan locos that can^t perform to modern standards, even with re-engineering.

    IEP in my view is under-specified for Bristol/South Wales as these services should qualify for TGC/ICE  specification rolling stock, even over the slower lines at the periphery.  If Swansea (or Weston etc) really is a serious IC destination then there should be no problem with wires. If not and services are near empty West of Cardiff etc, then all they can have is connections or a couple of daily hauled through services as happened in West  Yorks  just  after the ECML was wired in 1991.

    For the other destinations, a multiple unit solution seems necessary to cope with lighter outer loadings and the commercial need for through service to London. Here a hybrid formation solution might work; i.e a dmu at the country end, an emu at the other.  Now modern units have much greater tractive ability; emu^s have roundly double the power of 1980^s units (hence the sub-station crises!) and dmu^s can have a 750hp/570kW diesel under each car. They could therefore haul each other; the electric sections would have no power problem as there is no climbing and 125mph should be possible. The diesel sections are slower anyway and there, motored axles are the limiting factor for adhesion in acceleration and climbing.

    Just let^s not have 5-a side and no a/c to the Cotswolds (or any where else West of Crossrail)

    Happy Mothers^ Day,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 04, 2011, 00:57:05
    Quote
    I am finding it really hard to come up with a good solution for the services beyond Oxford

    Well then spare us any more of this. There is no point you worrying about it, because the Government has already come up with a solution - which doesn't involve rusting 50-year-old diesels or more recently-built freight engines designed to shift heavy bulk trains, not featherweight passenger trains making frequent stops.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 06, 2011, 23:11:29
    Interesting feature in the new issue of Rail about IEP, based on an interview with the boss of Agility Trains. Talks quite a bit about the diesel engines. They are looking at a number of designs, including ones that would offer 940hp each, a total of 2,820hp (2.1MW) per five-car train. A 180 has 5x750hp. They are well aware of the noise and vibration issue and are buying two engines which will be put under a testbed train in Japan later this year to help Hitachi look at ways to minimise these.

    The five-car and eight-car trains can both have an extra car added, at the time they are built, or later. They are also looking at a 10-car all-electric version, with a view to bidding when the Class 91s and Mk4s need replacing and drawings were seen by Rail for a 10-car bi-mode with five electric motor coaches and five diesel engines mounted on the same coaches - Penzance here we come?? The maximum possible train length would be a 12-car.

    Gives a daily diagram list suggesting Great Western would be operating 11 eight-car all-electric, 35 five-car bi-mode and nine five-car all electric (I stand corrected on that point), with East Coast having 35 five-car bi-modes and 10 five-car all-electrics. So, 100 operating, with about 10 more sets in the total fleet allowed for maintenance, etc.

    Agility is to take over North Pole depot, build a new depot at Stoke Gifford in the triangle alongside the Bristol Parkway-Filton Abbey Wood curve, provide overnight servicing facilities at Cardiff Tidal and Swansea Maliphant (between the station and Landore depot) and share existing facilities at Worcester, Exeter and Laira.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: woody on April 07, 2011, 11:05:58
    Agility is to take over North Pole depot, build a new depot at Stoke Gifford in the triangle alongside the Bristol Parkway-Filton Abbey Wood curve, provide overnight servicing facilities at Cardiff Tidal and Swansea Maliphant (between the station and Landore depot) and share existing facilities at Worcester, Exeter and Laira.
    Laira!.Though IEP was not going west of Exeter only HSTs or is there more going on behind the scenes than we know about.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on April 07, 2011, 13:16:53
    Thanks Willc.  I'll have to buy Rail.  Glad to see Hitachi is trying hard to get this right.  There do seem to be a lot of 5 car trains proposed thought.  I assume that they will be used alot in pairs (with the predictable extra cost of providing catering twice and the revenue protection issues of non-connecting carriages)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: mjones on April 07, 2011, 14:59:13
    Not to mention the wasted space of two buffet areas etc, maybe they are only planning to use trolleys?

    It really would be a shame if the lessons of the Voyager aren't learned this time...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 07, 2011, 15:36:05
    Gives a daily diagram list suggesting Great Western would be operating 11 eight-car all-electric, 35 five-car bi-mode and nine five-car all electric (I stand corrected on that point), with East Coast having 35 five-car bi-modes and 10 five-car all-electrics. So, 100 operating, with about 10 more sets in the total fleet allowed for maintenance, etc.


    The ratio of electric units for GW seems more explicit in 'Rail' this week; in the last MR (probably written about 3 weeks ago or more?) Roger Ford suggested it would probably be 11 and 9, but didn't commit to that as DfT had only given the total of 133 electric cars, which could also have been met by 6 x 8 car and 17 x 5 car.

    Agree that the sudden mention of Laira depot seems rather unexpected...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on April 07, 2011, 16:03:45
    Not to mention the wasted space of two buffet areas etc, maybe they are only planning to use trolleys?

    It really would be a shame if the lessons of the Voyager aren't learned this time...

    Of course lots of 5-car bi-modes would be fine as a temporary measure.  If we eventually get the wires to Swansea and Exeter and beyond and order some more electric trains then the bi-modes could replace the voyagers on XC services, the voyagers could replace the XC turbostars, the turbostars could be cascaded and we could scrap the "tin trucks" / "nodding donkeys".

    IF NR and Hitachii deliver on time and on budget, we needn't think of this as the last order of electric trains.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on April 07, 2011, 16:04:47
    Not to mention the wasted space of two buffet areas etc, maybe they are only planning to use trolleys?

    It really would be a shame if the lessons of the Voyager aren't learned this time...
    ...  The the space wasted by providing two more cabs and extra disabled toilets.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 07, 2011, 16:17:05
    They are also looking at a 10-car all-electric version, with a view to bidding when the Class 91s and Mk4s need replacing

    I'm a little surprised that 10-car electric versions (or 9-car possibly) haven't been chosen anyway?  8-Car trains (albeit 26m carriages) won't add much capacity and if you're planning on running 10-car Bi-mode trains around coupled together, then the platforms would all have to be done for that length anyway (where they aren't already long enough).  Still, as long as they can be easily lengthened, Pendolino style, then that's alright.  Flexibility is the key.

    I too am a little concerned about the logistics of running these 10-car Bi-mode trains around with two TM's, two catering staff, two large wastes of space in the form of unused cabs - if they're not careful, most of the benefits of having 26m carriages will be lost.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on April 07, 2011, 18:15:33
    I too am a little concerned about the logistics of running these 10-car Bi-mode trains around with two TM's, two catering staff, two large wastes of space in the form of unused cabs - if they're not careful, most of the benefits of having 26m carriages will be lost.

    But I look and say "why not make a virtue of it?".   So many trains are busier at their London end that the "country" end ... so why not run 10 carriages out from London, and split the train for 2 destinations.  Split at Oxford for Hereford and somewhere north of Banbury. Split at Swindon for Cheltenham and Weymouth. Split at Parkway for Swansea and Taunton. Split at Exeter for Paignton and Exmouth.   Some of these are more serious suggestions than others.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Deltic on April 07, 2011, 18:55:54
    Or more likely send the rear 5 coaches back to London with another 5 from farther afield. But isn't the problem with this that the government doesn't like coupling / uncoupling of trains / locos en route. That's why they have gone for bi-modes.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 07, 2011, 22:48:49
    I omitted mention of catering arrangements partly for the sake of brevity but also because it might be nice if Rail was able to sell a few copies...

    And why would staffing have to be doubled up everywhere? For example, on a London-Worcester service, splitting at Oxford, logic suggests you would staff a buffet and first class with customer hosts in the Cotswold section and not the Oxford one. Most Oxford originating and terminating fasts have no catering, or just a trolley. One TM would suffice (if revenue protection's an issue then use more travelling staff for that specific task) - FGW runs rather a lot of paired up Turbo formations with just a driver on board and no TM as tall - these formations also have four driving cabs, as did paired-up 180 formations. If you are to have a flexible fleet then this is what is needed. The 2+7 or 2+8 HST fleet is not very flexible and carries around air in a number of other places than the Cotswold Line off-peak.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 08, 2011, 00:21:44
    One TM would suffice (if revenue protection's an issue then use more travelling staff for that specific task) - FGW runs rather a lot of paired up Turbo formations with just a driver on board and no TM as tall

    Unless I'm mistaken, unless these trains are going to run as DOO - and I don't think they will, even on the Oxford route, and certainly not between London and Cardiff (Swansea) - then you will need a TM for both portions if there's no through corridor connection between the sets.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 08, 2011, 00:56:53
    I can see managers arguing that if all on-board staff have safety training, then having at least one steward/customer host in each unit and a tm somewhere in the formation would suffice. And let's face it, there's bound to be some sort of bust-up with the unions over the introduction of these trains somewhere down the line... double-manned HSTs ring any bells?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on April 08, 2011, 08:02:29
    Thanks Willc.  I'll have to buy Rail.  Glad to see Hitachi is trying hard to get this right.  There do seem to be a lot of 5 car trains proposed thought.  I assume that they will be used alot in pairs (with the predictable extra cost of providing catering twice and the revenue protection issues of non-connecting carriages)

    Having experienced new trains on other routes, I dont assume that they will be "used a lot in pairs" I cynicly assume that they will run mainly as single units as with voyagers.
    And why on earth would they "provide catering twice", not at all more likely, maybe a trolley if you are lucky.

    By cramming in lots of high density bus seats, minimising luggage space, removing catering, and reducing the number of toilets, it should be possible to provide "similar" seat numbers to an unimproved HST. "Similar" in this context is railway jargon for "not that much worse"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on April 08, 2011, 08:13:50
    With them opening a depot in Cardiff does this mean that there will be a lot of service starting from Cardiff in the morning, this will annoy a lot of commuters traveling to London.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on April 08, 2011, 08:46:01
    As well as the extra cabs and buffets a 2 * 5 car  bimode unit is also carting around 12 extra tons of dead metal when under the wires. Which must add to the running costs.  3 diesel engines per unit are also going to cost an awful lot more to maintain than a straight electric unit.

    Plus they are bound to reduce the number of miles between failures.  The newer electric units are now getting on towards 50K miles between failures. In contrast a 142 struggles to reach 5000.

    As they going to have auto coulings a  3 MW 160Kph (upgradeable to 200 if the lines are improved) diesel loco with the same couplings and compatible software would almost certainly be cheaper to buy, run and maintain.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 08, 2011, 11:02:39
    And let's face it, there's bound to be some sort of bust-up with the unions over the introduction of these trains somewhere down the line

    Too right.  I can see Crow/Norman looking at where they can throw a spanner in the works already.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 08, 2011, 21:31:55
    As well as the extra cabs and buffets a 2 * 5 car  bimode unit is also carting around 12 extra tons of dead metal when under the wires. Which must add to the running costs.  3 diesel engines per unit are also going to cost an awful lot more to maintain than a straight electric unit.

    Plus they are bound to reduce the number of miles between failures.  The newer electric units are now getting on towards 50K miles between failures. In contrast a 142 struggles to reach 5000.

    As they going to have auto coulings a  3 MW 160Kph (upgradeable to 200 if the lines are improved) diesel loco with the same couplings and compatible software would almost certainly be cheaper to buy, run and maintain.

    You aren't seriously suggesting a jerry-built railbus is in any way a fair indicator of the reliability of modern diesel units are you?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 08, 2011, 22:01:53
    Can not see what the fetish is for buffet cars, complete waste of space most routes with new rolling stock have trolley service which seems to work fine.

    For electric traction at 25kV the 4 tonne weight per engine will not add much to the overall power consumption it could argued that the extra mass will improve rail adhesion hence making better use of the tractive effort thereby improving acceleration also it could aid braking force


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: woody on April 09, 2011, 09:53:22
    Thanks Willc.  I'll have to buy Rail.  Glad to see Hitachi is trying hard to get this right.  There do seem to be a lot of 5 car trains proposed thought.  I assume that they will be used alot in pairs (with the predictable extra cost of providing catering twice and the revenue protection issues of non-connecting carriages)

    Having experienced new trains on other routes, I dont assume that they will be "used a lot in pairs" I cynicly assume that they will run mainly as single units as with voyagers.
    And why on earth would they "provide catering twice", not at all more likely, maybe a trolley if you are lucky.

    By cramming in lots of high density bus seats, minimising luggage space, removing catering, and reducing the number of toilets, it should be possible to provide "similar" seat numbers to an unimproved HST. "Similar" in this context is railway jargon for "not that much worse"

    43009 "First Transforming travel",but not necessary for the better though for all I am afraid.Travelled back to Plymouth on Friday on the 1406 "cattle wagon" Paddington to Penzance HST and being sat with my son in coach B I soon gave up the idea of macheteing my way to the buffet through the vestibule areas which were jammed with passengers and large luggage all the way to the buffet for the entire journey to Plymouth(are cases getting bigger?).Add to that there was no aircon in coach B on what was a warm day all left a bad taste in the mouth despite an on time arrival in Plymouth.
    It seems to me that Longer distance journeys to and from say Paddington to Devon and Cornwall were compromised to accommodate the overwhelming need to provide extra seats for FGWs commuter.I hope IEP addresses this compromise.
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on April 10, 2011, 09:59:21
    AFAIK the internal layout has yet to be decided, I would however be very suprised indeed if it is an improvement over a proper HST, and it might well be even worse than an "improved" high density bus style one.
    The trend is generaly towards shorter trains with high density bus seats, minimal lugage space and no catering, this is known as progress.
    I cant imagine that a new 5 car multiple unit will be an improvement over an 8 car HST.

    Certainly no chance of a proper restaurant, and I doubt that there even be a hot buffet.
    Restaurant services on trains to/from Wales were withdrawn several improvements ago. At the time I said that this was in preperation for downgrading Welsh services to DMUs. DMUs dont normally have restaurants.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on April 10, 2011, 11:02:30
    Restaurants on trains don't show a profit, nice though that they are. So whilst disappointing, I wouldn't expect the new fleet, either the 8 car electric or 5 car bi-mode to have restaurant provision.

    I would hope for hot food provision of some sort though available in both classes. But I won't be surprised if their isn't.

    Who knows, we might even see a renaissance in restaurant provision on services to the far west where the HSTs will continue to run for many years. Lots of TFKs that'll no longer be in use offering Travelling Chef between South Wales and Paddington. I suspect though that we are seeing the swansong of restaurants on the franchised UK rail network.

    HSTs available for open access could be another possibility..... SWAP Railway* anyone?


    *South Wales and Paddington  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 10, 2011, 11:55:35
    Broadgage, Hitachi say they can provide pretty much any internal layout (the class 395 presumably is the likely starting point for a high-density layout) and any catering set-up required by the operators but they envisage a maximum of 88 seats in a fully-seated trailer or motor standard coach - a handful more than a current high-density FGW HST coach, in a longer vehicle.

    And I think you need to forget your fetish for 'proper' restaurant cars being some kind of defining factor in what constitutes an express train. As of next month, the Plymouth Pullmans will be the last of their kind left in the UK. The world has moved on.

    Open access - i don't think so. You would fall foul of the "primarily abstractive" issue trying to operate to pretty much anywhere on the GWML - there is no equivalent to the Yorkshire and North East towns ignored by East Coast that are served by HT and GC.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on April 10, 2011, 16:49:36
    I suspect though that we are seeing the swansong of restaurants on the franchised UK rail network.

    While not disagreeing with you in the longterm, I was speaking to a member of the catering crew on one of the Pullman Services this week and he confirmed that the existing four services will remain in the May timetable, will have new menus and perhaps most importantly will be promoted.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 15, 2011, 13:57:40
    An interesting 'Railnews' article on electrification, touching on the history of railway electrification in the UK, running though the years to the current proposals.

    http://www.railnews.co.uk/content/documents/rn170_2011_year_of_sparks_effect.pdf (http://www.railnews.co.uk/content/documents/rn170_2011_year_of_sparks_effect.pdf)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on April 15, 2011, 14:21:07
    As well as the extra cabs and buffets a 2 * 5 car  bimode unit is also carting around 12 extra tons of dead metal when under the wires. Which must add to the running costs.  3 diesel engines per unit are also going to cost an awful lot more to maintain than a straight electric unit.

    Plus they are bound to reduce the number of miles between failures.  The newer electric units are now getting on towards 50K miles between failures. In contrast a 142 struggles to reach 5000.

    As they going to have auto coulings a  3 MW 160Kph (upgradeable to 200 if the lines are improved) diesel loco with the same couplings and compatible software would almost certainly be cheaper to buy, run and maintain.

    I only partly agree with this.  You need to remember that 12t x 3 (or x5 on teh 8 car train) is a lot less than the 60t that a powercar on teh original bui-mode proposal would have been.  You also should bear in mind that even the all electric version will have one 12t engine for emergency use. 

    As for reliability.  The underfloor engines are likely to be derivatives of extablished truck engines, so likley to be fairly reliable and cheap and compiant with the emissions standards


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 15, 2011, 17:53:48
    An interesting 'Railnews' article on electrification, touching on the history of railway electrification in the UK, running though the years to the current proposals.
    http://www.railnews.co.uk/content/documents/rn170_2011_year_of_sparks_effect.pdf (http://www.railnews.co.uk/content/documents/rn170_2011_year_of_sparks_effect.pdf)

    The map of the UK shown in the article, I can remember when the BRB DM&EE Electrification HQ was at Paddington in Tournament Hse in the 1990's had a very similar map colour coded to show existing (as was at the time) ac (red I think) and dc (blue I think) electrification also it showed the lines dotted for high priority and a paler shade for lesser priority.  The Western main lines was regarded as high priority to Swansea, even Plymouth vis both B & H and Bristol.   There was even a major feeding diagram which showed the location of all the Grid connections and all the track sectioning cabin locations.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 16, 2011, 00:39:08
    Would 9 5-car Voyagers (I think that's what runs entirely under the wires from Birmingham to Scotland) made into bi-modes cover the Cotswold line services? Also, would splitting the PAD - BRI - South-West services at Bristol (electric to Bristol, change onto a 125 at Bristol) and introducing extra PAD - South-West direct via Westbury services to compensate be acceptable, or is it a bad idea like making Cotswold line passengers change at Oxford?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 16, 2011, 06:39:57
    Bad idea anywhere.

    Second - where do you maintain these Voyagers?

    Thirdly - IF the voyagers were to be used as you suggest, what would XC use in replacement? And where do you suggedt those are maintained?

    Rather than pull suggestions out of thin air, cam you please make suggestions that make sense please? Because you've only make nonsensicsl ines so far.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 16, 2011, 09:59:49
    Bad idea anywhere.

    Second - where do you maintain these Voyagers?

    Thirdly - IF the voyagers were to be used as you suggest, what would XC use in replacement? And where do you suggedt those are maintained?

    Rather than pull suggestions out of thin air, cam you please make suggestions that make sense please? Because you've only make nonsensicsl ines so far.

    Regarding Voyagers for Cotswolds line, my main query was whether 9 5-car units were enough. Someone mentioned earlier that the 180s did the trick before, but as far as I know there aren't any 180s running entirely under the wires. Nonsensical? Does it make sense to build a small fleet of 9 (assuming that's correct) new gas guzzling IEP bi-modes, especially as we have a similar number of gas guzzling diesels, that have been under discussion of conversion to bi-mode, running entirely under the wires? I think not. This would be a lot simpler if attaching a loco to electric IEPs at Oxford wasn't the impossibility you've informed me of.

    Second, a good point about maintaining them (contrary to your belief, I've actually thought through most of this suggestion, but you've caught me out there). The question is, where do you maintain a similar small number of new diesel IEPs? Ok, they would share many more characteristics with the electric IEP stock than a Voyager would, but the diesel components would still require special treatment for a small fleet. I've just had an idea while writing this, perhaps the Cotswold Voyagers could have some diagrams end the day at Reading to allow the unit to be coupled with an XC Voyager passing through, which would go to wherever they are serviced (since the hub of XC is Birmingham and Virgin also operate Voyagers there I'm guessing the Voyager depot is there). Not ideal I admit, anyone got any better suggestions?

    Third, the Voyagers under the wires the whole way, running Birmingham to Glasgow and Edinburgh via the WCML are Virgin sets aren't they? In that case, the obvious thing to do is to replace them with something electric, to avoid a micro-fleet I would suggest Pendolinos of an appropriate length. Anyway, 5-car is apparently enough for the Cotswolds line, so the 221s from Virgin would go to XC, and pantograph cars would be ordered for all of them, making most 6-car. The 9 220s replaced by the 9 221s from Virgin would be sent to the Cotswolds with the addition of a pantograph car (making them 5-car). The other 220s would gain an electric pickup car (a pantograph car with 3rd rail shoes as well) for XCs services on the 3rd rail network (if 5-car won't be enough you could take this opportunity to add a trailer car as well to make them 6-car like the 221s).

    What about my query on the south-west services, does that idea make sense?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 16, 2011, 11:01:31
    Second, a good point about maintaining them (contrary to your belief, I've actually thought through most of this suggestion, but you've caught me out there). The question is, where do you maintain a similar small number of new diesel IEPs?

    If you needed economies of scale, together with the same sets on the East Coast, somerwhere close to (North or West) London - Old Oak Common?

    Quote
    I've just had an idea while writing this, perhaps the Cotswold Voyagers could have some diagrams end the day at Reading to allow the unit to be coupled with an XC Voyager passing through, which would go to wherever they are serviced (since the hub of XC is Birmingham and Virgin also operate Voyagers there I'm guessing the Voyager depot is there). Not ideal I admit, anyone got any better suggestions?

    Yes - the DFT is so far beating you hands down! Nothing you've yet come up with has beaten the current DfT thinking. I think you need to admit that you don't know enough about the rail network to be making DfT-beating thinking.

    RE your new suggestion.....You presyumably are intelligent enough to realise these couldn't all be attached to the one last northbound XC Voyager, and that they'd have to go probably one at a time - so xounting back up the timetable....what time woulod they have to start heading back to Birmingham each day? Probably in the height of the evening rush-hour, just when they'd be most wanted in service.

    And how do you get them all back down south in time to start the morning peak? mWhich by definition doesn't start close to Reading / London but way out in the sticks @ Hereford? I'm not sure any XC trains go down that line?.....

    Engage brain successfully please - this is another no-brainer....

    Can I ask how old you are?: Because if you're a teenager, I think we ought to give you credit...but otherwise I think you need to gain a lot more knowledge before making suggestions like this.

    Quote
    Third, the Voyagers under the wires the whole way, running Birmingham to Glasgow and Edinburgh via the WCML are Virgin sets aren't they? In that case, the obvious thing to do is to replace them with something electric, to avoid a micro-fleet I would suggest Pendolinos of an appropriate length.

    Are the rigs for Pendos still available? If they've been scrapped, that's too costly ann idea....also, for anything else stockwise - how many Voyagers do you think make that entire trip in a day? Wouldn't this be just as small a micro-fleet as you are trying to avoid?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 16, 2011, 16:14:05
    Second, a good point about maintaining them (contrary to your belief, I've actually thought through most of this suggestion, but you've caught me out there). The question is, where do you maintain a similar small number of new diesel IEPs?

    If you needed economies of scale, together with the same sets on the East Coast, somerwhere close to (North or West) London - Old Oak Common?
    The whole reason we are having this argument is that I think we need to avoid new diesel Intercity trains, mainly because of climate change but there's the financial risk of rising oil prices too. As I've said before, bi-mode only makes sense when the layout at the last wired station prohibits attaching a diesel loco (I guess it also makes sense for XC's Voyagers because they are cutting across between main routes with diesel sections both sides of the wired section). As Oxford is the only station where I've been told this could be a problem, there wouldn't be any IEP bi-modes on East Coast either.

    Quote
    Quote
    I've just had an idea while writing this, perhaps the Cotswold Voyagers could have some diagrams end the day at Reading to allow the unit to be coupled with an XC Voyager passing through, which would go to wherever they are serviced (since the hub of XC is Birmingham and Virgin also operate Voyagers there I'm guessing the Voyager depot is there). Not ideal I admit, anyone got any better suggestions?

    Yes - the DFT is so far beating you hands down! Nothing you've yet come up with has beaten the current DfT thinking. I think you need to admit that you don't know enough about the rail network to be making DfT-beating thinking.

    RE your new suggestion.....You presyumably are intelligent enough to realise these couldn't all be attached to the one last northbound XC Voyager, and that they'd have to go probably one at a time - so xounting back up the timetable....what time woulod they have to start heading back to Birmingham each day? Probably in the height of the evening rush-hour, just when they'd be most wanted in service.

    And how do you get them all back down south in time to start the morning peak? mWhich by definition doesn't start close to Reading / London but way out in the sticks @ Hereford? I'm not sure any XC trains go down that line?.....
    Assuming my rough estimate of 9 units is correct, and that the depot for Voyagers is in Birmingham, how many units would actually need to be stabled at the depot overnight? ATW park units overnight where there is no servicing facilities don't they (maybe at Carmarthen and/or Pwllheli?)? XC currently have 21:11 and 21:46 departures from Reading that could be used, and perhaps you could extend a later Oxford train to Birmingham as well, that's 3 units back to depot. In the morning, perhaps services from Birmingham to Bristol/Taunton/Plymouth could make an extra stop at Worcester to drop of a unit for Hereford. Most of what I'm suggesting is a compromise, but IEP is a huge and dangerous compromise, so I don't think the DfT is beating me hands down. If we didn't have any diesel IC trains running entirely under the wires then bi-mode IEP for that route only is not really avoidable. However we do have the diesel stock, provided there's enough of it. An IEP bi-mode micro fleet for the Cotswold line might just be beating what I've suggested for that route so far, but elsewhere it is a really stupid idea. I am not alone:
    Quote from: Christian Wolmar" link="www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2011/03/rail-666-new-trains-are-based-on-old-thinking
    rail industry sources suggest that Hammond has had the wool pulled over his eyes in numerous ways and  most specifically, on the question of why the design incorporates underfloor diesel engines when it would be far easier to simply have a locomotive haul the trains once the wires run out

    There has been some simplification of the order, but the muddled thinking behind it does not seem to have been addressed.  The diesel trains have been scrapped but more than 300 of the 533 carriages ^ just over a third of the original order and a strange number given that the trains will be in 5 coach units ^ are to be in hybrid trains. Everyone I talk to in the rail industry seems to think this is madness of the greatest order, based on a false notion ^ that it would be too slow to hitch up a diesel locomotive to the front of the train when the wires run out. Indeed, it has even been suggested to Hammond that it would be dangerous to have a diesel locomotive waiting at the appropriate place on the platform and therefore it would take nine minutes to connect the loco when, in fact, it could be done in less than half that time and would be a routine exercise provided there was the right signalling.

    Some of my ideas may be flawed and unworkable, that's why I'm putting them to forums to work out the kinks, but please don't try to claim bi-mode IEP is flawless. New Intercity diesel trains are undoubtedly a bad idea for the environment. It is better to make do and mend with what we've got, and electrify as much as we can. Where I might be going astray, is in finding the best way to make use of what we have.

    Quote
    Can I ask how old you are?: Because if you're a teenager, I think we ought to give you credit...but otherwise I think you need to gain a lot more knowledge before making suggestions like this.
    Born in 1990, completed a HND last year and in June I'll have finished my first year at university.

    Quote
    Quote
    Third, the Voyagers under the wires the whole way, running Birmingham to Glasgow and Edinburgh via the WCML are Virgin sets aren't they? In that case, the obvious thing to do is to replace them with something electric, to avoid a micro-fleet I would suggest Pendolinos of an appropriate length.

    Are the rigs for Pendos still available? If they've been scrapped, that's too costly ann idea....also, for anything else stockwise - how many Voyagers do you think make that entire trip in a day? Wouldn't this be just as small a micro-fleet as you are trying to avoid?
    As I said, I estimated 9 units. Needing confirmation of this is one of the reasons I posted the idea. As you say, I need to gain knowledge before making suggestions to the DfT. One of the comments under Wolmar's article suggested that's the only service Virgin use Voyagers for, which would be 20 sets I think. However, I Googled and they also use Voyagers for Chester and Holyhead services, which do go beyond the wires.

    As for Pendolinios, I think the original fleet was built at the now-closed Washwood Heath factory. If they can close the factory down yet still produce extra carriages and some all-new 11-car sets, building more for Birmingham - Scotland shouldn't be too much of a problem.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 16, 2011, 16:21:54
    Spend enough money & electrify the lot.

    There's the solution you're looking for.

    Now - persuade the taxpayer that we need to pay for it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 16, 2011, 18:21:06
    Spend enough money & electrify the lot.

    There's the solution you're looking for.

    Now - persuade the taxpayer that we need to pay for it.

    That's the solution I would go for, but the problem isn't just persuading the government to pay for it, you've also got to find the money and there probably simply isn't enough money available to do it all in one go. So I'm saying electrify certain chunks by 2020 (PAD to SWA, Bristol, Cheltenham, ValleyLines (funded, possibly along with CDF to SWA, by cancellation of the extra lane for part of the Heads Of The Valleys road) and possibly Weston-Super-Mare), buy electric IEPs (not the less powerful bi-modes DfT call electric, but true EMUs without a diesel engine in sight), add a few more sets to the Pendo order to get the Voyagers off their entirely electrified route and make do with our existing diesel stock until a slow but continuous program of electrification allows more routes to convert to electric stock.

    Does anyone know why the WCML is being gauge-cleared for IEP? I e-mailed the DfT to find out which routes would be cleared and WCML was on the list given in the reply, but the Pembroke Dock branch wasn't. That means Pembroke Dock will need it's own micro-fleet, Intercity 125s or Intercity 225s (225s being what I propose).

    Using 225s for all Cheltenham and Carmarthen services, along with Swansea ones (possibly all of them) would allow the cost of expanding the gauge on the Severn Tunnel diversionary route and Swansea to Carmarthen (possibly SWA - CDF too) to take 26m coaches to be diverted to electrification. The work being done on the WCML to clear it for IEP would certainly be a candidate for cutting to pay for more extensive electrification, as a non-tilting IEP would probably not be able to keep time on most services. If anyone knows how much these gauge clearances would cost, that would be useful too.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 16, 2011, 18:54:49
    Quote
    gas guzzling IEP bi-modes

    Now let me see, in order to generate electricity, you need power stations, which guzzle lots of coal, gas, oil and uranium. Renewables make up a very small part of this country's generating capacity, so unless you're about to advocate spending billions more that we don't have on covering the countryside and ringing the coast with wind turbines, we will continue to have to have a spread of generating capacity, relying on fossil fuels, just like diesel traction, for years to come.

    Quote
    This would be a lot simpler if attaching a loco to electric IEPs at Oxford wasn't the impossibility you've informed me of.

    No-one ever said impossible, just difficult and time-consuming, as it would be at other stations where wires end, eg Leeds and Edinburgh, and where loco-release facilities and stabling sidings were torn out years ago because they were no longer needed. And your environmentally-friendly policy revolves, unless it has changed yet again in the past week, on using ancient diesels, with ancient engines, which guzzle lots of fuel.

    Quote
    since the hub of XC is Birmingham and Virgin also operate Voyagers there I'm guessing the Voyager depot is there

    Again, do some research. The depot is at Barton-under-Needwood - as far north-east of Birmingham as Worcester is south-west of it - ie lots of empty-running, again not environmentally-friendly.

    Quote
    The 9 220s replaced by the 9 221s from Virgin would be sent to the Cotswolds

    No thanks, we don't want trains with lots of large (smelly) toilets and cramped interiors with pitifully few seats. And you are forgetting the need to provide extra capacity on the London-Oxford leg, so you need trains that can operate together - and more than nine of them.

    Quote
    we need to avoid new diesel Intercity trains

    Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world. Large parts of the network are not electrified, we still have no coherent plan to do more wiring, so you need to be realistic about the situation and that means that we will need to build some new trains with diesel engines.

    Quote
    IEP is a huge and dangerous compromise

    Dangerous in what way? If you mean carbon emissions, we may be no saints in this country but compared with the US and China, we most certainly are - those are the two countries most at fault and unsurprisingly, the two least inclined to clean up their acts. And as I pointed out last week, or was it the week before, the further wiring extends over the years, the fewer and fewer miles bi-modes would actually end up running on diesel anyway.

    Quote
    please don't try to claim bi-mode IEP is flawless. New Intercity diesel trains are undoubtedly a bad idea for the environment

    And who said it was flawless? No-one. We all recognise bi-mode is a compromise - your obsession with lumbering diesels dragging stuff around is just as much of a compromise, in case you hadn't noticed.

    Quote
    there probably simply isn't enough money available to do it all in one go

    Too right there isn't.

    Please forget wiring to Cheltenham - it's not going to happen until XC wiring, if that ever happens. The WAG is not going to pay for your fantasy wiring from Cardiff to Gloucester and the Goverment isn't going to pay to wire Swindon-Gloucester for an occasional weekend of diversions - in terms of passenger traffic, the Cotswold Line is more important than the London-Cheltenham route.

    Quote
    Does anyone know why the WCML is being gauge-cleared for IEP

    In earlier IEP plans, there was going to be a batch for Northampton-Euston fast trains, so it may be that DfT, being DafT, have forgotten this has been dropped, not that I can see there being any insuperable obstacles to operating a 26m coach on most of the WCML as it stands now anyway. Apart from the driving cars, all Class 390 Pendolino trailers are 23.9m long.

    As for Pembroke Dock and IC225, give it a rest.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 16, 2011, 19:28:48
    Using us to write your 1st year thesis is getting extremely annoying / boring - can you at least engage brain & do some proper research rather than continually pick our brains & immediately ignore the advice?

    You are currently having a wet dream with the public purse and your rather fantastic ideas. Now go & read what those with experience write on other fora & ingest, rather than read ours & ignore! Try uk.rail on google groups.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on April 17, 2011, 00:01:45
    caugh caugh......moving on children


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Ollie on April 17, 2011, 01:43:37
    Using us to write your 1st year thesis is getting extremely annoying / boring - can you at least engage brain & do some proper research rather than continually pick our brains & immediately ignore the advice?

    You are currently having a wet dream with the public purse and your rather fantastic ideas. Now go & read what those with experience write on other fora & ingest, rather than read ours & ignore! Try uk.rail on google groups.

    The coffee shop is for discussion, and that is exactly what is being created. Just because you don't like what is being said doesn't give you the right to be outright rude to other members on this forum who are purely just putting forward an idea.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 17, 2011, 08:12:46
    Indeed, you are right. Mods, please remove my post & those that follow. Time to ignore, rather than bite.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on April 17, 2011, 10:54:10
    Can I just also add to the wcml comment on gauge clearance, could it not be freight?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on April 17, 2011, 17:11:51
    This would be a lot simpler if attaching a loco to electric IEPs at Oxford wasn't the impossibility you've informed me of.

    No-one ever said impossible, just difficult and time-consuming, as it would be at other stations where wires end, eg Leeds and Edinburgh, and where loco-release facilities and stabling sidings were torn out years ago because they were no longer needed. And your environmentally-friendly policy revolves, unless it has changed yet again in the past week, on using ancient diesels, with ancient engines, which guzzle lots of fuel.

    The loss of engine release facilities is the real tradegy if it wasn't for this the DaFT wouldn't be coming up with the bi-mode.

    NSE at Cambridge used to do a swap 86 for 47 in 3 minutes. Coupling a loco on the front of an electric unit ought to be less than a mnute. Provided they have compatible auto couplers and software. As for the numbers involved a small build of new locos meeting the Euro emmission standards isn't going to be that expensive. Allegedly (third hand) Haywards Heath has joined two units in 14 seconds.

    Certainly at Hamm and Hanover where they join and split ICE 2 the rear unit comes up to stationary unit and couples staight up. They don't even shut the doors on the front unit.


    Another thought why aren't the 5 car IEPs going to be gangwayed throughout. 1 TM 1 caterer maybe even ubits with and without catering C(I)EPS and B(I)EPS..   I see no reason why an auto opening gangway could not be devised with suitable interlocks to lock the doors when the units separate and open them when the sets join..


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 17, 2011, 18:07:27
    Can I just also add to the wcml comment on gauge clearance, could it not be freight?

    Freight wagons have a completely different profile to passenger stock.

    Quote
    The loss of engine release facilities is the real tradegy if it wasn't for this the DaFT wouldn't be coming up with the bi-mode.

    Sorry? They've come up with it because many inter-city services run off the core lines that are to be electrified under current plans. Why on earth would the railway have retained costly engine release facilities when there were no engines to release? And while you can swop a loco/join units in a short time, you still have to do basic stuff like brake tests before moving off, so it isn't quite so quick. Gangwayed sets are a no-no because of the strength needed at the front of the train to protect the passenger compartment in case of a crash at high speed. 

     
    Quote
    a small build of new locos

    Find me a manufacturer that wants to build a small batch of diesel locos to a peculiar loading gauge which are able to handle a demanding duty cycle of constant stops and starts like the Cotswold Line - and again I question how small this batch would be, given the numbers that would actually be needed just to operate an hourly service out to Worcester/Malvern/Hereford, never mind any of the other places off the wires, along with the economics of a loco hauling around five-coach trains all the time. There is a reason why railways everywhere are going over to multiple unit operation.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 17, 2011, 18:08:50
    The problem with set to set connecting corridors is in part the aerodynamic shaped front end required for a 125+ train also currently there are no connecting corridor trains that are passed to run over 100mph.

    There is more to just a set of engine release sidings such locations would require crew rest rooms and could even require booking on points, its not only DfT that want bimode the ToCs would not want the coupling uncoupling of locos for such a short run as London Oxford


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on April 17, 2011, 18:15:51
    I've seen the flip side where auto-coupling and uncoupling has failed.

    Last year at Haywards Heath I saw two units fail to separate and one service was caped with the rear unit dragged empty to Brighton.

    Also at Bristol Temple Meads some months back I watched 2 x XC Voyagers try for over 40 mins to couple. The process appeared to be to gradually bump noses harder and harder! Staff eventually de-trained everyone in the front unit and they then had further attempts with increasingly hard bumps, but the couplers weren't having it. No matter which unit was driven into the other they just wouldn't marry. Crew gave up in the end and I heard that the second unit ran in a relief path behind the first as far as Derby.

    I'd be seriously concerned about reliability following any attempt to retrofit ageing diesel locos with auto-coupling gear. Or the waste of money that a new build small fleet of diesel locos whose only purpose is to drag units away from the wires. Much rather see a seemless switch from overhead to onboard diesel power.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on April 17, 2011, 18:19:56
    Quote from me
    Quote
    Can I just also add to the wcml comment on gauge clearance, could it not be freight?

    Quote from willc
    Quote
    Freight wagons have a completely different profile to passenger stock.

    will, you didn't really read what i wrote or read the posts above it then did you?

    or maybe you did, are you confirming that the wcml has had gauge clearance for freight due to the difference in profile compared to passenger stock

    or do you not actually know?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 17, 2011, 23:55:58
    I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to. According to Rhydgaled, DfT specifically said the WCML would be cleared for use by IEP - and I was suggesting that this could be accounted for by the previous plan to use IEP on Northampton fasts, which is no longer happening - it is perfectly possible they may not have updated the route clearance paperwork to reflect that change of plan yet. And that wouldn't be surprising given how many times the project has changed over the years.

    If the person responding for DfT just looked for references to WCML gauge clearance generally, then they would have found lots of stuff about W10 gauge clearance, which has been carried out all the way to Glasgow - but that is to allow 9ft 6in containers on standard flat wagons, and clearance for these would be neither here nor there in terms of passenger stock, which has a different profile, being lower, longer, with stepboards, etc. The key point about W10 is providing clearance at the top of the train to accommodate the containers. A standard container flat is 60ft, so much shorter than a 23.9m or 26m coach, and a container flat and its load is narrower than a passenger coach's body.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on April 18, 2011, 00:39:23
    thank you for clearing that up will, i was simply asking a question about someone else's post,and at the time of reading your first reply i may have taken it the wrong way for which i am sorry


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on April 28, 2011, 10:08:06
    Further article in the south wales evening post today about the DFT deciding not to extend the wires to Swansea:

    http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/news/MP-alleges-weaknesses-rail-electrification-findings/article-3497799-detail/article.html



    I do hope either the DFT change their minds or the welsh assembly  can find the money for it as it would enable a reduction in the number of Bi-mode IEP's with more 8 carriage emu's being ordered


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2011, 10:26:14
    Can't be long before the order is placed, can it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 28, 2011, 10:59:31
    No desperate urgency, since the first trains aren't needed for four years or so, to start testing ahead of 2016 entry into service, so still wriggle room to see if they can stitch up a deal to wire to Swansea in conjunction with Valley Lines electrification. Last month all the DfT did was reconfirm Hitachi/Agility as preferred bidder and the reopening of negotiations with them on a contract. Indication was this and Agility putting finance in place would take most of the rest of this year.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2011, 11:03:47
    Agility have just confirmed that their will be three (diesel) engines under a 5car dual-mode IEP.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 28, 2011, 11:51:02
    Part of the problem with running the wires to Swansea is Signaling and Telecoms systems imunisation, however there are plans to resignal the Swansea / Cardiff line but this is a little way off, it will be started until after the GWML effected by electrification is done. 

    A few other things may speed up the full electrification to Swansea; the political will of the Welsh Assembly post the elections next week, the GW franchise tendering process, the future of Network Rail (if NR becomes history the future cohesion of electrification and resignalling could become history too)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: willc on April 28, 2011, 11:56:09
    I'm not aware they had ever said (since the announcement at the start of March) that it wouldn't have three engines.

    And here's an interesting one for the proponents of a big locomotive with a big diesel engine. DB has just ordered 20 new diesel locos, with an option for up to 180 more - with four small engines in them. http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/news/single-view/view/db-regio-orders-multi-engine-traxx-diesel-locomotives.html


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2011, 12:06:40
    Odd then that their website merntions a change in spec. Looks as though you missed that.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on April 28, 2011, 12:16:47
    Agility have just confirmed that their will be three (diesel) engines under a 5car dual-mode IEP.

    Odd then that their website merntions a change in spec. Looks as though you missed that.

    ChrisB. Rather than post information without sources and then follow it up with a snidey, 'I know something you don't' post, how about providing a url?

    I've looked at Agility Trains' (http://www.agilitytrains.com/index.htm) website and am struggling to find the information you are referring to.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 02, 2011, 19:03:36
    You're right, I thought they'd have added it by now. I was talking to an Agility rep at a conference.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 02, 2011, 19:12:52
    You're right, I thought they'd have added it by now. I was talking to an Agility rep at a conference.
    There's the down fall a "rep" and not a design engineer or project manager


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 02, 2011, 19:16:57
    He was involved in the project.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: woody on May 02, 2011, 22:26:38
    According to the latest May 2011 ^Modern Railway^ magazine in a speech during a visit to Swansea on April 1st,Prime Minister David Cameron said that he was looking at extending the wires to Swansea.The mags ^Informed Sources^column says that Cardiff-Swansea could be wired for well under ^100million,the cost saving of fewer bi-modes covering the return on investment and adding that with 45 bi-modes in the March 1st announcement the minimum viable quantity there is all to play for.
      Also it says Network Rail is debating the location for commissioning its electrification factory train due in 2013 known with the acronym HOOP(High Output Overhead-line Plant) with one suggestion that it be used on the Cardiff-Swansea line with the commissioning budget helping to partially offsett the cost of electrification there.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 03, 2011, 05:18:32
    That was originally a suggestion on ukrail newsgroup.

    MR journos monitor there for their editorial....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on May 03, 2011, 17:32:42
    And similar suggestions have been made across many rail forums.

    Do you not think Roger Ford might actually be talking to people in the industry who wish to remain off the record rather than just picking up speculation from the internet.

    ChrisB, you do a great disservice to Modern Railway's journalists by suggesting their editorial is gleaned from internet speculation.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 03, 2011, 17:35:53
    It's true, though. I have caught them out several times specific to FGW. Where he's printed something incorrectly, and FGW tell you that he hasn't checked in with them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on May 03, 2011, 17:37:22
    Perhaps because someone in FGW is speaking off the record?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on May 03, 2011, 17:56:18
    I think Roger Ford built his reputation long before the Internet. Now insiders know they can trust him "off the record".


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 03, 2011, 18:37:17
    If that's the case (and i'm sure he is is briefed off-record at times) on these occasions I'm referring to, then he was fed incorrect info. More likely, picked it up from ukr, as that's where I'd also read it prior to it appearing in MR.


    Not sure what the deadline-to-newstand timeframe is, but he's been caught out 2 or 3 times recently (last 9 months or so) - and the info couldn't have changed in that time. He rarely prints corrections in following pieces either, where he's made errors.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 05, 2011, 11:36:45
    Are you suggesting he should rename his articles to 'Misinformed Sources'?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 05, 2011, 11:57:01
     :P :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Andrew1939 from West Oxon on May 05, 2011, 12:00:04
    I thought this was about GWML electrification!.
    Lets cut out this nonsense blagging of one against the other and only put in news about the electrification plans.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: FarWestJohn on May 06, 2011, 11:26:24
    Some very interesting technical information here on GW electrification:

    "In an exclusive and wide-ranging interview, our editor Grahame Taylor has been talking with Peter Dearman, Network Rail^s Head of Network Electrification."

    http://www.rail.co/2011/04/28/electrification-delivering-the-transformation/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 06, 2011, 13:08:58
    Some very interesting technical information here on GW electrification:

    "In an exclusive and wide-ranging interview, our editor Grahame Taylor has been talking with Peter Dearman, Network Rail^s Head of Network Electrification."

    http://www.rail.co/2011/04/28/electrification-delivering-the-transformation/

    Peter Dearman cut his teeth on the East Coast electrification in the 1980's he was the Area Electrification Engineer for the whole of the ECML in the 90's when all other routes such as the WCML 5

    If Network Rail (so long as it survives) can get the GWML done on time and to or below cost then that will ensure more routes are electrified, this article outlines the difficulties there are with electrifying a railway it is not just a simple matter of banging masts in the ground


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 06, 2011, 13:22:25
    Yet more confirmation from someone who knows what he's on about that the Severn Tunnel is not a problem

    Bet it doesn't stop posts in various forums claiming that it isn't possible though...   ;D

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on May 06, 2011, 18:28:41
    See also http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=3633.msg28413#msg28413 from 2008 ... ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on May 11, 2011, 00:23:08

    I was interested to read that one of the Feeder Stations/GSP's is to be at Melksham !

    Will the feed to Thingley go overhead ?

    Hope Grahame is pleased.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 11, 2011, 07:02:25

    I was interested to read that one of the Feeder Stations/GSP's is to be at Melksham !

    Will the feed to Thingley go overhead ?

    Hope Grahame is pleased.

    OTC
    The Grid site may well be at Melksham as there is a convenient Grid site, the 50kV (+25 / 0 / -25) feeder cables will I suspect be laid in the public highway, across private land (wayleave) and or along the railway in trough route to a railway feeder station, this is actually a very typical way the existing 25kV railways are fed the Grid site being several miles away from the railway.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Cruithne3753 on May 11, 2011, 18:02:49
    I'm curious about the details of where the wires will go... will EMUs be able to run between Bristol and Cardiff?  How far SW from Temple Meads will they go for commuter trains etc or have these not been finalised yet?  Are there any "blow up" maps?  All I've seen just show the overview.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Zoe on May 11, 2011, 18:05:08
    How far SW from Temple Meads will they go for commuter trains etc or have these not been finalised yet?  Are there any "blow up" maps?  All I've seen just show the overview.
    Under the current plan the wires will end at Bristol, commuter trains to Weston and Taunton will remain DMU operated.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 11, 2011, 18:17:16
    And EMU's would be able to run Bristol to Cardiff as the Temple Meads to Patchway diversionary route is being electrified.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 11, 2011, 20:09:34
    I believe the only EMU services planned are the Thames / Kennett Valley with cascaded 319's from Thameslink, I have not heard of any proposals to use EMUs in the Bristol / Cardiff area.  The thing about electrification is once it hits an area the TOC's want to make more use of it so my guess is the business case will be made to extend the wires and operate EMUs


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on May 17, 2011, 10:43:28
    There might be a case to split Cardiff-Pompy at BRI and use EMUs for the electrified bit


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 17, 2011, 10:46:39
    People won't want to change trains....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on May 17, 2011, 10:56:59
    Wasn't FGW  & network rail etc looking at the possibility if they could be cleared for the route to use the class 166's on the Cardiff - Portsmouth Services?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 17, 2011, 12:43:51
    News to me.....rumours abound though.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 17, 2011, 14:18:53
    Wasn't FGW  & network rail etc looking at the possibility if they could be cleared for the route to use the class 166's on the Cardiff - Portsmouth Services?

    Yes - it has been mentioned in the various Network Rail annual 'route business plans' for three or four years now, and has definitely been discussed in this forum before.  So it's more than a rumour. 

    It would require appropriate gauge clearance though.  The subject is usually raised in the context of how the 165/6 cannot possibly be used anywhere away from their current routes; however I'd point out that they were recently cleared between Redhill and Selhurst, and between Basingstoke and Guildford via Woking, in the run up to last Christmas's diversions.  Ths didn't appear to require any significant structure work, so it shouldn't be assumed there would be any major problems anywhere else.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on May 17, 2011, 14:47:37
    People won't want to change trains....

    I agree, but I suspect that we might long term see service pattern changes.  The ability to run EMUs from Cardiff to Taunton would strengthen the case for electrification beyond Bristol


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: devon_metro on May 17, 2011, 14:48:29
    People won't want to change trains....

    The main flows end at Bristol though. Whenever I travel on Portsmouth/Cardiff services I always join and leave at Bristol, and it seems the majority of passengers do the same.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 17, 2011, 15:00:50
    So you make the case for not wiring BRI to Taunton then....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on May 17, 2011, 18:06:36
    I've often wondered what the problem with the 165/166s is when it comes to gauge clearance. They seem to operate on a fairly wide cross section of routes at the moment. What's the main issue regarding them working further afield?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on May 17, 2011, 18:24:37
    So you make the case for not wiring BRI to Taunton then....

    I don't see the point of stopping the wires at Tauton it gives no real operation advantage except for local EMU's serving stations to Bristol and Cardiff.

    You'd still be looking at diesel or bi mode for services fro Exeter and beyond fro both FGW and  XC services.

    The logical places to stop the wires from Bristol are Exmouth, Paignton and Plymouth. With Berks and Hants infill.

    Just think of diesel you'd save on the Devon banks. 4000hp at top revs must suck in an awful lot of precious fuel.

    Having got to Plymouth then Penzance plus the Cornish branches must be the next goal. To basically eliminate diesel West of Plymouth.

    As the line speeds are basically low it must be possible to use a lighter catenery than for London to Bristol and therefore reduce the overall cost.

    I just hope Network rail can electrify the GWML to budget and ontime so that there is enough confidence to allow the electrification teams to just keep going West.

    That's why loco haulage with swaps between Diesel and Electric locos makes sense the changover moves as the wires progress.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 17, 2011, 18:33:15
    I've often wondered what the problem with the 165/166s is when it comes to gauge clearance. They seem to operate on a fairly wide cross section of routes at the moment. What's the main issue regarding them working further afield?

    Personally, I think I'd file it under railway myths. 

    As has been discussed fairly regularly elsewhere, there is a world of difference between 'can't be cleared' and 'hasn't been cleared yet'. 

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on May 17, 2011, 18:40:08
    When steam still reigned supreme GW outside cylinder locos such as Halls and Granges were banned form Salisbury to Easleigh and Southampton whilst they were cleared for Reading to Bournemouth and Portsmouth (via Botley).

    Something to do with tight clearance by platfoms. Hence GW engines were taken off at Salisbury and an ancient T9 took their place. If you lucky you might have got a West Country.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 18, 2011, 09:12:12
    It's a matter of clearance - and paying for platforms / bridges / possibly tunnels to be altered.

    There was mention of the possibility of turbos to Westbury during the next Reading blockade, so that may be where they start.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on May 19, 2011, 01:21:24
    I've often wondered what the problem with the 165/166s is when it comes to gauge clearance. They seem to operate on a fairly wide cross section of routes at the moment. What's the main issue regarding them working further afield?

    Personally, I think I'd file it under railway myths. 

    As has been discussed fairly regularly elsewhere, there is a world of difference between 'can't be cleared' and 'hasn't been cleared yet'. 

    Paul
    165/166s are supposedly slightly wider than other stock. I've found the following material that may be helpful to this discussion:
    • RSSB - T787 (http://www.rssb.co.uk/sitecollectiondocuments/pdf/reports/research/T787_rb2_final.pdf)
    • Might be the same as the above, but has a different filename (http://www.rssb.co.uk/sitecollectiondocuments/pdf/reports/research/T787_rb_final.pdf)
    • RSSB - T787 Appendix B-G - This is the big one. (http://www.rssb.co.uk/sitecollectiondocuments/pdf/reports/research/T787_appsB_G_final.pdf)

    Note particularly:
    Quote
    The Class 166 has the most limited alternative deployment because of its wider body profile. The Class 166 was built for use on Great Western routes, historically built to a wider gauge
    From the maps, (if I'm interpereting them correctly) it looks like a small area east and north of Newcastle could be a suitable location for deployment (picked that one out because it isn't in the GW region and may help Northern replace Pacers). I'd suggest putting them on Bristol - Taunton myself (after electrifcation, which might split CDF - Taunton at Bristol) but the maps seem to suggest they will not fit on that route.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 19, 2011, 02:09:38
    Interesting links, Rhydgaled, thanks.

    Though one thing struck me, and that's how many more routes are suddenly opened up to Turbos (and other traction) should these 10% or less structures be modified.  All sorts of opportunities are then opened up such are sending them to ATW to work the Aberystwyth services leading to 158's being transferred to strengthen Pompey to Cardiff services. Just an example by the way! 

    Though, forgive me for being a little pessimistic on the accuracy of the report, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though?  And how come Turbos have visited Weymouth and Llandudno over the years on excursion trains, when all routes to those destinations are, according to the diagrams, red for no-go?  Anyone?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 19, 2011, 08:16:28
    Though, forgive me for being a little pessimistic on the accuracy of the report, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though?  And how come Turbos have visited Weymouth and Llandudno over the years on excursion trains, when all routes to those destinations are, according to the diagrams, red for no-go?  Anyone?
    It might be they are cleared at reduced speed that may be ok for an excursion but not acceptable for normal service.

    Not all the 165/6's will be released post the TV area GWML electrification the branches (Greenford, Windsor, Marlow, Henley) will remain diesel like wise North Downs, Reading Basingstoke, beyond Newbury to Great Bedwin, I would guess perhaps 50% of the fleet will remain in the TV area.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 19, 2011, 09:35:54
    Indeed, along with 15 or so HSTs to run the PLY/PNZ services.

    It's the cost of platform & bridge clearance that is the concern. With zero money in the coffers to do this, it again goes back to the DfT to 'allow' these costs to be offset within a project.

    For example, the Reading re-modelling might be used to get clearances for turbos to run beyond Bedwyn.....if the HST was proving to be expensive to run & not carrying many passengers.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Zoe on May 19, 2011, 09:54:33
    For example, the Reading re-modelling might be used to get clearances for turbos to run beyond Bedwyn
    165s/166s are already cleared as far as Castle Cary.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 19, 2011, 09:59:34
    Indeed, they could go further....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Zoe on May 19, 2011, 10:04:16
    Indeed, they could go further....
    Not sure you'd get them through the Dawlish tunnels though so would rule out use in the Westcountry even though they would be suitable for regional services there.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 19, 2011, 10:10:38
    Tunnels & bridges would need work, indeed.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on May 19, 2011, 11:49:02
    Interesting links, Rhydgaled, thanks.
    I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though? 

    Only thing I can think of is that the 166s have "sticking out" bits of air conditioning units?  Or does the extra weight of the air con units (at the top of the train making them a bit top heavy?) cause them to sit lower on their suspension or bounce about the track a bit more?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Andrew1939 from West Oxon on May 19, 2011, 16:54:24
    I recall that many years ago the Class 165/6 Thames Turbos were sometimes sent to Eastleigh for some maintenance work that could not be carried out at Reading. It was necessary to remove all the steps at the carriage doors as they would otherwise have fouled some platforms on the way to Eastleigh. Of course it was possible to do this because they were running empty stock out of service.
    CLPG also ran a charter train from Thames Trains using a Class 166 Turbo on 14 June 1997 to Weymouth and I don't recall any clearance problems for that trip. There is a picture of the Turbo at weymouth station at http://www.clpg.co.uk/sptrns3.htm


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 19, 2011, 17:17:06
    The point I was trying to make (when mentioning Redhill - Selhurst and Guildford - Woking - Basingstoke) is that infrastructure problems may not be anything like as much of a stopper as some people believe.  The above routes are presumably not built to GW greater clearances - but was any physical work done to clear the stock?  None that I heard of.

    Removing stop boards used to be required for 442s en route to Ilford on the NLL - but it could be anything between one platform edge or all of them, as an example.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 19, 2011, 17:18:36
    PLatform edges, bridges & tunnels are the likely problems


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on May 19, 2011, 17:39:44
    Don't HSTs have a problem when diverted onto the Reading-Waterloo line. I remember reading somewhere that they had issues with some platform edges. Not sure what they did about it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 19, 2011, 17:40:37
    Indeed, and of the three Chris has listed, only tunnels present problems that are likely to be too costly to solve, especially as Paul points out, if it's only the odd structure on the route.  Taking some stone cutters to the odd bit of platform edge really isn't prohibitively expensive.  That's where the difference in the 'current' and 'with less than 10% of structures modified' graphs are interesting as, at a guess, more than double the route mileage suddenly opens up.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: coachflyer on May 19, 2011, 17:47:40
    Mark Hopwood stated in a staff meet the MD session at Reading this week that if they won the franchise that they might be prepared to pay for the electrification of the Greenford, Henley and Windsor branches. Marlow would be a problem due to the length of trains that can get from Bourne End to Marlow. Also the feasibility of doing the infill of third rail to Gatwick.

    He also stated that the type of stock to be used has not yet been confirmed with discussions ongoing about possibly ordering new trains with the 380's now arriving at Scot Rail being mentioned.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 19, 2011, 18:13:04
    Don't HSTs have a problem when diverted onto the Reading-Waterloo line. I remember reading somewhere that they had issues with some platform edges. Not sure what they did about it.

    They didn't do anything about it IIRC - certainly the recent diversions avoided the significant problem areas on the route, such as at Ascot. 

    Distilled from various discussions elsewhere, the main problem is almost certainly just the access ladders on the power car leading bogies.  There are a number of platforms on the Reading to Virginia Water section where HSTs are limited to little more than walking pace.

    Not part of your question bobm, but to save another post I've just remembered something about step boards regarding the SN 377/2s, the dual voltage units used temporarily on Thameslink a couple of years ago.  In this case the units were out of gauge somewhere, so they had the stepboards replaced with a set a couple of centimetres narrower.  Just as an example of what can be done to gauge clear otherwise unusable stock.  For an ECS trip to a depot you would just remove fouling stepboards, but that doesn't mean the whole thing is foul of gauge, it could be a matter of millimetres - so it would be cost effective to alter if stock was being moved for passenger use somewhere.

    Paul 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on September 26, 2011, 18:13:43
    A new story about electrification west of cardiff:

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/09/26/case-for-electrifying-railways-slammed-as-flawed-over-omissions-91466-29485757/



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 26, 2011, 18:24:24
    A further IEP depot to be built @ Swansea, according to a FGW brief


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on September 26, 2011, 18:43:07
    That would make sense.  There's about 8 HST's serviced there every night so you wouldn't want that many IEP's having to come ECS from Cardiff or Bristol every morning!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on September 26, 2011, 20:35:37
    A further IEP depot to be built @ Swansea, according to a FGW brief

    All I've read in the past is new stabling sidings for IEP at Swansea, no mention of an actual depot. I think the source wasn't a FGW brief though, so maybe you're quoting new information.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 26, 2011, 21:36:06
    Agility submitted a planning application to the local council last week, is the news that FGW passed on. Mayve a search of the council's planning srction on their website?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: homsar on October 07, 2011, 22:35:39
    Agility submitted a planning application to the local council last week, is the news that FGW passed on. Mayve a search of the council's planning srction on their website?

    You mean something like this (http://www2.swansea.gov.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=600604&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/swansea_noborder/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/swansea_noborder/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING)?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on October 08, 2011, 21:14:41
    Thank you for that link, homsar. And a very warm welcome to the Coffee Shop.  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: homsar on October 09, 2011, 13:44:34
    You're welcome! I've been stalking this thread for over a year, and I live in Swansea (and have recently browsed planning applications for other reasons), so thought I could finally contribute something back :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 09, 2011, 19:49:41
    Much appreciated.  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 15, 2011, 23:06:28
    Electrifcation depot to be at Swindon

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-15743070 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-15743070)

    Quote
    A ^3m factory train depot is to be built in Swindon as part of Network Rail's ^800m plan to electrify the line from London Paddington to Cardiff.

    The new depot will house a ^55m "factory train" which it is said will install overhead power lines along the track with the "minimum of disruption".

    A new independent business unit to "take control of the renewed Western route" will also be based in Swindon.

    Patrick Hallgate, from Network Rail, said it was ideally located.

    Mr Hallgate, Network Rail Western's new route managing director, said: "Swindon is our regional head quarters.

    "We've got about 500 staff here and control all aspects of the route from Paddington down to Penzance.

    "The factory train allows us to put the wires up in the air at a speed which allows us to run trains and minimise disruption throughout the years which the project is being undertaken.

    "And Swindon is ideally located - it's in the middle of the route and it allows us to get from one end to the other causing minimum disruption."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 15, 2011, 23:13:09
    Quote
    "And Swindon is ideally located - it's in the middle of the route....."

    Precisely the reason Brunel and Gooch sited their Locomotive & Carriage Works there. Shows that there aren't really any new ideas.......

    Good news for Swindon, but will it lead to some sort of permanent facility?



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 16, 2011, 06:21:21
    NR already have a major office there - are you referring to a works depot?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on November 16, 2011, 09:31:46
    Another good reasion to restore the Wilts and Berks and North Wilts canals to bring supplies for the factory train!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 16, 2011, 11:13:36
    Why not simply bring them by rail?....(sorry)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on November 17, 2011, 11:08:43
    Canal or rail doesn't matter both are good, but I do wonder just how much stuff will come via the M4


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on November 17, 2011, 11:23:14
    They also had a refreshment stop for all trains at Swindon - although that wasn't so popular!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on November 23, 2011, 08:03:57
    I'm surprised they've not chosen Moreton Cutting as an electrification depot still seems an ideal place already flat.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 23, 2011, 20:17:48
    I thought that was where they were relocating the High Output Depot from Reading.  would there have been room for both?



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 23, 2011, 21:10:33
    I'm surprised they've not chosen Moreton Cutting as an electrification depot still seems an ideal place already flat.
    Swindon is better placed as it is in the middle, Brunel was a cleaver chap putting his works there, its called revolution .............. of the wheel its just coming full circle the more complex areas to do tunnels etc are in the West.  Also when the Cardiff Valley lines are done and should Bristol Exeter be considered it will be well placed


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on November 27, 2011, 13:00:14
    I attended a very interesting presentation last Thursday by Tony Hegarty of NR, who is in charge of the signalling part of the GW upgrade. Much of what he said would be familiar but the following might be of interest (in no particular order). His talk didn't cover west of the Severn Tunnel.

    Resignalling to be complete by Dec 15, with the Temple Meads area last. There has been a step change in technology over the last couple of years, so even the original installations in the TV Signalling Centre are now several times larger than the latest kit. 

    Swindon to Kemble Redoubling (S2K) will be completed in April 14, aligning with the transfer of Swindon East to TVSC.
     
    Wiring to start Jan 14 in the Didcot area, and to be complete in just over two years, with Bristol area being the latest, finishing mid 16.

    New trains in timetable service Dec 16.

    Filton Bank will be four tracked after the wiring is put in place (ie wires with no tracks underneath!), and will need a new viaduct over the M32.

    All relief lines will be electrified (although the diagram on the floor of the room showed that most freight loops will remain unelectrified, though those at Bathampton and between Swindon and Didcot would be).

    The lines into Portbury and Avonmouth will be electrified, as it's a requirement of making the route fit for european freight operators. Though he then contradicted himself by saying that NR was reluctant to do them until they had a firm commitment from users that they would use electric traction.

    98 bridges etc will need replacing, although most Brunel structures are OK, it's the ones added subsequently which will go.

    There has been a directive from on high regarding the use of much lighter signalling structures. So no more foundations the size of a small family car. One gantry can cost over ^1m, and this will be reduced by at least 60%.

    Most signals will remain in place, given that cost of moving them and the limited time before ETRM is implemented. On that subject, apparently the problem with drivers on the Cambrian was solved by changing their shirts from white to blue!!

    Hope this is of interest.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on November 27, 2011, 16:00:29
    If the wires do go to Portbury, they should hurry up and get the Portishead branch re-opened and wired as well.

    I wouldnt mind a service between Portishead & Bristol Parkway.

    If they do wire to Avonmouth I wonder if the line to Severn beach will also be done, stupid if it isn't.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on November 27, 2011, 17:43:09

    98 bridges etc will need replacing, although most Brunel structures are OK, it's the ones added subsequently which will go.


    That was of great interest - particulary the paragraph above, which confirms my theory that IKB did have a crystal ball after all.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 27, 2011, 20:51:47
    Yes, indeed: thanks very much for that extremely interesting report, John R.  ;)

    I agree with BerkshireBugsy - IKB did indeed build his GWR with future-proofing included!  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 29, 2011, 01:18:19
    Thanks for that update, John.

    98 bridges etc will need replacing, although most Brunel structures are OK, it's the ones added subsequently which will go.

    Looks like some of those structures will get the treatment imminently.  I've counted 5 structures where there are civil engineering gangs present preparing for some serious works on bridges soon, two of which are Brunel structures I think.

    Not sure that it's directly connected to the electrification programme, but there's the footbridge at Kennington, a minor road bridge at Lower Basildon, the western and easternmost of the four bridges at Purley, and also one of the minor road bridges at White Waltham.

    The Westbury Lane bridge at Purley (the westernmost of the bridges there) has been mentioned before when there was controversy over dismantling it following local complaints.  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5783.0  (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5783.0)  It clearly wasn't necessary for the W10 enhancements that were stated at the time - work to lower the track took place instead, but it looks like it's about to get the treatment now!

    Meanwhile, there's still no sign of any work on the bridge at South Stoke, between Cholsey and Goring that has had a temporary bridge installed next to it for well over a year now and in the process mystified Paul and myself!



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 30, 2011, 18:30:05
    Looks like some of those structures will get the treatment imminently.  I've counted 5 structures where there are civil engineering gangs present preparing for some serious works on bridges soon, two of which are Brunel structures I think.

    Not sure that it's directly connected to the electrification programme, but there's the footbridge at Kennington, a minor road bridge at Lower Basildon, the western and easternmost of the four bridges at Purley, and also one of the minor road bridges at White Waltham.

    All those bridges you have listed are being dealt with as part of the pre works for electrification.

    I have been to an internal briefing recently where the program for GWML was covered and a number of other schemes nationally, I can not go into to much detail as some of it is commercially sensitive.

    The GWML electrification is ramping up at a fast pace


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 01, 2011, 00:36:02
    All those bridges you have listed are being dealt with as part of the pre works for electrification.

    Thanks for confirming that.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on December 09, 2011, 16:57:54
    Just seen this posted on another forum:

    http://www.rail.co/2011/12/09/alstom-in-talks-to-construct-pendolinos-for-intercity-express-programme/

    If they do decide to order some pendolino's then they should at least have bigger windows and a less cramped interior.

    If this does prove to be the case of Alstom' pendolino's being ordered for the GWML and East Coast then I hope some sense has been seen at the DFT and the wires go to Cheltenham, Swansea etc like it should have been from the start.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 09, 2011, 18:34:52
    If they do decide to order some pendolino's they at least have much bigger windows and a less cramped interior.

    That doesn't make sense.  ??? Surely what you meant was IF they ordered Pendolinos they would need to have bigger windows and a less cramped interior then existing.  But to do that they couldn't have a tilt profile, and then they wouldn't be Pendolinos - they'd just be an Alstom 125 mph EMU...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on December 09, 2011, 18:46:21
    Yes that is what I mean't, I didn't spot that error.


    I have noticed that part of the article has been taken down and is now only talking  about pendolino's on the east coast mainline.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 09, 2011, 19:56:40
    Quite a major change isn't it - no mention of IEP at all now.  For them to change it that quickly is a fair sign that the author must have 'got it a bit wrong'.  Some might say made it up.  :o

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 09, 2011, 20:06:26
    Meanwhile, there's still no sign of any work on the bridge at South Stoke, between Cholsey and Goring that has had a temporary bridge installed next to it for well over a year now and in the process mystified Paul and myself!

    To correct myself there as there's clearly a lot of activity there now - including a line marking on the bridge in spray paint where presumably the original brickwork will remain below, with a new concrete flat span stuck onto the top in the same style as the two bridges east of Didcot and the one at Hinksey, south of Oxford.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 09, 2011, 21:23:35
    It seems to me that they must have discovered that track lowering could deal with W10 gauge fairly late in the day, subsequent to setting up the worksite,  but immediately worked out that electrification clearance couldn't be achieved as well.

    So, the $64000 question.  Can they really re-use a planning application for gauge clearance to rebuild a bridge for electrification...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on December 09, 2011, 22:17:21
    Found the story on another website:

    http://thecomfytrain.co.uk/2011/12/09/alstom-%e2%80%98in-talks%e2%80%99-to-construct-pendolinos-for-intercity-express-programme/

    As someone has said with all the problems with the euro whats to stop Hitachi changing their minds and walking away.

    Also with the Governemnt wanting to drive down cost's and the non tilt Pendolino's costing far less than the bi-mode IEP  then I think I can guess which option the  DFT would take.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 09, 2011, 22:45:04
    There is little to be gained in speed on the GWML by using Pendolino's even on the ECML there is not as much gain as there was on the WCML.  If they are used on the ECML a device called a damper (electrical suppressor) was fitted on the WCML about every 10 miles before the Pendolino's started operation unless the new build Pendolino's are fitted with these the ECML will need them and possibly the GWML.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on December 09, 2011, 23:21:18
    Given that alot of GWML and ECML are straight enough for 125/140mph running anyway I can't see tilting Pendolinos being much use with East Coast or Great Western apart from perhaps Newcastle - Edinbrough. For tilt to be useful on Great Western, you'd probablly have to electrify to Plymouth (via Westbury) which as a wild guess might actually cut journey times significantly.

    Basicly though, once you've paid the extra for a train that tilts, wouldn't a plain-electric, 23m carriage length, version of IEP be cheaper and give you basicly the same result?

    And why does that article say a replacment for East Coast's Intercity 225s is needed in the next few years? Surely, since they have decided they can make Intercity 125s disability compliant (including power doors) and refurbish them so they go on until they are 60 years old, they can make class 91s and mark 4s go on until at least 2040, if not 2050. That should also be cheaper than new trains and, since mark 4s are probablly pretty close to disabililty compliance anyway, cheaper than the necessary Intercity 125 life-extension (of course they could just exempt 125s from having to have power doors to reduce life-extension costs).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: woody on December 09, 2011, 23:47:40
    Pendelinos come in a non tilt version as well.The Polish operator PKP Intercity, in charge of long distance passenger transport, has awarded Alstom a contract worth ^665 million to supply 20 New Pendolino non titing high speed trains.
    http://www.rail.co/2011/05/31/alstom-to-supply-20-new-pendolino-trains-for-pkp-intercity/
    The new Pendolino trains come in two versions. Trains with a bodyshell width of 2,830mm are suitable for UIC track (1,400mm).Trains with a bodyshell width of 3,200mm are manufactured for wide tracks (1,500mm).Also the new Pendolino trains are claimed to be 95% recyclable. The electric brake systems save up to 8% of energy consumed. Alstom says about 97% of the power is recycled and fed back into the catenary system.Compared to IEP you get more train for your bucks and therefore can justify wiring up enough miles to kill that shortsighted IEP Bi-mode train stone dead before we live to regret it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on December 09, 2011, 23:58:50
    The new Pendolinos' proposed for the Great western and East coast routes are likely to have  the same traction equipment as the class 390's however they will have similar bodywork to the class 180's.

    as for the class 91's I am sure 1 problems is getting the parts for them, as it would cost a lot of money to overhaul/re-build them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on December 10, 2011, 10:04:35
    The new Pendolinos' proposed for the Great western and East coast routes are likely to have  the same traction equipment as the class 390's however they will have similar bodywork to the class 180's.
    If the trains offered have class 180 bodywork, wouldn't they be considered part of the Cordia family rather than Pendolino? Anyway, an EMU version of the class 180, if cheaper than an EMU version of Hitachi's IEP, does sound like a good idea. If so, I hope they design a nicer looking nose for the train than the 180 one though, any chance of a 180 with a Voyager-like front end design?

    Quote
    as for the class 91's I am sure 1 problems is getting the parts for them, as it would cost a lot of money to overhaul/re-build them.
    Well, even an overhall shouldn't be needed for a while should it? Wasn't the last major refurb (delta 91) done by GNER alongside the Mallard refurb for the coaches, so not that long ago? When it comes to a refurb, wouldn't you be upgrading components (or perhaps totally changing the interal workings, like class 43s from Valenta engines to MTUs) so spare parts should then be easier to source than now.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Btline on December 10, 2011, 11:28:51
    They should use tilt. It would be useful North of Northallerton and on the B&H/Devon/Cornwall. Obviously, more electrification would be needed. But once we have the electrification trains/teams we should aspire to roll out a programme of mainline electrification.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 10, 2011, 11:35:25
    Found the story on another website:

    http://thecomfytrain.co.uk/2011/12/09/alstom-%e2%80%98in-talks%e2%80%99-to-construct-pendolinos-for-intercity-express-programme/

    But that's just a direct copy of the original story that was pulled from rail.co, so it too no longer has any credibility.  So let's not jump to any conclusions...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: woody on December 11, 2011, 00:19:17
    These interesting comments on the matter from Tony Miles on the Google uk rail forum (Dec 10 10.41pm) https://groups.google.com/group/uk.railway/browse_thread/thread/3bd8416456b134c9/1e3652b0f7cc28d1?hl=en&


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 11, 2011, 00:30:05
    Seems to require a log in now - I'm sure you used to be able to browse without an account though...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on December 11, 2011, 01:36:32
    Seems to require a log in now - I'm sure you used to be able to browse without an account though...

    Paul

    You can log into google using your youtube username & Password or hotmail log in details if you are already registered on them like i am


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 11, 2011, 12:33:52
    uk.railway is not a private google forum - it's a 'usenet newsgroup' that Google happen to provide their own front end for. 

    I don't have a password for hotmail or youtube.

    Please don't provide links to password protected versions of information - as it is on usenet Woody could have just copied and pasted it here...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on December 11, 2011, 13:12:11
    I got in fine without logging in.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: woody on December 11, 2011, 22:46:31
    uk.railway is not a private google forum - it's a 'usenet newsgroup' that Google happen to provide their own front end for. 

    I don't have a password for hotmail or youtube.

    Please don't provide links to password protected versions of information - as it is on usenet Woody could have just copied and pasted it here...

    Paul
    It was not password protected I just browsed onto Uk railway google groups clicked on "intercity Express program" and there it was.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 11, 2011, 22:53:09
    Hmm. It works for me, too, without problem - but then, I am logged in to both hotmail and youtube by default.

    Purely to maintain the peace here, I'll take a bit of a flyer and quote what that particular post says:

    Quote
    Both FGW and East Coast have told the DfT that the Pendolino would be
    ideal for those two main lines.
    And - just to calm the anti-390 brigade - it isn't "the exact design"
    that is the train type in question. It is the concept of the train in
    terms of the distributed power, technical specs etc. and the way
    Virgin work with Alstom that is being highlighted. In Italy last week
    Alstom hosted Virgin and new Italian private operator NTV to talk
    about their operations. Virgin explained how good the Alstom operation
    is in terms of maintaining the trains and getting so many sets in
    service every day. NTV said that their new AGV.italo fleet will be
    maintained by Alstom in exactly the same way and Alstom said that
    every enquiry they get about new train orders comes with "take us to
    Longsight to show us how you do the job there."
    As Jon has pointed out - a Pendolino-type train on a similar contract
    to the Alstom one with Virgin would come it at about ^20,000 per
    vehicle per month cheaper... work that out for 20 years and you soon
    find the money to electrify to Swansea etc.
    Alstom has also produced a design for a "simplified" Pendolino without
    the front hatches and permanently accessible couplers. These could
    couple to an Alstom diesel loco in a minute or two - and be ready to
    move off "because the trains and locos would be designed to do this
    from the start..."
    Everyone - even people in the DfT are actually saying the ^20k a month
    is "a low estimate" and confirm that IEP is still only backed by one
    (we know who) civil servant - who, somehow, still seems to have
    convinced ministers its a good idea.
    Finally - as has been mentioned - nobody wants to actually finance the
    IEP anyway. We know the DfT has now approached at least two of the
    ROSCOs begging them to take on the financing - both have told the DfT
    where to stick the idea. (and if the experienced ROSCOs don't think
    there is any money to be made will an inexperienced bank find the
    money? - especially now they know that the existing ROSCOs aren't
    interested?)
    Tony

    Chris from Nailsea  :-X


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 11, 2011, 22:55:29
    It was not password protected I just browsed onto Uk railway google groups clicked on "intercity Express program" and there it was.

    Weird - I wonder why they won't let me in then?   Have to do some digging - or buy a new PC or something...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: homsar on February 01, 2012, 13:53:57
    Agility submitted a planning application to the local council last week, is the news that FGW passed on. Mayve a search of the council's planning srction on their website?

    You mean something like this (http://www2.swansea.gov.uk/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/Generic/StdDetails.aspx?PT=Planning%20Applications%20On-Line&TYPE=PL/PlanningPK.xml&PARAM0=600604&XSLT=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/swansea_noborder/xslt/PL/PLDetails.xslt&FT=Planning%20Application%20Details&PUBLIC=Y&XMLSIDE=/Northgate/PlanningExplorer/SiteFiles/Skins/swansea_noborder/Menus/PL.xml&DAURI=PLANNING)?

    As a minor update, the website now claims that planning consent has been granted today, with apparently very little controversy.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on February 01, 2012, 15:32:42
    Too be honest where they are putting the new depot in Swansea is an industrial site already so I am not too surprised that planning permission has been given already


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on February 16, 2012, 21:03:30
    Just seen this posted on WNXX:

    http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/news/article/carbon-free-freight-trains-to-be-introduced-by-db-schenker-rail-uk/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 16, 2012, 21:32:34
    Just seen this posted on WNXX:

    http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/news/article/carbon-free-freight-trains-to-be-introduced-by-db-schenker-rail-uk/
    NR are looking at its land and property assets with a view to its use for renewable energy generation


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on February 18, 2012, 23:07:33

    The idea of NR generating its own electricity and exporting the surplus, especially if it's green, is well worth pushing, now that there is no monolithic GEGB.

    Wind/PV sources need nearly 100% backup to meet continuous demand and need Govt subsidy.

    The combined heat and power system is also suitable for the railway; the waste heat being used for district (piped) heating in an urban area and for heat driven absorption cooling for industry. Typically the railway needs about 80MVA(e) at 40/50 mile intervals. Placed in urban areas where there is the heat/industry demand, small railway power stations might well improve electrification's chances, as the West of Cardiff scheme may indicate.

    It may also be more efficient to generate 25kV 1ph directly rather than transmit, transform and split off a phase from the grid.

    Lots Road lives again,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on February 29, 2012, 15:35:46
    An interesting article with an interview with Mark Langman, Network Rail's Wales Route Manager, with strong hints that electrification to Swansea, as well as the Valley Lines, is still very much on the agenda and strongly supported by Network Rail.

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/need-to-read/2012/02/29/electrification-can-boost-welsh-economy-says-network-rail-s-managing-director-in-wales-mark-langman-91466-30426051/ (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/need-to-read/2012/02/29/electrification-can-boost-welsh-economy-says-network-rail-s-managing-director-in-wales-mark-langman-91466-30426051/)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 12, 2012, 22:35:32
    From Railnews: (http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2012/03/12-welsh-delegation-calls-for-more.html)

    Quote from: Railnews
    Welsh delegation calls for more electrification

    A delegation of business people and politicians from south Wales has arrived in Westminster to urge a rethink on electrification.
     
    The Great Western Main Line is set to be electrified from London as far as Cardiff Central, but many people in south Wales say the scheme should continue to Swansea.
     
    Conservative AM Byron Davies is also calling for a South Wales Metro to be created, which would require electrification of the Valley lines.
     
    Such a scheme already exists in outline, although its supporters say they are worried that some routes, such as the lines to Ebbw Vale Parkway and Maesteg, may not be included.
     
    Welsh Government minister Carl Sargeant is arguing that further investment would boost the economy in depressed areas.
     
    In an article published in the Western Mail, he said the case for electrification was 'far stronger than many rail schemes that have already been funded by the UK Government in England'.
     
    A Department for Transport spokesman said that the Welsh Government had provided an outline business case for electrification beyond Cardiff to Swansea.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 27, 2012, 13:50:13
    Contract for main works to Bristol, Cardiff, Oxford, and Newbury has just been awarded to Amey:

    http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/news/single-view/view/amey-awarded-great-western-electrification-contract.html

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 11, 2012, 21:03:44
    Roughly a year until actual physical work will start and bright green marking have been sprayed trackside for most of the route between Didcot and Reading.  They look about the right distance apart to be locations for the catenary masts.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 11, 2012, 21:17:58
    Roughly a year until actual physical work will start and bright green marking have been sprayed trackside for most of the route between Didcot and Reading.  They look about the right distance apart to be locations for the catenary masts.

    They will be using driven steel piles so will go in quite quick, the structures could on top straight away.  There is a push to get started, DfT find it embarrassing when NR are efficient  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bristolboy on October 14, 2012, 20:36:19
    I read somewhere about rumours that the government was going to accelerate many infrastructure projects, including linked to the railways (and this electrification - both start date and pace) to give a boost to the economy from more construction jobs (whilst still avoiding calling it a plan b).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on October 14, 2012, 20:40:30
    I read somewhere about rumours that the government was going to accelerate many infrastructure projects, including linked to the railways (and this electrification - both start date and pace) to give a boost to the economy from more construction jobs (whilst still avoiding calling it a plan b).

    Well they need to speed up the contstruction of the 2 high output trains which Network rail are going to use to speed up the electrification projects.

    The government should also in my opinion hurry up and order some new emu's are its is looking very likely that there are not going to be enough emu's to cover all these newly electrified routes especially since they still have signed the thameslink contract.

    I suppose Northern could use thoe class 317's that are in storage but I think new emu's will be needed for the Great Western especially since you have not chance of fitting a class 319 down the  branches to Marlow and Henley On Thames.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 14, 2012, 20:46:44
    According to the latest CP4 enhancements plans (updated this month) the electrification train will be constructed by next April, but not in use until October:

    High output base Construction complete/available for use April 2013
    Consist 1 Piling system available for use October 2013
    Consist 2 Structures system available for use November 2013
    Consist 3 Wiring system available for use March 2014


    Regarding new EMUs, the new franchisee will be responsible for their procurement in whatever form that takes surely?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Southern Stag on October 14, 2012, 21:06:27
    Regarding new EMUs, the new franchisee will be responsible for their procurement in whatever form that takes surely?
    Unless there is too much of a delay to the franchising process hopefully the new TOC will be able to procure the new EMUs. An possibility which is looking increasingly likely is the North West scheme being finished but no EMUs being available. 319s being released are dependant on the delivery of new Thameslink EMUs, which is suffering delays.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 14, 2012, 22:04:52
    The EMU's for the Thames Valley area it would make sense to ensure they had some compatibility with Crossrail units.

    In general the GW electrification is on time, there are a few project issues which is not surprising given it's complexity, the Government could push for acceleration it will come at a larger price tag the existing program was designed to a price agreed with DfT


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on November 15, 2012, 20:47:24
    I saw this on Twitter earlier from Modern Railways:

    "With 319s overcommitted, Southern is ordering more EMUs and now we hear DfT to order 125mph EMUs for Oxford - double-price Desiros, anyone?"

    Anyone know any more and given how long it is taking to sign the Thameslink train contract with Siemens there is a good chance that the infrastructure will be ready but we will have no electric trains available:-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 15, 2012, 21:46:47
    I saw this on Twitter earlier from Modern Railways:

    "With 319s overcommitted, Southern is ordering more EMUs and now we hear DfT to order 125mph EMUs for Oxford - double-price Desiros, anyone?"

    The GWML electrification and Crossrail is being gauged to W12 and the GWML will be intermodal all of which mean double deck trains are a potential!!!

    Anyone know any more and given how long it is taking to sign the Thameslink train contract with Siemens there is a good chance that the infrastructure will be ready but we will have no electric trains available:-)

      Thameslink on the other had just about clears W6 gauge.

    I have heard from a very reliable source that the use of 313's is being investigated for the services off of the ECML through to the South when the link between the ECML and Thameslink is commissioned


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on November 15, 2012, 23:32:08
    The 40 vehicles ordered today (8x5) will be delivered in Dec 14. I'm guessing that they will enable 8 Class 319's to be cascaded to the North West to avoid the embarrassing position whereby the second stage of electrification there is completed with no rolling stock to utilise it.

    But clearly the even more embarrassing prospect is looming whereby GW electrification is completed to Oxford with no stock available, hence the first steps to procurement of a larger tranche of EMUs. Given that there is now much more electrification envisaged up to 2019 now, this makes sense, as the 319s will then find alternative uses once they become available.

    Another possibility is that the govt is hedging its bets against the Siemens deal collapsing in which case some more conventional emus would be helpful as a stop gap measure.

    I'd be surprised if 313's are being considered for Thameslink work. They'll be over 40 years old, have a maximum speed of 75, are only 3 coaches in length, and would not be at all suitable for the GN outer suburban services that are envisaged to run onto Thameslink.  (Not sure how many, if any, of the inner suburban Moorgate services are expected to switch to the Thameslink route.)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 16, 2012, 09:26:56
    The GWML electrification and Crossrail is being gauged to W12 and the GWML will be intermodal all of which mean double deck trains are a potential!!!

    Sorry, there's a bit of confusion there.  'Intermodal' simply describes the concept of freight containers (in fact any goods) that can be transported flexibly by sea, on rail, and on lorries during differnt parts of their journey.   Therefore the GW is already an intermodal route, but not yet at UK gauge W12 throughout.   

    (But then are you thinking of the system where containers complete with road trailers are carried on rail wagons?  That cannot be done in any UK gauge either.)

    Anyway, UK W10 and W12 gauges still do not allow for continental style double decker (DD) passenger trains either, their overall heights are only a few cm more than C1/C3 carriage gauge, the difference is all to do with opening out curved structures to allow for the corners of the containers, and the ensuing sway of the container outside its normal envelope. Network Rail include a diagram of the relative sizes of the different gauge profiles in most of the RUS documents, it's in Appendix A of the Freight RUS for instance:

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/freight/freight%20rus.pdf

    ...you'll see there that W12 provides no greater height than W10, it is a slight width gain only and certainly not the solution you seem to think it is.  In fact W12 as can be seen provides no height improvement over the original W6...

    To allow for DD trains a route needs to be completely rebuilt to UIC/TSI GB, GB+ or GC, and in the UK this would also require a massive amount of work to the infrastructure below the solebar, in particular thousands of platforms would have to be cut back and lowered, and many girder bridge structures would require modification.

    PS Crossrail is explicitly not being built to allow for DD trains - it will always remain a barrier, and as it will be providing the majority of the suburban services in the future on either side ot the tunnel - I think you can foresee no change to any remaining non-Crossrail services.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 16, 2012, 10:35:56
    I saw this on Twitter earlier from Modern Railways:

    "With 319s overcommitted, Southern is ordering more EMUs and now we hear DfT to order 125mph EMUs for Oxford - double-price Desiros, anyone?"

    It would make sense in terms of uniform timings to have a fleet of 125mph EMUs operate the fast Oxford to London services that aren't to be operated by IEPs.  They could also potentially operate the Newbury to London services after electrification.  Looking forward to reading an official announcement about this if it's true!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 16, 2012, 10:47:01
    Hitachi 395s (aka Javelins) perhaps? 

    They are basically operated as 125 mph units (although capable of 140 mph).  Much commonality with electric IEPs, but with a commuter door layout for a stopping service.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 16, 2012, 18:27:24
    The GWML electrification and Crossrail is being gauged to W12 and the GWML will be intermodal all of which mean double deck trains are a potential!!!

    Sorry, there's a bit of confusion there.  'Intermodal' simply describes the concept of freight containers (in fact any goods) that can be transported flexibly by sea, on rail, and on lorries during differnt parts of their journey.   Therefore the GW is already an intermodal route, but not yet at UK gauge W12 throughout.   
    Opps sorry meant interoperable, to the extent that the existing 12 miles of GW electrification is going to be re-registered to accommodate the additional clearances and continental types of pantographs.  Crossrail is being gauged for double deck trains

    None of the GN suburban's are planned to go Thameslink, the 313 option is being looked at as a "Plan B" and likely for driver route knowledge from mid to late 2015 when the ECML - Thameslink connection will be available


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on November 16, 2012, 19:16:51
    I wonder with the recent order of additional electrostars for Southern could we see some class 377's being subleased to FGW (or whoever is operating the GW franchise) come 2016 if the new Thameslink units are only just entering service.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 16, 2012, 20:50:46
    The Thameslink timetable change is set for December 2018 with the 24 trains per hour through the core.

    In many ways it would make sense (although this is in short supply in the railways nowadays) for the GW TV trains to be a version of the Crossrail trains so there is some compatibility should there ever be the need to rescue each other


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 17, 2012, 10:44:49
    Crossrail is being gauged for double deck trains

    The Crossrail tunnels are not being initially fitted out for double deck trains, which i why I wrote what I did.  They are built to allow UIC/TSI GB gauge but only with major modifications.  But that is pretty much academic unless they also completely rebuild the existing Heathrow tunnels, and the Connaught tunnel to North Woolwich, which are not big enough.  Are there any plans for that - I don't think so.

    I believed from online sources that they were just re-registering the existing GW OHLE to allow for 125 mph running with two pans up, but that this is a requirement of IEP(GW), not Crossrail.  So that doesn't necessarily imply it's part of a covert conversion of the GWML to allow for double decker trains.   Are any of the GWML bridge works providing for anything beyond W10/W12 plus electrification clearance?  Are there any  corresponding gauge changes planned between Stratford and Shenfield, which is already undergoing an electrification update?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Network SouthEast on November 17, 2012, 11:35:20


    I believed from online sources that they were just re-registering the existing GW OHLE to allow for 125 mph running with two pans up, but that this is a requirement of IEP(GW), not Crossrail. 
    The DfT documentation says that OHLE will be capable of 125mph running on the relief lines, but 140mph on the fast lines. There's no actual plan at the moment to see 140mph running, but it is nice to see that provision is being made for it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 20, 2012, 11:46:06
    Possible extensions of the GWML electrification to either Bedwyn, Westbury or Bath via Bradford-Upon-Avon are being considered by the DfT.  Interesting to hear that the options are being officially considered.  Bedwyn would be logical in my opinion, but I'm not so sure about further afield - though electric hauled stone trains are an interesting idea!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20399057 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20399057)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on November 20, 2012, 11:59:32
    Well if they can wire via Bradford on Avon then maybe they could wire between Westbury & Southampton that would allow the Cardiff - Portsmouth service to be worked by emu's.

    Besides  maybe they should wire via Melksham  as well (That should please a few members ofn this forum)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 20, 2012, 12:09:12
    Well if they can wire via Bradford on Avon then maybe they could wire between Westbury & Southampton that would allow the Cardiff - Portsmouth service to be worked by emu's.

    Besides  maybe they should wire via Melksham  as well (That should please a few members ofn this forum)

    I think that's one of the problems, isn't it?  Whenever possible extensions are mentioned, there's always a 'well, if they're going to do that, they might as well do that as well' argument for adjoining sections of track!  Certainly having the route from Newbury via Westbury to Bath electrified does provide for a useful diversionary route which is arguably more important now with the electrification extending to Swansea meaning fewer bi-mode IEP's will be available to cover such routes at times of engineering or other service disruption.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on November 20, 2012, 14:46:43
    I agree with what you are saying Industryinsider and if they include wiring the line through Melksham I am sure our members living in the area would be quite pleased (especially if they get a more regular rail service)

    Also weren't they putting something to go with the GW power suppply in Melksham so could that perhaps also be another reason?

    One final point I woul like to make is my concern about Network Rail taking on too much work especially since  the current proposals already given the go ahead are quiete extensive unlless Network Rail and the Government know something we dont (3rd electrification Factory train perhaps?)

    The whole extra electrostars for Southern have also got me thinking something is up


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 20, 2012, 18:56:29

    Also weren't they putting something to go with the GW power suppply in Melksham so could that perhaps also be another reason?

    One of the principle intakes from the TNO (Transition Network Operator aka National Grid).  One of the weakness in system currently planed is in the Reading area keeping the depot alive when the Auto Transformer system feed from Kensal Green or Didcot is not available, also the Newbury leg is vulnerable as it is a stub end feed extending the wires via Westbury to the Melksham area would allow for a feed from there.

    One final point I woul like to make is my concern about Network Rail taking on too much work especially since  the current proposals already given the go ahead are quiete extensive unlless Network Rail and the Government know something we dont (3rd electrification Factory train perhaps?)

    One of the most critical resources is the amount of trained staff to construct, test and commission an AC electrified railway something which Network Rail and its contractors are acutely aware of


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Explorer on November 20, 2012, 20:51:43
    Picking up the double deck debate...
    Low platforms on the continent mean you can  have a lower saloon with entrance doors between the bogies and gangways on the upper deck only. That's not really feasible with the UK platform height. Apart from that station dwell times would be significantly increased, which is not a good idea if you want to put 24tph through the central section.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 20, 2012, 21:07:50
    I think, with the possible exception of HS2, there will be no double-deck trains operating on the National Rail network any time soon. 

    So no chance of anything like this once again running on UK tracks! http://www.yellins.co.uk/transporthistory/rail/ddtrain.html (http://www.yellins.co.uk/transporthistory/rail/ddtrain.html)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Explorer on November 20, 2012, 21:31:00
    I remember the 4DDs. There was one coach standing outside Chart Leacon for a long time. The forced ventillation didn't work very well and they were very stuffy when full. And it took an age for people to clamber down the steps from the upper compartments.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 22, 2012, 11:55:29
    One final point I woul like to make is my concern about Network Rail taking on too much work especially since  the current proposals already given the go ahead are quiete extensive unlless Network Rail and the Government know something we dont (3rd electrification Factory train perhaps?)

    They'd have to build a second HOOP train first, and NR haven't ever reported ordering a second train yet.  Given the fanfare surrounding the single train that is on order, you'd expect a second one would be publicised?

    This article is one of many that refers to a single HOOP train: 

    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/windhoff-to-build-network-rails-electrification-factory-train.html

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on November 26, 2012, 11:19:25
    One of the principle intakes from the TNO (Transition Network Operator aka National Grid).  One of the weakness in system currently planed is in the Reading area keeping the depot alive when the Auto Transformer system feed from Kensal Green or Didcot is not available, also the Newbury leg is vulnerable as it is a stub end feed extending the wires via Westbury to the Melksham area would allow for a feed from there.


    Isn't the Super-Grid electricity sub-station at Bramley Hants now to have a traction Grid Supply Point, with the Nuneaton - Soton wiring?

    OTC



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 26, 2012, 13:08:54
    One of the principle intakes from the TNO (Transition Network Operator aka National Grid).  One of the weakness in system currently planed is in the Reading area keeping the depot alive when the Auto Transformer system feed from Kensal Green or Didcot is not available, also the Newbury leg is vulnerable as it is a stub end feed extending the wires via Westbury to the Melksham area would allow for a feed from there.


    Isn't the Super-Grid electricity sub-station at Bramley Hants now to have a traction Grid Supply Point, with the Nuneaton - Soton wiring?

    OTC



    I believe so, this will still leave Newbury as a stub end feed west from Southcote Jcn


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grandsire on November 26, 2012, 16:58:46
    Possible extensions of the GWML electrification to either Bedwyn, Westbury or Bath via Bradford-Upon-Avon are being considered by the DfT.  Interesting to hear that the options are being officially considered.  Bedwyn would be logical in my opinion, but I'm not so sure about further afield - though electric hauled stone trains are an interesting idea!

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20399057 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20399057)
    I expect its already been covered in the previous 50+ pages of this thread, but isn't the stopping of electrification at Newbury something to do with boundaries between signalling centres?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 26, 2012, 17:31:38
    I expect its already been covered in the previous 50+ pages of this thread, but isn't the stopping of electrification at Newbury something to do with boundaries between signalling centres?

    Not likely.  By the time electrification is underway nearly everything will be signalled from Didcot anyway (Thames Valley Signalling Centre).  The main point about electrification boundaries is that they will be designed to fit the intended post electrification timetable, whatever that happens to be, not the current timetable. 

    As an example, there are regular proposals that the boundary must be at Bedwyn - but only because that is currently the place where many DMU services terminate.  Once IEP is introduced Bedwyn might no longer have terminating trains at all, just calls in regular additional IEP semi-fasts.

    Whatever solution people have in mind is probably already suggested somewhere in the GW RUS, the GW ITT, or the London and SE RUS; and however it ends up it's more likely to be different than stay the same...

    Paul
       


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 27, 2012, 15:44:45
    I thought that there was a signaling issue too. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 27, 2012, 17:28:53
    Signalling policy has changed significantly since electrification was announced.  However there seems to be no obvious signalling boundary at or near Newbury anyway.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 29, 2012, 11:53:18
    The first electrification masts are up on the GWML!  Quite a surreal sight to be honest, but about half a mile of track just to the east of Reading station has now got masts up (no wires yet of course) in the same area as the new switches and crossings that have been installed at Kennet Bridge Junction.  I'm guessing that this is a short test/proving area prior to the HOOP train starting in earnest next year?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 29, 2012, 12:31:07
    The first electrification masts are up on the GWML!  Quite a surreal sight to be honest, but about half a mile of track just to the east of Reading station has now got masts up (no wires yet of course) in the same area as the new switches and crossings that have been installed at Kennet Bridge Junction.  I'm guessing that this is a short test/proving area prior to the HOOP train starting in earnest next year?

    ........... Or is it ooooooooopppps we are behind on the plan, lets nail something in the ground very 50 meters 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Explorer on December 29, 2012, 14:34:02
    I think it was always the plan to make passive provision for electrification during the Reading remodelling. It makes sense, in order to minimise disruption later, to do as much as possible in places that are currently away from the live railway. I suspect that now electrification beyond the extent of Crossrail is going ahead, it's worth putting up the masts before the new platforms open.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on December 29, 2012, 15:44:47
    The first electrification masts are up on the GWML!  Quite a surreal sight to be honest, but about half a mile of track just to the east of Reading station has now got masts up (no wires yet of course) in the same area as the new switches and crossings that have been installed at Kennet Bridge Junction.  I'm guessing that this is a short test/proving area prior to the HOOP train starting in earnest next year?

    I think it was always the plan to make passive provision for electrification during the Reading remodelling. It makes sense, in order to minimise disruption later, to do as much as possible in places that are currently away from the live railway. I suspect that now electrification beyond the extent of Crossrail is going ahead, it's worth putting up the masts before the new platforms open.

    Of the two options, I think Western Explorer's is the more likely explanation, despite my huge respect for Industry Insider's encyclopaedic knowledge. The High Output Operating Plant system isn't due for delivery for a few months yet.

    Wondering whether it had jumped through all the HOOPs a few months early, I did a bit of searching. I found that HOOP will not deliver all of the electrification work:
    Quote
    A plan is being developed around working in 7 to 8 hour possessions between Sunday and Thursday, with longer 8-10 hour possessions on Fridays and Saturdays. Each evening, the team will normally take three two-mile possessions on one line ^ the adjacent line will still operate at 20-60 miles per hour. Approximately 80% of the work will be carried out using high-output processes, while the remaining 20% will be delivered by more traditional methods. An immense amount of work will need to be done with 13,784 piles, 1,427 concrete foundations and 13,078 structures all on the ^to do^ list.

    That quote, which I hadn't seen before is from an article in The Rail Engineer (http://www.therailengineer.com/2012/10/09/an-electrifying-conference/), reporting on a conference with all the industry arms involved in electrification. The whole article gives an interesting insight into the logistical challenges faced by the project teams. Well worth a read.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 29, 2012, 16:05:00
    I think it was always the plan to make passive provision for electrification during the Reading remodelling. It makes sense, in order to minimise disruption later, to do as much as possible in places that are currently away from the live railway. I suspect that now electrification beyond the extent of Crossrail is going ahead, it's worth putting up the masts before the new platforms open.

    Yes that's the plan however the actual design and development doesn't quite match the plan a decision has been taken to do some piling and mast erecting "at risk"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on December 29, 2012, 16:24:50
    An interesting comment in the article about electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking line starting in 2014, yet this has yet to be approvied, and is the subject of much contention between the Mayor of London/TfL and DaFT. This point is followed up in the comments, though with no conclusive outcome.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 29, 2012, 23:25:50
    The first electrification masts are up on the GWML!  Quite a surreal sight to be honest, but about half a mile of track just to the east of Reading station has now got masts up (no wires yet of course) in the same area as the new switches and crossings that have been installed at Kennet Bridge Junction.  I'm guessing that this is a short test/proving area prior to the HOOP train starting in earnest next year?

    I think it was always the plan to make passive provision for electrification during the Reading remodelling. It makes sense, in order to minimise disruption later, to do as much as possible in places that are currently away from the live railway. I suspect that now electrification beyond the extent of Crossrail is going ahead, it's worth putting up the masts before the new platforms open.

    Of the two options, I think Western Explorer's is the more likely explanation, despite my huge respect for Industry Insider's encyclopaedic knowledge. The High Output Operating Plant system isn't due for delivery for a few months yet.

    Thank you, and yes, having thought about it a little 'Western Explorer's' hunch is probably closer to the mark, though the section that's been done is very much still part of the live railway - I remember hearing that electrification of the new platforms would start to take place by the end of the year, so this may be the first sign of that phase of the work.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Explorer on December 30, 2012, 00:09:29
    Thank you, and yes, having thought about it a little 'Western Explorer's' hunch is probably closer to the mark, though the section that's been done is very much still part of the live railway - I remember hearing that electrification of the new platforms would start to take place by the end of the year, so this may be the first sign of that phase of the work.

    I last went into Reading (from Maidenhead) about three weeks ago by which time track had been laid into P13-15 from the Southern underpass. P11 and 12 are blocked by the footbridge support. I didn't notice any masts at that time.

    Incidentally, I was told that the underpass was going to be laid with long sleepers so that conductor rail could be added later if needed (and there would also be room for OLE). I didn't see whether this had actually been done.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 30, 2012, 00:16:49
    No, there's no masts within the station area at the moment.  Only the area I described at Kennet Bridge Junction, about half a mile east of the station extending about another half a mile towards London.

    Regarding 3rd Rail electrification, platforms 13/14/15 have passive provision, as well as the underpass, so I assume compatible sleepers will be used in all of those areas.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 30, 2012, 00:40:51
    I'm sure they will provide for third rail, but I don't think they are any different in length to any other sleepers are they? They just have a set of precast threaded inserts at either end where the pots can be fitted - I remember someone noticed that they'd been used somewhere on the North Downs route even though non-electrified.

    (What I'm certain of is that the DfT were talking out of their hats when they said they'd have to be steel sleepers to allow for third rail...)   ???

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 30, 2012, 08:55:30
    I thought the (old) underpass east of Reading had been slab tracked, if this is the case then the re-bar has to have extra depth of concrete and a few other measure to protect it from stray DC.  If its conventional sleepers then it doesn't matter too much as they are all the same length conrail or non conrail the big difference for third rail is the holes cast in for the pots but a bit of spot sleeper replacement would cure that, a little more time consuming if glued ballast has been used.

    The only time I can envisage conrail trough the underpass would be as part of an AC / DC interface where a electrical section OHL overlaps a conrail electrical section.  The ORR and not keen to extend DC third rail and it is not current NR policy to extend it either.   

    Operationally I cannot see much benefit over the cost of install and maintenance.   The ORR would require Track Isolating Switches (TIS) and Neg Short Circuiting devices fitted (traditional Hook Switches are out of favour especially for new schemes) and Neg Shorting Devices would be required for emergency isolations as the extension would be new.  These devices require a power supply and SCADA with associated mods to Eastliegh ECR.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on December 30, 2012, 10:33:17
    (traditional Hook Switches are out of favour especially for new schemes)

    Remember being shown how to operate a hook switch when at Sutton. Never had to do it anger. One of the checks we had to do was ensure that every station had it's operating lever.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on December 30, 2012, 12:47:04
    I thought the (old) underpass east of Reading had been slab tracked,

    I'm not clear what this means (will google in a minute) but from memory the track passing through the eastern underpass is built normal sleepered track construction

    The trouble is that this was done when the evenings were drawing in so I may be mistaken

    Slab track duly researched


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: EBrown on December 30, 2012, 16:12:47
    I believe slab track is similar to the track inside St. Pancras International? :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on December 30, 2012, 16:18:43
    It's been a while since I have been to st. Pancras but I believe you are right


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 31, 2012, 13:45:33

    The only time I can envisage conrail trough the underpass would be as part of an AC / DC interface where a electrical section OHL overlaps a conrail electrical section.  The ORR and not keen to extend DC third rail and it is not current NR policy to extend it either.   


    I also thought that the underpass would have been the most obvious/logical place to have a short changeover section, and there have been a number of subsequent statements, (including by NR in response to FGW as recently as last October) that they intend to allow for AC and DC in the underpass:

    Quote

    {FGW}
    25. Paragraph 5.10 Remodelling of East Throat: Network Rail to advise extent of third rail and / or overhead electrification intended or if passive provision provided in the southern underpass;
    {NR}
    The Up and Down Reading Low Level Line is provided with passive provision for AC & DC electrification with headroom clearances and 3rd Rail sleepers being installed.

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/network%20code/network%20change/current%20proposals/reading%20redevelopment/nc%20g1%20rsar%20002/train%20operator%20replies/first%20great%20western/reply%20to%20fgw%20stage%20f%20ncn%2003102012.pdf 

    However DfT have also said in the GW franchise ITT:

    "The three new north side platforms and the new dive under at Reading station will be equipped [...] to facilitate third rail electrification."

    Which suggests to me tripling the complexity of the power supplies for little operational gain, although I suppose changeover during a planned station call is always going to be better than a stop outside the station; especially where a changeover failure would block a single track.   Swings and roundabouts...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Explorer on December 31, 2012, 15:14:57
    @Paul7755: "I also thought that the underpass would have been the most obvious/logical place to have a short changeover section, and there have been a number of subsequent statements, (including by NR in response to FGW as recently as last October) that they intend to allow for AC and DC in the underpass"

    It would be preferable to make the changeover in a platform because then there are more options if it fails for any reason. You don't want to have a train stuck in the underpass or needing to reverse out, even though it is bidirectional.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Network SouthEast on December 31, 2012, 15:29:28
    Aside from disruption risk when changing from AC to DC due to rolling stock issues there are two other factors that have not been mentioned by posters yet in respect of changing over at a platform.

    1. driver of AC trains forgetting to pan-down when changing over to DC mode, and then either activated the ADD or worse... hitting a bridge or other object and ripping the pan off.

    2. door release other than in a platform - several incidents of this each year, but thankfully no injuries to passengers. Why create an extra risk?

    It is possible to change over from AC to DC on the move, as is done by London Overground (but not Southern) on the WLL at North Pole, however it requires a fairly substantial overlap.

    As the underpass is only a short distance I really don't see why posters here are making a fuss about DC overlapping with AC. There are plenty of examples on the rail network already where ECOs (and their substations/infrastructure) provide AC and DC supply in the same location.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 31, 2012, 15:36:36
    @Paul7755: "I also thought that the underpass would have been the most obvious/logical place to have a short changeover section, and there have been a number of subsequent statements, (including by NR in response to FGW as recently as last October) that they intend to allow for AC and DC in the underpass"

    It would be preferable to make the changeover in a platform because then there are more options if it fails for any reason. You don't want to have a train stuck in the underpass or needing to reverse out, even though it is bidirectional


    I'm not disagreeing with that point though.  What I went on to suggest is that the costs of having three dual voltage platform areas, is significantly higher than doing it along the length of the underpass - and this might colour their decision.

    Having said this it's already been discussed to death once in the main Reading Station thread anyway, so I'll leave it there I think.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 31, 2012, 15:57:44
    AC / DC change over sections are not short.  They are usually 3 electrical sections which have to longer than the longest train to use the section, note this include non electric traction hauled trains; it can be done with 2 electrical sections which may be the case at Reading as there are 2 rectifiers at Reading to manage the DC return current, at least 1 of these would have to be in service for AC / DC change over, AC will almost certainly need the installation of isolation transformers.

    I know the GW electrification team have looked at the system we installed at Ludgate Cellars system used for the Thameslink change over at Blackfriars this is an extremely expensive and complex contractor system.

    The actual change over of power from one to the other is the easy part its the managing the traction return currents that are the problems.  Stray DC cause electrolytic erosion ferrous  items like rebar, bridge steels, cable armours etc (and not just on railway owned land) also track circuits have to be DC immune over a considerable distance; for stray AC this is more an EMC issue with telecoms and track circuits but can cause some rise in earth potential under fault conditions on the AC system.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 31, 2012, 15:59:13
    On a lighter note - from First Great Western JourneyCheck:

    Quote
    15:16 Avonmouth to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:50
    This train will be cancelled.
    This is due to electrical supply problems.
    Message Received: 31/12/2012 14:35

     ???


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on December 31, 2012, 16:03:49
    Did they find that the pantograph wouldn't fit a 142 ??


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 31, 2012, 16:56:56

    I last went into Reading (from Maidenhead) about three weeks ago by which time track had been laid into P13-15 from the Southern underpass.

    Webcams show the rail was delivered through the platforms a little later than that; it only appeared from Sun 16th, and sleepers were being fitted on the 18th and 19th. 

    However, the main reason for my looking back to those dates was that you can just see that the sleepers actually used, in P13/14 at least, definitely are fitted with the threaded inserts for third rail insulators. (You need the extreme bottom right view of camera 1/1 at 100% magnification, try about mid-day on the 19th.)

    As they are buried in ballast now ??? you can't see that sort of detail any longer.  Seriously though I realise it's still a work in progress and the sleepers will probably reappear during final tamping and lining etc...

    Paul



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Explorer on December 31, 2012, 20:52:22
    On a lighter note - from First Great Western JourneyCheck:

    Quote
    15:16 Avonmouth to Bristol Temple Meads due 15:50
    This train will be cancelled.
    This is due to electrical supply problems.
    Message Received: 31/12/2012 14:35

     ???

    This was at Reading P16 on 12th December. I was last there on the 14th but sans camera.


    Edit note: Quote marks fixed. CfN.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on December 31, 2012, 20:57:59
    Happy New Year everyone.

    Might not the ac/dc change-over be simpler on the Wokingham line rather than at Reading, as dual voltage stock is now to be the future for the South Western....

    S'pect it's been suggested before,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on February 26, 2013, 16:04:35
    Worth mentioning that preliminary work continues at a pace, with foundation holes dug most of the way from Reading to Oxford for the overhead masts that will be installed by this wonderful electrification train that will soon be with us.

    Most of the holes have simply been dug, lined with a strong canvas sack with handles, and then filled in with gravel, soil and ballast.  But at a few locations the foundation post to which the gantry will be attached has also been installed.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 26, 2013, 18:34:22
    Worth mentioning that preliminary work continues at a pace, with foundation holes dug most of the way from Reading to Oxford for the overhead masts that will be installed by this wonderful electrification train that will soon be with us.

    Most of the holes have simply been dug, lined with a strong canvas sack with handles, and then filled in with gravel, soil and ballast.  But at a few locations the foundation post to which the gantry will be attached has also been installed.

    In OLE teams gantries are refereed to as Structures, the dig out structure foundations ahead of being filled with concrete is quite normal often they are hand dug.

    The first part of the GW Mainline electrification to be commissioned is Reading Oxford, this will allow driver training. East of Reading relies on Kensal Green feeder station and Crossrail electrifying Stockley to Maidenhead 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 26, 2013, 22:16:47
    Work is now well under way at the Swindon Electrification Depot.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on February 27, 2013, 10:17:00
    East of Reading relies on Kensal Green feeder station and Crossrail electrifying Stockley to Maidenhead 

    And that's the problem we don't want Crossrail on teh GWML what we want is an electric railway.

    Surely it would be better for Network rail to electrify throughout from Stockley to Swansea and not build the turnback sidings at Maidenehad but run trains that gothrough the Crossrail tunnels at Paddington to Reading.

    Also we don't want 378 style coaches for our local trains which Crossrail will probably go for.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on February 27, 2013, 11:29:59
    Network Rail are to all intents electrifying from Stockley. All the on-network work is being done by Network Rail.  When documentation refers to it being 'done by Crossrail' it really just means 'paid for from the TfL/DfT Crossrail budget' rather than the DfT HLOS budget.

    Paul



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on February 27, 2013, 14:27:24
    It's the allocation of the money that's the problem if the elctrifcation as far as Maidenhead comes out of Crossrail's budget they will think they own it and have priority. Which would be similar to HEX and the problem that causes.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 27, 2013, 18:20:44
    Network Rail are to all intents electrifying from Stockley. All the on-network work is being done by Network Rail.  When documentation refers to it being 'done by Crossrail' it really just means 'paid for from the TfL/DfT Crossrail budget' rather than the DfT HLOS budget.

    Paul
    That is correct, there are some works being funded by GWML electrification between Stockley and Maidenhead.

    It's the allocation of the money that's the problem if the elctrifcation as far as Maidenhead comes out of Crossrail's budget they will think they own it and have priority. Which would be similar to HEX and the problem that causes.
    The relationship of Crossrail and occupancy is defined by DfT who are funding it.  It has been mentioned before Crossrail is delivered under an Act of Parliament which has defined the Western terminals one of which is Maidenhead, to overturn the Act would result in reopening a public enquiry and any consequential Judicial Reviews  not to mention the cost in doing all that pale into insignificance cost of building a few turn back sidings at Maidenhead.   My personal guess is that by 2022 the time table on the GW will be re-jigged for Crossrail to run to Reading also to take account of EWrail running into Reading replacing the Reading / Oxfords


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 27, 2013, 19:16:15
    I agree, ET, the traffic will go where it is needed. If a train load of Canary Wharf bankers want to travel to and from Oxford daily, then a train will do the trip. Maidenhead is as good a place to start and stop as any, but once the infrastructure is in, the TOCs will want to use it to the full.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on February 27, 2013, 21:11:13
    I can't see Canary Wharf bankers wanting to travel from Oxford in a 378!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Network SouthEast on February 28, 2013, 01:56:18
    I think the odds of them travelling in a 378 are pretty slim, as the Crossrail rolling stock will be a similar spec to the Thameslink stock, which will have proper 2+2 seating for starters.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on February 28, 2013, 11:48:41
    I think the odds of them travelling in a 378 are pretty slim, as the Crossrail rolling stock will be a similar spec to the Thameslink stock, which will have proper 2+2 seating for starters.

    Will they have 2+2 seating though?  The specification states that each Crossrail train will have 450 seats (with room for a total of 1500 passengers).  That equates to just 45 seats per carriage in a 10-car train.  Compare that with the Class 378s 38 seats per carriage with its longitudinal seating and the 60-70 seats per carriage you'd expect to find in a typical 2+2 seated 20m carriage, and that suggests to me there will be quite a lot of longitudinal seating?

    http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/download/4962 (http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/download/4962)

    I personally think that they will go with a mixed layout of 2+2 and longitudinal, in a similar fashion to the S8 underground stock on the Metropolitan Line, to achieve that 45 seats per carriage ratio.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Jonty on February 28, 2013, 13:01:45
    I may be being stooped, but how does 450 seats per train equate to 1,500 passengers.

    Lots of folks standing...? :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on February 28, 2013, 13:04:01
    The passenger carrying design must surely reflect the intended type of service, high capacity regional metro.

    Considering Crossrail 1 to have 'four legs', people expecting to use this presumed extension to Reading are just  going to have to deal with accommodation that's designed around the needs of Shenfield (GE slows), Abbey Wood (new route but only zone 4) and Heathrow (Connect style).

    I've always assumed that they aren't at all likely to design the train internals to be suitable for a Reading extension - and there isn't likely to be a subset of different stock either.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on February 28, 2013, 13:13:24
    I may be being stooped, but how does 450 seats per train equate to 1,500 passengers.

    Lots of folks standing...? :o

    Well of course they allow for standing.  ::)  Those 378s mentioned earlier had a published capacity of 500 back when they were only 3 car trains.  That was the way they were 'sold' as an improvement over the elderly Class 313 EMUs. So in that respect they are little different to underground trains. 

    The idea that capacity is equal to seat numbers is something peculiar to long distance trains.

    (Incidentally, there was quite a kerfuffle when SWT reduced the seating in their inner suburban 455s to allow for more standing in the aisles and around the doors, but they still ended up with 244 seats (and 28 'perch' seats) per 4 car unit.  Standing capacity though is defined on them as 4 per sq m.) 

    Edited for more exact seat numbers

    Paul 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on February 28, 2013, 13:24:34
    Considering Crossrail 1 to have 'four legs', people expecting to use this presumed extension to Reading are just  going to have to deal with accommodation that's designed around the needs of Shenfield (GE slows), Abbey Wood (new route but only zone 4) and Heathrow (Connect style).

    I've always assumed that they aren't at all likely to design the train internals to be suitable for a Reading extension - and there isn't likely to be a subset of different stock either.

    Paul

    Another reason why Crossrail doesn't work West of Paddington even if only to Maidenhead because it's 24m 19ch miles out.

    Although Shenfield is 20m 16ch there have always been a fasts and semi running on the mainline which will presumably still run and interchange with Crossrail at Stratford.

    Plus you've got to admit the Current Heathrow Connect 360/2s have got style so the Crossrail stock won't be an improvement.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 28, 2013, 17:15:12
    Out here in the sticks, the first bit of preparation for electrification is under way. The footbridge over the railway at Stapleton Road station - between Bristol Temple Meads and Bristol Parkway - is having extra bits added to it. This should render it more difficult for an accidental connection between 25KV AC OHLE and Mk 1 pedestrian.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on March 01, 2013, 11:01:18
    Getting old and not necessarily wiser I'd back the stupidity of Mk 1 pedestrian against the ingenuity of the OHLE engineer.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 18, 2013, 21:30:49
    Will these be the electric units that end up working the LTV routes from Paddington to Oxford and Newbury after a short stint on the Thameslink route.  And will that 'extended order' end up providing the trains that end up working the East-West Rail route after that has been electrified?

    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/southern-selects-bombardier-to-supply-trains-for-thameslink-cascade.html (http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/southern-selects-bombardier-to-supply-trains-for-thameslink-cascade.html)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Network SouthEast on July 18, 2013, 21:40:06
    Will these be the electric units that end up working the LTV routes from Paddington to Oxford and Newbury after a short stint on the Thameslink route.  And will that 'extended order' end up providing the trains that end up working the East-West Rail route after that has been electrified?
    I reckon the extended order could just be for life on LTV. NR expect 12 car trains to be needed in the future to keep up with demand on LTV.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 18, 2013, 21:58:09
    Will these be the electric units that end up working the LTV routes from Paddington to Oxford and Newbury after a short stint on the Thameslink route.  And will that 'extended order' end up providing the trains that end up working the East-West Rail route after that has been electrified?

    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/southern-selects-bombardier-to-supply-trains-for-thameslink-cascade.html (http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/southern-selects-bombardier-to-supply-trains-for-thameslink-cascade.html)


    Don't think these will find their way on to the GW or EWrail, Southern need more trains as it is in part to lengthen services (daft things like 12 cars on the Epsom's  :o   ) 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 18, 2013, 22:08:46
    We'll see!  Southern won't exist from July 2015 by the time these trains arrive, and I'm a bit lost on what the effect of the expanded Thameslink network (and the new Siemens trains) will have on  existing services, and thus how much released stock will be available for other services, on Southern's current network.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on July 19, 2013, 16:46:39
    More preparation:

    Quote

    B4040 closes at Luckington for rail electrification and waterpipe work

    THE B4040 Luckington Road is due to be closed until August 5 while Network Rail works on the electrification of the main London to South Wales line.

    Source: Wilts and Glos Standard (http://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/news/10560191._/)


    Given the short duration, I presume they will just be raising the parapet.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 19, 2013, 18:38:17
    We'll see!  Southern won't exist from July 2015 by the time these trains arrive, and I'm a bit lost on what the effect of the expanded Thameslink network (and the new Siemens trains) will have on  existing services, and thus how much released stock will be available for other services, on Southern's current network.
    The whole Thameslink service is supposed to operate with the (mystical) class 700's   I say mystical because we are building stuff to some pretty generic information.

    There is also an expansion of Southeastern's services and lengthening which will require units, even with Southern ceasing after July 15 doesn't remove to increase in the number of trains and the lengthening.   The Investment Projects part of NR is deep in Power Supply Enhancement works across all 3 dc routes in readiness for the Dec 2018 timetable change


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 26, 2013, 16:19:37
    Here's a NR blurb on the engineering train

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Groundbreaking-factory-train-to-cut-years-off-Great-Western-electrification-1e0d.aspx


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 31, 2013, 11:34:55
    And a DfT press release that refers to what stock is being transferred to run under the wires...

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/commuters-to-benefit-from-state-of-the-art-electric-trains

    Quote
    The 116 new carriages will initially be used on the Thameslink route allowing the release of existing rolling stock to newly electrified routes across the country.

    and

    Quote
    Once the new Thameslink rolling stock has been delivered these 116 carriages will also transfer to operate on newly electrified rou^s elsewhere in England.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on July 31, 2013, 11:54:33
    For a moment I thought they were referring to Class 116 units...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 31, 2013, 11:57:26
    The way the dates pan out, I think we're probably now looking at the displaced 319s mostly going to the northwest, because they need suburban EMUs before the GW needs them, and then the 'temporary extra' Thameslink Electrostar/377s coming to the GW - the latter are supposed to have been ordered with 110 mph capability.

    I think any nominally spare 319s will still find a use somewhere in the wider Southern area of operations - anywhere four car units without gangways would be suitable, such as on the coastway between Brighton and Portsmouth/Southampton.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on August 01, 2013, 18:03:45
    They only need a handful though before 2016, which is when the majority of the GW requirement also becomes due. There are around 9 Class 317's lying idle IIRC, and it wouldn't surprise me to see those brought into use for the new Liverpool electric services which will happen in Dec 14.

    Though I agree that 110mph stock would be better utilised on the GW than in the North West where the capability to run above 100mph will be worthless.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on September 12, 2013, 11:45:22
    From the Bath Chronicle: (http://www.thisisbath.co.uk/Minister-derails-hopes-electrified-rail-line/story-19780828-detail/story.html#axzz2efowUSSZ)

    Quote from: Bath Chronicle
    Minister derails hopes of electrified rail line

    A Government minister has given short shrift to a town^s plea to be included in the plans to electrify the railway line from London to the West, saying there is no ^business case^.

    Civic leaders in Westbury had written to Transport Minister Simon Burns to call for the Reading to Westbury main line, which runs on through Somerset to Exeter, to be part of the project.

    The line is being electrified to Bristol and South Wales, but is going only as far as Bedwyn station in east Wiltshire, not across to Westbury and Frome.

    Mr Burns told them a feasibility report looked into extending to west Wiltshire and Somerset and decided it would not be cost-effective.

    On a slightly brighter note, Duncan Hames (Chippenham MP) is currently meeting the Transport Secretary to ask him about the new rail services that electrification makes possible, and the associated potential for trains to stop at Corsham.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on September 12, 2013, 13:10:04
    I agreee a local service between Bristol and Chippenham/Swindon would be ideal especially it served new stations at Corsham and Royal Wotton Bassett.

    Of course this assumes there is capacity on the GW between Wotton Basset Jct and Swindon although an emu would be easier to path


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on October 31, 2013, 15:51:26
    It looks like work has started in earnest on electrification work between Reading and Didcot. After a few tubular steel piles were installed earlier this year near Pangbourne, piling for the OHLE masts is under way.  Currently these have been installed intermittently east of Cholsey and near Goring alongside the the down main and between Pangbourne station and the A329 overbridge next to the up relief.  There may be more but it was a bit difficult to spot from a HST  ;D

    There was activity at the electrification stockpile at Moreton Cutting, east of Didcot today with lorries being loaded with steel piling when I passed by twice today.

    It looks like Amey are not waiting for the arrival of the High Output train before starting work on this section of the line.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on October 31, 2013, 15:59:26
    The High Output train arrived recently, didn't it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 31, 2013, 16:12:43
    The High Output train arrived recently, didn't it?

    The NR PR in July only really mentioned the work going on towards completion by Windhoffs in Germany. 
    AIUI from discussion elsewhere it is planned to visit the NR test track at High Marnham, for testing and crew training. Will probably need all sorts of certification and passing trials given it is supposed to work alongside an open line...

    In September Railway Gazette were reporting its completion:
    http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/high-output-electrification-train-ready-to-roll.html 

    I suspect it won't be seen 'in the wild' for a few months yet, in fact has Amey's contract to operate it actually started yet?

    Paul 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 31, 2013, 18:14:33
    It looks like Amey are not waiting for the arrival of the High Output train before starting work on this section of the line.

    That's because the time to get the "test section" built is tight, the IEP's will be run at line speed between Didcot and Tilhurst as part of the shake down of the trains


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on November 01, 2013, 08:32:30

    That's because the time to get the "test section" built is tight, the IEP's will be run at line speed between Didcot and Tilhurst as part of the shake down of the trains

    That's interesting - anyone know when the first IEP is due in the UK for testing?  I would presume that any shake-down running on this section would need to be at night as both main and relief lines are pretty busy during the day.

    I can't see electrification work west of Didcot starting before the end of 2014 as they won't have completed the bridge rebuilds before then and completion north of Didcot is dependent on the upgrade work at Oxford station.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 01, 2013, 10:52:49
    I thought the IEPs are going straight to the ECML for testing?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on November 01, 2013, 12:50:53
    I will have a read through later but I am sure there is something about this in the August issue of Modern Railways.

    Hitachi were supposed to build at least one pre-production unit in japan before shipping it to the UK sometime in 2015.

    "Correction"

    There is a feature on page 17 of the November 2013 issue of Todays Railways UK about GBRF winning the IEP testing contract which states that the pre-series IEP's will be shipped to the UK for testing which will commence in March 2015. From this I think these 1st units should be in the UK by December 2014/January 2015.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on November 08, 2013, 11:05:42
    First part of High Output Plant train arrived yesterday in the UK from Windhoff in Germany.

    Pictures of it passing through Market Harborough en route from the Channel Tunnel to the High Marnham test track.

    http://mark5812.smugmug.com/Trains2013-1/November-2013/i-cGXVQgJ/A
    http://mark5812.smugmug.com/Trains2013-1/November-2013/i-VN8tkjb/A

    I think this consist includes the piling rig.  Clearly there is more to come.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2013, 20:13:47
    Well spotted, DidcotPunter! I've been waiting for a glimpse. If that is five units in the pictures, there are still 18 to deliver. The two vehicles to the rear of the train appear to be almost identical. The third looks like the one that holds the pile vertical. I believe the white shields are used to allow working next to a live line. Any insider info here?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 09, 2013, 11:16:22
    Well spotted, DidcotPunter! I've been waiting for a glimpse. If that is five units in the pictures, there are still 18 to deliver. The two vehicles to the rear of the train appear to be almost identical. The third looks like the one that holds the pile vertical. I believe the white shields are used to allow working next to a live line. Any insider info here?

    That's how NR describe the shields: http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Gallery/The-steel-safety-39-wall-39-on-the-HOPS-to-allow-adjacent-line-working-at-speed-1bf2.aspx

    There are a number of descriptions knocking about of the functions of different modules, but one thing I've gleaned is that certain modules can split again on site, so the lead section, referred to as 'the' piling module, is two (or three) sets of equipment that can run independently.  So I wonder if the best idea is to think of it as having five functional tasks, but there'll be more than five separate sections when in operation.

    The NR Electrification RUS of 2009 has a fairly detailed explanation (in its Appendix 2) of what they intended it to look like when ordered, obviously it may be slightly different by now but it gives a good idea including artists impressions.   The press release containing the picture I linked to above also describes the five functional areas of the train:

    Quote
    - A piling rig, with two MPVs with Movax vibro piling heads, which literally vibrate the steel piles into the soil, 2 pile carrying wagons, and finally a Fambo hydraulic percussion hammer MPV for tougher ground.

    - An excavation and concrete batching consist. This will feature an Hitachi excavator plus a Kniele concrete unit which will mix concrete from onboard aggregate, cement and water tanks.

    - A structures consist, which will erect the Series One masts, portal booms and twin track cantilevers. It is intended to carry 30 masts for erection, per night.

    - Ancillary conductor consist, which will install the earthing wires, return wires and small parts such as registration arms and other equipment.

    - The contact and catenary consist, which will string up the remaining wires, under tension. Another unit install other articles such as contenary wires under low bridges, neutral sections and record information such as height and stagger.

    Each consist will include two MPVs with full driving cabs, powered by MTU power packs, which can be driven at 60mph off-site. On site driving cabs will allow the train to be driven very slowly in possessions, such as when installing contact
    wire.
    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Groundbreaking-factory-train-to-cut-years-off-Great-Western-electrification-1e0d.aspx

    Note for instance how the explanation of the first 'consist' of the five includes 3 MPVs.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on March 07, 2014, 18:54:02
    Saw this at Swindon today - looks to be part of the High Output Plant system (HOPS) train - all shiny and new.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/swi070301.jpg)
    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/swi070302.jpg)
    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/swi070303.jpg)

    Couldn't see too much of the rest of the train as the "safety guards" were on my side of it.
    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/swi070304.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on March 07, 2014, 19:15:42
    That looks like the 'Excavation and Concrete Batching' section of the HOPS train:

    http://www.railexpress.co.uk/news/new-factory-train-will-slash-gwml-electrification-schedule


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on March 07, 2014, 19:29:06
    Swindon is the High Output Operating Base, or HOOB. From my research (I'm not a professional railwayman but I'm usually pretty good with Google) I believe it will look something like this:

    (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e8/Hoobs.jpg/250px-Hoobs.jpg)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 07, 2014, 19:31:55
    They're smart, they're fun, they know!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on March 07, 2014, 20:16:36
    That looks like the 'Excavation and Concrete Batching' section of the HOPS train:

    http://www.railexpress.co.uk/news/new-factory-train-will-slash-gwml-electrification-schedule

    Thanks - yes that looks to be the one.  I was told it was going for a run from the depot, into Swindon to change ends, then off to go around the Didcot triangle to turn it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on March 07, 2014, 23:05:46
    Swindon is the High Output Operating Base, or HOOB. From my research (I'm not a professional railwayman but I'm usually pretty good with Google) I believe it will look something like this:

    (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e8/Hoobs.jpg/250px-Hoobs.jpg)

    Post of the week! If I could award a prize, you'd get it Tufty.  ;D ;D ;D

    ♪HOOB HOOB hooray! The HOOBmobile is coming your way♫.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bdm0KUbEo4o

    And worth adding. I laughed when seeing Red Squirrel's post. I laughed hard. Damn near coughed up a lung.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on March 08, 2014, 10:16:20
    Well now you've gone and encouraged me: I just can't wait for the day when one of these rolls over the new Stapleton Rd viaduct:

    (http://www.oilzine.com/images/features/hoobmobile.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 10, 2014, 08:05:54
    First electric services from London to Bristol Parkway should be running by 2018, with electric services to Temple Meads the following year according to Chris Aldridge of Network Rail - http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Electric-trains-London-Bristol-running-Great/story-20785715-detail/story.html


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on March 10, 2014, 08:26:06
    Isn't that somewhat later than originally billed. This is the headline on Network Rail's GW Electrification page.

    We^re electrifying the railway between London and Bristol, including Newbury and Oxford, by 2016 and to Cardiff by 2017


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 10, 2014, 09:35:11
    Isn't that somewhat later than originally billed. This is the headline on Network Rail's GW Electrification page.

    We^re electrifying the railway between London and Bristol, including Newbury and Oxford, by 2016 and to Cardiff by 2017

    Well, yes, they do still say the line is to be ready by 2016, but the first trains (IEP) are not due until 2017. So it may be a matter of months for Parkway - but it does look as if the order has been changed, with most Bristol services being delayed.

    Now would that be because there is going to be other work in or around Temple Meads at the time?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 10, 2014, 09:51:39
    ... but the first trains (IEP) are not due until 2017.
    Having quoted that from a press release, some NR publicity still says "into use from 2016".


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 10, 2014, 13:35:29
    Wide-ranging article on the National Electrification Programme - http://www.therailengineer.com/2014/03/07/national-electrification-programme/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on March 15, 2014, 14:28:02
    Swindon is the High Output Operating Base, or HOOB. From my research (I'm not a professional railwayman but I'm usually pretty good with Google) I believe it will look something like this:

    (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e8/Hoobs.jpg/250px-Hoobs.jpg)

    Seems you weren't alone with this thought...  the signallers at Swindon beat you to it.  Saw this at Swindon Panel where they control access to the depot which holds the train.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/hoob.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on March 15, 2014, 14:45:31
    Brilliant! Made me chuckle.  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 17, 2014, 17:46:30
    ^87 million GWML electrification substations contract awarded - http://www.globalrailnews.com/2014/03/17/great-western-electrification-contract-awarded/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 17, 2014, 20:41:33
    A variation on the story (with a possibly more relevant picture to illustrate it), from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26609000):

    Quote
    London Paddington to Bristol rail electrification creates Swindon jobs

    (http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/73624000/jpg/_73624036_73624031.jpg)
    Electric trains should be running between London and Bristol by 2016

    About 100 jobs will be created in Swindon as part of the electrification of the railway line between London Paddington and Bristol.

    Network Rail bosses are due to sign the deal with ABB and UK Power Networks Services to provide 30 electricity substations to power the trains.

    The first of the stations is due to be delivered in June 2015 with the remainder at six-week intervals

    Work to upgrade bridges along the route is already under way.

    The route between London and Bristol - including the Newbury to Oxford link - is due to be completed by 2016 with the extension to Cardiff by 2017.

    A Network Rail spokesman said electric trains would have 20% more seats than a diesel equivalent, with journey times improved.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 18, 2014, 08:26:50
    Disagreement between UK government and WAG over who should pay for Valley Lines Electrification - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-26620650


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 18, 2014, 17:18:24
    Disagreement between UK government and WAG over who should pay for Valley Lines Electrification - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-26620650

    Well, there's a shock.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 21, 2014, 14:29:30
    Disagreement between UK government and WAG over who should pay for Valley Lines Electrification - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-26620650

    And more -
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-26676140


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on March 21, 2014, 17:01:54
    I think it's been mentioned before but the extension of electrification from Newbury to Bedwyn now appears to be receiving positive consideration by DfT

    http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/electrification-of-great-western-beyond-newbury-being-considered

    Not a done deal yet though - and given the costs involved of the other options to extend the wires to Westbury and beyond, anything further than Bedwyn seems unlikely at this stage.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 21, 2014, 17:18:33

    Well, yes, they do still say the line is to be ready by 2016, but the first trains (IEP) are not due until 2017. So it may be a matter of months for Parkway - but it does look as if the order has been changed, with most Bristol services being delayed.

    Now would that be because there is going to be other work in or around Temple Meads at the time?

    Here in Four Track, Now! Towers, we have been pondering the same point. The IEP programme will add traffic to the line between BRI and Filton, with two extra TPH each way from BRI to PAD via BPW being only the start. Trains will need to get to and from the depot as well. The MetroWest plans could move ahead at some pace, but even the status quo will be tricky to maintain with only two tracks. The slightest problem brings everything  grinding to a halt.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Lee on March 24, 2014, 08:29:36
    ^87 million GWML electrification substations contract awarded - http://www.globalrailnews.com/2014/03/17/great-western-electrification-contract-awarded/

    Further detail on the substations contract - http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/news/article/abb-and-consortium-partner-win-145-million-order-to-upgrade-uk-rail-network/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 24, 2014, 20:15:24
    ^87 million GWML electrification substations contract awarded - http://www.globalrailnews.com/2014/03/17/great-western-electrification-contract-awarded/

    Further detail on the substations contract - http://www.breakingtravelnews.com/news/article/abb-and-consortium-partner-win-145-million-order-to-upgrade-uk-rail-network/

    SMOS light  ::) bit of an oxymoron, it much heavier than the SMOS used at Hayes and Old Oak Common Feeder Stations when HEX was commissioned in the 1990's ............. its called progress.  :P

    To be fair though this concept requires less site work to install and commission basically out door switchgear on a pallet on a mast ............. as an electrical engineer I think it will look fantastic  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 24, 2014, 20:47:27

    SMOS light  ::) bit of an oxymoron, it much heavier than the SMOS used at Hayes and Old Oak Common Feeder Stations when HEX was commissioned in the 1990's ............. its called progress.  :P

    To be fair though this concept requires less site work to install and commission basically out door switchgear on a pallet on a mast ............. as an electrical engineer I think it will look fantastic  ;D

    Light is the new heavy, it seems. Looks good, though - value engineering of a good sort.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 24, 2014, 21:10:09

    SMOS light  ::) bit of an oxymoron, it much heavier than the SMOS used at Hayes and Old Oak Common Feeder Stations when HEX was commissioned in the 1990's ............. its called progress.  :P

    To be fair though this concept requires less site work to install and commission basically out door switchgear on a pallet on a mast ............. as an electrical engineer I think it will look fantastic  ;D

    Light is the new heavy, it seems. Looks good, though - value engineering of a good sort.

    Vorsprung durch Technik or possibly All'avanguardia della tecnica but defiantly not 'advantage through technology' of the UK type


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 25, 2014, 17:06:32

    Pity the journos who wrote those electrification articles didn't include the salient facts in their articles.

    Froth about "company track records" and "30 substations" actually clouds rather than informs.

    What is ^87M actually buying?

     OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 25, 2014, 18:12:39

    Vorsprung durch Technik or possibly All'avanguardia della tecnica but defiantly not 'advantage through technology' of the UK type

    Or the "Four sprung duck technique". The rest of that schoolboy joke is not for this forum.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on April 03, 2014, 12:18:54
    Never let it be suggested that the DMGT operates any kind of bias, but I have to say that the headline on this article really takes the biscuit:

    Quote

    Bristol passengers face five years of delays in ^7.5bn rail works

    By Michael Ribbeck

    IT was considered the greatest engineering feat of its time and a wonder of the industrial age. Isambard Kingdom Brunel's Great Western rail line was completed in 1838 and was immediately hailed as one of the wonders of the modern world.

    And now 176 years later First Great Western, the firm which operates services on the route, has announced the biggest upgrade the route has witnessed in its history.

    From Bristol Post (http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/TrainPassengers-face-years-delays-pound-7-5bn/story-20875920-detail/story.html#ixzz2xowA2hNl)


    The general run of the article is positive about the benefits of such a massive investment, so we must assume that it was a member of the editorial team who thought up the Eeyorish headline. As far as I can see, all Mark Hopwood said was:

    Quote

    All of this will take time. We will do all we can to keep inconvenience to a minimum ^ but passengers' patience will be invaluable.


    I don't know how others see this statement, but to me it doesn't sound like he was announcing the start of Delaymageddon...

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 09, 2014, 10:03:50
    Attended a presentation by two Network Rail guys last night put on by the local branch of IMechE....we got Richard McCulloch -Principal Sponsor for the IEP & Electrification project plus Ben Stevens, sponsor for the Oxford Resignalling project....

    Some notes....

    IEP trains testing on ECML Feb15, GWML (RDG-DID) Aug/Sep15
    Class 800 will be bi-mode units, Class 801 all-electric units - according to Richard, the DfT *still* haven't firmed up the mix!
    Pantographs can be raised / lowered while at speed

    Electrification - RDG-DID in time for the testing above
    Remaining track to OXF/BSK (EMUs to run)/Newbury & BPW Dec16
    BPW/Bath & BTM May17
    Cardiff Dec17
    Swansea May18
    164 structures in total (bridges/tunnels/station awnings) need clearance work


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on April 10, 2014, 20:18:34
    Awesome amount of engineering work involved, whilst most people will notice only a copper cable, and will wonder why it costs so much.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 10, 2014, 21:36:17
    Awesome amount of engineering work involved, whilst most people will notice only a copper cable, and will wonder why it costs so much.
    And logistically the construction work is compressed into very short access times, with some very scarcity of skilled labour to do it with


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on April 11, 2014, 22:10:50
    From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-26989003)

    Quote
    Great Western electrification disruption tackled

    (http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/73428000/jpg/_73428885_73428884.jpg)
    The railway bridge at Dauntsey Lock on the B4069 will be closed for five months

    Network Rail has pledged to work harder to avoid disruption caused by the Great Western line electrification project.

    Over the past few weeks, several roads and bridges have been closed off in Wiltshire causing delays for motorists.

    After a public meeting held on Thursday the firm offered Wiltshire Council a liaison officer to ensure people were better informed.

    The Swindon to Kemble line is being upgraded to two lines ahead of the main electrification work.

    Conservative North Wiltshire MP, Robert Gray welcomed the move: "Through a liaison officer, that person is going to be solely responsible for making sure the local people know what's going on.

    "Frankly if you know what's going on, you know where the diversions are, where the blockages are that really helps you to sort out your day - if you don't know you get frustrated and cross."

    Some of the recent closures include a bridge along the B4069 at Dauntsey Lock which is being closed for 22 weeks to allow works to take place.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on April 15, 2014, 18:20:33
    From The Herald (http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/11134881.MP_brands_Network_Rail__incompetent__over_extended_bridge_closure/):
    Quote
    MP brands Network Rail 'incompetent' over extended bridge closure
    NETWORK Rail has been labelled ^insensitive and incompetent^ by an MP after it admitted its rebuilding project of the first of 29 Oxfordshire bridges is already months off track.

    The rail infrastructure company is planning to rebuild or remodel the bridges as part of the work needed for the ^1bn electrification of the rail network.

    Fulscot Road bridge in South Moreton was supposed to be shut for six months, but ^ongoing design issues^ and the weather meant that closure has been pushed to 12 months.


    South Moreton residents said they are ^disgusted^ and they understood the closure of the main road out of the village into Didcot was because the rail firm had not foreseen engineering problems.

    Now Wantage MP Ed Vaizey has joined the criticism. He said: ^I believe Network Rail has proved to be both insensitive and incompetent so far, as sadly has been demonstrated in the very, very poor process and communication about Fulscot Bridge which is to remain closed for months to come even though it should, by now, have reopened.

    ^They are proceeding as though motorists don^t exist.^

    Mr Vaizey said that until he met Network Rail bosses three weeks ago, the firm was not regularly meeting with highways authority Oxfordshire County Council on the project.

    Claire Hollis, 39, who runs The Crown Inn in High Street, said the pub had been ^very quiet^ during the past six months, but said: ^This is even more frustrating.

    ^If we had known it would be a year in the first place we would have promoted things differently.

    ^Network Rail don^t even let us know what is going on.^

    The village^s woes were compounded when Oxfordshire County Council also closed the two main diversion routes into the village recently to carry out temporary repairs to make the roads usable for Network Rail contractors.

    South Moreton Parish Council clerk Roger Templeman said he was ^absolutely disgusted^ by the village^s treatment.

    He said: ^Nearly a year of traffic diversions are causing great inconvenience to villagers, loss of business to the village^s pubs, lots of damage to cars and cycles due to the potholes, safety issues for pedestrians competing with diverted traffic on the village roads, and no pedestrian diversion for villagers to the shops.^

    Network Rail is modifying railway bridges to make way for new, overhead electric wires, which it says will allow it to run faster, more reliable and more eco-friendly trains.

    It will need to rebuild portions of the A4074 near Sandford-on-Thames, the A34 near Didcot, a bridge on Steventon High Street and a bridge on the A338 at Grove which takes 13,000 journeys each day from and to Oxford.

    Mr Vaizey said he would meet Transport Minister Stephen Hammond on May 20 to try to get Government funding to build temporary replacement bridges for Steventon and Grove.

    Network Rail spokeswoman Anne-Marie Batson said: ^Our policy is to minimise the impact on the community for the programme overall and we remain steadfast in meeting this, alongside the task to deliver a major scheme.^

    She refused to give details about what the ^design issues^ were.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 15, 2014, 21:19:04
    I think for a Railway company
    Quote
    "They are proceeding as though motorists don^t exist.^
    is quite a fair view  :)

    Seriously though generally NR want to get these things done as quick as possible just delaying a project costs money, the weather this winter with all the floods quite possibly means the project have lost all their long duration line possessions, these are hard won from the TOC's n FOC's at the best of times. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on April 23, 2014, 15:16:26
    From The Herald Series (http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/hsdidcotnews/11164394.Network_Rail_admits__considerable_problems__with___1bn_rail_electrification_project/)
    Quote
    Network Rail admits 'considerable problems' with ^1bn rail electrification project

    NETWORK Rail has admitted to Wantage MP Ed Vaizey it has had ^considerable problems^ with its ^1bn electrification project so far.

    Mr Vaizey, who previously branded the company ^incompetent and insensitive^, said directors told him they would work ^much harder^ to minimise the inevitable disruption the project would cause.

    It comes after the rail infrastructure company announced last month that it would have to close Fulscot Bridge in South Moreton, near Didcot, for double the six months already suffered by residents. It has now submitted an application to South Oxfordshire District Council to raise the bridge, after discovering ^more work was needed^.

    The company is working on electrifying the Great Western Mainline for improved and faster services.

    After meeting with directors, Mr Vaizey said: ^They have acknowledged that there have been considerable problems in the work done on bridges so far, and that they needed to make considerable improvements to their planning and the way they work with local councils and local communities. I have already seen some evidence of measures being put in place to do so...


    ^I was also heartened to hear that Network Rail will work much harder with their contractors and the county council to minimise, as far as possible, the inevitable disruption that this work will cause.^

    Network Rail spokeswoman Anne-Marie Batson said: ^We certainly acknowledged to Mr Vaizey that there have been considerable challenges on the bridge projects and this included Fulscot Bridge.

    ^We are currently installing new embankments but, unfortunately, more work is needed to bring the road back into line with the bridge and reinforce the arch supports at the sides.

    ^We will continue working closely with Mr Vaizey^s office, the local authorities, parish and town councils and the community throughout the project to keep everyone informed.^


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on May 13, 2014, 14:23:59
    "Network Rail chief warns upgrade project will breach ^1bn budget"

    From today's FT interview with Mark Carne, new Chief Executive of Network Rail:-

    "The scheme to convert the line linking London to south Wales from diesel to electric trains was originally priced at about ^1bn but that is now under review because of rising costs.

    There have been several problems from stormy winter weather to disputes with councils over road closures, to the presence of bats, newts and dormice along the route."

    Full details of the interview here (registration may be required):

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1873242e-d9c2-11e3-b3e3-00144feabdc0.html

    Apart from bats, newts and dormice, I guess it's not surprising they're over budget given the weather and road closure related issues.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on May 13, 2014, 15:30:37
    Still a relative bargain compared to the ^40 billion + being wasted on HS2 though?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on May 13, 2014, 16:05:29
    Still a relative bargain compared to the ^40 billion + being wasted on HS2 though?

    I guess we'll have to agree to differ on our opinion on the need for HS2, but it's an interesting comparison, though the HS2 costs will include land purchase and compensation as well as the rather large "optimism bias" imposed by the Treasury for works of this nature.

    I note that on the FGW website they quote a spend of ^7.5bn by Network Rail on GW upgrades.

    http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/About-Us/greater-west

    Presumably in addition to electrification, this includes schemes such as Reading rebuild and flyovers, Swindon-Kemble redoubling and Filton Bank four-track replacement, as well as Temple Meads and Oxford station upgrades. Not sure if the Crossrail part of the GWML is included in this.

    One can argue whether HS2 or GW upgrade represents better value but it looks like both are happening.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 13, 2014, 17:26:32
    Still a relative bargain compared to the ^40 billion + being wasted on HS2 though?

    I guess we'll have to agree to differ on our opinion on the need for HS2, but it's an interesting comparison, though the HS2 costs will include land purchase and compensation as well as the rather large "optimism bias" imposed by the Treasury for works of this nature.

    I note that on the FGW website they quote a spend of ^7.5bn by Network Rail on GW upgrades.

    http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/About-Us/greater-west

    Presumably in addition to electrification, this includes schemes such as Reading rebuild and flyovers, Swindon-Kemble redoubling and Filton Bank four-track replacement, as well as Temple Meads and Oxford station upgrades. Not sure if the Crossrail part of the GWML is included in this.

    One can argue whether HS2 or GW upgrade represents better value but it looks like both are happening.

    Also re signalling virtually the entire route Hayes to Bristol, all the work around Oxford

    There's a lot going on


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on May 13, 2014, 18:20:15
    Still a relative bargain compared to the ^40 billion + being wasted on HS2 though?

    We should agree to disagree on HS2. Like Filton Bank four-tracking, Crossrail, Portishead, Kemble reodoubling, the Bicester chord, and a whole bundle of other enhancements, HS2 will increase capacity, in this case from South to North, where voices are loud in support. If it must be built, then it makes sense to build it to a high-speed spec.

    It is a shame that the budget is going to be busted for electrification, but not a huge surprise. This is one of those cases when you don't really know what needs doing until you start doing it, and the issues with the weather haven't helped. There is no question of not doing it this time, and it will be worth the pain and the cost to have a modern, efficient, and expandable electric railway. As Electric train is keen to point out (quite rightly) the future is 25KV OHLE. My former home Blackpool will be a beneficiary of electrification, and has recently had its tramway essentially rebuilt, with the foresight to make it compatible with European Tram-train spec. The local council has, very recently, approved a contribution of ^1.6 million to have the tramway run away from the promenade to Blackpool North Station. The total cost of ^16 million will be covered by that and Transport for Lancashire, the ITA that Bristol, for one, lacks. In this way, transport becomes integrated forever.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on May 14, 2014, 13:29:59
    On a lighter note two Class 20s (189 and 142), very smart in the new Balfour Beatty blue and white livery, have appeared in platform 6 at Slough. Apparently for electrifcation work.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on May 14, 2014, 14:23:05
    It is a shame that the budget is going to be busted for electrification, but not a huge surprise. This is one of those cases when you don't really know what needs doing until you start doing it, and the issues with the weather haven't helped.
    Certainly seems that they underestimated the works required and hence cost of raising a number of the bridges. I daresay they weren't in such a state of repair that there was concern if they remained as they were, but attempting to build them up has revealed foundations not sufficient, structural issues etc.

    As to 'disputes with councils' that also reflects insufficient planning and local engagement. You can't expect to put in to divert traffic several, even tens of miles for six months especially on major routes without providing suitable alternatives.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 14, 2014, 14:51:28
    On a lighter note two Class 20s (189 and 142), very smart in the new Balfour Beatty blue and white livery, have appeared in platform 6 at Slough. Apparently for electrifcation work.

    In connection with the reinstatement of the former Langley Oil Terminal sidings as they will be used during the Crossrail electrification works.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on May 14, 2014, 20:37:55
    Can anyone clarify please. Is it one elctrification team working form Hayes to Maidenhead for Crossrail and another from Maidenhead to Swansea for the DfT and Welsh assembly? Or is it the same team being paid from two different pots one for Crossrail and the other for the GWML.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 14, 2014, 21:01:11
    Can anyone clarify please. Is it one elctrification team working form Hayes to Maidenhead for Crossrail and another from Maidenhead to Swansea for the DfT and Welsh assembly? Or is it the same team being paid from two different pots one for Crossrail and the other for the GWML.

    Certainly there are 2 separate contacts for the Crossrail and the GW electrification, they will be the same (or very similar) members of the contractors staff working on both.

    To the outsider it may seem barmy way to work, however these are funded from different sources, yes I know its all tax payers money but HM Treasury don't do sensible, therefore they have to be kept separate contractually. Crossrail has its delivery targets to achieve set by TfL and DfT and GW has its set by the ORR and DfT.

    There is a lot of joined up thinking going on in the background to ensure the two schemes join seamlessly at Maidenhead ............... or at least that's what someone in the GW project told me  ;D

    The GW electrification construction delivery teams are just starting to ramp up, I can always tell because the number of offers of jobs increases, were as the Crossrail teams are about 6 months ahead.

    The biggest problem the industry has is the number of experienced OLE construction staff, there just aren't enough; engineers from Spain, Germany and Hungary are brought over this very expensive though


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on May 15, 2014, 10:10:46
    My understanding was that Balfour Beatty have the contract for electrification from Airport Junction to Maidenhead under the Crossrail contract and Amey are doing from Maidenhead to Newbury, Oxford, Bristol and Cardiff under the GWML electrification contract. Not sure about Cardiff to Swansea and the Valley lines electrification.

    In the meantime Network Rail have started to update the GW electrification pages on their site.

    On the Didcot to Swindon section dates have been announced for the road closures for bridge rebuilding on this section.  Oddly these appear on the Oxfordshire County Council website but not the NR one yet. See here:-

    http://voyager.oxfordshire.gov.uk/map.aspx

    (to view individual dates, uncheck everything under Travel options then check Roadworks and set Calendar to "All dates")

    The one exception is the A338 bridge at Wantage Road over which there has been much controversy. From the announcement here:-

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-electrification/oxfordshire/

    ..it appears that Network Rail have now agreed to install a temporary bridge at the site during the rebuild so that the road remains open. Maybe that will placate the riled burghers of Wantage and Grove  ;D  No doubt this will have contributed the budget overspend by NR mentioned earlier as well.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Enterprise on May 15, 2014, 10:51:45
    On a lighter note two Class 20s (189 and 142), very smart in the new Balfour Beatty blue and white livery, have appeared in platform 6 at Slough. Apparently for electrifcation work.

    Well done 8F!
    I also saw them this morning, quite splendid in their grey / blue livery.

    I also noticed that they had what looked like wood wagons sandwiched between them and original headcodes boxes!
    One was 'T0' and the other was '1K73', a very interesting choice.
    Are those scottish codes?
    WE.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 15, 2014, 11:16:55
    One was 'T0' and the other was '1K73', a very interesting choice.
    Are those scottish codes?

    1K73 is the 11:40 Norwich to Cambridge, so they'd better get their skates on if they're going to get there on time for that working.  :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Ollie on May 15, 2014, 16:50:19

    1K73 is the 11:40 Norwich to Cambridge, so they'd better get their skates on if they're going to get there on time for that working.  :o

    Maybe they have decided to work on the 23:30 from Glasgow Central to Ayr instead. (Also 1K73)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 12, 2014, 01:21:49
    They've been there for a week or so, but the first OLE structure masts in connecting with the GWML electrification (i.e. outside of the Reading rebuild area) have appeared just to the east of Pangbourne.  Supports are being installed overnight in the area, though using traditional methods rather than the HOOP machine.  Hopefully any niggles/delays with the various modules of the HOOP will be sorted shortly and the pace can be upped so that the project doesn't fall too far behind schedule!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 12, 2014, 20:46:12

    1K73 is the 11:40 Norwich to Cambridge, so they'd better get their skates on if they're going to get there on time for that working.  :o

    Maybe they have decided to work on the 23:30 from Glasgow Central to Ayr instead. (Also 1K73)

    I read the 1 K 73 as being I K B


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 02, 2014, 13:02:26
    Morning peak in chaos today as a result of a piling crew cutting a signalling cable near Pangbourne. Cardiff terminators and through Cheltenham trains cancelled, some diversions from Bristol via Westbury and other cancellations from Oxford.

    In the meantime Network Rail have published an artists impression of the OLE support design to be used in Sydney Gardens, Bath here:

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/banes/

    Three week blockade planned next summer to install OLE in Box Tunnel followed by a further three week shutdown east of Bath for more wiring.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on July 02, 2014, 15:12:19
    Those details from Network Rail (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/banes/) of the work ahead in Bath, quoted in full:

    Quote
    Bath update, Tuesday 1 July

    (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/assets/0/72/4294967297/30064771426/30064772515/30064773580/30064773581/faaebec7-df93-42d2-9b3b-999638a3d347.jpg)

    Electrification will open the way for a new generation of electric intercity trains serving Bath from 2017, resulting in more seats, more leg room, more tables and a reduction in journey times.

    It will also bring a greener and quieter railway, with fewer emissions and a reduction in the noise as electric trains replace the existing diesel ones.

    To achieve this, we're doing a package of works in preparation for the electrification of the Bath railway corridor. The majority of the work will be completed at night so trains can operate as normal for passengers.

    Work which can't be completed at night and which will affect the City of Bath will be carried out during six weeks from mid-July to the end of August 2015 in two main phases.

    The first three week phase will affect only the immediate Box Tunnel area (near Corsham) but the second three week phase also requires the closure the entire railway immediately east of Bath station and the direct route to Trowbridge.

    By maximising the work over a six week period it will be completed with the minimum possible disruption to passengers. We will also use the closure to complete other work that was scheduled over the coming years.

    The work is planned for the summer of 2015 as we need to sequence the work between work at Reading and Bristol and to avoid bat and newt breeding seasons. There will be further work west of Bath in 2016 that will require further changes to train services over some weekends, but on a smaller scale.

    The work to be completed in summer 2015 includes:

    • Lowering the track in Box Tunnel and installing electrification equipment.
    • Aligning the track at Bath Spa station to reduce the stepping gap between the train and the platform, while also making the platforms longer and larger.
    • Installing specially designed electrification equipment in Sydney Gardens in recognition of its unique status as a World Heritage Site. Huge care will be taken to ensure that the work protects the special status of the City of Bath and its listed buildings.
    • We're working with First Great Western, Bath & North East Somerset Council and Bath Tourism Plus to make sure that the electrification of the railway through Bath causes the minimum disruption to rail users and visitors to the city.

    The overriding objective of all these organisations is to keep passengers on trains, wherever possible, rather than having to use coach services.

    Final plans will be announced in autumn 2014 following dialogue with businesses, tourism representatives and rail users.

    All parties are working to ensure that Bath remains open during the works next summer, albeit with reduced train services. Measures under consideration to manage the impact on residents and visitors include:

    • Ensuring commuters and off-peak passengers can travel by train by keeping the rail route west of Bath open throughout the work, so that a reduced service from Bath Spa to London Paddington and Bath Spa to Bristol Temple Meads and Cardiff Central can operate.
    • Keeping passengers on trains that normally travel through Bath Spa by diverting services where possible.
    • Implementing a high quality coach service between Bath Spa and Chippenham, Trowbridge and Westbury at the same frequency as rail services, connecting passengers with onward train services at those stations.
    • Easing ticket restrictions to enable passengers to use alternative rail routes.
    • Allowing car park season ticket holders to use car parks at alternative train stations.

    These proposals will be refined following a review of passenger journeys made at Bath Spa this summer and consultation with user groups.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 02, 2014, 19:20:04
    Morning peak in chaos today as a result of a piling crew cutting a signalling cable near Pangbourne. Cardiff terminators and through Cheltenham trains cancelled, some diversions from Bristol via Westbury and other cancellations from Oxford.

    I am sure there will be more that to come, there is a challenge to get the Reading - Didcot section wired and powered asap so the full line speed running in and tests can be done.

    Three week blockade planned next summer to install OLE in Box Tunnel followed by a further three week shutdown east of Bath for more wiring.

    It is the only practical way to do this type of work, I am involved in a project working on the bottom ends of both the ECML and MML the short possessions extend the work out to months, increases cost and there is high risk of overrun due equipment / install failure


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 02, 2014, 19:26:43
    There isn't any stock to test an electrified section if done 'asap'


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 02, 2014, 20:06:08
    There isn't any stock to test an electrified section if done 'asap'

    It's due in the UK later this year


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on July 03, 2014, 10:55:52
    There isn't any stock to test an electrified section if done 'asap'

    There are various electrification test coaches which can be used as well as borrowing emus and electric locomotives from other places to draw large currents. Lack of stock is, I suggest, the last of their worries.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on July 03, 2014, 13:09:55
    Those details from Network Rail (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/banes/) of the work ahead in Bath, quoted in full:

    Quote
    Bath update, Tuesday 1 July

    (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/assets/0/72/4294967297/30064771426/30064772515/30064773580/30064773581/faaebec7-df93-42d2-9b3b-999638a3d347.jpg)

    Electrification will open the way for a new generation of electric intercity trains serving Bath from 2017, resulting in more seats, more leg room, more tables and a reduction in journey times.

    It will also bring a greener and quieter railway, with fewer emissions and a reduction in the noise as electric trains replace the existing diesel ones.
    Err, what's the seating capacity of the IC125s going to be after the 1st->std conversions again? 560? If so, some of the new trains will have 245 fewer seats while others will have an increase of 67. As for the Sydney Gardens OHLE design sketch, I note the fencing has vanished and the OHLE mast does not extend to ground level. I hope they can resolve the latter as it is the same problem which blights some electrified viaducts (which have masts bolted to the outside face), a vertical pillar ending in thin air looks very odd. With only a black-and-white sketch to go on, it is hard to judge the visual impact any more than that.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on July 04, 2014, 00:08:26
    The press release merely says, "more seats".

    Across the routes that the IEPs will serve there will be a net increase of seats available in any 24 hour period. a train for train comparison isn't really fair, as the timetable and frequency of services are being totally re-cast.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on July 04, 2014, 08:59:39
    The press release merely says, "more seats".

    Across the routes that the IEPs will serve there will be a net increase of seats available in any 24 hour period. a train for train comparison isn't really fair, as the timetable and frequency of services are being totally re-cast.

    This is looking increasingly like "voyager mark two"
    When the (then) Virgin voyagers were being discussed, I and many others, expressed concern that the new trains were half length and therefore likely to be overcrowded.
    We were assured by the rail industry that the new  much shorter trains would in fact be fine because "there will be a net increase in seats over 24 hours" and that "the timetable and frequency of services is being totally re-cast"

    The new half length trains duly arrived, and many popular services were full and standing from day one, and years later are still thus. It is little consolation to those standing on a new shorter train to be told that more seats are available in total, if they have to stand on a service that previously had seats for all.

    It is now admitted that voyagers are not ideal for long journeys from either the passenger comfort or total train length point of view. We are however stuck with them for many years yet.
    And in at least one respect, the IEPs are even worse than voyagers with not even a buffet for steerage.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 04, 2014, 14:17:59
    The new half length trains duly arrived, and many popular services were full and standing from day one, and years later are still thus. It is little consolation to those standing on a new shorter train to be told that more seats are available in total, if they have to stand on a service that previously had seats for all.

    I quite agree.  However, the current IEP formations suggest all trains through Bath will be formed of 9-Car IEPs with a mix of 5-Car IEPs and 9-Car IEPs forming the additional two trains as hour between Bristol and London, which, although they won't call at Bath, will no doubt attract many Bristol customers away from those routed via Bath.  The net result for Bath should be (with my realistic head on, not my cynical or optimistic one) a suitable increase in seats.  However, I am a little concerned about the South Wales services that will see little if any frequency increases.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on July 04, 2014, 17:42:58
    I would expect the additional services through Bristol Parkway to provide some relief to the South Wales services as well, particularly if they are faster by virtue of not stopping at Swindon or Didcot.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 05, 2014, 10:02:26
    Yes, I'd agree, John - they should indeed provide some relief, as will the enhanced service to from Cheltenham/Gloucester.  I'm concerned that it won't be enough though, over time, given the continuing growth on the route, especially if any of the Cardiff services are formed of 5-Car Bi-Mode IEPs.  I have similar concerns over the Cotswold Line.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 05, 2014, 10:27:34
    I would expect the additional services through Bristol Parkway to provide some relief to the South Wales services as well, particularly if they are faster by virtue of not stopping at Swindon or Didcot.

    It's a faster route in any case. Then add in the faster acceleration and later braking times, and the service will be faster, even with stops at Swindon and Didcot.

    Given that this was all planned a few years ago, since when rail use has grown substantially, do we know if there are options for more (or longer) trains?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on July 05, 2014, 21:50:39
    The new half length trains duly arrived, and many popular services were full and standing from day one, and years later are still thus. It is little consolation to those standing on a new shorter train to be told that more seats are available in total, if they have to stand on a service that previously had seats for all.

    I quite agree.  However, the current IEP formations suggest all trains through Bath will be formed of 9-Car IEPs with a mix of 5-Car IEPs and 9-Car IEPs forming the additional two trains as hour between Bristol and London, which, although they won't call at Bath, will no doubt attract many Bristol customers away from those routed via Bath.  The net result for Bath should be (with my realistic head on, not my cynical or optimistic one) a suitable increase in seats.  However, I am a little concerned about the South Wales services that will see little if any frequency increases.
    Yes, Bath seems to have got off lightly on the IEP front, every other GW-IC route it seems will see 5-car units on at least some services.

    Yes, I'd agree, John - they should indeed provide some relief, as will the enhanced service to from Cheltenham/Gloucester.  I'm concerned that it won't be enough though, over time, given the continuing growth on the route, especially if any of the Cardiff services are formed of 5-Car Bi-Mode IEPs.  I have similar concerns over the Cotswold Line.
    As I've just posted over on the 15:51 to Worcester topic, the DfT diagram modelling assumes single 5-car units on all but two Costwolds-PAD services in each direction. There are some single 5-car units on Cardiff workings too, and on Swansea services. For example, the 08:40 PAD-SWA, 08:58 PAD-CDF and 09:40 PAD-SWA are all single 5-car units.

    I would expect the additional services through Bristol Parkway to provide some relief to the South Wales services as well, particularly if they are faster by virtue of not stopping at Swindon or Didcot.

    It's a faster route in any case. Then add in the faster acceleration and later braking times, and the service will be faster, even with stops at Swindon and Didcot.

    Given that this was all planned a few years ago, since when rail use has grown substantially, do we know if there are options for more (or longer) trains?
    There are/were options for trains to run on other routes (southern WCML, IC225 replacment, Kings Lynn and PAD-Plymouth/Penzance), one of which has been taken up, but nothing about train lengthening as far as I'm aware. Anyway, the problem isn't a shortage of units*, so an option for more trains isn't required, longer trains is what we need.

    * in fact I think we could probably have slightly fewer of them, since there is an allowance for a small amount of multiple working in the 5-car fleet currently planned.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 06, 2014, 11:01:12
    I do wish the DfT would get over their obsession with trying to get 100% utilisation and 100 reliability from rolling stock.

    It is mathamatically impossible as all mechnical things will fail at some point. They also need constant maintenace to maintain their reliabilty.

    It can be proved that the higher the utilisation achieved the lower the reliability. This was comprehensively proved with Hull trains. When they lost their spare Meridian their fleet went from being one of the most reliable fleets (as measured by miles 5 minute failures) to being one of the worst with a  large decrease in miles per failure.

    So instead of trying to spread the 5 cars all over the country why not order another couple or more and add to the Cotswold line fleet for strengthening and improving the reliability of the whole fleet. It would pay off in the life of the units.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 06, 2014, 11:25:08
    I do wish the DfT would get over their obsession with trying to get 100% utilisation and 100 reliability from rolling stock.
    I can find no evidence that they are doing that at all.   Tenders do seem to be based on daily diagrams required, but winning bidders are providing more trains than required.

    The recent ECML track access application for the post-IEP timetable shows quite a low utilisation of their IEP fleet, as you'd expect with four sub-fleets:

    Quote
    The fleet consists of the following formation (with 2x 5 car operation in the peaks):
    10 x 9 car bi-mode plus 3 x 9 car bi-mode spare sets (Class 800 series)
    26 x 9 car electrics plus 4 x 9 car electric spare sets (Class 801 series)
    8 x 5 car bi-modes plus 2 x 5 car bi-mode spare sets (Class 800 series)
    10 x 5 car electrics plus 2 x 5 car bi-mode spare sets (Class 801 series)
    (54 diagrams per day) plus 11 spare sets per day

    http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/12184/s17-ec-applic-form-p.pdf

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 22, 2014, 13:39:34
    A query about GW branches and electrification.  Everyone is well aware of the main 'electrification gap' affecting services based around Reading, i.e. the North Downs route to Gatwick via Redhill.   It is also common knowledge that the 3 main Thames Valley branches are being wired.

    But what about the FGW services between Oxford and Banbury?  These rarely gets mentioned one way or another, AFAICR, but I just noticed in the electrification diagram shown on page 41 of the GW route plan here:

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/strategicbusinessplan/cp5/supporting%20documents/our%20activity%20and%20expenditure%20plans/route%20plans/western%20route%20plan.pdf

    ...an unlabelled extension north of Oxford.  Is that supposed to be Banbury, or is it just an error in the drawing?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Network SouthEast on July 22, 2014, 14:02:24
    Oxford to Banbury and Reading to Basingstoke are being wired up as part of the bigger "Electric Spine" project which will see electrification of Bedford to Nottingham, Banbury to Nuneaton and the East West line from Oxford to Bedford, as well as the eventual conversion of Basingstoke to Southampton from DC to AC.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 22, 2014, 14:22:02
    Oxford-Banbury electrification is part of the freight spine work, not the GW electrification, and thus subject to a different timescale.

    A turbo will service the FGW OXF-BAN trains until such time as the electrification to BAN is complete - then there's talk of starting OXF IEPs back from there, certainly in the peaks. IT should mean no OXF starters/terminators in the peaks, and thus improve punctuality through Oxford going forward....

    ....and ease the services through the station when the redevelopment takes place, and not all platforms are available


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 22, 2014, 14:49:25
    Thanks but I know all about the 'electric spine' aspects of electrification - but going by the latest update to the CP enhancements (Jun 14) the dates for the sections to Oxford Banbury and Basingstoke are still to be decided - and with much of the rest of the electric spine work due to finish beyond 2019, is there any firm evidence that these two are going to be done by 2019 (end of CP5)?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 22, 2014, 15:15:26
    Those sections, I thought, are part of the GW scheme? Oxford *must* be as IEPs are due to start running to Newbury & Oxford by 2017(? - but certainly the first to use IEPs, and within CP5).

    The Spine I thought was following the completion of the current plans for GW electrification, so could well be outside CP5.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 22, 2014, 15:53:37
    Those sections, I thought, are part of the GW scheme?

    My typo sorry, I meant Oxford to Banbury, rather than Oxford itself...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on July 22, 2014, 20:59:32
    A turbo will service the FGW OXF-BAN trains until such time as the electrification to BAN is complete - then there's talk of starting OXF IEPs back from there, certainly in the peaks.
    How would Oxford's hourly IEP service start back from Banbury? It is currently advertised as starting back from Worcester/Hereford. If there's going to be more than one IEP per hour to Oxford, where are the additional IEP units coming from?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 22, 2014, 22:38:47
    If there's going to be more than one IEP per hour to Oxford, where are the additional IEP units coming from?

    The DfT's fantasy diagram section.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 23, 2014, 09:27:15
    My bad - I was chucking the 319s (or whatever) in the same overall 'IEP' programme for ease of writing. It's likely to be these rather than actual IEP that start back from BAN.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on August 13, 2014, 09:33:34
    BBC South Today's report on the work of the HOPS train on the GWML has just been posted on the BBC News website:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28766197 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28766197)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on August 13, 2014, 10:36:36
    And Paul Clifton tweeted a photo (https://twitter.com/PaulCliftonBBC/status/499163119714066432/photo/1) of the cameraman getting extremely wet....



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on August 13, 2014, 10:47:25
    Would it would be too much to expect the dates to be right though?   
    Parkway to Cardiff by Dec 2017, and Cardiff to Swansea by Dec 2018 is the latest published timeline.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 13, 2014, 19:40:15
    Would it would be too much to expect the dates to be right though?   
    Parkway to Cardiff by Dec 2017, and Cardiff to Swansea by Dec 2018 is the latest published timeline.

    Paul

    I would say they will not be too far out with electrification on new route gets going it is quite quick, the line possessions already booked, surveying and trial holes ongoing so providing the factory train does what says on the can then yes, this train is only for plain line complex areas will be done with conventional RRVs.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on August 14, 2014, 10:29:33
    BBC South Today's report on the work of the HOPS train on the GWML has just been posted on the BBC News website:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28766197 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-28766197)

    I notice NR are saying that this marks the *start* of the electrification....when *we* know otherwise that piling has been taking place for a while now. Of course, all the pro mags & websites take this as gospel, without checking. Even one who marked the first pile going in....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on August 19, 2014, 16:12:51
    Passing North Pole just now (the depot not the compass point) and I notice that a whole raft of Hitachi branding has appeared over the front doors and along the side of the shed...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on August 25, 2014, 14:38:29
    ......and apparently there is a new logo to cover the GWML electrification work that looks very familiar (wonder how much they payed a consultant to come up with that idea ::) ::)): http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/furrerfrey/news-overview/2014/q3/GWE.html


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on August 25, 2014, 16:15:29
    Who owns the original copyright?....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on August 25, 2014, 17:19:45
    The Great Western Railway's legacy GWR roundel is trademarked for certain uses, with the mark being owned by the Science Museum Group (SCMG Enterprises Limited).

    http://www.ipo.gov.uk/tmcase/Results/1/UK00002636701

    I have a feeling it may be public domain for other uses, such as when used by heritage railways, other museums (not for souvenirs) and publications. It's unlikely, I think, that SCMG Enterprises Limited are going to be concerned that their trademark is being debased by the subtly altered use in a totally different class of business to which they use the trademark for.

    If Furrer+Frey, or other partners in the Great Western Electrification progamme, started selling cufflinks, badges, crockery or mirrors with that GWE roundel on them then they could be breaching SCMG Enterprises Limited's trademark. I don't think that's likely though.

    Looking into this did lead me to another recent trademark using the letters 'GWR'. See:

    http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4600.msg159965#msg159965


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on August 26, 2014, 09:23:50
    Wires down AGAIN on the southern end of the ECML, with serious disruption since last evening.
    Hopefully lessons have been learnt from the failed East Coast scheme and the GWR electrification will be more successful.
    However many parts of the GWR route are exposed to high winds, and other parts have steep sided cuttings and embankments that appear vulnerable to landslides displacing masts etc.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: a-driver on August 26, 2014, 11:18:18
    Wires down AGAIN on the southern end of the ECML, with serious disruption since last evening.
    Hopefully lessons have been learnt from the failed East Coast scheme and the GWR electrification will be more successful.
    However many parts of the GWR route are exposed to high winds, and other parts have steep sided cuttings and embankments that appear vulnerable to landslides displacing masts etc.


    It was alleged that it was a Network Rail test train that bought the wires down as well.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 26, 2014, 19:29:48
    Broadgauge the type of OLE being used on the GWML west of Airport Jcn has a different means of registering the wires.  The ECML with its BR Mk3 head span construction is prone to all line blockage if one road is damaged on the GW independently mechanically registered equipment is being used, basically it will use portal (ie steel beams across all lines) in 4 track areas and single mast for each line in 2 track areas; also the GWML are going for typical 50 metres between structures whereas the ECML is typically 70 metres.

    Will the GWML get affected by a rip down at some stage yes it will do HST's have catastrophic failures stranding passengers for hours on end in the middle of no where  yes they have, mechanical and electrical systems fail we have to accept that its when the human intervention during the failures fails that is inexcusable


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on August 26, 2014, 19:53:43
    ...and single mast for each line in 2 track areas; also the GWML are going for typical 50 metres between structures whereas the ECML is typically 70 metres.

    Also, I believe the plan is to have bi-di signalling installed as part of the Oxford corridor enhancements between Didcot and Banbury, so along with the bi-di signalling already installed westwards from Didcot to Bristol, and the fact that many trains will have back-up emergency diesel power or full bi-mode capability and every indication is that the GWML system (and the ability to continue in some capacity when there has been a failure) will be much more robust than the ECML which does fail spectacularly far too often.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 26, 2014, 21:43:41
    and every indication is that the GWML system (and the ability to continue in some capacity when there has been a failure) will be much more robust than the ECML which does fail spectacularly far too often.

    The ECML OLE is now 25 years old for the newest parts, between Hitchin and Peterborough its over 30.  BR did the ECML electrification to a very tight budget, its maintenance suffered in the Railtrack years at the very time it need a half life refit it did not get that much money most being diverted the WCML although in 2000 ish it did get a new feeder station at Corries Mill, new SCADA and new protection relays but these were seen a performance enhancements.

    Line access on the ECML is very restrictive due to a lot of freight and currently the Scottish Sleepers are diverted down the ECML at weekend while the WCML is have yet more work done to it.

    The ECML has an OLE power upgrade project planned for the next 5 years along with ETRMS the power upgrade keeps getting "optimised"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 26, 2014, 21:46:53

    Also, I believe the plan is to have bi-di signalling installed as part of the Oxford corridor enhancements between Didcot and Banbury, so along with the bi-di signalling already installed westwards from Didcot to Bristol, and the fact that many trains will have back-up emergency diesel power or full bi-mode capability and every indication is that the GWML system (and the ability to continue in some capacity when there has been a failure) will be much more robust than the ECML which does fail spectacularly far too often.

    All the trains will have diesel back-up. The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station, subject to no entanglement of cables. The engines will be used daily, taking the sets into and out of the depot.

    If push comes to shove, they will probably be used to keep the lights and aircon on until a loco arrives to rescueone and all.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on August 26, 2014, 21:47:40
    The ECML has an OLE power upgrade project planned for the next 5 years along with ETRMS the power upgrade keeps getting "optimised"

    That sounds like the new type of value engineering in which the bean counters engineer all the value out of the project before they approve it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on August 26, 2014, 22:41:15

    Also, I believe the plan is to have bi-di signalling installed as part of the Oxford corridor enhancements between Didcot and Banbury, so along with the bi-di signalling already installed westwards from Didcot to Bristol, and the fact that many trains will have back-up emergency diesel power or full bi-mode capability and every indication is that the GWML system (and the ability to continue in some capacity when there has been a failure) will be much more robust than the ECML which does fail spectacularly far too often.

    All the trains will have diesel back-up. The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station, subject to no entanglement of cables. The engines will be used daily, taking the sets into and out of the depot.

    If push comes to shove, they will probably be used to keep the lights and aircon on until a loco arrives to rescueone and all.

    Yes, agreed that all the SET/IEP's will, but the reason I said most trains is because I was taking into account the likely use of EMUs without any back-up diesel power on the London to Oxford/Newbury route and maybe further afield than that.  Compatible couplers with the SET trains would be potentially very useful on those occasions an EMU is stranded.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 26, 2014, 22:44:20
    All the trains will have diesel back-up. The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station, subject to no entanglement of cables. The engines will be used daily, taking the sets into and out of the depot.

    If push comes to shove, they will probably be used to keep the lights and aircon on until a loco arrives to rescueone and all.

    Twerking all the way  ;D ;D sorry could not resist I am sure you meant Pan

    According to the IET lecture given by Hitachi last summer the gen sets on the electric traction only trains principle use is to maintain hotel services, it can power the traction pack with a limited speed of 30mph max


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 26, 2014, 22:59:48
    The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station...

    Twerking all the way  ;D ;D sorry could not resist I am sure you meant Pan


    Erm ... simply so I know how to record this correctly in our 'acronyms and abbreviations' pages, should I refer to 'pantographs', 'pants' or 'pans'?  ::) :o ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: trainbuff on August 27, 2014, 11:01:16
    I believe you should refer to them as pans. That seems to be what the railway people I know refer to them as. Never heard them called 'pants' till your post!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on August 27, 2014, 12:18:59

    Also, I believe the plan is to have bi-di signalling installed as part of the Oxford corridor enhancements between Didcot and Banbury, so along with the bi-di signalling already installed westwards from Didcot to Bristol, and the fact that many trains will have back-up emergency diesel power or full bi-mode capability and every indication is that the GWML system (and the ability to continue in some capacity when there has been a failure) will be much more robust than the ECML which does fail spectacularly far too often.

    All the trains will have diesel back-up. The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station, subject to no entanglement of cables. The engines will be used daily, taking the sets into and out of the depot.

    If push comes to shove, they will probably be used to keep the lights and aircon on until a loco arrives to rescueone and all.
    I think it is only one diesel engine on a 9-car 'electric', with 3 or 4 on a 9-car 'bi-mode' (although currently the GW will not be getting any of those) and 2 diesel engines on a hypothetical 10-car 'electric'. Personally, I think the bolded bit at the end is more likely, since if the wires are down there is likely entanglement or an electric-only unit blocking the line ahead. Thus, the diesel engine in the 'electric' sets becomes just about keeping the lights on and the saloon temperature correct. The flaw with that is that aircon/heating/lighting systems can fail for other reasons beside loss of power. I've read enough complaints about 158s with failed aircon despite the fact everything else still working to know that. Thus, I would suggest that a solution which could also keep passengers comfortable in the event of the aircon failing while the OHLE is still undamaged and working would be better than a diesel engine which only helps if the lack of aircon is caused by loss of power.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on August 27, 2014, 14:41:04
    Thus, the diesel engine in the 'electric' sets becomes just about keeping the lights on and the saloon temperature correct.

    With the ability to move to a station to de-train passengers if necessary. With the ability to reach and use a crossover to a relief or bi-directional line to pass an obstruction. It's not just about providing hotel power. The diesel engine provides much more in the way of operational flexibility than just keeping the lights on and the saloons comfortable. Much reduced chance of the horror stories we hear of passengers trapped on trains for hours at a time unable to move forward or backward.

    And, as already mentioned, freedom of movement in depots.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 27, 2014, 18:23:33
    The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station...

    Twerking all the way  ;D ;D sorry could not resist I am sure you meant Pan


    Erm ... simply so I know how to record this correctly in our 'acronyms and abbreviations' pages, should I refer to 'pantographs', 'pants' or 'pans'?  ::) :o ;D

    Pan in the singular and Pans in the plural ................

    Some say they are called a Pan because its short for Pantograph and some say its because the look like a frying pan and you certainly do if you touch one and others believe its to do with Peter Pan because 'lectricary is magic.  As an engineer I'll go with the last one  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on September 11, 2014, 10:09:42
    Has there been a change of plans for the GW electrification?

    I understood from the published information that the overhead wires would be individually supported and registered so that if one set came down it wouldn't affect the overhead over the other tracks. In other words - Headspans, R.I.P.

    However, while walking along Tudor Road in Reading at the end of last week, this is the road that runs parallel to the railway and connects Station Approach to the Caversham Road, I noticed headspans on the start of the curve from Reading Station towards Reading West.

    Then I noticed in the photograph published on page 28 of the September Modern Railways that the tall masts shown at South Moreton seem to be undeniably for headspans.

    Is Network Rail trying to save money and will reliability suffer? Why have we not been told?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 11, 2014, 10:25:09
    Has there been a change of plans for the GW electrification?

    I understood from the published information that the overhead wires would be individually supported and registered so that if one set came down it wouldn't affect the overhead over the other tracks. In other words - Headspans, R.I.P.

    However, while walking along Tudor Road in Reading at the end of last week, this is the road that runs parallel to the railway and connects Station Approach to the Caversham Road, I noticed headspans on the start of the curve from Reading Station towards Reading West.

    Then I noticed in the photograph published on page 28 of the September Modern Railways that the tall masts shown at South Moreton seem to be undeniably for headspans.

    Is Network Rail trying to save money and will reliability suffer? Why have we not been told?

    When you say you "noticed headspans", do you mean with the support cable (not just any old bit of wire) strung between the uprights? Or do you just mean "tall masts"? I though the same of the pairs of tall uprights elsewhere aroung Reading, until they started fitting double crossbars to them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 11, 2014, 10:33:06
    Headspans are fine - what could possibly go wrong?

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


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on September 11, 2014, 12:10:01

    When you say you "noticed headspans", do you mean with the support cable (not just any old bit of wire) strung between the uprights? Or do you just mean "tall masts"? I though the same of the pairs of tall uprights elsewhere aroung Reading, until they started fitting double crossbars to them.

    Looking along Tudor Road to the west one can see masts placed along the edge of the embankment roughly where Reading Main Line West Signal Box stood. From the tops of these masts, and three or four are visible, are what look to be the top wires of headspans forming a catenary across the tracks. It is not possible to see the corresponding mast on the other side of the tracks from Tudor Road. The next time I'm there or at the station I shall have to have another look to see if my suspicions are confirmed.

    The photograph in Modern Railways is taken with a telephoto lens and shows 9 very tall masts on the outside of the curve with an HST passing on the Down Main. There appears to be gaps in the spacing as if two or three masts are missing. There are correspondingly tall masts on the inside of the curve but it is not possible to count them as they are obscured by the curve and the trees. I know it is difficult to make accurate judgements on dimensions from such an image, but the masts appear to be about 2 1/2 to 3 times as high as the rear of the HST which is about in line with the last of the masts on the inside of the curve. In any event they look to be higher than the masts shown in your photograph. This might possibly be an isolation or feeder point but there do seem to be a lot of masts for such a feature.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on September 11, 2014, 12:46:03
    I found a few photos on the site dedicated to the Old Dalby test track that conveniently show old and new side by side.  The shot below suggests that the UK1 masts are generally stronger and higher, and although it's only a single track cantilever shown, all the hardware seems to be mounted level with or higher than the contact wire, the old type on the left the cantilever is mounted lower, IYSWIM:

    http://www.old-dalby.com/images/14-02-03_new%20registration%20arm.jpg

    What might also be significant is that the GWML is a '25 kV - 0 - 25 kV' autotransformer installation.  The additional catenary(s) that form the second, anti phase 25 kV supply (the autotransformer feeder - ATF) are normally mounted outside and higher than the portals or cantilevers, if starting with a brand new installation they may have decided to place the ATF higher, because they can.   There are also earth conductors strung along the masts, IIRC - perhaps the more space between everything the better.

    However I thought the only OHLE visible in the Caversham Rd area was that present over the depot stabling tracks (there since before they opened) - and that is the lightweight style known as 'trolley wire' under headspans that is typically used in depots at low speed, but that isn't indicative of main line policy.

    PS - checked today, the only headspans visible from the station are those over the stabling sidings.  As far as I could see from a train leaving platform 2 for Reading West there is still nothing in place over the Westbury lines.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 11, 2014, 15:33:04
    All the trains will have diesel back-up. The 9-car sets will have 2 (or three possibly) diesel engines, which should be able to provide enough power to limp along with pants down to the next station, subject to no entanglement of cables. The engines will be used daily, taking the sets into and out of the depot.

    If push comes to shove, they will probably be used to keep the lights and aircon on until a loco arrives to rescueone and all.

    Twerking all the way  ;D ;D sorry could not resist I am sure you meant Pan

    You do it your way, I'll do it mine...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 12, 2014, 18:51:11
    However I thought the only OHLE visible in the Caversham Rd area was that present over the depot stabling tracks (there since before they opened) - and that is the lightweight style known as 'trolley wire' under headspans that is typically used in depots at low speed, but that isn't indicative of main line policy.

    PS - checked today, the only headspans visible from the station are those over the stabling sidings.  As far as I could see from a train leaving platform 2 for Reading West there is still nothing in place over the Westbury lines.

    Paul
    Here's what you see from the end of Tudor Road. It is trolley wire, evidently, so it must be in the depot. But it is impossible to believe that when looking at it - it just looks far too close! Going further along, into the car park before the Queens Arms, separates the supports in the view, but still leaves the distance impossible to judge as you can't see the ground under them.

    Looking from the station (which dramatically foreshortens the distances so they look very odd indeed) you can see supports along the viaduct, which is too far west to be seen from those places, but not on the ramp which should be visible. However, the south side of the ramp is not even finished yet. I think you can see in the second picture that supports in the depot (behind the OHLE supports on the relief lines) are the right thing and do come a lot further east - and I think the gantry in the foreground is the one in the other picture.

    PS: looking at the full picture, before I cropped it a bit too much, that definitely is the same gantry.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: tom m on September 12, 2014, 19:33:37
    Looks like the electrification in the new depot is all of the headapan type.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 12, 2014, 19:39:49
    Looks like the electrification in the new depot is all of the headapan type.

    As paul7755 noted above, it is usual in depots to use this 'trolley wire' system. That means no catenary - just a contact wire with close-spaced headspan supports.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on September 13, 2014, 09:27:10
    Yes, in depots where speeds are low, trolley wires supported by headspans are used. This is the case at Reading. Between Reading and Didcot the stanchions which are being erected will support portal cross-members. You can see these awaiting assembly in the NR/Amey/Lundy Projects electrification compound at Moreton Cutting, east of Didcot. There is also an example of a "half portal" erected in the Balfour Beatty site in the former Langley Fuel Sidings just east of Langley station further up the line. Possibly put up for training purposes for the BB team doing the Airport Junction to Maidenhead section.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 13, 2014, 09:39:16
    Stuving's first photos shows Jacques Galland 25kV Section insulators well I think they are  Jacques Galland they seem to be the preferred manufacture.

    It is highly unlikely that headspan construction will be used on any main running lines on new electrification, if the GW route had their way the 12 miles of headspan between Padd and Airport Jcn would be replaced but that would be to expensive and disruptive


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on September 23, 2014, 22:07:10
    Saw my first mast in the Didcot area today, just by the signalling centre.
    Although it is more like a vertical pipe than a mast, does it get narrower as it gets taller?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on September 23, 2014, 22:34:01
    I wonder if what you saw is the pile that is driven into the ground to form the support? Sometimes you can see one that has been left mostly above ground.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 24, 2014, 07:36:59
    I suspect that it was a steel pile they are about 600 to 750mm in diameter come in 5m lengths often one is driven in and a second or even a third is attached to the top and then that driven in.  They have a number of bosses for bolting each other together of for attaching the OLE structure base plate to.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on September 24, 2014, 07:50:22
    I suspect that it was a steel pile they are about 600 to 750mm in diameter come in 5m lengths often one is driven in and a second or even a third is attached to the top and then that driven in.  They have a number of bosses for bolting each other together of for attaching the OLE structure base plate to.

    I've seen quite a few of those "tubes" in the ground from London to Reading but most of them are buried quite deep. What I find curious if that they don't appear to be spaced evenly and there seem to be some gaps where it seems there should be a support but isn't. Could this be because in some locations they are more difficult to install than others ?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on September 24, 2014, 09:11:39
    I suspect that it was a steel pile they are about 600 to 750mm in diameter come in 5m lengths often one is driven in and a second or even a third is attached to the top and then that driven in.  They have a number of bosses for bolting each other together of for attaching the OLE structure base plate to.
    Yes that would be them and there were some other piles laying nearby so that would make complete sense.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 24, 2014, 09:13:59
    I think I saw a fair number of these 5m piles, er, piled up in Swindon the other week.

    I too am surprised by the apparently patchy nature of operations. Most extremely there seems to be something going between Bath and Box Tunnel, with scaffolding barriers put up at roughly the right intervals.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on September 24, 2014, 10:37:53
    I too am surprised by the apparently patchy nature of operations. Most extremely there seems to be something going between Bath and Box Tunnel, with scaffolding barriers put up at roughly the right intervals.

    That'll be so the foundation trenches can be dug.  Safety barriers are out up if they're close to the track.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on September 24, 2014, 10:58:45
    Apologies if this has been asked before but are there any elements of the Electrification Program that require planning permission? I'm guessing that since Brunel first installed the railway planning rules may have changed a bit!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on September 24, 2014, 11:17:48
    Network Rail is, generally, exempt from planning permission regs on it's own land. However they do consult with local authorities and bodies such as English Heritage, Cadw in Wales, and Historic Scotland.

    I've no doubt that specific sites of historic importance on the GWML, such as Maidenhead Bridge, Wharncliffe Viaduct, Box Tunnel and Sydney Gardens in Bath have been given careful consideration.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on September 24, 2014, 11:23:03
    Apologies if this has been asked before but are there any elements of the Electrification Program that require planning permission? I'm guessing that since Brunel first installed the railway planning rules may have changed a bit!

    In general, they use something called 'permitted development rights' within the railway's existing boundaries.  in principle, the original Acts setting up the railway allow for maintenance and modifications connected to operation of the railway, in perpetuity.

    Listed building consent is also then required for modifications to some structures.  As a broad generalisation they do not have to get permission for the overall concept of wiring, they just inform local authorities they are doing it, and explain how they are meeting requirements for important buildings...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on September 24, 2014, 11:44:26
    I've seen quite a few of those "tubes" in the ground from London to Reading but most of them are buried quite deep. What I find curious if that they don't appear to be spaced evenly and there seem to be some gaps where it seems there should be a support but isn't. Could this be because in some locations they are more difficult to install than others ?

    From what I've read of the HOPS train, it includes a number of piling rigs, of different types that can operate separately, one of which is for very hard or difficult ground.   It would make sense to bomb along with the lighter equipment putting in the standard tubular piles and if a first attempt showed up difficult ground, then mark the location and leave it to the specialist rig coming later.

    Another benefit of the type of piles chosen, with the flange mounted threaded holes, is that there's a transition plate from pile to mast that allows for verticality adjustment, meaning that within reason the piles don't have to be exactly plumb.  The same piles are used for many recent signal post installations, and even the massive signal gantries at Reading...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on September 24, 2014, 11:45:42
    I've seen quite a few of those "tubes" in the ground from London to Reading but most of them are buried quite deep. What I find curious if that they don't appear to be spaced evenly and there seem to be some gaps where it seems there should be a support but isn't. Could this be because in some locations they are more difficult to install than others ?

    From what I've read of the HOPS train, it includes a number of piling rigs, of different types that can operate separately, one of which is for very hard or difficult ground.   It would make sense to bomb along with the lighter equipment putting in the standard tubular piles and if a first attempt showed up difficult ground, then mark the location and leave it to the specialist rig coming later.

    Another benefit of the type of piles chosen, with the flange mounted threaded holes, is that there's a transition plate from pile to mast that allows for verticality adjustment, meaning that within reason the piles don't have to be exactly plumb.  The same piles are used for many recent signal post installations, and even the massive signal gantries at Reading...

    Paul

    That makes perfect sense Paul - thanks


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 24, 2014, 13:29:24

    Another benefit of the type of piles chosen, with the flange mounted threaded holes, is that there's a transition plate from pile to mast that allows for verticality adjustment, meaning that within reason the piles don't have to be exactly plumb.  The same piles are used for many recent signal post installations...


    Fnaar fnaar! K-yuk k-yuk! Eat your heart out Finbarr Saunders!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on September 24, 2014, 16:47:21
    Apologies if this has been asked before but are there any elements of the Electrification Program that require planning permission? I'm guessing that since Brunel first installed the railway planning rules may have changed a bit!

    In general, they use something called 'permitted development rights' within the railway's existing boundaries.  in principle, the original Acts setting up the railway allow for maintenance and modifications connected to operation of the railway, in perpetuity.

    Listed building consent is also then required for modifications to some structures.  As a broad generalisation they do not have to get permission for the overall concept of wiring, they just inform local authorities they are doing it, and explain how they are meeting requirements for important buildings...

    Paul

    That is my understanding too.  They did need planning consent for a few things like new depots but for putting the wires up they generally do not need consent.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on September 24, 2014, 16:50:17
    NR announce that Wantage Rd bridge will now not be closed during the works, the new bridge is to be built alongside it:
    Quote
    Network Rail has confirmed that the A338 Wantage Road bridge will remain open for the majority of the improvements.

    Network Rail is building a new, higher bridge across the railway line as part of its Great Western Electrification Programme. New, faster, quieter and cleaner trains will draw power from overhead lines and the extra height is needed to ensure clearance.

    The road will not need to be closed, as the new bridge will be constructed alongside the existing one. Minor, short-term restrictions may be in place at times during the process but for the majority of the time traffic will flow normally.

    Once the new bridge is complete the old bridge will be demolished. Work will start in within the next couple of months and the bridge will open next summer
    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/A338-Wantage-Road-will-stay-open-during-major-bridge-reconstruction-216d.aspx


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 24, 2014, 19:16:36
    Typical spacing of OLE structures on the GWML is 50 metres, (the ECML and MML it is 70 metres) there are several different diameter piles being used depending on the structure required, it is likely the train will go out with all the same size piles and thump them in where required and then come back a thump in another size on another visit.

    I have never managed to work out the logic behind OLE civil's engineers  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 24, 2014, 19:45:35
    Apologies if this has been asked before but are there any elements of the Electrification Program that require planning permission? I'm guessing that since Brunel first installed the railway planning rules may have changed a bit!

    In general, they use something called 'permitted development rights' within the railway's existing boundaries.  in principle, the original Acts setting up the railway allow for maintenance and modifications connected to operation of the railway, in perpetuity.

    Listed building consent is also then required for modifications to some structures.  As a broad generalisation they do not have to get permission for the overall concept of wiring, they just inform local authorities they are doing it, and explain how they are meeting requirements for important buildings...

    Paul

    The relevant planning law was posted here et seq. (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=13143.msg142485#msg142485). Planning approval is required for lots of buildings, including all bridges, as they are not now possible as permitted development. However:
    Quote
    A.2. The prior approval referred to in paragraph A.1 is not to be refused by the appropriate authority nor are conditions to be imposed unless they are satisfied that^
    (a) the development (other than the provision of or works carried out to a dam) ought to be and could reasonably be carried out elsewhere on the land; or
    (b) the design or external appearance of any building, bridge, aqueduct, pier or dam would injure the amenity of the neighbourhood and is reasonably capable of modification to avoid such injury.

    So the first question is - is a portal or gantry a bridge? I guess that could only apply to signal gantries with a walkway and a ladder each end; arguably that's a footbridge (albeit not public). 

    For OLE, it can't reasonably be built anywhere else, can it? But it's probably as well for NR that it does doesn't seem to be in that list, since the current design is - let's face it - pretty ugly. Certainly enough to "injure the amenity" of most places. Whether it is "reasonably capable of modification to avoid such injury" is debatable, but I do think that better-looking structures are possible.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 24, 2014, 22:03:12
    Whether it is "reasonably capable of modification to avoid such injury" is debatable, but I do think that better-looking structures are possible.

    Define "reasonably", with an accountant present. Ornate faux-Victorian wrought ironwork would be nice, but massed-produced and simple will win the day. It may not win awards for aesthetic content, but who expects that on a railway? Even the bits normally regarded as pretty - semaphore signals spring to mind - doubtless had their detractors in their early days. Necessity will trump art every time, but some will see fairness of form in the new OLE.

    As Spike Milligan put it: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. You can get it out with Optrex".


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 24, 2014, 22:53:43
    NR will always consult with the local Authority planners on any structure, unless it is covered a TWA and even then NR will notify the local Authority when it intends to carry out the works.

    Things like road closures and section 66 have to be applied for many projects so it always helps to keep the planners on side.   NR will invoke it permitted development rights if it has too.

    Like all large undertakings and utilities NR has a consents team that deal with local Authorities, other external railways, utilities, etc 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on October 01, 2014, 19:13:57
    They are replacing a road bridge over the railway in Maidenhead as part of this.. I still can't understand how they are doing this whilst trains are running underneath.. Though I'm terribly impressed that they are...

    I've been reliably informed by my son (who has to walk over the replacement temporary footbridge each day) that the old bridge has finally gone..

    I am guessing adding the new improved, and higher bridge will also have to be done very carefully :-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 01, 2014, 21:09:32
    They are replacing a road bridge over the railway in Maidenhead as part of this.. I still can't understand how they are doing this whilst trains are running underneath.. Though I'm terribly impressed that they are...

    I've been reliably informed by my son (who has to walk over the replacement temporary footbridge each day) that the old bridge has finally gone..

    I am guessing adding the new improved, and higher bridge will also have to be done very carefully :-)

    Not all of it is actually done while the trains are running, some lighter work might be done behind scaffold screening or back from the open line; however the heavy lift stuff is done during an "All Line Block" type possession.

    "All Line Block" type possession are like hens teeth and will have been in the planning for at least 2 years.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: NickB on October 03, 2014, 08:29:31
    There goes the road bridge at Cox Green.... (went last Sunday apparently)

    http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/News/Areas/Cox-Green/Highfield-Bridge-lifted-out-as-part-of-electrification-works-01102014.htm



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 03, 2014, 18:00:06
    There goes the road bridge at Cox Green.... (went last Sunday apparently)

    http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/News/Areas/Cox-Green/Highfield-Bridge-lifted-out-as-part-of-electrification-works-01102014.htm



    I'm sure they will put something back to fill the hole  ;D



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 03, 2014, 18:24:06
    That report makes it sound like the same bridge is going back - is it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on October 12, 2014, 20:03:42
    The bridge on the A417 at Challow Station between Didcot and Swindon was demolished this morning. Apologies for the poor quality as it was rather foggy but here are some pictures of the last girder being lifted out by Anscough's most impressive 500 tonne lift capacity crane:

    (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1119929/Challow%20Bridge/Low%20res/Last%20Girder%20-%20Initial%20Lift.jpg)
    Initial lift

    (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1119929/Challow%20Bridge/Low%20res/Last%20Girder%20-%20Mid%20Lift.jpg)
    Mid lift

    (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1119929/Challow%20Bridge/Low%20res/Girder%20Lowering.jpg)
    Lowering the girder

    (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1119929/Challow%20Bridge/Low%20res/Ainscough%20500t%20Crane.jpg)
    Anscough 500 t crane

    The plan is for the line to be handed back by 5:00am tomorrow morning and the pre-cast beams for the new bridge deck will be lifted into position next weekend.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 12, 2014, 21:06:59
    One of my favourite locations for photos between Didcot and Swindon.  Hopefully the new bridge will not be too high sided to allow future expeditions there.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on October 12, 2014, 21:52:30
    Obviously the parapets will be higher - though you should still get a good view from the approaches.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 12, 2014, 22:16:43
    Can't find the plans for this one, but I see that the replacement bridge at Pearson's Brickyard (the one you see in the up direction from the platform at Bristol Porkway) has a minimum 1525mm from pavement to top of parapet - which I make about 5s 4d in old money. If this one's the same, you may have to stand on tippytoes Bobm.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 13, 2014, 19:38:28
    One of my favourite locations for photos between Didcot and Swindon.  Hopefully the new bridge will not be too high sided to allow future expeditions there.

    Can't find the plans for this one, but I see that the replacement bridge at Pearson's Brickyard (the one you see in the up direction from the platform at Bristol Porkway) has a minimum 1525mm from pavement to top of parapet - which I make about 5s 4d in old money. If this one's the same, you may have to stand on tippytoes Bobm.

    BS EN 50122-2 (I think its part 2 my copy is at work) "Railway applications. Fixed installations. Electrical safety, earthing and the return circuit. Provisions against the effects of stray currents caused by d.c. traction systems"  :o ::) requires min height of 1820mm, I have had a couple of upset Civil Engineers at work who have had to add and extra 295mm onto their parapets


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 13, 2014, 20:00:36
    This seems to apply to DC traction systems... are AC systems the same?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 13, 2014, 20:29:47
    This seems to apply to DC traction systems... are AC systems the same?

    Its probably part 1 then, I normally just work off of in house standards


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 13, 2014, 21:34:42
    Sorry, I wasn't testing you - I just wondered if there were different parapet height requirements for the differing characteristics of ac and dc traction supplies. More to the point, I'm 1970mm tall (pretty big for a squirrel, huh?), so whereas I can easily see over a 1525mm parapet, an 1820mm one is a bit of a stretch!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 13, 2014, 22:09:53
    Sorry, I wasn't testing you - I just wondered if there were different parapet height requirements for the differing characteristics of ac and dc traction supplies. More to the point, I'm 1970mm tall (pretty big for a squirrel, huh?), so whereas I can easily see over a 1525mm parapet, an 1820mm one is a bit of a stretch!

    There's not many DC systems with overhead power kit these days, not in heavy rail anyway. I am sure that whoever ruled that the gap shalleth be 1820mm had in mind every one of the seven recognised grades of bloody idiot on railways. A grade one would try to prove to his pals that you can touch the cable with a dry wooden pole, and suffer no harm, whereas a true grade seven would want to demonstrate that a stream of alcohol-enhanced urine would not conduct 25Kv as far as the todger. All these and more must  be protected from themselves and their folly.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 13, 2014, 23:22:04
    This seems to apply to DC traction systems... are AC systems the same?

    Its probably part 1 then, I normally just work off of in house standards

    BS EN50122-2 is "BS EN 50122-2:2010. Railway applications. Fixed installations. Electrical safety, earthing and the return circuit. Provisions against the effects of stray currents caused by d.c. traction systems". That's about currents flowing through the ground that destroy pipes, structural steel, and rebar etc. Not likely to mention parapet heights.

    BS EN50122-1 is "BS EN 50122-1:2011 Railway applications. Fixed installations. Electrical safety, earthing and the return circuit. Protective provisions against electric shock". That'll be the one, and presumably it covers AC and DC.

    There is also BS EN 50122-3: "BS EN 50122-3:2010. Railway applications. Fixed installations. Electrical safety, earthing and the return circuit. Mutual Interaction of a.c. and d.c. traction systems". That sounds like it's all about the electrical system design. Note the other two had earlier versions with different titles.

    I've often wondered why, if DC causes such enormous problems of stray currents, is wasn't replaced by AC ages ago. It's not particularly difficult to make a DC motor and its supporting systems to work on both. If you took the decision and waited 20 years, there would not be too much to convert for a changeover. You could even pick a frequency below 50 Hz to make the motor design easier - after all, it's what the Germans did, I think in the 1920s.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 14, 2014, 09:31:35
    Hey ho. When I googled BS EN50122-2 I found this http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/5070/TTGN3.pdf , which is about overhead dc (essentially tramway systems) and which therefore is concerned with parapet heights. Not a standard, but gives some idea of what's what.

    As an aside, am I the only one who finds it shocking (pun intended) that British Standards are all made so expensive that they are realistically only available to businesses? Shouldn't they be freely available to anyone with an interest?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on October 14, 2014, 10:00:02
    I have just accessed the Network Rail/Murphy plans for the reconstruction of Challow Bridge from the Vale of White Horse District Council's planning website. These show that the top of the parapet on the west side of the rebuilt bridge will be 1800mm above pavement level. There is no pavement on the east side, just a kerb, so this will be slightly higher. So, if you're not taller than 6 foot, you'll have to tiptoe  :)

    You can find the plans here: http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/java/support/Main.jsp?MODULE=ApplicationDetails&REF=P14/V1672/P11


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 14, 2014, 10:16:53
    Oh well - I'll look forward to resubmitted plans for Pearson's Brickyard, with 'pent roof detail' added to the top of the parapet. ::)

    Memo to self: must dig out those old platform boots...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 14, 2014, 10:59:54
    Hey ho. When I googled BS EN50122-2 I found this http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0012/5070/TTGN3.pdf , which is about overhead dc (essentially tramway systems) and which therefore is concerned with parapet heights. Not a standard, but gives some idea of what's what.

    As an aside, am I the only one who finds it shocking (pun intended) that British Standards are all made so expensive that they are realistically only available to businesses? Shouldn't they be freely available to anyone with an interest?

    That guidance document is primarily about stray direct currents (as per its title), whether the feed is overhead or third rail. There is however quite a lot about safety; essentially because safety requires a lot of good earth connections, but that makes stray currents worse.  For safety, it refers to BS EN50122-1, as you would expect. And I can't see any mention of parapets or bridges per se.

    BSI is not unusual in getting most of its income from selling standards; I think most national standards bodies are the same. The reason is obvious enough - so that commercial users of standards should bear the costs not just of publication but of the secretariat. Technical committees are made up of volunteers, and it seems unfair to charge only member companies since they provide these volunteers.

    It does get a bit odd where (as is often the case) the standard is written and negotiated and voted on by another organisation, which these days is usually European or international. For electrical/electronic ones this is usually CEN/CENELEC (which operate pretty much as a single body), unless communications is involved when it is ETSI. ETSI is the one I am familiar with - it has both companies (including individuals) and countries (for radio and telecoms regulations) as members. In this case the member companies do pay most of the costs.

    Drafts are nowadays made public, and there is a public consultation stage in the approval process. Then the final step before publication is the national vote, where only national standards bodies are involved and most of the people who wrote it are not involved at all. Published standards do cost money.

    I certainly came across several people (e.g. government employees) who were offended by the cost (or in some cases the secrecy) of some standards and even regulations. The same is the case in aeronautical standards, a lot of which come from ARINC, apparently an American private company. That's now a bit less obscure, in that it's part of SAE, an engineering institution - though you need to dig to find out.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 14, 2014, 11:26:29

    That guidance document is primarily about stray direct currents (as per its title), whether the feed is overhead or third rail. There is however quite a lot about safety; essentially because safety requires a lot of good earth connections, but that makes stray currents worse.  For safety, it refers to BS EN50122-1, as you would expect. And I can't see any mention of parapets or bridges per se.


    I'm beginning to get the impression that there is some confusion at NR as to what the height should be for parapets - as DidcotPunter points out, the plans for Challow bridge include an 1800mm parapet, whereas the current (sic!) plans for Pearson's Brickyard have a 1525mm parapet - and at Pearson's Brickyard, the OHLE is starting to rise to give the extra clearance required at Bristol Porkway.

    Does it depend on how long a stick FT,N!'s 'bloody idiot' would require to poke the wires?

    It does get a bit odd where (as is often the case) the standard is written and negotiated and voted on by another organisation, which these days is usually European or international. For electrical/electronic ones this is usually CEN/CENELEC (which operate pretty much as a single body), unless communications is involved when it is ETSI. ETSI is the one I am familiar with - it has both companies (including individuals) and countries (for radio and telecoms regulations) as members. In this case the member companies do pay most of the costs.

    Drafts are nowadays made public, and there is a public consultation stage in the approval process. Then the final step before publication is the national vote, where only national standards bodies are involved and most of the people who wrote it are not involved at all. Published standards do cost money.

    I certainly came across several people (e.g. government employees) who were offended by the cost (or in some cases the secrecy) of some standards and even regulations. The same is the case in aeronautical standards, a lot of which come from ARINC, apparently an American private company. That's now a bit less obscure, in that it's part of SAE, an engineering institution - though you need to dig to find out.

    Hmm... Doesn't cost much to publish online though, does it? I guess I've just got used to the wonderful open-source world of IT, where standards are freely-available and anyone can contribute.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on October 14, 2014, 11:35:50
    All tge work to produce has to be paid for! They don't work for free on Standard development


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 14, 2014, 11:57:49

    Does it depend on how long a stick FT,N!'s 'bloody idiot' would require to poke the wires?


    For a Grade 1, yes, and in the case of a Grade 7, the state of the prostate gland.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 14, 2014, 18:31:09
    I've often wondered why, if DC causes such enormous problems of stray currents, is wasn't replaced by AC ages ago. It's not particularly difficult to make a DC motor and its supporting systems to work on both. If you took the decision and waited 20 years, there would not be too much to convert for a changeover. You could even pick a frequency below 50 Hz to make the motor design easier - after all, it's what the Germans did, I think in the 1920s.

    We have so much DC electrification to convert it to AC is very expensive and will take decades.  The scheme to convert Basingstoke / Southampton is being questioned on cost even taking into account that the Dc traction equipment and its associated HV network is obsolescent.


    I'm beginning to get the impression that there is some confusion at NR as to what the height should be for parapets - as DidcotPunter points out, the plans for Challow bridge include an 1800mm parapet, whereas the current (sic!) plans for Pearson's Brickyard have a 1525mm parapet - and at Pearson's Brickyard, the OHLE is starting to rise to give the extra clearance required at Bristol Porkway.

    The confusion is the parapet height is stated in BS EN 50122 for bridges over electrified railways which Civil Engineer regarded as an electrical standard but it is not stated in the Euro Codes Civil Engineers normally work to; often its not until an Electrification Engineer starts to check their design that they find the Civil Engineer has already signed their off, most of the time it get captured before it get expensive.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on October 15, 2014, 12:27:31
    The confusion is the parapet height is stated in BS EN 50122 for bridges over electrified railways which Civil Engineer regarded as an electrical standard but it is not stated in the Euro Codes Civil Engineers normally work to; often its not until an Electrification Engineer starts to check their design that they find the Civil Engineer has already signed their off, most of the time it get captured before it get expensive.
    ET I'm very surprised at that.  Don't you have IDR (Inter Disciplinary Reviews) and IDCs (Inter Disciplinary Checks) before the design is ultimately approved ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 15, 2014, 18:40:40
    The confusion is the parapet height is stated in BS EN 50122 for bridges over electrified railways which Civil Engineer regarded as an electrical standard but it is not stated in the Euro Codes Civil Engineers normally work to; often its not until an Electrification Engineer starts to check their design that they find the Civil Engineer has already signed their off, most of the time it get captured before it get expensive.
    ET I'm very surprised at that.  Don't you have IDR (Inter Disciplinary Reviews) and IDCs (Inter Disciplinary Checks) before the design is ultimately approved ;)

    Yes we do which works great when it a whole project, occasionally projects are split and independent of each other and if the Route Asset Team do not pick up on it at AIP (Acceptance in Principle) dummies get spat out latter on .... mainly by the project manager cost, delay being the 2 largest dummies they spit out  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on October 16, 2014, 11:43:54
    I've just followed a link on Rail UK Forums to a set of recent photos on Flickr which shows the HOPS train undergoing commissioning trials on the High Marnham Test Track in Nottinghamshire as well as the Series 1 OHLE which will be installed on the GWML. The equipment looks very robust but rather more visually intrusive than I was expecting, certainly compared to the Series 2 OHLE in use on the Liverpool to Manchester line. Here's the link:

    HOPS electrification train - Flickr album (https://www.flickr.com/photos/108904076@N07/sets/72157645369330317/with/15332853470/)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 16, 2014, 12:06:49
    I've just followed a link on Rail UK Forums to a set of recent photos on Flickr which shows the HOPS train undergoing commissioning trials on the High Marnham Test Track in Nottinghamshire as well as the Series 1 OHLE which will be installed on the GWML. The equipment looks very robust but rather more visually intrusive than I was expecting, certainly compared to the Series 2 OHLE in use on the Liverpool to Manchester line. Here's the link:

    HOPS electrification train - Flickr album (https://www.flickr.com/photos/108904076@N07/sets/72157645369330317/with/15332853470/)


    But the structures in place around Reading are not the same as those - not much lighter, but certainly different.

    One thing the test track ones do have is diagonal stays. I was expecting these, and/or guys, to appear at Reading too. The GEML pictures in the Furrer and Frey presentation that was posted here a while back show such features, in particular on the two-barred portals where we expect tensioners to be mounted. There are suitable extra piled foundations near most portals, not just those two-barred ones, but none is yet used for anything.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on October 16, 2014, 12:15:34

    But the structures in place around Reading are not the same as those - not much lighter, but certainly different.

    From memory and from a distance the posts I have seen between Cholsey and Moreton look very similar to the posts in those photographs. Unfortunately I don't have a picture to prove whether that is the case or not and they also hadn't added any of the horizontal elements of the structure.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 16, 2014, 12:35:08

    But the structures in place around Reading are not the same as those - not much lighter, but certainly different.

    From memory and from a distance the posts I have seen between Cholsey and Moreton look very similar to the posts in those photographs. Unfortunately I don't have a picture to prove whether that is the case or not and they also hadn't added any of the horizontal elements of the structure.

    A post is pretty much a post - they are all square section. But most of the "plain" supports on either side of Reading are ladder-braced portals (three or four tracks) or diagonally-braced cantilevers (two tracks). I though there were recent pictures posted, but the most recent I can find is http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=6405.msg147472#msg147472 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=6405.msg147472#msg147472). That shows both, though the portals look a bit narrower than most. There are a number of variations on the basic themes.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 16, 2014, 16:40:32
    One thing the test track ones do have is diagonal stays. I was expecting these, and/or guys, to appear at Reading too. The GEML pictures in the Furrer and Frey presentation that was posted here a while back show such features, in particular on the two-barred portals where we expect tensioners to be mounted. There are suitable extra piled foundations near most portals, not just those two-barred ones, but none is yet used for anything.

    Well, fancy that. Going into Reading today, what should I see but a row of pretty portals, stays akimbo. Only the two-barred ones, and not all of those, but note that the one shown has only one stay at the moment. And not the ones easiest to see for a picture, so it's peeping over the Buddleia.

    Still, it makes a change to have a prediction (or more of an expectation) borne out.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 16, 2014, 18:10:11
    I've just followed a link on Rail UK Forums to a set of recent photos on Flickr which shows the HOPS train undergoing commissioning trials on the High Marnham Test Track in Nottinghamshire as well as the Series 1 OHLE which will be installed on the GWML. The equipment looks very robust but rather more visually intrusive than I was expecting, certainly compared to the Series 2 OHLE in use on the Liverpool to Manchester line. Here's the link:

    HOPS electrification train - Flickr album (https://www.flickr.com/photos/108904076@N07/sets/72157645369330317/with/15332853470/)


    But the structures in place around Reading are not the same as those - not much lighter, but certainly different.

    Of course, aren't the structures installed by HOPS likely to be designed specifically to handled by the on-board machinery? So they wouldn't be the same as those installed "by hand". And any fancy bits that the HOPS-compatible kit can't do will use the other design.
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 16, 2014, 18:10:41
    As stuving says, a post is pretty much a post. The stuff at Reading, and at the test track, all looks pretty modular, and may well be what is used most places. There are three different types of cross-member shown in those excellent photos, so I assume the commissioning trials is testing each variation. Might be that the crew who will use the train are involved here.

    It's quite lumpy and functional. Expect something more sympathetic through Bath, Maidenhead etc, but with the same method of building where possible.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on October 16, 2014, 19:01:56
    I don't understand why NR couldn't have gone retro and reverted to the MK1 design used in the 1960s on the WCML.  Much more pleasing to the eye and considerably less intrusive ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 16, 2014, 20:09:37
    I've just followed a link on Rail UK Forums to a set of recent photos on Flickr which shows the HOPS train undergoing commissioning trials on the High Marnham Test Track in Nottinghamshire as well as the Series 1 OHLE which will be installed on the GWML. The equipment looks very robust but rather more visually intrusive than I was expecting, certainly compared to the Series 2 OHLE in use on the Liverpool to Manchester line. Here's the link:

    HOPS electrification train - Flickr album (https://www.flickr.com/photos/108904076@N07/sets/72157645369330317/with/15332853470/)


    But the structures in place around Reading are not the same as those - not much lighter, but certainly different.

    One thing the test track ones do have is diagonal stays. I was expecting these, and/or guys, to appear at Reading too. The GEML pictures in the Furrer and Frey presentation that was posted here a while back show such features, in particular on the two-barred portals where we expect tensioners to be mounted. There are suitable extra piled foundations near most portals, not just those two-barred ones, but none is yet used for anything.

    The difference in the style of structures between Reading Station and the remaining GW including the part being done by Crossrail is likely to be down to the NR Product Acceptance process; the Reading Station OLE structures were probably designed 4 or more years ago indeed some have been erected for almost 2 years.

    The GW electrification is using a new series of OLE components called UK Series 2 (UK series 1 has been used on the GE out of Liverpool Street Stn)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on October 19, 2014, 13:01:59
    This weekend they have been installing a new bridge at Foxhall Road in Didcot. Given the width of the abutments looks like it me be 2-way whereas the old bridge was only a single carriageway. can anyone confirm that?

    (https://www.flickr.com/photos/128009138@N07/15385778429/in/set-72157646524296954)
    (https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/105108319655356872455/albums/6071881013507083169/6071881004933881394)
    (https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/105108319655356872455/albums/6071880840129661569/6071880840385412290)

    Pictures to follow once worked out how to attach them


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 19, 2014, 15:23:48
    This weekend they have been installing a new bridge at Foxhall Road in Didcot. Given the width of the abutments looks like it me be 2-way whereas the old bridge was only a single carriageway. can anyone confirm that?

    Nope. It's a single carriageway, and they are even leaving the footpath cantilevered off the side.

    However, it is a rather odd design, where the concrete bridge deck sits on the crossbeams of a ladder-type steel span. So the main beams of that span are wider apart (10.8 m between centres) than the old bridge width (6.1 m within parapets).

    (Details from South Oxfordshire DC planning application P14/S2287/P11, which is perhaps at: http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/ccm/support/Main.jsp?MODULE=FolderView&ID=339875816&CODE=A50C036F350C1DD48C9BAB0A15CD0850&NAME=Application&REF=P14/S2287/P11 (http://www.southoxon.gov.uk/ccm/support/Main.jsp?MODULE=FolderView&ID=339875816&CODE=A50C036F350C1DD48C9BAB0A15CD0850&NAME=Application&REF=P14/S2287/P11).)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ironstone11 on October 19, 2014, 18:05:49
    This weekend they have been installing a new bridge at Foxhall Road in Didcot. Given the width of the abutments looks like it me be 2-way whereas the old bridge was only a single carriageway. can anyone confirm that?
    Nope. It's a single carriageway, and they are even leaving the footpath cantilevered off the side.

    The replacement appears to me to be a two way bridge. The drawing shows a Northbound cariageway and a Southbound carriageway. The width between kerbs is stated as being 6.5m, which is adequate for a local road.
    I don't know if the standards are country-wide, but the one I looked at (Lancashire CC) quoted 6.75m for a local distributor road and 6m for a transitional road.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 19, 2014, 18:32:24
    This weekend they have been installing a new bridge at Foxhall Road in Didcot. Given the width of the abutments looks like it me be 2-way whereas the old bridge was only a single carriageway. can anyone confirm that?
    Nope. It's a single carriageway, and they are even leaving the footpath cantilevered off the side.

    The replacement appears to me to be a two way bridge. The drawing shows a Northbound cariageway and a Southbound carriageway. The width between kerbs is stated as being 6.5m, which is adequate for a local road.
    I don't know if the standards are country-wide, but the one I looked at (Lancashire CC) quoted 6.75m for a local distributor road and 6m for a transitional road.

    We're talking at cross purposes, plus I didn't read the first post carefully. It's certainly a single carriageway, not a dual carriageway, road. It's wider than the old one, and wide enough for two-way traffic, and should be marked as such (central white line).

    The old bridge was also wide enough for two-way traffic, though not wide enough for a central white line. It was a bit tight, even for two cars, as the narrower part was in fact only 4.7 m between parapets. But there were no signs to manage priorities - you had to work it out for yourself. The next bridge up the same road (Basil Hill Road over the West Curve) has traffic lights, though I suspect that's because it's not straight rather than because it's narrower. It's not being altered for electrification (other than by raised parapets); the track is being lowered.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on October 19, 2014, 19:30:13
    Cant seem to load pictures of Foxhall Road bridge replacement so here is the link.
    https://www.flickr.com/photos/128009138@N07/sets/72157646524296954/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/128009138@N07/sets/72157646524296954/)
    Thanks for the links to the plans and I certainly never tried to pass another car in my car on the old bridge.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on December 16, 2014, 09:47:35
    Unexpected turn of events reported in the Swindon Advertiser (http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/11667691.Stratton_Green_Bridge_to_reopen_a_month_after_closing_for_rail_electrification/)

    Quote
    STRATTON Green Bridge will re-open on Saturday morning, a month after it closed to allow the railway line to be electrified.

    Some cables, underneath the bridge, which need re-routing, are deeper under the ground than first thought so further work has to be carried out.

    Network Rail says the work can be carried out over a few nights so they have said the bridge can re-open, although it will need to shut on several evenings.

    However, it will need to be closed again at some point in the new year so the electrification work can take place.

    Although no workers have been seen at the bridge for the past few weeks, Network Rail say they have carried out work in the month since the bridge first closed so that when it does close next year, it will be for a shorter period of time than had been expected.

    The bridge closed on November 17 and has contributed to the major traffic problems in the town. It was thought that it would remain shut until April.

    Andrew Haynes, Network Rail^s west of England project director, said: ^We understand the closure of this bridge has inconvenienced local residents and those who commute into Swindon, which is why we were keen to reopen the bridge once it had been confirmed that these services could be diverted at a later date, without the need for a daytime road closure.

    ^We hope that once the bridge reopens it will contribute towards easing the traffic situation in the town centre.

    ^The reconstruction of this bridge is essential to enable a new fleet of longer, faster, quieter and greener electric trains to serve commuters in Wiltshire travelling on the route from London to Cardiff.

    ^While a further closure is therefore necessary, the work we have already undertaken with the utility companies means the duration of this closure will be shorter, and as before the bridge will remain open to pedestrians and cyclists.

    "Throughout this closure, we will continue to work with the council and assess the work taking place on site to ensure we minimise disruption to local residents and commuters.^


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on December 16, 2014, 11:08:04
    Not the only place where work is on the change. From The Herald Series (http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/hsdidcotnews/11664933.Street_closure_on_hold_as_Network_Rail_considers_new_bridge_plan_for_Steventon/):
    Quote
    A HIGHLY-controversial plan to close a village high street for ten months next year has been put on hold indefinitely.

    Network Rail has said it may have found a solution which means it will not have to close Steventon High Street to carry out work on a bridge.

    The company wanted to raise the bridge, which passes below the High Street, to create room for new overhead electric wires on the track beneath.

    Residents and business owners feared shops would have to close if the company shut the road from February 16.

    But spokesman Julian Burnell said: ^It appears an alternative solution may have arisen as a result of the technical development works which have been going on in parallel to the construction of the project.^

    He said the company needed to investigate the option in more detail and discuss the implications with the community.

    He did not want to outline the new plan but said it would require the closure of the Stocks Lane level crossing and the restriction of the Causeway level crossing to pedestrians only.

    He said: ^The closure of the bridge remains an option if the solution we are investigating proves unworkable, but it is on indefinite hold for now.^

    Villagers have previously called on the firm to lower the track beneath, rather than raise the bridge.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 16, 2014, 11:39:39
    Quote
    Andrew Haynes, Network Rail’s west of England project director,

    Didn't an Andrew Haynes previously work for FGW?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 16, 2014, 11:48:00
    Quote
    Andrew Haynes, Network Rail^s west of England project director,

    Didn't an Andrew Haynes previously work for FGW?

    Don't know - but an Andrew Haines was their MD  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 16, 2014, 12:04:41
    ahhh! :-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxman on December 16, 2014, 13:09:20
    The ex FG Andrew Haines has been Chief Exec of the CAA since 2009.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 17, 2014, 01:02:12
    For further information on the Coffee Shop forum, see also http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1215.msg31086#msg31086  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 08, 2015, 21:12:21
    On my first trip into London today (THA-PAD) since the Christmas break and noticed quite a few of those circular piles in evidence sticking out of the ground trackside between Reading and Theale, and also a few between Theale and Aldermaston. The work is spreading!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 09, 2015, 13:49:01
    On my first trip into London today (THA-PAD) since the Christmas break and noticed quite a few of those circular piles in evidence sticking out of the ground trackside between Reading and Theale, and also a few between Theale and Aldermaston. The work is spreading!

    A few OLE seeds, a little fertilizer and plenty of water  :)  oh and a crane and a naffin big hammer ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on January 09, 2015, 17:12:50
    From GetReading (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/network-rail-admits-more-disruption-8405737)

    Quote

    Network Rail had admitted to a Reading MP that replacing decades-old infrastructure during the electrification process could cause more cancellations and delays.

    Reading East MP Rob Wilson has published the letter from Patrick Hallgate, western route managing director at Network Rail which acknowledged problems suffered by rail commuters over the past few months.

    Mr Hallgate, writing just before Christmas, does not rule out further problems.

    He was responding to a letter from Mr Wilson concerning delays and cancellations around Reading Station in late 2014.

    He referred to investment replacing signalling equipment - some 60-years-old - East of Reading and in Slough.

    He said; "The most disappointing aspect of the investment this year has been the significant impact that the works have caused on the day-to-day operation.

    "We have instigated a piece of work due to report back early January which examined what additional mitigations we can put in place immediately which would reduce the likelihood of these of these occurrences."

    He referred to piling work in October which led to Mr Wilson's original letter.

    He said: "Whilst we are content that this will reduce the likelihood that there will be further recurrence, we must also be realistic.

    "There are 15,000 piles to be placed as part of the electrification programme and just over 1,200 of them are now completed.

    "With a number of cables buried for decades, it is likely that at some stage we will cause another problem."

    He went on: "The key is to ensure that the 'high risk' cables are treated as such, with additional mitigations applied to them and work carried out at a less disruptive point in time where possible."

    He added: "Whilst our general asset performance for the inner Thames Valley has improved over the past six months, I appreciate this is scant consolation to those caught up in disruption. "We have been having less incidents, but they are causing increasing amounts of delay."

    Commenting on his letter Mr Wilson said: ^m pleased that Network Rail acknowledges the impact that problems on the rail network have had on passengers and that action will be taken to lessen the impact of future disruption.

    "I welcome the news that the re-signalling to the east of Reading will be completed by Easter, as well as pledge of additional mitigation, especially in high risk areas.

    ^It^s clear that the transformational changes taking place require massive upgrades to the current network ^ indeed this Government is overseeing the biggest investment in the railways since the Victorian era.

    ^It is therefore inevitable that errors will occur from time-to-time, however limiting the frequency of disruption and dealing with delays and cancellations effectively is absolutely imperative.

    "During the latter months of 2014 the performance at times was completely unacceptable and this must be rectified.

    ^Apologies and acknowledgements of error cannot absolve poor performance; what commuters expect is an efficient, punctual service and that is something I will continue to push for.

    "I hope that this will indeed be the case from now on and I will continue to liaise with Network Rail and First Great Western, feeding back to my constituents at every possible opportunity.^



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on January 09, 2015, 23:52:36
    A few OLE seeds, a little fertilizer and plenty of water  :)  oh and a crane and a naffin big hammer ;D

    This would give a new slant to electrification being "green". There are a number of straight stemmed trees strong enough for catenary support, with stiffening. It would certainly be much cheaper just to plant trackside seeds every 50m; by the time DfT got round to approving the wiring, they would be to full height.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on January 11, 2015, 10:29:07
    Is the new office and sidings on the north side of the track just East of Swindon station to do with electrification?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on January 11, 2015, 15:00:40
    Yes, it's where the HOOP factory train lives:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23317641 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23317641)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 11, 2015, 15:31:52
    Just saw the HOPS (formerly HOOP) unit as we passed through Swindon from PAD. This is the first time in quite a few months that I have done the journey, and so much has changed!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on January 11, 2015, 18:07:33
    Yes, it's where the HOOP factory train lives:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23317641 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23317641)

    ...hmmm not so sure about that.  I thought the electrification 'factory' was on the South side of the line near Highworth Junction.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on January 12, 2015, 14:54:45
    Ah! You could be right about the South side, thinking about it. I have definitely seen electrification equipment between Bruce Street bridges and the Highworth junction on the South and that's probably what I was thinking of.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 16, 2015, 18:01:00
    Bit of news from an engineering update I've seen:

    The HOPS train should start its first wiring runs in February, and the IEP test section, between Didcot and Tilehurst, is on time to be energised in August 2015.  That follows the IEP's arrival from Japan in March, testing at Old Darby from April and ECML testing between April and October, so we might just see an IEP doing testing runs on the GWML before the end of the year.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on January 16, 2015, 18:38:14
    Test runs at quiet times between Paddington and Airport Junction before then perhaps?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on January 16, 2015, 18:51:06
    I for one will be pleasantly surprised....but I doubt it.

    Not due off the East Coast until October


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 16, 2015, 20:21:10
    Test runs at quiet times between Paddington and Airport Junction before then perhaps?

    Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr when?

    The Didcot / Tilehurst will enable daytime test runs, the tests are I believe for ATP also to allow some test on the OLE fault protection system (which for GWEP is new a novel IEC 61850 based system ie it ain't been used anywhere else in the world for rail OLE traction complete with Goose messages  :o )

    From my informed sources  8) the wires will be up however there is likely to be some "fine tuning" once the test runs are complete.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on January 16, 2015, 20:36:37
    On the Tilehurst to Didcot section, given then they still have to:-

    - Complete the piling (mostly done)
    - Erect all the stanchions (still plenty to do)
    - Install the portals and twin-track cantilevers (most still to do)
    - Install the registration arms and associated steelwork (all to do)
    - Do the wiring (all to do)
    - Complete the National Grid feeder station at Foxhall Junction

    I'm not sure what the HOPS wiring train is going to wire in February but there isn't much there are the moment  :D

    I'll be amazed it it's all complete by August, let alone October when the IEP testing is due to begin.

    I'll happily eat my hat if it is  :D




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on January 16, 2015, 21:17:28
    Bit of news from an engineering update I've seen:

    The HOPS train should start its first wiring runs in February, and the IEP test section, between Didcot and Tilehurst, is on time to be energised in August 2015.  That follows the IEP's arrival from Japan in March, testing at Old Darby from April and ECML testing between April and October, so we might just see an IEP doing testing runs on the GWML before the end of the year.
    [pedant alert] Old Darlby [pedant alert]


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 16, 2015, 22:32:22

    I'll happily eat my hat if it is  :D


    Old Derby, perhaps?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on January 17, 2015, 00:22:18

    I'll happily eat my hat if it is  :D


    Old Derby, perhaps?

    One of these may be digestible
    http://customcakesbystef.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/ladies-hat-cake.html


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: NickF on January 23, 2015, 15:13:58
    Newspaper article on whats happening in Wiltshire here:

    http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/11746286.Rail_users_warned_to_prepare_for_summer_disruption_ahead_of_electrification_work/



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 24, 2015, 13:44:16
    As you may have gathered I live by the line just East of Taplow Station.

    We've just had a note through the door from Network Rail headed Crossrail Electrification Works.

    Interesting that it says it's to support new Crossrail services. Presumably the IEPs will use their diesel engines  from  Hayes to Reading! It's no wonder the most of the good burghers of the Thames Valley believe they have to wait until Crossrail comes to get electric trains and don't realise that there might be an electric service by 2017 to Bristol.

    Any rate they outline the following programmes :

    12 January to 27 Feb Monday Sunday 08:00 18:00 Vegetation Clearance along embankments. No sign nearby yet.

    19 January to 20th February 2015 Sunday Thursday 22:15 05:15 and Saturday 22:15 08:30 Installation of piled foundations. (no disturbance so far).

    2 February to 20 April Sunday Thursday 22:15 05:15 and Saturday 22:15 08:30 Installation of the overhead line structures.

    [Edit by FT,N! to correct typos only, content unaffected)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 24, 2015, 19:34:51
    It's a contractual distinction. Wiring Stockley to Maidenhead is paid for by Crossrail, therefore it is presumably for Crossrail to take the PR credit.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on January 25, 2015, 12:55:54
    And it'll be Crossrail trains serving Taplow generally. You might get the odd local GW franchise stopper, but the service will be branded Crossrail, I believe


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 25, 2015, 13:46:10
    Hopefully we'll have an electric service at Taplow before Crossrail.

    Then when people have got used to a similar to todays but  faster service using proper EMUs, with loos,  in comes Crossrails Metro sideways seating no loo units stopping all stations.

    That's why Theresa May is making a fuss about semis from Twyford and Maidenehad.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 25, 2015, 14:40:19
    Hopefully we'll have an electric service at Taplow before Crossrail.

    Then when people have got used to a similar to todays but  faster service using proper EMUs, with loos,  in comes Crossrails Metro sideways seating no loo units stopping all stations.

    As ever, you're quite right about the lack of toilets.  But it isn't possible to fit the declared seating capacity into a 9 car train using 'sideways seating'.   50 seats per 25m carriage (average) will require a majority of 2+2 seats, because the length gain is cancelled out by the extra set of double doors.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 25, 2015, 16:53:01
    And it'll be Crossrail trains serving Taplow generally. You might get the odd local GW franchise stopper, but the service will be branded Crossrail, I believe

    ............might even get a Sunday service!  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 25, 2015, 18:55:14
    Is this the thread where we discussing the exact mileage of the Crossrail wiring boundary, and substation locations and stuff?

    If so the database problem Grahame has been referring to seems to have resulted in three or four posts going missing?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on January 25, 2015, 23:48:49
    Is this the thread where we discussing the exact mileage of the Crossrail wiring boundary, and substation locations and stuff?

    If so the database problem Grahame has been referring to seems to have resulted in three or four posts going missing?

    Paul

    Noted .. and it may have been.  Odd, as I could have sworn that I didn't loose any posts.  Still taking a look.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 26, 2015, 19:51:35
    I am sure I made a post about MPATS


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on February 21, 2015, 19:47:43
    Many moons ago, back in 1987, I entered a Blue Peter competition to do with the railways. I forget exactly what it was, I think it was a rail safety campaign, but that may have been a different one. Anyway, I came runner up and had a trip to London in the cab of a 125 etc and was given a load of model railway stuff etc. Today I found one of the other gifts, a chunk of copper used for the electrification of the mainline between London, Leeds & Edinburgh. I thought it quite interesting that its only taken almost 30 years to get around to doing the Great Western Mainline!

    (https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8572/15981908154_59ef808736_s.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qmgsuA)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 22, 2015, 10:47:51
    Many moons ago, back in 1987, I entered a Blue Peter competition to do with the railways. I forget exactly what it was, I think it was a rail safety campaign, but that may have been a different one. Anyway, I came runner up and had a trip to London in the cab of a 125 etc and was given a load of model railway stuff etc. Today I found one of the other gifts, a chunk of copper used for the electrification of the mainline between London, Leeds & Edinburgh. I thought it quite interesting that its only taken almost 30 years to get around to doing the Great Western Mainline!

    (https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8572/15981908154_59ef808736_s.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qmgsuA)


    I joined the BRB HQ DM&EE Electrification Group which bizarrely was based in Tournament Hse Paddington  ::) in 1990 the plans for both the then Western Region and the Midland Region line to Derby and Sheffield were quite advanced, all the National Grid intakes and locations for track section cabins etc were all mapped out, all the structures that needed replacing / modifying etc were all known.

    The Electrification Groups plan was to roll onto either the Midland or the Western through the 1990 the view was the HSDT's would be life expired in 2000 as they were after all only a temporary stop gap  ;D

    What caused the delay .......................... John Major


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on February 22, 2015, 22:28:14

    I joined the BRB HQ DM&EE Electrification Group which bizarrely was based in Tournament Hse Paddington  ::) in 1990 the plans for both the then Western Region and the Midland Region line to Derby and Sheffield were quite advanced, all the National Grid intakes and locations for track section cabins etc were all mapped out, all the structures that needed replacing / modifying etc were all known.

    The Electrification Groups plan was to roll onto either the Midland or the Western through the 1990 the view was the HSDT's would be life expired in 2000 as they were after all only a temporary stop gap  ;D

    What caused the delay .......................... John Major

    I imagine that the 1990 design was much as the ECML, with Mk3b BT OLE, 132kV feeder stations with 3 TSC's between. How much has the design changed with 25 years passing?

    I think the problem was UK economic failure thanks to the Lawson "boom" rather than John Major, personally.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 23, 2015, 18:24:12

    I joined the BRB HQ DM&EE Electrification Group which bizarrely was based in Tournament Hse Paddington  ::) in 1990 the plans for both the then Western Region and the Midland Region line to Derby and Sheffield were quite advanced, all the National Grid intakes and locations for track section cabins etc were all mapped out, all the structures that needed replacing / modifying etc were all known.

    The Electrification Groups plan was to roll onto either the Midland or the Western through the 1990 the view was the HSDT's would be life expired in 2000 as they were after all only a temporary stop gap  ;D


    What caused the delay .......................... John Major

    I imagine that the 1990 design was much as the ECML, with Mk3b BT OLE, 132kV feeder stations with 3 TSC's between. How much has the design changed with 25 years passing?

    Was BT with RC and FS ITSC's MPTSC's;  now its AT with ATF and there are ATFS and MPATS which is 50kV although the trains see 25kV ............ still 50Hz though

    I think the problem was UK economic failure thanks to the Lawson "boom" rather than John Major, personally.

    OTC
    Personally I blame Major he was the Prime Minister that privatised the Railways formed Railtrack and the byzantine contracting of maintenance and the dog eat dog TOC franchising ........... Major make Beeching look like a novice


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on February 23, 2015, 18:56:39
    Was BT with RC and FS ITSC's MPTSC's;  now its AT with ATF and there are ATFS and MPATS which is 50kV although the trains see 25kV ............ still 50Hz though

    Huh? Please can we have the abbreviations explained for that lot. Some of us aren't electrical engineers.  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 23, 2015, 19:23:34
    I am not an electrical engineer but I would guess AT is Auto Transformer.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on February 23, 2015, 19:25:27
    Was BT with RC and FS ITSC's MPTSC's;  now its AT with ATF and there are ATFS and MPATS which is 50kV although the trains see 25kV ............ still 50Hz though

    Huh? Please can we have the abbreviations explained for that lot. Some of us aren't electrical engineers.  ;)

    Thanks @BNM - i'm sure if you are in the know its obvious!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on February 23, 2015, 19:41:59
    Let's have a go, as a layman in these matters.  It's a bit like one of those quizzes but without photos...

    BT = Booster Transformer

    RC = Return Conductor (a cable which parallels the rails, nominally at 0 Volts)

    FS = Feeder Station

    ITSC = Intermediate Track Sectioning Cabin  (divides the OHLE into switchable sections)

    MPTSC  = Mid Point Track Sectioning Cabin

    AT = Auto Transformer

    ATF = Auto Transformer Feeder (a 25 kV cable which is anti phase to the catenary - hence 50 kV transmission) 

    ATFS = Auto Transformer Feeder Section

    MPATS = Mid Point Autotransformer Section

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on February 23, 2015, 20:14:31
    ........... Major make Beeching look like a novice

    That's an interesting statement; probably worth a topic in its own right! Both made fundamental and highly-controversial changes which completely changed the way people thought about railways for the next twenty years. Both are widely misunderstood. Who knows what state the railways would be in now if neither had put their oar in?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: trainer on February 23, 2015, 22:31:13
    ........... Major make Beeching look like a novice

     Who knows what state the railways would be in now if neither had put their oar in?

    I've often thought that the Somerset and Dorset Joint and the Strawberry Line would have been an electrified country lines as in Switzerland. But then I have a better grasp of fairy tales than economics.  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on February 23, 2015, 22:40:23
    ........... Major make Beeching look like a novice

    That's an interesting statement; probably worth a topic in its own right! Both made fundamental and highly-controversial changes which completely changed the way people thought about railways for the next twenty years. Both are widely misunderstood. Who knows what state the railways would be in now if neither had put their oar in?
    Since finding out about a certain Mr Marples, my opinion of Dr Beeching is that he was really a pawn and Mr Marples was the real villian. I think I know even less about Mr Major than the other two, but my perception of him in terms of railways is probably somewhere between the Marples and Beeching.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on February 24, 2015, 10:19:49
    ........... Major make Beeching look like a novice

    That's an interesting statement; probably worth a topic in its own right! Both made fundamental and highly-controversial changes which completely changed the way people thought about railways for the next twenty years. Both are widely misunderstood. Who knows what state the railways would be in now if neither had put their oar in?
    Since finding out about a certain Mr Marples, my opinion of Dr Beeching is that he was really a pawn and Mr Marples was the real villian. I think I know even less about Mr Major than the other two, but my perception of him in terms of railways is probably somewhere between the Marples and Beeching.

    But Castle closed twice as many miles of track as Marples, and did so after Labour came to power promising to halt the Beeching cuts! Since Major, to the probable disappointment of headline writers, there have been no 'major' closures - rather the opposite.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 24, 2015, 10:40:45
    But Castle closed twice as many miles of track as Marples, and did so after Labour came to power promising to halt the Beeching cuts!

    Strange how everyone 'conveniently' continues to forget that.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on February 24, 2015, 17:02:41
    Since finding out about a certain Mr Marples, my opinion of Dr Beeching is that he was really a pawn and Mr Marples was the real villian. I think I know even less about Mr Major than the other two, but my perception of him in terms of railways is probably somewhere between the Marples and Beeching.

    This view of Marples is common - but inaccurate. He was admittedly a rogue but if Marples hadn't been Minister of Transport then someone else would have been and very similar changes would have taken place. It was not just Marples who thought cars were the future. Most people did so too - which is why they bought cars. The number of cars on the road doubled in just 10 years -  from 4.9 million in 1960 to 9.97 million in 1970 - so it's hardly surprising that there was pressure for new or re-built roads.

    This demand had nothing whatsoever to do with personalities or politics and everything to do with car manufacturers gaining the cost savings of larger production volumes. And this increase in the number of cars played merry hell with passenger numbers, especially on the branch lines and shorter distance main line journeys.

    Trains were perceived to be, and often were, old-fashioned and dirty. Many people's memories were still coloured by horrendous journeys during the war or going on holiday - one summer Saturday in 1957 some 80 long distance trains ran through Newton Abbot on their way west and all of them were more than TWO HOURS late. People decided never to use the train again. And they told their friends. Steam traction was still being used and passengers got smuts in their eyes and dirty shirts. Many coaches were pre-war and frequently taps didn't work or the sliding windows jammed. The upholstery was often caked in dust and dirt.

    Stations were grimy places - some of them hadn't seen a paint brush since, ooh, 1938. Even the new diesel locomotives were covered in dirt and oil after a few weeks use and scarely seemed a good advertisement for the Modernisation Plan. They also kept breaking down - including one embarrassing time on the Royal Train.

    Cars were clean - and yours. They went when you wanted, where you wanted and on the route you wanted. You never 'missed' your car and it wasn't necessary to get a bus to the station first.

    People voted against the railway. The closures had little or nothing to do with Marples' business interests or personality, but everything to do with a fall in demand and a collapse in receipts.

    And Beeching was no pawn, he was a director of Imperial Chemical Industries.




    Edit note: Quote marks fixed, for clarity. CfN.  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on February 24, 2015, 18:43:38
    There was a Paul Clifton report on tonight's South Today of a 1-year delay to the GW electrification programme, which is also covered in this from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-31610849):
    Quote
    24 February 2015
    Last updated at 17:41
    Great Western electrification scheme 'one year behind schedule'

    The job is bigger and harder than expected, but also dramatically more expensive, sources say

    Plans to modernise railways in the Thames Valley are a year behind schedule after they proved to be "dramatically more expensive" than first thought.

    The predicted cost to transform the old Great Western route has climbed from ^640m to ^1.74bn, the BBC has learned.

    Senior industry executives have said the plans to complete the work by the end of 2016 will not be met.

    Network Rail said work was "progressing well" but schedules could change.

    Overhead wires need to be fitted between Reading and Oxford so that modern trains can run on the line and carry more passengers, ease overcrowding, and improve rail times.

    New trains are being shipped from Japan, with the first due to arrive in two weeks.

    But they cannot be tested on the Great Western line because the power supply is not in place.

    Sources have told the BBC the job is bigger and harder than expected, but also dramatically more expensive.

    Paul Clifton, BBC South transport correspondent
    The first of a new fleet of electric trains is on its way from a factory in Japan, raising the prospect of brand new trains standing idle in sidings.

    Officially, Network Rail is still aiming for the wires to be working late next year. But note the careful choice of language. "Aiming for" is not the same as promising.

    I've now been told by four separate sources the target will not be met.

    One told me the project was in complete disarray and the wires will not be up until 2017.

    And when are the SETs due to all be ready?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 24, 2015, 20:00:54
    There was a Paul Clifton report on tonight's South Today of a 1-year delay to the GW electrification programme, which is also covered in this from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-31610849):
    Quote
    24 February 2015
    Last updated at 17:41
    Great Western electrification scheme 'one year behind schedule'

    The job is bigger and harder than expected, but also dramatically more expensive, sources say

    Plans to modernise railways in the Thames Valley are a year behind schedule after they proved to be "dramatically more expensive" than first thought.

    The predicted cost to transform the old Great Western route has climbed from ^640m to ^1.74bn, the BBC has learned.

    Senior industry executives have said the plans to complete the work by the end of 2016 will not be met.


    And when are the SETs due to all be ready?

    There's a shock, then. An electric shock?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on February 24, 2015, 22:06:41

    Was BT with RC and FS ITSC's MPTSC's;  now its AT with ATF and there are ATFS and MPATS which is 50kV although the trains see 25kV ............ still 50Hz though


    ... Your LED's won't twinkle without a GSP!

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 24, 2015, 22:16:16

    Trains were perceived to be, and often were, old-fashioned and dirty. Many people's memories were still coloured by horrendous journeys during the war or going on holiday - one summer Saturday in 1957 some 80 long distance trains ran through Newton Abbot on their way west and all of them were more than TWO HOURS late. People decided never to use the train again. And they told their friends. Steam traction was still being used and passengers got smuts in their eyes and dirty shirts. Many coaches were pre-war and frequently taps didn't work or the sliding windows jammed. The upholstery was often caked in dust and dirt.

    Stations were grimy places - some of them hadn't seen a paint brush since, ooh, 1938. Even the new diesel locomotives were covered in dirt and oil after a few weeks use and scarely seemed a good advertisement for the Modernisation Plan. They also kept breaking down - including one embarrassing time on the Royal Train.

    Cars were clean - and yours. They went when you wanted, where you wanted and on the route you wanted. You never 'missed' your car and it wasn't necessary to get a bus to the station first.

    People voted against the railway. The closures had little or nothing to do with Marples' business interests or personality, but everything to do with a fall in demand and a collapse in receipts.

    And Beeching was no pawn, he was a director of Imperial Chemical Industries.


    Ah, happy days, eh?

    Beeching provoked controversy by being paid more than the previous head of the British Railways Board and the Prime Minister (^24,000 pa against ^14,000 and ^10,000 respectively). That was his salary at ICI when he was seconded for 5 years.

    As for the abbreviations (other than Imperial Chemical Industries), I can only say IDK.

    FT,N!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on February 24, 2015, 22:33:00
    There was a Paul Clifton report on tonight's South Today of a 1-year delay to the GW electrification programme, which is also covered in this from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-31610849):

    Can't say I'm too surprised to learn that there might be a delay as progress does seem to have been a little pedestrian and timescales are tight.

    The key is to ensure that the one year delay to the first phase doesn't escalate to a two year delay to Cardiff, three years to Swansea etc., and plenty of testing time for the IEP trains isn't necessarily a bad thing, plus it gives more time to sort out an appropriate EMU for the suburban services.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on February 24, 2015, 23:04:46
    ... Steam traction was still being used and passengers got smuts in their eyes and dirty shirts. Many coaches were pre-war and frequently taps didn't work or the sliding windows jammed. The upholstery was often caked in dust and dirt.

    But isn't that the absolute joy of travelling on a preserved railway?  If you don't finish the day with your eyes watering and your clothes stinking of coal-smoke, you haven't done it properly!  ;) :D ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on February 25, 2015, 06:03:35
    There was a Paul Clifton report on tonight's South Today of a 1-year delay to the GW electrification programme, which is also covered in this from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-31610849):
    Quote
    24 February 2015
    Last updated at 17:41
    Great Western electrification scheme 'one year behind schedule'

    The job is bigger and harder than expected, but also dramatically more expensive, sources say

    Plans to modernise railways in the Thames Valley are a year behind schedule after they proved to be "dramatically more expensive" than first thought.

    The predicted cost to transform the old Great Western route has climbed from ^640m to ^1.74bn, the BBC has learned.

    Senior industry executives have said the plans to complete the work by the end of 2016 will not be met.

    Network Rail said work was "progressing well" but schedules could change.

    Overhead wires need to be fitted between Reading and Oxford so that modern trains can run on the line and carry more passengers, ease overcrowding, and improve rail times.

    New trains are being shipped from Japan, with the first due to arrive in two weeks.

    But they cannot be tested on the Great Western line because the power supply is not in place.

    Sources have told the BBC the job is bigger and harder than expected, but also dramatically more expensive.

    Paul Clifton, BBC South transport correspondent
    The first of a new fleet of electric trains is on its way from a factory in Japan, raising the prospect of brand new trains standing idle in sidings.

    Officially, Network Rail is still aiming for the wires to be working late next year. But note the careful choice of language. "Aiming for" is not the same as promising.

    I've now been told by four separate sources the target will not be met.

    One told me the project was in complete disarray and the wires will not be up until 2017.

    And when are the SETs due to all be ready?

    What a farce...........but then again massive delays on the railways are hardly a new thing are they?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 25, 2015, 07:55:38
    It once again shows the difficulties of starting a project when it is not fully designed. Railtrack made that mistake spectaculallry over the West Coast Mainline Upgrade in the 1990's.  They had not even got a specification for what work needed to be done!  NR has tried to avoind this mistake, but politicians announce something and want it to happen quickly and NR falls into line because they want to investment. 

    Even if they knew which bridges needed replacement each one is a project in its own right.  I know of at least two where they started off assuming they could have an extended closure only to have to change. I suggest there are more that I do not know about.  Utility service diversions on bridges always seem to take longer than you allow.  The electrification train also seems to have taken longer to arrive than originally planned. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on February 25, 2015, 08:32:55
    It once again shows the difficulties of starting a project when it is not fully designed. Railtrack made that mistake spectaculallry over the West Coast Mainline Upgrade in the 1990's.  They had not even got a specification for what work needed to be done!  NR has tried to avoind this mistake, but politicians announce something and want it to happen quickly and NR falls into line because they want to investment. 

    Even if they knew which bridges needed replacement each one is a project in its own right.  I know of at least two where they started off assuming they could have an extended closure only to have to change. I suggest there are more that I do not know about.  Utility service diversions on bridges always seem to take longer than you allow.  The electrification train also seems to have taken longer to arrive than originally planned. 

    .......so who came up with the original cost which has now trebled? Was that NR or the Government?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Jason on February 25, 2015, 09:02:05
    Maybe the extra ^1 billion is set aside to cover the costs of fines resulting from piling works wrecking the signalling cables ? ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on February 25, 2015, 09:26:52
    ... Steam traction was still being used and passengers got smuts in their eyes and dirty shirts. Many coaches were pre-war and frequently taps didn't work or the sliding windows jammed. The upholstery was often caked in dust and dirt.

    But isn't that the absolute joy of travelling on a preserved railway?  If you don't finish the day with your eyes watering and your clothes stinking of coal-smoke, you haven't done it properly!  ;) :D ;D

    Ah, takes me back to an all-nighter on the Severn Valley a few years ago... fun for a while, but back in the real world I think a fast, efficient electrified railway wins the day!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on February 25, 2015, 09:38:28
    Maybe the extra ^1 billion is set aside to cover the costs of fines resulting from piling works wrecking the signalling cables ? ;)

    ............as FGW proudly boast of all the huge levels of investment which "they" are making, perhaps they could chip in to covering the shortfall by returning some of the ^millions of compo which they get from NR in respect of signal failures etc and never pass on to their customers..............it must be sitting in a bank account somewhere.......unless it's set aside to pay bonuses?  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 25, 2015, 09:44:50
    I think both the original estimate and the new figure quoted are to some extent based in fantasy. The first estimate would have been done without in-depth surveying of every inch of the railway, but would not have been deliberately underestimated. Ellendunne makes this point well. The cost, in terms of time and money, in surveying and doing design work for the whole route for electrification would have been enormous, and unjustified without knowing that the project would go ahead. That sounds counter-intuitive when compared to other building projects, but as ellendunne again points out, this isn't a single buildinhg project, it is hundreds of them.

    I hope the new cost is an over-estimate. It will otherwise cast a cloud over any further electrification schemes.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on February 25, 2015, 09:52:16
    .......so who came up with the original cost which has now trebled? Was that NR or the Government?

    That depends ... firstly on whether it's true.

    I can't understand why so little effort is made to explain what these cost and time numbers mean. It makes most comments on them into nonsense - as happened for the channel tunnel, and more recently for HS2.

    Politicians want these time and cost numbers from the very start, before much work has been done on defining what the project entails. In a commercial contract senior management want that too. Inevitably those initial numbers have a large uncertainty, which the customer may accept - i.e. " as soon as you can for a reasonable cost". The equivalent cost estimate is a "known cost" basis, which means it goes up as more expensive problems become known.

    That's fine if everyone understands it. But it is different from a guaranteed cost or delivery time, which involves extra payment and time allowed so as to reduce the risk. If we (or the press) think it's a "promise" when it's a "target" (the distinction Paul Clifton was making, but not clarifying, yesterday), we all get confused.

    In the CP5 delivery plan, for project W001a, there are two "Regulated Outputs" - for "Entry Into Service" - in June 2016 to Newbury, Oxford, Chippenham, and in May 2017 to Bristol TM. Both stages had passed GRIP 3 (single option selection) by July 2014, and GRIP 4 (single option scope defined) is due by August 2015. But the real start time is "First timetabled public use of the infrastructure", for which the "indicator" is December 2016 or May 2017 for the two stages. Of course the work for GRIP 4 is what tells you how much money, resources, and in practice (resources being very much finite) time is going to be required. So I conclude that the "regulated "outputs" are not really fixed and firm or promised dates, just two performance criteria on which NR will be formally judged by ORR but allowed to miss them if their excuses are good enough.

    This may all be explained somewhere, but if it is I expect it is hidden inside documents so long, jargon-ridden, and numerous as to make it invisible.

    The situation with costs is similar, but it is harder to find single-project costs anywhere. About all I can find is the 2013 Periodic Review* by ORR, dealing with NR's capital plans for CP5. Here, in the introduction, it says:
    Quote
    81. Around ^7bn of projects are at an early stage of development and hence the costs are uncertain. Fixing this cost now could involve paying a large ^risk premium‟. So to ensure better value for money we have taken a new approach to setting the efficient level of costs for these projects, building on a proposal made by the Rail Delivery Group (RDG). We have made a provisional cost assessment now but we will finalise the total efficient cost progressively by March 2015 as project plans become more mature.
    The idea that this is new to ORR is very worrying.

    Later it expands this a bit:
    Quote
    [9.86] We considered Network Rail‟s response to the draft determination, where we agreed with some of its points and acknowledged that costs for some projects may have changed considerably since the SBP as scope has developed further.
    9.87 The enhancements cost adjustment mechanism is a new process that will deal with changes to cost estimates (both up and down). We think that this process will address Network Rail‟s points as we will agree more accurate efficient costs when the projects reach a more advanced stage.

    When assessing costs, it aggregates projects rather than showing them separately. In Chapter 9, on enhancements, we read:
    Quote
    9.14 Network Rail proposed in its SBP that the outputs and funding for some of these should only be fixed once they have reached a later stage when a single option has been selected (i.e. GRIP 4). This was the main issue we faced in determining efficient costs and is explained more fully in the section ^major issues in assessing enhancements‟.
    Again, that suggests a lack of an agreed basis between NR, ORR, and DfT on this fundamental issue.

    Electrification schemes, i.e. all the current projects added together, were ^3.2 Bn in the Strategic Business Plan.
    Quote
    9.58 A further point made by Network Rail was that, since the SBP submission the costs for Great Western electrification, Midland Main Line electrification and East West rail have increased by about ^376m in total as a result of further development and design work. It acknowledged that the new approach is specifically designed to deal with this happening but considered that it would be sensible to include this additional amount in our assumptions for the determination. As the portfolio of projects develops costs for some may increase whereas costs for others may decrease. We have not added the amount Network Rail suggested at this stage, just as we have not assumed any further cost reductions. This will be addressed through the enhancements cost adjustment framework.

    That suggests a modest cost increase which is covered by this "cost adjustment" mechanism, acknowledging that the initial costs were not meant to be complete. But it well short of what is being reported now.
     
    If the cost increase of nearly ^1Bn is even roughly right (and it probably is not, but how would we know?) that cost increase would be a serious concern.

    The timescale may not be, though it would be hard to spend all that extra money without taking time to do so. And while there is that gap of 6 months from EIS to new timetable, introducing a timetable can't be put off at short notice - that 6 months does not sound generous for proving runs over the whole network before the deadline for committing to the timetable change.

    *Periodic Review 2013: Final determination of Network Rail^s outputs and funding for 2014-19 October 2013 (http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/452/pr13-final-determination.pdf)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on February 25, 2015, 10:04:56
    Even if they knew which bridges needed replacement each one is a project in its own right.  I know of at least two where they started off assuming they could have an extended closure only to have to change. I suggest there are more that I do not know about.  Utility service diversions on bridges always seem to take longer than you allow.  The electrification train also seems to have taken longer to arrive than originally planned. 

    I don't know if the footbridge at Goring needed to be replaced for electrictrification purposes (as opposed to being knackered), but the temporary one they are installing is MUCH higher than the current one. However, it is taking them forever to finish assembling it - the one we had a couple of years ago when they refurbished the old bridge went up in half the time. It really seems to be going at a snails pace at times, despite starting off rather quickly.

    From Goring to Reading there are a lot of posts installed now, some with bits hanging off them, but there is still a lot to do - nothing is in place around the Gatehampton bridge - and I assume something needs to be in place at stations, but there doesn't appear to be any evidence (to us uneducated types at least) of electrification process at Goring, Pangbourne or Tilehurst stations themselves.

    I'm also surprised by the variety of post sizes, shapes and spans - it all looks very random at times (I know it isn't!).

    Out of interest, does anyone know how they plan to handle the wires over Gatehampton bridge (over the Thames) and in areas where its too narrow for the posts ? What about through the actual stations, will there be posts installed on platforms, is it going to hang from the canopies ? I assume they can't have a post at each end as the span will be too long for the cables ? Never really thought about it until I realised how close the posts are the other day.

    This months Goring Gap had an update on the progress, hopefully John will add it to the forum again like he did before. But there is also a notice to all residence that Network Rail have stated as of now (February) all OHLE components are to be classed as live and avoided at all costs.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on February 25, 2015, 10:06:38
    This view of Marples is common - but inaccurate. He was admittedly a rogue but if Marples hadn't been Minister of Transport then someone else would have been and very similar changes would have taken place. It was not just Marples who thought cars were the future. Most people did so too - which is why they bought cars. The number of cars on the road doubled in just 10 years -  from 4.9 million in 1960 to 9.97 million in 1970 - so it's hardly surprising that there was pressure for new or re-built roads.

    This demand had nothing whatsoever to do with personalities or politics and everything to do with car manufacturers gaining the cost savings of larger production volumes. And this increase in the number of cars played merry hell with passenger numbers, especially on the branch lines and shorter distance main line journeys.
    Yes, yes, cars were taking off, and clousure of branch lines was therefore understandable. What I particularly object to is the construction of the motorways and similar major roads,  presumably taxpayer-funded. If all roads were like the A487 today, or worse, maybe the car would have been limited to rail-heading and the core main line network would have remained a part of most long-distance journeys. Although I suppose the 1960s were a few years before people realised (in 1980s??) that climate change would be a problem, so they possibily had an excuse whereas the current governments wanting to bypass the M4 etc. are totally inexcusable.

    And Beeching was no pawn, he was a director of Imperial Chemical Industries.
    I meant in the context of rail closures, I assume the government decided the policy and Beeching was employed to implement it.

    There was a Paul Clifton report on tonight's South Today of a 1-year delay to the GW electrification programme, which is also covered in this from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-31610849):

    Can't say I'm too surprised to learn that there might be a delay as progress does seem to have been a little pedestrian and timescales are tight.

    The key is to ensure that the one year delay to the first phase doesn't escalate to a two year delay to Cardiff, three years to Swansea etc., and plenty of testing time for the IEP trains isn't necessarily a bad thing, plus it gives more time to sort out an appropriate EMU for the suburban services.
    There did seem to be rather alot of route planned for electrification by 2016, but a whole year (2017-2018) allowed for extending wires from Cardiff to Swansea, so I wonder whether things could be reprofiled, to minimise bad press. For example instead of Oxford, Newbury and Bristol in 2016, just Oxford or Bristol could be targetted. Then in 2017 Cardiff and Newbury and finally in 2018 Swansea and the remaining one of Oxford/Bristol.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on February 25, 2015, 10:21:11
    There did seem to be rather alot of route planned for electrification by 2016, but a whole year (2017-2018) allowed for extending wires from Cardiff to Swansea, so I wonder whether things could be reprofiled, to minimise bad press. For example instead of Oxford, Newbury and Bristol in 2016, just Oxford or Bristol could be targetted. Then in 2017 Cardiff and Newbury and finally in 2018 Swansea and the remaining one of Oxford/Bristol.

    More likely the opposite. Times for Cardiff-Swansea past GRIP 3 are all "indicative". Bristol TM to Cardiff missed GRIP 3, and  the CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan* says:
    Quote
    * GRIP 3 missed for Bristol Temple Meads and Bristol Parkway to Cardiff Central. The new date is subject to change until the programme has been re-examined, revised and communicated to the stakeholders. It is acknowledged that this section of the main line includes relatively complex locations that require further and greater study to deliver the best whole-life cost solution. This is supported by the client. The locations agreed in this category ^ and required to complete GRIP 3 Single Option Selection and fully signed-off Integrated AiP ^ is limited to Bristol Temple Meads Station and Bristol Parkway Station.

    If the first two stages are bigger than foreseen, something will have to give. Almost certainly this third stage plus the South Wales Main Line will have to be delayed further so that 2+2 only needs to come to 6.

    * As last revised in December 2014.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on February 25, 2015, 10:25:22

    The good news is that the first 319 ran from Liverpool to Newton le Willows yesterday, just 14 weeks late.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on February 25, 2015, 10:50:41
    Given the way the current NW project has changed in just two months the current physical state of the GW around Reading - Didcot doesn't actually make me worry a great deal.   

    Once all the gantries are up, (after all the piling issues are sorted), the rest can follow fairly quickly,  assuming can be paid for...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on February 25, 2015, 11:12:23
    Given the way the current NW project has changed in just two months the current physical state of the GW around Reading - Didcot doesn't actually make me worry a great deal.   

    Once all the gantries are up, (after all the piling issues are sorted), the rest can follow fairly quickly,  assuming can be paid for...

    Paul

    ........has anyone got a spare billion lying around?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: PhilWakely on February 25, 2015, 13:38:49
    ........has anyone got a spare billion lying around?

    Very briefly, back in 2000, I was in possession of 1 Billion Turkish Lira :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on February 25, 2015, 15:19:52
    I don't know if the footbridge at Goring needed to be replaced for electrictrification purposes (as opposed to being knackered), but the temporary one they are installing is MUCH higher than the current one. However, it is taking them forever to finish assembling it - the one we had a couple of years ago when they refurbished the old bridge went up in half the time. It really seems to be going at a snails pace at times, despite starting off rather quickly.

    The temporary one looks like all it's missing is the steps down to the island platforms, and it looks like the steps won't be put into position until the current bridge is partially demolished, so possibly that will happen overnight or over a weekend soon.   The temporary structures are all much higher than the ones they replace - presumably that makes things easier should there be a delay putting in the new structure as electrification works can progress under them.  Or it might be something as simple as it being a requirement for all temporary, as well as new permanent structures, to be OHLE compliant?

    Either way, Goring footbridge is to be replaced as it's too low (though also a little knackered looking!), and we now know that disabled access will be provided in the form of new lifts.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 25, 2015, 15:47:53

    Very briefly, back in 2000, I was in possession of 1 Billion Turkish Lira :)

    It was a sad day when they knocked six noughts off the money.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Andrew1939 from West Oxon on February 25, 2015, 16:20:45
    The BBC chap reported that delays to the western electrification will delay testing the IEO/Hitachi SET trains. As they intended to be used on the East Coast line why can't they be tested there and if OK put into service for a year or so earlier than planned? Some of the East Coast HSTs could then be passed back to FGW to relieve its overloading for a year so before the electrification is complete and the Hitachi trains can be used on the western as planned a year or so later


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on February 25, 2015, 18:58:00
    Updating what I said back in early Jan:

    Quote
    On my first trip into London today (THA-PAD) since the Christmas break and noticed quite a few of those circular piles in evidence sticking out of the ground trackside between Reading and Theale, and also a few between Theale and Aldermaston. The work is spreading!

    As of today, piles are now in evidence, albeit somewhat sporadically, as far along the line as just east of Midgham. So, there is progress, but there seem to be a lot of gaps between where the piles have been driven home (with wooden lid on top) and where there are none as yet.

    There is also work ongoing at Thatcham Station on construction of a new footbridge, but the progress does seem quite slow to me.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 25, 2015, 19:14:45
    Let's have a go, as a layman in these matters.  It's a bit like one of those quizzes but without photos...

    BT = Booster Transformer

    RC = Return Conductor (a cable which parallels the rails, nominally at 0 Volts)

    FS = Feeder Station

    ITSC = Intermediate Track Sectioning Cabin  (divides the OHLE into switchable sections)

    MPTSC  = Mid Point Track Sectioning Cabin

    AT = Auto Transformer

    ATF = Auto Transformer Feeder (a 25 kV cable which is anti phase to the catenary - hence 50 kV transmission) 

    ATFS = Auto Transformer Feeder Section

    MPATS = Mid Point Autotransformer Section

    Paul

    What Paul said   ;D


    I am disappointed but not surprised at the announcement that GWEP is a year behind, its been well known within the electrification fraternity there are issues, to many of the old n bold who were involved in BedPan, ECML, GN schemes GEWP seem painfully relearning the lessons of 3 decades ago. 

    Someone seems to have snuck in some low bridges  :o  :P 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on February 25, 2015, 19:22:52
    I blame that Isambard Kingdom Brunel bloke - such a woeful lack of foresight, on his part.  ::) :o ;D

    And - purely as an aside, and probably going off on a fairly wide tangent: Network Rail's contractors have just done a fair bit of work on the cast-iron hundred-year-old footbridge at Nailsea & Backwell station, none of which seemed to involve raising it in any way.  Was that anything to do with electrification?  :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 26, 2015, 11:34:04
    The BBC chap reported that delays to the western electrification will delay testing the IEO/Hitachi SET trains. As they intended to be used on the East Coast line why can't they be tested there and if OK put into service for a year or so earlier than planned? Some of the East Coast HSTs could then be passed back to FGW to relieve its overloading for a year so before the electrification is complete and the Hitachi trains can be used on the western as planned a year or so later

    If the project slips much further, I guess they may do exactly that...will testing on the GWR still be needed before going live in service here though? But yes, there are sufficient new trains for both East Coast & GWR, so at the point the East Coast starts using theirs, this would release HSTs from that route.

    I suspect the DfT has long-term plans for these, but some might be able to be loaned to GWR until the project here is complete? A year isn't probably long enough to bother, seeing the East Coast's were entering service after GWR


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on February 26, 2015, 12:45:10
    The Hitachi SETs destined for the GWML need to be tested on it prior to entering service as they'll be fitted with the GW ATP (which isn't installed anywhere else). Hence the focus on getting Didcot to Reading wired and energised as this is planned as the test site. This is supposed to be completed by August  :) but I would think that the end of the year is more likely. How this fits in the testing of the pre-series trains on the Old Dalby test track and the ECML I am unsure.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on February 26, 2015, 12:57:36
    But yes, there are sufficient new trains for both East Coast & GWR, so at the point the East Coast starts using theirs, this would release HSTs from that route.

    I suspect the DfT has long-term plans for these, but some might be able to be loaned to GWR until the project here is complete? A year isn't probably long enough to bother, seeing the East Coast's were entering service after GWR
    ScotRail will probably want to get its hands on whichever IC125s are released first, since the refurbishment they have planned before the trains enter service is MAJOR. As for DfT, they don't even have plans for the younger IC225 sets on the ECML after IEP, so I very much doubt they have plans for IC125s. My opinion is that planning a new fleet without having plans for the existing assets is daft, but that's the DfT and the fragmented rail industy for you.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on February 26, 2015, 13:12:28
    Updating what I said back in early Jan:

    Quote
    On my first trip into London today (THA-PAD) since the Christmas break and noticed quite a few of those circular piles in evidence sticking out of the ground trackside between Reading and Theale, and also a few between Theale and Aldermaston. The work is spreading!

    As of today, piles are now in evidence, albeit somewhat sporadically, as far along the line as just east of Midgham. So, there is progress, but there seem to be a lot of gaps between where the piles have been driven home (with wooden lid on top) and where there are none as yet.

    There is also work ongoing at Thatcham Station on construction of a new footbridge, but the progress does seem quite slow to me.

    Thatcham crossing I think you are being unfair about the footbridge replacement at Thatcham.

    Only this morning I noticed a ladder had been put in the hole next to the existing waiting room and I'm sure the ladder wasn't there last week (although the hole was)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on February 26, 2015, 13:16:31
    ScotRail will probably want to get its hands on whichever IC125s are released first, since the refurbishment they have planned before the trains enter service is MAJOR. As for DfT, they don't even have plans for the younger IC225 sets on the ECML after IEP, so I very much doubt they have plans for IC125s. My opinion is that planning a new fleet without having plans for the existing assets is daft, but that's the DfT and the fragmented rail industy for you.

    It's not up to the DfT what they do with the existing assets. They'll say it's for the owners to decide extended or new leases.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on February 26, 2015, 13:17:19
    Ever so slightly tongue in cheek there I suspect (and hope) BB  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 26, 2015, 13:36:08
    As for DfT, they don't even have plans for the younger IC225 sets on the ECML after IEP, so I very much doubt they have plans for IC125s.

    Please don't quote facts when you can't possibly know!

    Scotrail will have contracted for certain HSTs, not just 'any' HSTs. I understand they have contracted those being released by FGW, not East Coast? Possibly even from a different ROSCO?

    And quote your sources re the DfT and having plans for rolling stock, or couch your statement differently This is likely *your opinion*, not the DfT's. My bet is that they *do* have plans for all stock being released, but it may not be ever set in stone & can be changed.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 26, 2015, 13:42:48
    ScotRail will probably want to get its hands on whichever IC125s are released first, since the refurbishment they have planned before the trains enter service is MAJOR. As for DfT, they don't even have plans for the younger IC225 sets on the ECML after IEP, so I very much doubt they have plans for IC125s. My opinion is that planning a new fleet without having plans for the existing assets is daft, but that's the DfT and the fragmented rail industy for you.

    It's not up to the DfT what they do with the existing assets. They'll say it's for the owners to decide extended or new leases.

    Hmm - not sure about that. Yes, if they want to hold onto them, but if one of the options offered to East Coast was that they took IEPs in exchange for the 225s, then the DfT will have alternative plans.

    For example, FGW can only cascade the turbos with the DfTs approval - if the DfT thought they'd (for example) better off being deployed in place of Northern's Pacers, then that's what would happen....Of course, in 'agreement' with (read money changing hands, and other stock options) FGW

    The DfT will say they don't micro-manage the stock, but I reckon otherwise. Nothing happens stock-wise without the DfTs agreement


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on February 26, 2015, 13:53:20
    Please don't quote facts when you can't possibly know!

    Scotrail will have contracted for certain HSTs, not just 'any' HSTs. I understand they have contracted those being released by FGW, not East Coast? Possibly even from a different ROSCO?
    I did say 'probably'. It was an uninformed guess and perhaps I should have made that clearer. Sorry. You make a good point that ScotRail may have already a committed deal with a ROSCO, which I didn't think of.

    And quote your sources re the DfT and having plans for rolling stock, or couch your statement differently This is likely *your opinion*, not the DfT's. My bet is that they *do* have plans for all stock being released, but it may not be ever set in stone & can be changed.
    I'm sure I have a letter somewhere that states that the DfT's view on the future of the existing stock is a matter for the TOCs and ROSCOs. As I stated in my post, I personally think that is a very silly view for the DfT to take given that they mandated use of IEP on GWML and ECML.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 26, 2015, 13:56:51
    The only recent occurance of TOCs beating the DfT to reallocations was the TPE loss of the 17x's to Chiltern. But then theyu failed by finding TPE a solution.....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 26, 2015, 19:08:19
    Had a little bit of inside info today,

    Not all of the delay is down to NR some of it is down to DfT  :o

    Boundary Rd bridge in Newbury DfT have not approved the awarded the contract for this replacement.

    Oxford Stn looks like 2016 or even 2017 before DfT get around to this rebuild

    Plus there are some other sensitive issues on the route down to DfT that I was not made fully privy too.

    Looks like a playground bundle coming up soon ::) ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on February 26, 2015, 21:00:39
    Electric train said "Oxford Stn looks like 2016 or even 2017 before DfT get around to this rebuild."

    I travel between Didcot and Oxford everyday and have noticed that the holes have been dug and a lost of piles have been added between Didcot and Kennington Junc. But between Kennington Junc and Oxford no visible work for electrification has taken place, of course it could be that they are undertaking the work in stages but I wonder if they haven't started because of all the changes that are planned at Oxford station. They also don't appear to have done any work on the 3 footbridges between Kennington Junc and Oxford assuming of course that they need to be raised.

    Does anybody know what the blue 'crash-like' barriers that are attached to the track and appear next to the piles are for? Lots of these have appeared between Didcot and Oxford usually adjacent to the piles but not always.

    In other developments they still appear to laying the cable from Didcot Power station to the feedin substation at Foxhall Junction and although they have built the road to the substation it doesn't look as if any building has taken place yet.

    The good news is that Basil Hill Road bridge in Didcot  has just reopened and the temporary footbridge from Didcot Parkway to the car park is almost complete so that the permanent footbridge can be replaced/raised.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 26, 2015, 21:42:32

    Does anybody know what the blue 'crash-like' barriers that are attached to the track and appear next to the piles are for? Lots of these have appeared between Didcot and Oxford usually adjacent to the piles but not always.

    The blue fencing provides a "Green Fenced Zone" for working it saves the need for a look out when you are working behind it although a Controller of Site Safety is still needed


    In other developments they still appear to laying the cable from Didcot Power station to the feedin substation at Foxhall Junction and although they have built the road to the substation it doesn't look as if any building has taken place yet.


    You'll be amazed, astonished, bemused when you do see what is going to go on site  ;D   The switchgear is one of the last items to arrive on site, then there will be a lot of site wiring and testing and finally commissioned into service.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 26, 2015, 22:17:22
    My opinion is that planning a new fleet without having plans for the existing assets is daft, but that's the DfT and the fragmented rail industy for you.

    Quite apart from the points made by others your argument would carry more weight if the HSTs weren't already nearly 40 years old.  Why would they need to plan a future for life expired stock?

    The March edition of Modern Railways is reporting that DfT have asked FGW to seek a price for an additional order of IEPs for the West of England services. It says that cascading Midland class 222 DEMUs has been ruled out due to the delays to Midland electrification and the use of life extended HSTs has been ruled out. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 26, 2015, 23:00:30

    The blue fencing provides a "Green Fenced Zone" for working it saves the need for a look out when you are working behind it although a Controller of Site Safety is still needed


    Blue - the new green, eh?

    This will not be the first time that we have had brand spanking new kit waiting for the infrastructure to catch up. The new order for IEPs, if confirmed, shows either that things have changed since the first order was placed, or it was underestimated in the first place. Hopefully, we'll get them at a decent price still. Why is FGW being asked to to the dealing, though, rather than DfT?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 26, 2015, 23:08:13
    Why is FGW being asked to to the dealing, though, rather than DfT?

    As they keep saying they do not deal in rolling stock. ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 26, 2015, 23:22:30
    Despite the assertion that DfT do not plan rolling stock allocation, Modern Railways is reporting that DfT is coming up with a rolling stock cascade plan.  This is said to include transfer of 387/1 s to FGW.  The first units with transfer in 2016 with the rest to follow in 2018.  They also suggest that the remaining 365 sets not being retained by Govia will also transfer to FGW for use on the stopping services out of Paddington. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 27, 2015, 08:04:06
    BBC West report today that the hold-up is because of power supply problems.

    Hmm...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on February 27, 2015, 09:16:02
    My opinion is that planning a new fleet without having plans for the existing assets is daft, but that's the DfT and the fragmented rail industy for you.
    Quite apart from the points made by others your argument would carry more weight if the HSTs weren't already nearly 40 years old.  Why would they need to plan a future for life expired stock?
    The IC125s may be nearly 40, but the IC225s aren't.

    he March edition of Modern Railways is reporting that DfT have asked FGW to seek a price for an additional order of IEPs for the West of England services. It says that cascading Midland class 222 DEMUs has been ruled out due to the delays to Midland electrification and the use of life extended HSTs has been ruled out.
    Sounds like somebody has forgotten what was said by (if I recall correctly) by First Great Western's MD in Modern Railways some time ago. He ruled out 222s back then saying something like 'passengers do not like the cramped interiors and underfloor diesel engines of those trains'. That ought to rule out IEP too.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on February 27, 2015, 09:28:39

    ...Blue - the new green, eh?


    May I recommend this YouTube video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TtnD4jmCDQ)?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 27, 2015, 09:31:57
    That ought to rule out IEP too.

    It should, but the DfT have told 'em to take 'em, so that's decided then.  ::)

    Oxford Stn looks like 2016 or even 2017 before DfT get around to this rebuild

    According to a certain FGW project director who ought to know, Oxford *station* rebuild was always 2017, never 2016. The resignalling was going to be 2016, however, and that most of it has moved back also to 2017. Chiltern is trying to get a 'phase 1 resignalling' done still in 2016.

    Of course, the resignalling will need to be complete before the wires can go up - any track layout changes need wires above them....and they won't want to get all the machinery back soon after putting them up before any changes


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 27, 2015, 18:47:28
    BBC West report today that the hold-up is because of power supply problems.

    Hmm...

    Not surprising there's no Over Head Line  ;D ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 06, 2015, 22:32:12
    Swindon Station Footbridge

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=30064794571 (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=30064794571)

    Quote
    In order to accommodate the new trains and electrification infrastructure we need to remove the redundant Swindon Station footbridge that used to serve Polaris House.

    In truth it may have been intended to serve polaris house, but it has never been opened. So it never did. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 24, 2015, 19:12:17
    If you look in the DfT's mini-franchise outline, at what electric services start at which SLC change, it is clear that they are later than the CP5 timetable says. I asked an FGW area manager about this at the manager-bothering session at Reading today, and he confirmed that these are revised dates. We knew there was a review going on, but only Twyford-Marlow had officially been deferred (awaiting infrastructure decisions for Bourne End).

    The new milsetones are very tight - any delay in handing over working wires will jeopardise the full IEP (and son of IEP) service in December 2018. There may be a little leeway in the phasing, and a priority list of what might be allowed to slip a little - I suggested that the branches, and South Wales past Cardiff, might be a few months late and found that was a familiar concept. But note - any of these dates before Dec 2018 may slip back to Dec 2018.

    To Newbury, Oxford, the CP5 date (for "First Electric Train") is Dec 2016 and now it is May 2017.
    To Chippenham, Bristol Parkway CP5 has the same - not clear if this makes it by May 2017.
    To Bristol Temple Meads, at least via Chippenham, CP5 has May 2017, now December 2018.
    To Cardiff, CP5 is December 2017, now December 2018.
    To Swansea, CP5 has May 2018, now December 2018 (but ...).
    Branch lines, CP5 has Dec 2017, now no fixed date.
    Basingstoke, CP5 had TBA, and that is now TBA but later than before.

    I was told that the first EMUs will run Paddingtom - West Drayton, replacing the Greenford trains which will convert to shuttles from West Ealing. This will allow driver familiarisation etc. in advance of the main start. DfT have this step in May 2017, which must be wrong - it's mentioned under SLC1, which ends on that date - but I can't remember how much earlier the correct date is.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on March 24, 2015, 19:21:52
    Interestingly FGW Twitter feed today was stating electrification of "London to Bristol, Oxford and Newbury will be complete by 2016.South Wales 2017" .....hmmmmmm :-\


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 24, 2015, 19:45:37
    I was told that the first EMUs will run Paddingtom - West Drayton, replacing the Greenford trains which will convert to shuttles from West Ealing. This will allow driver familiarisation etc. in advance of the main start. DfT have this step in May 2017, which must be wrong - it's mentioned under SLC1, which ends on that date - but I can't remember how much earlier the correct date is.

    December 2016 for the Greenford shuttles I think.  Though I thought it was Paddington to Hayes, rather than West Drayton?  The former already being wired of course.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 24, 2015, 20:08:14
    December 2016 for the Greenford shuttles I think.  Though I thought it was Paddington to Hayes, rather than West Drayton?  The former already being wired of course.

    Since June 2016 was the original date to finish the wires to Oxford, Newbury etc. you imagine Network Rail would be very keen to at least finish and hand over something by then (for 1st train in December). Though this bit is actually being done by Crossrail. Presumably this date has been negotiated into their contracts? Maybe NR are more confident of Crossrail's ability to meet milestones than their own.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 24, 2015, 21:58:22
    I was told that the first EMUs will run Paddingtom - West Drayton, replacing the Greenford trains which will convert to shuttles from West Ealing. This will allow driver familiarisation etc. in advance of the main start. DfT have this step in May 2017, which must be wrong - it's mentioned under SLC1, which ends on that date - but I can't remember how much earlier the correct date is.

    December 2016 for the Greenford shuttles I think.  Though I thought it was Paddington to Hayes, rather than West Drayton?  The former already being wired of course.

    All this goes to explain all the phone calls from the Crossrail team asking if I was interested in position in their Electrification team, quite a bit to do was one of the things said to me  :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 24, 2015, 23:05:21
    December 2016 for the Greenford shuttles I think.  Though I thought it was Paddington to Hayes, rather than West Drayton?  The former already being wired of course.

    All this goes to explain all the phone calls from the Crossrail team asking if I was interested in position in their Electrification team, quite a bit to do was one of the things said to me  :o

    According to Crossrail, Western end electrification is due to complete 21062016 (as is West Drayton but not Hayes & Harlington stations). But it's being managed by Network Rail anyway, so the difference from GW electrification is NR working for Crossrail with TfL's money (but handing over to themselves for non-Crossrail use first) rather than working for themselves. I found Balfour Beatty's announcement they were doing the OHLE and AT stations for Stockley Park - Maidenhead, with completion in 2016 (OHLE) and 2017 (AT). Which doesn't quite square. Who's doing the power infeeds I don't know. Since these contracts were let in October 2013 and June 2014, there was "quite a bit to do" right from the start.

    (So, do you trust Crossrail/NR to do better than me at getting all the bits in the right order?)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 25, 2015, 09:40:47
    According to Crossrail, Western end electrification is due to complete 2106 (as is West Drayton but not Hayes & Harlington stations).

    In this case, I hope Crossrail (and you!) are very wrong.... :-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 25, 2015, 18:19:01
    December 2016 for the Greenford shuttles I think.  Though I thought it was Paddington to Hayes, rather than West Drayton?  The former already being wired of course.

    All this goes to explain all the phone calls from the Crossrail team asking if I was interested in position in their Electrification team, quite a bit to do was one of the things said to me  :o

    According to Crossrail, Western end electrification is due to complete 2106 (as is West Drayton but not Hayes & Harlington stations). But it's being managed by Network Rail anyway, so the difference from GW electrification is NR working for Crossrail with TfL's money (but handing over to themselves for non-Crossrail use first) rather than working for themselves. I found Balfour Beatty's announcement they were doing the OHLE and AT stations for Stockley Park - Maidenhead, with completion in 2016 (OHLE) and 2017 (AT). Which doesn't quite square. Who's doing the power infeeds I don't know. Since these contracts were let in October 2013 and June 2014, there was "quite a bit to do" right from the start.

    NR are doing all the "on network" for Crossrail and will remain the asset owner, operator and maintainer; only the tunnels sections will be owned, operated and maintained by TfL.

    The in feed for Crossrail is at Kensel Green, the 2 large 400kV transformers are on site ( by the gas holders) the 400 kV grid line is a cable tunnel under the Canal.  The next GWEP grid is Didcot.  Maidenhead is MPATS  :o  ;D so is quite crucial to the whole GWEP until Bramley comes in when Reading Basingstoke is electrified.

    My particular specialty is Distribution and not the knitting


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on March 25, 2015, 21:04:16
    I am sure this question has been asked about Crossrail before but I didn't know what to search for.

    I was travelling home from Paddington in the light for once and I was trying to work out how the crossrail track will run along side the existing 4 tracks in places where there is limited space.

    I did find some volumes of maps on the Crossrail web site but there are so many of them

    On a separate note I was driving from Pangbourne along the road which runs between the Thames and the GWML and was very impressed with the progress on erecting the OLE gantries but then it was the first time I had been along there in ages.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 25, 2015, 21:30:23
    I was travelling home from Paddington in the light for once and I was trying to work out how the crossrail track will run along side the existing 4 tracks in places where there is limited space.

    From Paddington there are 6 running lines before merging into 4 shortly before Old Oak Common, the crossrail tracks will join up with these 6 tracks and will then run on the 2 relief lines (of the existing 4 tracks that operate west of Old Oak)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 25, 2015, 22:53:40
    I am sure this question has been asked about Crossrail before but I didn't know what to search for.

    I was travelling home from Paddington in the light for once and I was trying to work out how the crossrail track will run along side the existing 4 tracks in places where there is limited space.

    As in the previous reply, Crossrail's tracks merge with the existing reliefs by Old Oak Common.  A diagram was posted quite recently in the Crossrail thread here:

    http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=818.msg172796#msg172796


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on April 12, 2015, 17:59:03
    I was very surprised today (Sunday 12th April) when driving over Thatcham level crossing to see that the new footbridge construction had come on leaps and bounds. It's still not in use  but in the attached picture you can see the new one in the distance.

    This picture was taken standing on the level crossing looking eastbound


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on April 12, 2015, 18:04:20
    I assume the footbridge in the foreground will now be removed.

    Pardon the pun, but it is hardly a step forward if the new footbridge is further from the station exit or further to walk for potential passengers wanting to cross the line for a train.  However without a number of lengthy possessions I suppose there was no alternative.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on April 12, 2015, 18:09:23
    I assume the footbridge in the foreground will now be removed.

    Pardon the pun, but it is hardly a step forward if the new footbridge is further from the station exit or further to walk for potential passengers wanting to cross the line for a train.  However without a number of lengthy possessions I suppose there was no alternative.

    Bobm - there is still some work to be done on the new bridge before it can be put into use. For example at the bottom of the bridge steps (on the Thatcham side at least) there is a big gap which will need to be filled with concrete.

    I know this has been discussed elsewhere in a different thread but as expected  there are no ramps or lifts and as bobm says they are quite a way down the platform.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 12, 2015, 19:15:11
    Is there a level crossing behind the photographer?   The OHLE sometimes has to rise up in height over a crossing, and this might constrain the footbridge position, as will the existing platform buildings of course.  There might be no other position that clears the existing buildings on either side and also allows for space beyond for future lifts to be added.

    There remains a slim possibility they chose the site at random...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on April 12, 2015, 19:34:29
    Yes, there is Paul7755, Berkshire Bugsy was standing on the crossing when he took the picture.

    The new bridge must have gone up over the weekend BB as it definitely wasn't there on Friday evening when I drove past.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on April 12, 2015, 19:37:48
    Yes, there is Paul7755, Berkshire Bugsy was standing on the crossing when he took the picture.

    The new bridge must have gone up over the weekend BB as it definitely wasn't there on Friday evening when I drove past.

    Thanks TC - I drove up Friday night and think I would have seen it.

    Here are a couple of additional pictures showing the new bridge placement in respect of the existing structures. I have had trouble posting these so apologies if they are duplicates


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on April 20, 2015, 13:09:20
    I assume the footbridge in the foreground will now be removed.

    Pardon the pun, but it is hardly a step forward if the new footbridge is further from the station exit or further to walk for potential passengers wanting to cross the line for a train.  However without a number of lengthy possessions I suppose there was no alternative.

    Bobm - there is still some work to be done on the new bridge before it can be put into use. For example at the bottom of the bridge steps (on the Thatcham side at least) there is a big gap which will need to be filled with concrete.

    I know this has been discussed elsewhere in a different thread but as expected  there are no ramps or lifts and as bobm says they are quite a way down the platform.


    Really? No ramps or lifts? I'm very surprised if that's not in contravention of the Disabled Access Act, or whatever it's called.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on April 20, 2015, 13:12:13
    I assume the footbridge in the foreground will now be removed.

    Pardon the pun, but it is hardly a step forward if the new footbridge is further from the station exit or further to walk for potential passengers wanting to cross the line for a train.  However without a number of lengthy possessions I suppose there was no alternative.



    Bobm - there is still some work to be done on the new bridge before it can be put into use. For example at the bottom of the bridge steps (on the Thatcham side at least) there is a big gap which will need to be filled with concrete.

    I know this has been discussed elsewhere in a different thread but as expected  there are no ramps or lifts and as bobm says they are quite a way down the platform.


    Really? No ramps or lifts? I'm very surprised if that's not in contravention of the Disabled Access Act, or whatever it's called.

    I haven't been down there for a week but my understanding is that because there are ramps to each platform and it is possible to cross via the level crossing they are not needed.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 20, 2015, 13:14:00
    Yes, that is correct


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on April 20, 2015, 13:17:21
    Ok, thanks!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on May 11, 2015, 06:16:07
    If you want to see what services are looking like during the work between Bath-Chippenham 18-31 July and from 1 August, these are now showing on Real Time Trains. A place I regularly visit for timetables during Engineering works on the FGW network now FGW don't bother any more (sigh)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on June 12, 2015, 16:50:34
    We have a timetable for phase 1 of the works between Chippenham and Bath from 18th-31st July:
    https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/-/media/pdf/travel-updates/gw1506%20bath%20timetable%20v4.pdf?la=en


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Phil on June 12, 2015, 19:31:32
    Parochial, I know, but I can't help but love how Melksham gets a namecheck in the timetable headings ["LONDON TO SWINDON, MELKSHAM, BATH,
    BRISTOL AND SOUTH WALES"] whereas Trowbridge doesn't. Ha.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on June 12, 2015, 23:25:41
    Parochial, I know, but I can't help but love how Melksham gets a namecheck in the timetable headings ["LONDON TO SWINDON, MELKSHAM, BATH,
    BRISTOL AND SOUTH WALES"] whereas Trowbridge doesn't. Ha.

    Surely a mere oversight, given Trowbridge's legendary status in the field of, er, ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Phil on June 13, 2015, 06:46:20

    Surely a mere oversight, given Trowbridge's legendary status in the field of, er, ...

    Shorthand. Isaac Pitman was born there. To be fair, Trowbridge knew their rightful place in the world right up until British Rail's days, when the station was named "Trowbridge - Junction for Melksham"; it's only in recent years it's got ideas above it's station (as it were)

    Anyway, back to the original subject....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on June 13, 2015, 07:02:23
    For those two weeks, Trowbridge will share the distinction with Coombe of being a station where trains pull up just short of the station (not at a platform) and reverse to carry on their journey.  I can kinda understand it at Coombe ... at a county town with a population of around 30,000 and 850,000 passenger journeys per year, it seems a bit of an odd thing to be doing!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on June 13, 2015, 10:55:30
    Can the trains reverse in the station?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 13, 2015, 15:17:39
    We discussed this before (somewhere) and the answer is No.  The signalling does't allow it.  The only way would be to run through to Westbury and turnback there.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on June 13, 2015, 17:38:34
    We discussed this before (somewhere) and the answer is No.  The signalling does't allow it.  The only way would be to run through to Westbury and turnback there.

    We did indeed discuss that under a very different topic - possibly on the TransWilts CRP or Frequent Poster boards, as we were speculating as to how relief could be provided for the 17:36 off Swindon which is full and standing and has a long gap in front of it.

    The "Story" of reversal at Trowbridge is that it used to be possible and indeed was regularly timetabled "way back when" - indeed Trowbridge was hailed as the junction for Melksham and Devizes and only some trains carried on south to Westbury. Come 1990, and the resignalling of Westbury, the Bradford North Curve which allowed trains to run direct from Melksham to Bradford-on-Avon was removed - rumoured to be (a) because of an oversight in design or (b) because of the lack of a suitable electric supply at Bradford West junction with which to operate the points. From that time, any train coming South through Melksham wanting to head west towards Bradford-on-Avon had to go to Westbury to reverse.

    A re-installation of Bradford North Curve was included in the current electrification plans - with the intent of allowing divisions around Box tunnel without reversal.   However, as a "cost cutting exercise" this plan was replaced by signalling changes that allow a reversal of trains just to the south of the existing Bradford Junction, and you'll find that fixed stop boards are now in place just over a maximum train length south of the junction crossover.    There's also a safe walkway been installed to allow crew to get from one end of the train to the other.  I would be very interested to know the cost of this walkway, compared to what it would have cost to go that bit further with bidirecton running, and then let the crew walk along their train (or the majority of it) at the platform.  It would have cost an extra minute or two running time, but would have saved the need to bustitute the TransWilts when the lines' heavy with London to Bristol expresses, which is what we have coming up in late July.   Presumably now that Network Rail is part of the public purse, we could ask to see details of this decision which seems to have been very narrow minded - looking purely at saving NR money at the expense of crippling options during the diversions; I can accept that Bradford North Curve might have been a step too far.  But installing new stop boards a few hundred yards further south surely can't have been a massive price element?





    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 13, 2015, 22:13:36
    To reach Trowbridge station would have involved another 'right direction' signal being interlocked for the reversing movement.  Remember in the 1980s/1990s BR was strapped for cash and all schemes were carried out to the absolute minimum requirements necessary, hence the current layout.  To change it now would probably be in the ^100,000s and there is probably no business case.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Louis94 on June 13, 2015, 22:26:55
    For those two weeks, Trowbridge will share the distinction with Coombe of being a station where trains pull up just short of the station (not at a platform) and reverse to carry on their journey.  I can kinda understand it at Coombe ... at a county town with a population of around 30,000 and 850,000 passenger journeys per year, it seems a bit of an odd thing to be doing!

    Do you count about a mile away as just short of the station then? I don't think I would...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on June 13, 2015, 23:14:18
    To change it now would probably be in the ^100,000s and there is probably no business case.

    Given the period during this 6 week block when reversals will be needed is just the two weeks, I can see that might be the case. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on June 14, 2015, 01:07:06
    To change it now would probably be in the ^100,000s and there is probably no business case.

    Given the period during this 6 week block when reversals will be needed is just the two weeks, I can see that might be the case. 

    I agree -  having highlighted the word "now" in SandTEngineer's quote.   I wonder what the extra cost would have been had it been done as an alternative to "reversal outside" when that was put in?    I see your comment that it may date back 20 years, but there were works going on to put in stop boards and a walkway fairly recently - was that just some sort of upgrade work then, to a facility that was already there?

    At Chippenham, there's an ability to reverse trains arriving from Thingley and it's done from time to time; a useful facility when things are up the Swanee in various ways.  The business case for "reverse facility at Trowbridge STATION" rather than "reverse in the Trowbridge Boondocks" should include such analysis.   Rather interestingly, I can envisage situations that could even be timetabled to use it ... such as the extra Bristol to Bath Metro local over which there's a bit of a ?? when it gets to Bath, and the 15:20 Cheltenham Spa to Swindon that could have become the 15:20 to Trowbridge, with the 17:54 Swindon to Cheltenham Spa could become the 17:12 from Trowbridge.

    Do you count about a mile away as just short of the station then? I don't think I would...

    I was borderline in choosing those words; I'm tempted to travel on some of the Westbury to Chippenham services I'm offered for 18th July (change at Bath Spa) and see what words Westbury and Trowbridge passengers use to describe it. It's the final km or so of a walk I've done from home (on footpaths, I stress, NOT on the track) and once I pass the stop board I feel I'm really getting there.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on June 18, 2015, 23:43:16
    Moving away from the altered timetable, there are signs of progress in the Bristol area. The first actual OHLE is now ready for all to see, if as yet unconnected to the mains, at the IEP depot in Stoke Gifford:

    (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/Boyamijealous_7108a707/20150616_162712_zpsylwqc95j.jpg)

    I only had my phone as I travelled to Gloucester, but will try again with a proper camera.

    By Avonmeads, there are signs of action, with a compound having been established.

    (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/Boyamijealous_7108a707/20150618_072304_zpsga9iwuv9.jpg)

    The line into the fenced off bit has been spruced up, and there are a few OHLE piles, er, piled up in a corner. There are also some of the concrete troughs used for signalling. I assume both are leftovers from other works nearby. I have a photo (with bonus steam train) from the same vantage point, taken last year:

    (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/Boyamijealous_7108a707/2014-05-14%2015.58.41_zpsnmolpxnw.jpg)

    Looks like they are going through with this electrification then!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on June 19, 2015, 14:35:39
    Conversely, things could grind to a halt through Goring, as we have a nice new action group just formed to stop Network Rail proceeding with the installation of the posts and cross beams as they are an eyesore (something I do not disagree with).... be interesting to see what happens, lawyers are poised to get involved which always makes for a nice delay.

    I'll enquire if I can copy the info from the local magazine to the forums.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on June 19, 2015, 16:47:42
    Aren't the mast installations done under Network Rail's permitted development rights? No external permissions needed and thus very difficult to legally challenge.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 19, 2015, 18:02:32
    Conversely, things could grind to a halt through Goring, as we have a nice new action group just formed to stop Network Rail proceeding with the installation of the posts and cross beams as they are an eyesore (something I do not disagree with).... be interesting to see what happens, lawyers are poised to get involved which always makes for a nice delay.

    I'll enquire if I can copy the info from the local magazine to the forums.
    Aren't the mast installations done under Network Rail's permitted development rights? No external permissions needed and thus very difficult to legally challenge.

    I am quite certain it would be under the permitted development and there would have been dialogue with the local planning authority.   Any areas of outstanding natural beauty, heritage, conservation areas will have been dealt with with the relevant body.

    My guess it will not stop the work especially if NR have all the authorities / permissions in place until they get a Court Order or an Prohibition Notice


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Henry on June 19, 2015, 19:35:53

     Report  'Spotlight' news program this evening ;- ^Final confirmation that the region will get a brand new fleet of high speed inter-city trains has been delayed.
     
     As far as I can understand confirmation of the agreement should have been 'rubber stamped' at the end of June,
     but has been put back.  I was under the impression it was all a ''done deal''.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 19, 2015, 21:03:17
    I have been advised by a college "There have been a few technical issues encountered during construction at several locations along the Route"



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on June 19, 2015, 21:41:06
    Aren't the mast installations done under Network Rail's permitted development rights? No external permissions needed and thus very difficult to legally challenge.

    Yes, but apparently NR haven't followed the rules, and admitted so at a meeting on 6th May with the Railway Action Group, various Councillors and John Howell MP. I have emailed the editor to request permission but not had a reply yet, so I will only quote a few small parts (Goring Gap News, July 2015, p33):

    Quote
    NR admitted that they had failed to consult adequately during the approvals process and would re-engage with the local authorities to remedy this... John Howell welcomed the offer from NR to hold further consultation talks with the relevant authorities.... NR's Permitted Development Rights could be legally challenged as they have not conducted the required consultation process properly and not made any changes to reduce the visual impact on the AONB

    Last month when the initial article was published there was something in there about NR saying they would have different masts through the AONB which would lessen the impact (thinner, painted green etc), but then later admitted they had no intention of now doing so - unfortunately I don't have that edition of the magazine now to refer to.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on August 09, 2015, 18:51:22
    I traveled from Thatcham to Paddington last week and couldn't notice much progress on the electrification project. Is this because work is currently focusing on the Bath area?

    I'm sure it will all come together but progress does seem to be slow


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on August 09, 2015, 19:45:02
    From posts elsewhere on the Coffee Shop forum (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=16078.0), the ORR seem to share your concern, BerkshireBugsy.  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on August 11, 2015, 18:23:14
    I noticed at Pangbourne a few days ago that some dangly bits had been fixed to some of the masts there. Only seen from the road under the Whitchurch Road bridge, so no idea how much has been achieved.

    Yes, there's quite a few 'dangly bits' now fitted between Goring and Tilehurst, and a few more between Maidenhead and Slough.  One support pole is being used for two registration arms (I think that's what they're called!), covering one track each.  Starting to look like an electrified railway now and can't be too long before the wires are strung on the Reading to Didcot test section?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 11, 2015, 20:04:10
    I noticed at Pangbourne a few days ago that some dangly bits had been fixed to some of the masts there. Only seen from the road under the Whitchurch Road bridge, so no idea how much has been achieved.

    Yes, there's quite a few 'dangly bits' now fitted between Goring and Tilehurst, and a few more between Maidenhead and Slough.  One support pole is being used for two registration arms (I think that's what they're called!), covering one track each.  Starting to look like an electrified railway now and can't be too long before the wires are strung on the Reading to Didcot test section?
    I believe the Grid connection at Didcot was commissioned on Saturday night, I've not heard how it went although I believe there were some problems ................. but then there always is caution when playing around with 400kV and 50kV  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 15, 2015, 19:43:29
    I came back from SWI on Thursday (13 August) and saw what looked like the piles for the gantrys for quite a distance - before the line passes below the M4 after leaving SWI until close to Wootton Bassett Junction. If it was what I saw, then much of the foundation work on that stretch is done, with little sign of progress. Why that bit was done and nowhere else, I have no idea.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 17, 2015, 08:37:30
    I came back from SWI on Thursday (13 August) and saw what looked like the piles for the gantrys for quite a distance - before the line passes below the M4 after leaving SWI until close to Wootton Bassett Junction. If it was what I saw, then much of the foundation work on that stretch is done, with little sign of progress. Why that bit was done and nowhere else, I have no idea.

    Possession time will only allow a certain amount of work to be done also there is only so much material you can load on a works train that can be delivered.

    There are only so many qualified staff in the UK to supervise / engineer the work, not all the survey has been done, some locations needing possessions to do this. 

    There is also the lead time of the delivery of the steel masts.

    There are many reasons and possibly some excuses too


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 17, 2015, 14:56:59
    Thanks ET.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 02, 2015, 17:26:58
    Just watched this video several times trying to ascertain by how much the track was lowered in the Box - Bath exercise: not much, by the look of it, though I imagine it varied.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2FJWJ7MUoc

    Does anyone know how much they dropped it by?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on September 02, 2015, 20:16:44
    Just watched this video several times trying to ascertain by how much the track was lowered in the Box - Bath exercise: not much, by the look of it, though I imagine it varied.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2FJWJ7MUoc

    Does anyone know how much they dropped it by?

    I have the figures somewhere ... there was confusion of units in the press at one point and I think the maximum anywhere was 30 cm (1 foot) with other lowerings being 6 inches or less.   However, I was being told this and making notes months ago when my main concern was the smooth operation of the blockade, once assured that the changes weren't going to scandalously ruin historical sited by dropping trains into deep pits!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 02, 2015, 20:23:49
    Thanks, Graham - that concurs with how it looks on the NR timelapse videos. Doesn't seem enough somehow!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 02, 2015, 20:59:43
    I noticed recently that an area is being/has been cleared adjacent to the up platform at Midgham, just to the west of the small car park on that side of the Station.

    It looks like some electrification facility might be going in, but wondered if anyone knows for sure?

    There also appeared to be some markings on the platform which I think may be the positions for future OHLE posts.

    Overall, electrification progress on the B&H does still seem slow to me, as an uneducated observer.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 02, 2015, 21:04:35
    Just watched this video several times trying to ascertain by how much the track was lowered in the Box - Bath exercise: not much, by the look of it, though I imagine it varied.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2FJWJ7MUoc

    Does anyone know how much they dropped it by?

    It is likely did what is called a deep dig which is where the base layer of ballast is removed and possibly some of the formation below; this can also mean that track drainage has to be altered. I know the bridge over the stream within Box Tunnel was also worked.

    Once the bed ballast has been dropped it has to be levelled and then compacted with monster size whacker plates before the sleeps and rails go down.

    Often it is the logistics of getting men, plant and materials in and out of railways sites that eat up the time


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on September 02, 2015, 22:01:54
    Quote from: Thatcham Crossing
    Overall, electrification progress on the B&H does still seem slow to me, as an uneducated observer.

    I think most efforts have gone into getting the test section to Didcot ready.  I hear the wiring train will be running by the end of the month...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 03, 2015, 16:59:47
    Overall, electrification progress on the B&H does still seem slow to me, as an uneducated observer.

    I've told the tale of my loft conversion and new kitchen before. Having had a new combi boiler to replace the old floor standing model in the kitchen, I figured the first job needed was to move the programmer from one side of the kitchen to the other. I disappeared below the floor when my wife went out. The wiring needed redoing, as we no longer needed the hot water settings or MZVs below the floor upstairs, and chasing the concreted wall for the wiring was a sod, as was making good the floor afterwards. 4 hours later, having moved the programmer and plastered over the new channel, with triumph, I put down my screwdriver. Enter Mrs FT, N! - "Is that all you've done?"

    It's in the preparation. Sticking the masts and wires will be the easy bit compared to what you don't see.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on September 08, 2015, 12:32:31
    Poster up at Swindon thanking passengers for their patience during the recent work.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/boxtha.jpg)

    Ironically some of my journeys were *easier* during the blockade!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 10, 2015, 11:23:35
    Poster up at Swindon thanking passengers for their patience during the recent work.

    Ironically some of my journeys were *easier* during the blockade!


    My ride home from Swindon was faster than via Chippenham and Bath.

    To quote Spike Milligan in Puckoon - "Patience - that word was invented by dull buggers who can't think fast enough". Patience is a virtue, but not one of mine.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on September 22, 2015, 22:58:26
    Passing Wantage Road today I notice that the new bridge abutments are going up.  The South abutment is in line with the abutment of the old bridge rather than the pier that was on the old platform. So the new bridge will allow the loops to be extended, or full 4 tracking if desired.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on September 23, 2015, 09:36:03
    Around Taplow the masts and cantilever arms are being fitted with the dangly bits (technical term) to hang the wire. No sign of posts on the station yet.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on September 23, 2015, 10:25:10
    At Didcot Parkway they have started to cut back the platform canopies and I assume this is for clearance for the electric wires. As far as I can tell they have only done platform 4; although platform 1 doesn't have any canopies to cut back.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on September 23, 2015, 11:25:55
    Goring has the bolt locations cemented into the ground on some of the platforms (partly in the carpark on London end of Platform 4, in the center island of platform 2/3 and on the edge of platform 1, in the new area that was cleared by the temporary bridge at the Oxford end of platform 4).

    They have also screened off two areas along the wall by the High Street bridge where I presume they will be attaching OHLE/masts to the wall - I am guessing the screening is there temporarily while they are working on it.

    Still haven't noticed much activity on the Gatehampton bridge over the Thames though, but the rest of it is coming along quite quickly.

    Just amazes me how many differently designed/shaped/sized masts, arms and "dangly" bits that seem to be appearing, and how random (its obviously not!) the placement seems to be. Gotta say from an engineering/design point of view, it's very impressive how it all comes together  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 23, 2015, 21:54:53

    Just amazes me how many differently designed/shaped/sized masts, arms and "dangly" bits that seem to be appearing, and how random (its obviously not!) the placement seems to be. Gotta say from an engineering/design point of view, it's very impressive how it all comes together  :)

    I've been involved in electrification projects and an Engineer for a couple of decades and still amazes me  :o ;D

    There is of course a design and a plan to deliver the project.  Once the foundations are in and the structures are up and set to the correct rake and with the new type of cantilevers and the portals the height above rail is set  the fitting of small part steel, stove pipes, insulators registration arms become much quicker also some of this can be done in much shorter possessions than the foundation and structure erecting.

    Once all the registration arms are in place and assuming the anchor structures have their anchors the wire runs will start both the catenary and contact wire at the same time usually with temporary droppers, the next stage is put the permanent droppers in and register the wire run to the correct height and stagger


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rob on the hill on October 01, 2015, 12:03:19
    Interesting article in Rail Engineer about recent works east of Bath and Box tunnel:
    http://www.railengineer.uk/2015/09/30/preparing-the-way-for-bath-electrification/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 01, 2015, 17:46:31
    Very interesting indeed - thank you!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 01, 2015, 17:50:52
    Indeed, an interesting article and one that complemented a similar RAIL magazine article a couple of issues ago.

    Also worth remembering (as we're always reminded when the reverse is true) that the blockade, sorry Temporary Period Of Disruption, despite its complexity, was completed on time.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on October 01, 2015, 21:17:06
    Also interesting that they mentioned the other nearby excavations around Box Tunnel in somewhat vague terms - some that go below the tunnel bore and others maybe above - all apparently for ammunition storage.  No mention that this was RAF Corsham: the site of central UK government should the Russians invade/bomb/nuke/etc. - an underground city for civil servants and MPs, accommodation, hospitals, BBC studios, ... and even its own pub - the Red Lion I believe.  Don't worry Graeme - it's out of classification now.

    Hang on; there's a black car just turned up outside ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: trainer on October 01, 2015, 22:15:53
    Also interesting that they mentioned the other nearby excavations around Box Tunnel in somewhat vague terms - ........ Don't worry Graeme - it's out of classification now.

    Hang on; there's a black car just turned up outside ...

    It's so out of classification that I took a group of school students around them many years ago when someone was trying to make a tourist attraction out of them.  I think they failed!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rower40 on October 02, 2015, 10:16:52

    It's so out of classification that I took a group of school students around them many years ago when someone was trying to make a tourist attraction out of them.  I think they failed!
    The students, or the tourist attraction promoters? ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 02, 2015, 21:10:09
    (hello Rower40!)

    There was even a display of photos of the site in Bristol a few years ago. Some very old tech there, some of it rather mouldy...



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on October 02, 2015, 21:17:15
    Also interesting that they mentioned the other nearby excavations around Box Tunnel in somewhat vague terms - some that go below the tunnel bore and others maybe above - all apparently for ammunition storage.  No mention that this was RAF Corsham: the site of central UK government should the Russians invade/bomb/nuke/etc. - an underground city for civil servants and MPs, accommodation, hospitals, BBC studios, ... and even its own pub - the Red Lion I believe.  Don't worry Graeme - it's out of classification now.

    Hang on; there's a black car just turned up outside ...

    Not forgetting the strategic reserve of steam locomotives squirelled away under Box. That's if you believe the more frothing/conspiracy theorist rail enthusiasts.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: hoover50 on October 11, 2015, 11:37:11
    According to the Daily Fail, work on 3 bridges in Royal Wootton Bassett will be delayed by the discovery of a colony of endangered great crested newts in Royal Wootton Bassett -

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3267985/Bad-newts-train-High-speed-link-delayed-year-animal-colony.html



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on October 11, 2015, 12:16:40
    Not forgetting the strategic reserve of steam locomotives squirelled away under Box.

    Well, they had to put them somewhere when Standedge Tunnel reopened and they were displaced by the strategic reserve of carrying narrowboats...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rower40 on October 12, 2015, 13:04:51
    According to the Daily Fail, work on 3 bridges in Royal Wootton Bassett will be delayed by the discovery of a colony of endangered great crested newts in Royal Wootton Bassett -

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3267985/Bad-newts-train-High-speed-link-delayed-year-animal-colony.html


    Cue massive sighs-of-relief from NR and their signalling and electrification subcontractors.  The enormous delays to the project, brought about by constant scope changes, and lack of skilled designers/installers/testers, can now be blamed on newts.  Not boiling frogs, honest.  (See Roger Ford, Modern Railways, for about the last 15 years...)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 12, 2015, 16:23:55
    I bet countries around the world laugh at us that we will stop major building projects because some tiny reptiles have been found. I've nothing against newts but we really do need to get our priorities right.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on October 12, 2015, 16:28:59
    I bet countries around the world laugh at us that we will stop major building projects because some tiny reptiles have been found. I've nothing against newts but we really do need to get our priorities right.

    We have, by protecting the endangered species.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on October 12, 2015, 17:32:08
    I bet countries around the world laugh at us that we will stop major building projects because some tiny reptiles have been found. I've nothing against newts but we really do need to get our priorities right.

    We have, by protecting the endangered species.

    You only have to google newts and delay to get a large number of instances where projects have been held up. So for an endangered species, they are remarkably common.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on October 12, 2015, 18:00:57
    So the protection is working then, which is great newts  ;)

    Ok, OK back to my day job....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 12, 2015, 21:05:12
    I'm sure anyone reading this thread who endures the daily crush into and out of Paddington will take comfort from the fact that as the delays to electrification continue to mount up that the little newts are happy further down the line along with the butterflies and bats.

    If the Victorians had taken every bit of wildlife into consideration then we wouldn't have a railway at all. Hmmm maybe that isn't such a bad thing?  :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Jason on October 13, 2015, 12:05:22
    I don't know if this is new news or just scaremongering ?
    "Green Park Station may open without any trains stopping there"
    http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-open-without-10243662 (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-open-without-10243662)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 13, 2015, 12:07:47
    Initially  ??? then realised it's a different Green Park station!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 13, 2015, 12:30:22
    It is a realistic issue.   The timetables have to consider the entirety of what is going on across an area including a number of busy junctions.  The line doesn't run in isolation, you have XC and freight whose timings also have to deal with conflicts at Reading West Jn, Oxford Rd Jn, Southcote Jn, and with SWT main line services at Basingstoke, (even if the stoppers don't cross the mainline because they run into a bay they still cross the up line in doing so).  The turnaround time at Basingstoke might disappear completely with an extra stop both ways if all the times at Reading are fixed, for example.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on October 13, 2015, 12:53:27
    It is a realistic issue. 

    Indeed ... although I would wonder about alternate trains skipping Bramley and skipping Mortimer, leaving them with an hourly service.  Back of an envelope calculations shows that about half a dozen passengers get off, and half a dozen get on, each train at each of these stops. And still with 2 stops between Southcote and Basingstoke, no operational pathing issues. As an old friend of ours might write, stops CANCELLED for OPERATIONAL CONVENIENCE, but it might be the best of a bad job.  Could there also be some Reading West skips, as that's also served by locals to Newbury.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on October 13, 2015, 13:04:47
    Could skip Green Park and make only hourly stops there....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 13, 2015, 13:44:57
    Anyway back to the original topic :) I haven't travelled into London for over a month now and one thing I noticed about the installation of OLE masts is that it is extremely random.In some sections there are just the circular tubes waiting to be cut to size where in other areas there are masts, cross masts and dangly sections (excuse my ignorance on what they are called S&T!)

    And it some areas there is nothing at all.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 13, 2015, 14:09:54
    Anyway back to the original topic :) I haven't travelled into London for over a month now and one thing I noticed about the installation of OLE masts is that it is extremely random.In some sections there are just the circular tubes waiting to be cut to size where in other areas there are masts, cross masts and dangly sections (excuse my ignorance on what they are called S&T!)

    And it some areas there is nothing at all.
    Really makes you wonder just how far behind they really are now.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 13, 2015, 14:27:48
    Anyway back to the original topic :) I haven't travelled into London for over a month now and one thing I noticed about the installation of OLE masts is that it is extremely random.In some sections there are just the circular tubes waiting to be cut to size where in other areas there are masts, cross masts and dangly sections (excuse my ignorance on what they are called S&T!)

    And it some areas there is nothing at all.
    Really makes you wonder just how far behind they really are now.

    They are definitely behind, but they have actually done rather a lot just very randomly distributed (I was surprised to see a large number of piles done in S Wales).  I suspect it means that it will all come together in complete runs of OLE rather quickly. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 13, 2015, 14:43:24
    Whilst I admire your optimism, on the 2 bits of line I travel fairly frequently (PAD-RDG, and RDG-THA on the B&H) there still seem to be several stretches where there aren't even piles in the ground yet.

    For example, around Slough Station, there seems to be very little evidence of electrification work under way at all?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 13, 2015, 14:46:42
    Whilst I admire your optimism, on the 2 bits of line I travel fairly frequently (PAD-RDG, and RDG-THA on the B&H) there still seem to be several stretches where there aren't even piles in the ground yet.

    For example, around Slough Station, there seems to be very little evidence of electrification work under way at all?

    I'm not sure I agree TC - there seemed to be quite a few changes around the Twyford/maidenhead section since I last travelled through


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on October 13, 2015, 14:49:41
    They've been busy around Burnham/Taplow alright, banging away all night! (so to speak)

    To be fair we all had letters from NR explaining what would be happening, when, and apologising for the noise, and also visits from their (very pleasant) representatives.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 13, 2015, 19:30:24
    On my way out of BRI this morning, I noticed the pile of, er, piles by the siding behind Avonmeads had been substantially augmented.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 13, 2015, 21:13:37
    Quote
    there seemed to be quite a few changes around the Twyford/maidenhead section since I last travelled through

    That's my point really BB, it seems quite sporadic - although I do appreciate they can't be working everywhere at once.

    What does seem apparent to me though is that they seem to be leaving the complex/hard bits till last, eg, around some stations, bridges, and areas where there are obstructions close to the track. An example of this is just west of Aldermaston where the boundary of a housing estate (fences/trees/walls) is very close to the line. No sign of any piling, although there is plenty on the rest of that stretch towards Midgham.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on October 14, 2015, 07:29:11
    Anyway back to the original topic :) In some sections there are just the circular tubes waiting to be cut to size where in other areas there are masts, cross masts and dangly sections (excuse my ignorance on what they are called S&T!)

    The "dangly bits" are referred to as "small part steel".  Also, the perceived lack of progress around stations can be partly explained by the fact that the wires will be held up by different types of support.  The most likely type will be a twin track portal arrangement, and that installing this will need fairly major holes to be cut into station canopies and twin track possessions.  Also, there is a gauge clearance exercise to be done too.  The route will be re-gauged to allow W10 and W12 freight wagons to come through, and also to provide adequate clearance for pantographs in accordance with European inter-operability requirements.  This means a measuring and cutting back of the canopies, where the originals are staying, or a rebuild.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 14, 2015, 08:17:21
    Anyway back to the original topic :) In some sections there are just the circular tubes waiting to be cut to size where in other areas there are masts, cross masts and dangly sections (excuse my ignorance on what they are called S&T!)

    The "dangly bits" are referred to as "small part steel".  Also, the perceived lack of progress around stations can be partly explained by the fact that the wires will be held up by different types of support.  The most likely type will be a twin track portal arrangement, and that installing this will need fairly major holes to be cut into station canopies and twin track possessions.  Also, there is a gauge clearance exercise to be done too.  The route will be re-gauged to allow W10 and W12 freight wagons to come through, and also to provide adequate clearance for pantographs in accordance with European inter-operability requirements.  This means a measuring and cutting back of the canopies, where the originals are staying, or a rebuild.

    Thanks for that - can I ask what is significant about the W10/W12 freight wagons in this respect?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on October 14, 2015, 09:05:01

    Thanks for that - can I ask what is significant about the W10/W12 freight wagons in this respect?

    The gauge is dictated by the size of ISO shipping containers.  W10 is a 9'-6" high deep sea container (also known as "High-Cube").  W12 is similar but refrigerated.   This traffic comes through Southampton and needs to go down to Acton or to the WCML.  These tall containers carried on standard UK freight wagons could potentially hit overhanging canopies.

    See here (http://www.greenlogistics.org/SiteResources/cb01cdef-c5ce-4f19-bcf2-a8fd0aac657a_LRN2008%20Woodburn.pdf (http://www.greenlogistics.org/SiteResources/cb01cdef-c5ce-4f19-bcf2-a8fd0aac657a_LRN2008%20Woodburn.pdf)) for a better explanation


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 14, 2015, 10:05:23
    In real measurements the difference between W10 and W12 is trivial, about 5 cm on the width overall, so an inch each side in old money, so it is almost always an easy win to get W12 rather than W10.   There is no height difference between the gauges.

    Another thing about W10 and W12 freight gauges is that they are no higher than 'locomotive gauge' - the work is all about fitting the corners of the boxes through a particular gap.   

    One thing that is always true, is that 'electrification' clearance does not automatically bring with it W10/W12 clearance.

    I think the comparison drawing that NR use in their RUSs etc (attached below) makes the relative sizes clearer - they show all the container gauges as being within the superimposed locomotive for width, and even W10/W12 is the same height.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on October 14, 2015, 10:39:05
    We had another visit from Crossrail yesterday telling us they will be banging away over the weekend. Don't think it will effect us much as the most of the posts near us are already in place.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on October 14, 2015, 12:15:15
    Really makes you wonder just how far behind they really are now.
    Can anyone remember when the first section (was it Reading-Didcot, or Didcot-Swindon?) was supposed to be energised ready for IEP testing to begin? Probably was arround now, so we might get an idea of how far the scheme is behind when that first section is switched on.

    Another thing about W10 and W12 freight gauges is that they are no higher than 'locomotive gauge' - the work is all about fitting the corners of the boxes through a particular gap.
    Square 'pegs' (containers) and round 'holes' (arched bridges and most tunnels) spring to mind.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 14, 2015, 12:34:14
    Can anyone remember when the first section (was it Reading-Didcot, or Didcot-Swindon?) was supposed to be energised ready for IEP testing to begin?

    Reading to Didcot and the end of last month IIRC.  Work really appears to have picked up in pace with many areas now looking ready for the wiring train.  That said there are several locations, mostly around the stations, where there are no sign of gantries as yet - as Visoflex and Berkshire Bugsy were discussing earlier.

    If the recent rate of progress is maintained then I'd bet on delivery less than six months late for that section.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 14, 2015, 14:58:43
    Square 'pegs' (containers) and round 'holes' (arched bridges and most tunnels) spring to mind.

    Indeed,  One of the options for gauge enhancement is to replace an arch bridge with a beam bridge without needing to raise the overall bridge height at all.

    Paul7755's link was informative (thanks).  It makes it clear why all this fright gauge enhancement work has little affect on taking us any closer to double decker passenger trains as in Europe, which need extra height in the centre rather than squared-up corners.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 14, 2015, 15:02:13
    Work really appears to have picked up in pace with many areas now looking ready for the wiring train.  .

    Does that mean that they have now started to get the hang of the new German work train which were introduced with such fanfare (didn't the Queen name it)?  If so then that is indeed good news for the future as the current issues can be viewed in large part as teething problems rather than anything more permanent . 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 14, 2015, 15:12:43
    Well, it's out pretty much every night, split into various sections with hundreds of staff beetling about nearby.  I still have my doubts as to it ever getting close to the efficiencies expected of it though!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 14, 2015, 17:24:25
    Leaving BRI for SWI this morning, I spied a lorry load of piles (about 6) unloading at the siding behind Avonmeads. I don't know where they are made, but it's kind of sad to see them arrive by road.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on October 14, 2015, 18:53:41
    a lorry load of piles

    I've got a cream for mine.  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on October 15, 2015, 07:45:42
    a lorry load of piles

    I've got a cream for mine.  ;D

    I think the Brunel set came through Thatcham (Westbound) about 600 - would it be going home for the night?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 15, 2015, 16:47:09

    I've got a cream for mine.  ;D

    Not those sort - these!

    (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/Boyamijealous_7108a707/Piles_zps0yen4eet.jpg)

    Best I can do for the moment.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 15, 2015, 16:49:28
    a lorry load of piles

    I've got a cream for mine.  ;D

    I think the Brunel set came through Thatcham (Westbound) about 600 - would it be going home for the night?

    Probably been out for a night on the piles.   ;D

    Seriously though I cannot find anything going west at that point apart from an empty turbo to Bedwyn.  Most of the trains connected with the electrification tend to head back to Swindon via the west curve at Reading.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 15, 2015, 16:57:51
    Quote

    There you go man,
    Keep as cool as you can
    Face piles of trials with smiles
    It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave
    And keep on thinking free



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 15, 2015, 23:24:15
    I really did try to resist the temptation to post here ::), but the example of Stephen Fry baiting Rob Brydon on QI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tS9YsYLYi-Q) prompted me to respond:

    ... (I was surprised to see a large number of piles done in S Wales).

    "In England, we have indoor flushing toilets."  :P ::) :o ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 16, 2015, 18:03:38
    Quote

    There you go man,
    Keep as cool as you can
    Face piles of trials with smiles
    It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave
    And keep on thinking free



    You know, I've been thinking about our fortune, and I've decided that...

    You are John Lodge, and I claim my ^5. (^10 if you are Justin Hayward)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on October 16, 2015, 20:06:19
    I'm more than that, I know I am - at least, I think I must be.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 17, 2015, 18:48:54
    I'm more than that, I know I am - at least, I think I must be.

    And Ren^ Descartes was a drunken fart:
    "I drink, therefore I am".


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 17, 2015, 19:17:06
    Good excuse to raise a glass to him then.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on October 17, 2015, 22:58:51
    Socrates himself is a bugger when he's pissed .


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on October 17, 2015, 23:11:24
    Socrates himself is a bugger when he's pissed .

    Ahem. Are you inebriated too? Them's not the right lyrics to the Bruces' Philosophers Song (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9SqQNgDrgg).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 19, 2015, 17:29:38
    Socrates himself is a bugger when he's pissed .

    Ahem. Are you inebriated too? Them's not the right lyrics to the Bruces' Philosophers Song (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9SqQNgDrgg).

    Some confusion with Aristotle, methinks.

    Anyway, enough philosophy, back to electrification. Although I have nothing new to report at present.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 21, 2015, 17:59:30
    As high as ^2.8bn now being quoted by Mark Carne to complete the extended GWEP :o

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34594599 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34594599)

    Fortunately, as most of the major electrification projects are so delayed that they will be slipping into CP6, I should imagine the books will be balanced by setting some of the money aside from that Control Period to cover the remaining committed CP5 projects.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 21, 2015, 18:29:57
    Fortunately, as most of the major electrification projects are so delayed that they will be slipping into CP6, I should imagine the books will be balanced by setting some of the money aside from that Control Period to cover the remaining committed CP5 projects.

    Errrrrrrrrrrrr no there has been a 20% cull on the CP5  renewals and enhancements budgets with the work being deferred into CP6 and even some deferred CP4 work has  be further deferred into CP6.  The operational budgets are also being squeezed with pressure to reduce overtime.

    Recruitment ban been imposed this includes internal promotions, all vacancies now have to go before a panel for approval before they can be advertised, vacancies cannot be filled with consultants or agency staff.  When agency staff contracts come to an end they more than likely will not get extended.

    I suspect there is yet more to come.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 21, 2015, 18:46:28
    Errrrrrrrrrrrr no there has been a 20% cull on the CP5  renewals and enhancements budgets with the work being deferred into CP6 and even some deferred CP4 work has  be further deferred into CP6. 

    Yes, that's what I was saying - work will be deferred (at least partially) into CP6, MML to Sheffield and TransPennine to Selby, and quite possibly the Valley Lines (but hopefully not Didcot to Oxford).  Some of the schemes that might have otherwise made it into CP6 will now be unlikely to happen.  All that along with the tightening of belts in CP5 that you mention.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 21, 2015, 19:06:23
    As high as ^2.8bn now being quoted by Mark Carne to complete the extended GWEP :o

    That's pathetic. Estimating is a core engineering competence, needed by all professional grades (though varying in its form).

    All estimates are incomplete. The only way to identify the "unknown unknowns" is to finish the job. So some contingency element is always needed, and if it is large to start with you have to work to reduce it. Sometimes a quite incomplete costing - "known costs only"  has to be used to start the project, otherwise the time scales get too long. You just have to know that's what you are dealing with.

    Of course bosses of all kinds, but especially ones selling the project, tend to leave off the contingency and misrepresent the accuracy of the estimate. And politicians are worse, and as for journalists ... so what we were told may not represent what the underlying estimate said. But even so, to have missed such a huge amount is ... careless, very.

    It reminds me of the VW executives' grilling by the US senate. Having said the board did not know about the lies, one was quoted as saying it was all down to a few software engineers. No it wasn't: it was one of the six (roughly) levels of management in between. Look for the "project champion" who was promising the top brass "yes we can". I suspect someone in NR was doing the same thing; being so keen to be patted on the tummy by his master (the minister) he would roll over and say whatever was asked.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on October 21, 2015, 19:19:27
    I think it would be interesting to understand how much of the overrun is due to engineering issues, and how much is due to a change in the tolerance of society to disruption and change since the last major schemes.  I suspect the latter is having quite an impact. As an example I understand from perusing information relating to the "Goring Gap" dispute that Network Rail are considering (at some point) taking down the masts installed and putting up something more acceptable to the Nimby's sorry locals.  How much is that going to cost?  Maybe they should instead built a tunnel so they can hide the whole railway and then we can beat ourselves up some more and wonder why things cost more to do in the UK than abroad.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on October 21, 2015, 19:25:08
    Would any of the experts on here care to estimate the actual final cost, when the scheme is finished and working ?
    I estimate the full final cost at about 8.7 billion pounds, this estimate being based on multiplying the original figure by 10.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 21, 2015, 19:39:38
    Would any of the experts on here care to estimate the actual final cost, when the scheme is finished and working?

    In a word...  No! ;)

    Mind you, I did think the original costings seemed very low.  I'd like to know what degree of the overspend is due to the electrification train not working as expected.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 21, 2015, 19:45:19
    Would any of the experts on here care to estimate the actual final cost, when the scheme is finished and working ?
    I estimate the full final cost at about 8.7 billion pounds, this estimate being based on multiplying the original figure by 10.

    Some time ago on the Coffee Shop forum, I made what turned out to be a remarkably accurate prediction of the cost of a particular infrastructure improvement - simply by making up a figure.  :P

    See http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=8366.msg103379#msg103379  ;) :D ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 21, 2015, 19:58:50
    As high as ^2.8bn now being quoted by Mark Carne to complete the extended GWEP :o

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34594599 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34594599)

    Wow that's quite an increase in cost. Coupled with not being able to give a completion date this project really has turned into a bit of a sham. It's pretty obvious they are along way behind with what you can or should I say cannot see with regards to masts and wiring.

    Add in the cost and some say the suitability of the trains ordered, it's all a bit concerning.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rob on the hill on October 21, 2015, 20:41:30
    Maybe President Xi Jinping could be persuaded to write another cheque while he's here...?  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on October 21, 2015, 21:33:05
    One of the principle underlying causes, which we have discussed in many related threads before, is that NR got rid of the majority of its Engineering Expertise. So what do you expect the Bulls**ters and Accountants left behind to come up with?

    End of Rant


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 21, 2015, 21:40:57
    The GEWP estimate was done over 6 years ago, there was political pressure both small p and big P (ie small p internal and big P Government) to have the magical figure of ^1b so a lot of creative thinking was done.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on October 21, 2015, 22:00:28
    The GEWP estimate was done over 6 years ago, there was political pressure both small p and big P (ie small p internal and big P Government) to have the magical figure of ^1b so a lot of creative thinking was done.

    I accept your point ET but the NR GRIP Process, as you well know, was designed to prevent this type of outcome from happening.  Weren't NR very adept at blaming Railtrack for all the ills of the UK rail industry for exactly the same reasons.  That never did hold any water with me, having worked for both organisations for nearly 15 years in total (8 RT and 7 NR).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 21, 2015, 22:13:46
    The GEWP estimate was done over 6 years ago, there was political pressure both small p and big P (ie small p internal and big P Government) to have the magical figure of ^1b so a lot of creative thinking was done.

    I accept your point ET but the NR GRIP Process, as you well know, was designed to prevent this type of outcome from happening.  Weren't NR very adept at blaming Railtrack for all the ills of the UK rail industry.  That never did hold any water with me, having worked for both organisations for nearly 15 years in total (8 RT and 7 NR).

    You are correct the GRIP process should prevent such things happening, I don't have a lot of faith in it to be honest it can be manipulated to get the desired result, all to common is the "to be developed in GRIP 4" or what ever the next GRIP stage is, thereby the team in the lower GRIP stage puts a "risk" in documents get signed people move on and a new team comes along and find the risk pot is more a thimble


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 21, 2015, 23:17:39

    You are correct the GRIP process should prevent such things happening, I don't have a lot of faith in it to be honest it can be manipulated to get the desired result, all to common is the "to be developed in GRIP 4" or what ever the next GRIP stage is, thereby the team in the lower GRIP stage puts a "risk" in documents get signed people move on and a new team comes along and find the risk pot is more a thimble

    This sums up many of the excellent comments made above. As with MetroBust in Bristol, it is possible to decide the outcome - in this case bus is good, tram is bad - then work the maths to arrive at the desired result. Big infrastructure is harder to deal with, and there are good reasons for pressing ahead despite the cost.

    A lot has been invested in the GW mainline electrification already. To my mind, it was a very big mistake to cancel the project in the 1980s for short term gain. The cost would have been far lower in real terms, although the technology has prospered since. It has now passed the point of no return. Hitachi will be turning out the new trains according to their contract, whether there are wires for them to run under or not. The HSTs, despite their fans, are nearing a point way beyond the end of their initial lifetimes. They were meant as a stop-gap to keep us moving until electrification.

    The day will come when we in the UK join the ranks of all-electric railways. Diesel is dirty, the trains use it only to produce electricity to drive the trains. They have to carry huge engines and hundreds of litres of oil to do this. That takes energy that costs money. The worst coal-fired power station powering a 14MW electric loco is probably doing a cleaner job than the cleanest diesel unit, but power for rail is heading down a one-track line towards 25 KV overhead equipment, maybe with battery power for the shortest branch lines. Electric train is a prophet in his own time.

    Coal-fired stations are being demolished - like Didcot - with gas filling the gap until the new nuclear stations get a new clear path towards our low emission future.We are also using less electricity year on year in our homes. I have just replaced 8 50 watt GU10 spotlights with LEDs burning 3 Watts each, and they are brighter and a decent light. The internet is doing much to increase our consumption, but that will drop off with improvements to the technology, hopefully. We will end up with a base load of around 25 GW, equal to about 8 Hinkley C nuclear stations, with peak consumption provided by CCGT (Combined Cycle Gas Turbine) plants such as at Didcot and Avonmouth. These can fire up in minutes, with Dinorwig in Wales keeping the lights on when everyone gets up to put the kettle on at the end of one of the soup operas, or half time in the footie. We may develop Thorium as a nuclear fuel, or harness the tides. Wind and solar farms will be with us for a generation only, as they are not reliable, have too big a footprint for the power they supply, and need alternative backup. You build them, you have to do it twice. If the electric railways were powered by wind turbines, then for two thirds of the time you would be going nowhere.

    If the price of electrification looks big, then look at Hinkley C. That was put at ^16 billion last year, ^24 billion yesterday, but ^25 billion today. The sight of a Chinese cheque book has an effect. Jobcentres as far away as Bristol and Gloucester are poised to recruit everything from nuclear scientist to cleaner and the possibility of avoiding work anywhere in Somerset will disappear.

    But building a better railway and cleaner power isn't a job creation scheme, or at least shouldn't be. Our future as a country will see gas used only to generate electricity, and that gas will come from hydraulically fractured wells as the North Sea proves uneconomic. We will cook by magnetic induction, heat our homes with wood burners or ceramic heaters, maybe even embrace electric cars. The revolution will be driven by cost, not principle, but railways will lead the way if the government lets them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on October 21, 2015, 23:34:35
    Wind and solar farms will be with us for a generation only, as they are not reliable, have too big a footprint for the power they supply, and need alternative backup. You build them, you have to do it twice. If the electric railways were powered by wind turbines, then for two thirds of the time you would be going nowhere.

    The position is not as clear as that.  Or at least only if you use the power only in the same location as it is generated.  However the wind and the sun provide power at different times in different locations so with a National or even continental grid these fluctuations even out. Yes you do not get solar power at night though, but battery technology for large scale static storage of energy is coming on a pace.  So I would not write off either of these technologies as quickly as that.  I do have problems with big solar farms as I believe in the longer term we will need the land to grow food rather than energy. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 22, 2015, 09:51:37
    The HSTs, despite their fans, are nearing a point way beyond the end of their initial lifetimes. They were meant as a stop-gap to keep us moving until electrification.
    I did not know this. How long were they intended to be in service? I count myself an HST fan ^ how could you not be when your first sight of one was a huge, sleak, yellow and blue machine that whisked you so fast, in such silence and comfort, all the way from deepest Gloucestershire to London without having to change at Swindon, at age eight or so? I'll miss them ^ and their capacious guard's vans when I put my bike on the train ^ but I'll welcome the electric, sleaker, faster, quieter IEPs that replace them, just as I miss the sight of Didcot's cooling towers but welcome the cleaner air.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on October 22, 2015, 09:54:46
    As an example I understand from perusing information relating to the "Goring Gap" dispute that Network Rail are considering (at some point) taking down the masts installed and putting up something more acceptable to the Nimby's sorry locals.

    I live in Goring and think the OHLE looks bloody hideous, the views have been completely ruined. BUT, I am also a realist, times change and so does the landscape.

    PS. I also support Tesco opening (and having a useful shop that is open when all the others in the village are closed), rather than that boarded up, hideous eyesore we have had for the past 2 years, so not all locals are Nimby's!  :(


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on October 22, 2015, 09:58:25
    And in other news, I noticed at Pangbourne this morning they have started preparing piles/foundations for the masts on the platforms.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 22, 2015, 10:14:48
    As an example I understand from perusing information relating to the "Goring Gap" dispute that Network Rail are considering (at some point) taking down the masts installed and putting up something more acceptable to the Nimby's sorry locals. 

    Alternatively, NR are too polite to say up front that they won't do it, and are offering talks about mitigating the problem in response to the critics.  IMHO there is no way they'll change the masts retrospectively.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on October 22, 2015, 10:43:39
    The HSTs, despite their fans, are nearing a point way beyond the end of their initial lifetimes. They were meant as a stop-gap to keep us moving until electrification.
    I did not know this. How long were they intended to be in service?
    A stop-gap yes, but I thought it was a stop-gap until the introduction of the APT (Advanced Passenger Train). I'm not sure which version of the APT was intended for GW at the time IC125 was born though, the APT-P (prototype) would of course have required electrification but the APT-E (experimental) was gas-turbine powered and didn't require electrification.

    I count myself an HST fan ^ [snip]I'll miss them ^ and their capacious guard's vans when I put my bike on the train ^ but I'll welcome the electric, sleaker, faster, quieter IEPs that replace them.
    I'll probably miss the IC125s too, and with any luck will welcome their class 801 replacements on the Great Western. However, I expect I will see rather alot of class 800 'sardine midgets' instead of 801s.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 22, 2015, 12:30:55
    Having said that, I also remember the terrible smell of burning brake pads in the early 125s. According to what I heard at the time, this was because the carriages a/c was connected to the brake cooling circuit, and this had not been picked up in testing because... it had never been tested in motion with people in the carriages!  :o

    The problem was solved, obviously, but that it happened at all shows a great lack of thought for the passengers (if the reason I heard was correct).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 22, 2015, 13:23:23
    Quote
    I also remember the terrible smell of burning brake pads in the early 125s

    Not so sure it was only the early ones, I smelt it quite strongly only yesterday on a PAD-SLO-RDG service (whilst decelerating for the SLO stop).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 22, 2015, 13:27:22
    Not so sure it was only the early ones, I smelt it quite strongly only yesterday on a PAD-SLO-RDG service (whilst decelerating for the SLO stop).
    You will when the driver has to slam on the breaks. It is very rare to smell the brakes these days. When I was a child it was always part of travelling on an HST so I guess in the early days of the HSTs drivers breaked later than they do now.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 22, 2015, 14:05:56
    My understanding is that the brake smell problem was almost, but not quite completely solved by BR in the early days, by arranging for the dampers on the A/C air intakes which were designed to prevent entry of air when saloon air temperature is low to also close when the brakes were applied (see page 36 of http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3%20Brochure.pdf (http://www.porterbrook.com/downloads/brochures/Mk3%20Brochure.pdf)).  You still get the occasional whiff though, presumably when the braking is heavy and the dampers are not completely closed (or when they reopen after braking has finished).  Having said that you also get an occasional whiff on other stock especially Mark IVs and class 158



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 22, 2015, 15:09:26
    Tim's explanation tallies with what I remember being told, but in more detail (I might, possibly, have been given the same detail back then but doubt very much I would have understood it!)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 22, 2015, 18:39:28
    The HSTs, despite their fans, are nearing a point way beyond the end of their initial lifetimes. They were meant as a stop-gap to keep us moving until electrification.
    I did not know this. How long were they intended to be in service?
    A stop-gap yes, but I thought it was a stop-gap until the introduction of the APT (Advanced Passenger Train). I'm not sure which version of the APT was intended for GW at the time IC125 was born though, the APT-P (prototype) would of course have required electrification but the APT-E (experimental) was gas-turbine powered and didn't require electrification.

    I count myself an HST fan ^ [snip]I'll miss them ^ and their capacious guard's vans when I put my bike on the train ^ but I'll welcome the electric, sleaker, faster, quieter IEPs that replace them.
    I'll probably miss the IC125s too, and with any luck will welcome their class 801 replacements on the Great Western. However, I expect I will see rather alot of class 800 'sardine midgets' instead of 801s.

    The HSDT's (IC125) designed in the early 1970's were a stop gap before full electrification of all main lines in the UK, there needed to be a rest bite due to the WCML electrification costing more than originally estimated ................... sound familiar  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 22, 2015, 18:50:56
    The HSTs, despite their fans, are nearing a point way beyond the end of their initial lifetimes. They were meant as a stop-gap to keep us moving until electrification.
    I did not know this. How long were they intended to be in service?

    I think that by the time the first was built, it was pretty obvious they were here to stay. It was indeed brought into play only because  of the problems with the APT. You may think that as soon as an alternative looked like being available, the APT was doomed, if it wasn't already, and any pressure for electrification would disappear.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 22, 2015, 19:16:21
    Hang on ^ what did the APT have to do with electrification? I remember seeing one somewhere, once; perhaps it was Reading? Or maybe North Pole or somewhere similar near Paddington? Can't remember where, but I do remember it being a large number of points in my I Spy On a Train Journey book! Anyway, I'm sure that even if some APTs were electric, by no means all were (though how many were made? Can't have been many.)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: NickF on October 22, 2015, 20:19:08
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-34594599


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 22, 2015, 20:59:23
    Hang on ^ what did the APT have to do with electrification? I remember seeing one somewhere, once; perhaps it was Reading? Or maybe North Pole or somewhere similar near Paddington? Can't remember where, but I do remember it being a large number of points in my I Spy On a Train Journey book! Anyway, I'm sure that even if some APTs were electric, by no means all were (though how many were made? Can't have been many.)

    There were only three APTs build for actual passenger use, plus one experimental prototype. All were powered by 25 KV AC. The start of the development was in the mid-1960s, and the expectation was for success in a short period of time, with a long production run following the first three entering service. Electrification was considered essential for this, and in 1977, a parliamentary select committee on efficiency in nationalised industries proposed a rolling programme of electrification for when it was ready.

    Before that, it had become obvious that APT wasn't going to be a short-term development, and the British Rail Board authorised the rapid development of a high speed diesel to enter service by 1972 to fill the gap until APT was ready. In the event, APT didn't go into passenger service proper until 1981, and had few friends in the corridors of power. The HSTs had been deployed from late 1975, and were well embedded in railway consciousness. The 1979 election saw a new government in place that eventually cancelled the electrification plans and privatised the railways. The HSTs were so good at the job, that there was nothing broke that needed mending. Until now, as they are heading towards relative retirement, although I am sure there will still be HSTs running somewhere in anther 20 years. Who could resist redeploying a fast train like that?

    APT was quietly abandoned by 1986, although much of the technology developed for it found its way into the Pendolino design. Who knows - a few more years of work and more backing, and it may have been a goer today.

    That's a s good a history as I have been able to compile. I am also a fan of the HST, but it's time to move on.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 22, 2015, 21:05:23
    Quote
    You will when the driver has to slam on the breaks (sic!). It is very rare to smell the brakes these days.

    I would dispute that. I smell it nearly every time I travel on an HST. Maybe I just have a keen sense of smell!

    Will definitely miss them - one of the few trains left where you can stick your head out of the window like the "old days"!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 22, 2015, 21:06:19
    Hang on ^ what did the APT have to do with electrification? I remember seeing one somewhere, once; perhaps it was Reading? Or maybe North Pole or somewhere similar near Paddington? Can't remember where, but I do remember it being a large number of points in my I Spy On a Train Journey book! Anyway, I'm sure that even if some APTs were electric, by no means all were (though how many were made? Can't have been many.)
    Hang on ^ what did the APT have to do with electrification? I remember seeing one somewhere, once; perhaps it was Reading? Or maybe North Pole or somewhere similar near Paddington? Can't remember where, but I do remember it being a large number of points in my I Spy On a Train Journey book! Anyway, I'm sure that even if some APTs were electric, by no means all were (though how many were made? Can't have been many.)

    There were only three APTs build for actual passenger use, plus one experimental prototype. All were powered by 25 KV AC. The start of the development was in the mid-1960s, and the expectation was for success in a short period of time, with a long production run following the first three entering service. Electrification was considered essential for this, and in 1977, a parliamentary select committee on efficiency in nationalised industries proposed a rolling programme of electrification for when it was ready.

    Before that, it had become obvious that APT wasn't going to be a short-term development, and the British Rail Board authorised the rapid development of a high speed diesel to enter service by 1972 to fill the gap until APT was ready. In the event, APT didn't go into passenger service proper until 1981, and had few friends in the corridors of power. The HSTs had been deployed from late 1975, and were well embedded in railway consciousness. The 1979 election saw a new government in place that eventually cancelled the electrification plans and privatised the railways. The HSTs were so good at the job, that there was nothing broke that needed mending. Until now, as they are heading towards relative retirement, although I am sure there will still be HSTs running somewhere in anther 20 years. Who could resist redeploying a fast train like that?

    APT was quietly abandoned by 1986, although much of the technology developed for it found its way into the Pendolino design. Who knows - a few more years of work and more backing, and it may have been a goer today.

    That's a s good a history as I have been able to compile. I am also a fan of the HST, but it's time to move on.

    In the 1970's there was the APT-E   E standing for experimental it was gas turbine powered http://www.rapidotrains.com/apt1.html


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 22, 2015, 21:18:40
    I was beginning to wonder if what I remembered as APT was actually something else, but Electric Train's link looks like what I remember. Allowing for scale!  ;) What I mostly remember about the APT though is that it was meant to tilt but didn't.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on October 22, 2015, 21:21:48
    Quote
    You will when the driver has to slam on the breaks (sic!). It is very rare to smell the brakes these days.

    I would dispute that. I smell it nearly every time I travel on an HST. Maybe I just have a keen sense of smell!


    You do still smell it, but it is nothing like the first couple of years.

    At the risk of further digression, it's interesting that in the era of privatisation, there's possibly a more unpleasant smell that pervades Voyagers, but 12 years on not a lot has been done to address that particular odour.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on October 22, 2015, 21:52:40
    Quote
    You will when the driver has to slam on the breaks (sic!). It is very rare to smell the brakes these days.

    I would dispute that. I smell it nearly every time I travel on an HST. Maybe I just have a keen sense of smell!


    You do still smell it, but it is nothing like the first couple of years.

    At the risk of further digression, it's interesting that in the era of privatisation, there's possibly a more unpleasant smell that pervades Voyagers, but 12 years on not a lot has been done to address that particular odour.

    I recall a couple of years ago after a heavy brake application it came in quite strongly (perhaps the damper was not working) and one woman became quote concerned and want to pull the alarm.  I managed to persuade her that it was OK and she did not need to. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on October 23, 2015, 11:06:09
    I was beginning to wonder if what I remembered as APT was actually something else, but Electric Train's link looks like what I remember. Allowing for scale!  ;) What I mostly remember about the APT though is that it was meant to tilt but didn't.
    That's the APT-E, the gas turbine one that didn't require electrification and hence you may well have seen it at Reading. I'm not sure whether APT-E could tilt, but APT-P (the electric version, that actually went into service) could tilt. Some of the APT tech went into the IC225 (class 91 and mrk4 coaches) which it is rumored was orrigianlly going to be called APT-U. The IC225 was supposed to allow for tilt to be retro-fitted, but it never was.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rob on the hill on October 23, 2015, 12:16:09
    The Nations Railway: The Golden Age of British Rail
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4I_d2PwUD-s

    This BBC documentary includes the development of the APT and HST from 34mins. Very interesting programme with lots of nostalgic footage from the British Rail film unit.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 23, 2015, 14:02:37

    At the risk of further digression, it's interesting that in the era of privatisation, there's possibly a more unpleasant smell that pervades Voyagers, but 12 years on not a lot has been done to address that particular odour.

    AIUI, this is down to a the warm exhaust system running too close to a sewage tank and "simmering" the contents combined with an air con intake too near a tank vent. 

    I understand that Virgin has made real changes to their voyagers by changing some of the piping of the venting.   Similar changes were made the Pendolinos which had a similar problem with a similar cause.  It has improved the problem although maybe not completely solved it.   

    XC being the dreadful franchise that they are, have chosen the cheaper option of installing air fresheners behind some of the panels in the toilets and upping the frequency of cleaning out tanks and replacing air filters rather than spending money on adopting a known engineering solution. 

    Not looking forward to my XC trip this evening. 
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 23, 2015, 14:29:01
    XC being the dreadful franchise that they are,

    I do hope that the new Cross Country franchise, the one starting in 2019 (I have little hope of the direct award next year specifying anything but cosmetic improvements) is far more demanding of the operator as if ever there was a franchise that has just stood still over the last few years, then XC is it - despite having so much more growth potential.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on October 23, 2015, 14:36:44
    With no stock available & full trains over 75% of the time, I can see why they've foregone the growth potential.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 23, 2015, 15:00:48
    Yes indeed - fundamental changes are needed with the franchise specification.   A bit like the famous 'no growth' Northern franchise of 2004 being altered this time to specify the introduction of a brand new fleet of trains and add over 200 trains to the timetable each day.  Frequency of service isn't much of a problem on XC- better than it's ever been on most of their routes, but train length most certainly is.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 23, 2015, 18:16:27
    I've been ploughing through the transcript of the PAC hearing (http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/public-accounts-committee/network-rail-20142019-rail-investment-programme/oral/23330.pdf) on the 21st. It is of course very irritating - silly questions not being challenged, and sensible ones not being answered meaningfully. Some bits are more illuminating, and do give us a more official version of what has already been reported. Here's an example, on why the piling factory train doesn't do what it says on its can:

    Quote
      Q31 David Mowat: It is my observation that Mr Carne^s evidence and Mr Price^s evidence were contradictory. Mr Carne said that the ^2.6 billion, or the range that you now have, was due to three factors ^ estimating errors, scope and regulatory ^ none of which was execution problems. Mr Price said that actually there was ^1 billion of execution error in this, because the correct number was the one that was agreed last year. It seems to me that the two of you have got some sorting out to do on that. Your position is that it was just an estimating thing, whereas Mr Price is saying that actually the correct figure was the one that was given to the Committee last year. Those two pieces of evidence do not stack up together.

      Mark Carne: Perhaps I can try to address that point. Fundamentally, as I said, this particular project ^ let us focus on this project ^ was very immature at the time when the final determination was set, so there was a lot of scope definition that needed to be done, there was a lot of design that needed to be done, and that led to a greater degree of certainty about what the final cost would be. However, there is no doubt that the construction of this project has proved to be much more challenging and difficult than it should have been and that partly goes back to planning. Let me give you a very specific example of what I mean. When you electrify a railway line, you also have to re-signal it; otherwise, the high-voltage electrification interferes with the signals. In normal circumstances one would re-signal the railway line first, before you electrify it. In this case, because of some challenges in the supply chain, the signalling and the construction sequencing, we were not able to do that in all cases. So we decided, okay, we will start the piling of the ^

      David Mowat: Okay ^

      Mark Carne: If I may, because this is about the construction risk, which I absolutely accept is a material factor in this. In this case, on the Great Western line, because the signalling system had been buried in the ballast in British Rail days, in the 1970s, to prevent it being stolen by cable thieves, we did not know exactly where it was, then when we put the piles in we cut the signalling cables.

      Q32 Mr Bacon: You drilled through the signals?

      Mark Carne: We cut through the signals on two occasions. Quite clearly, that was unacceptable, because it would have caused disruption to passengers on the railway line. Therefore, for every single pile that we have to put in, we have to dig a trial hole ^

      Q33 David Mowat: I understand and that is quite rational ^ you found stuff as you were going through that you had not expected, and that was reasonable. All I am saying, and we need not spend time on this, is that that, though, is a little contradictory to what Mr Price said. Mr Price told the Committee that a decent contractor could have done this for the ^1.6 billion. You are telling us now that it is about ^2.3 billion to ^2.6 billion and that is generally due to estimating errors rather than execution errors.

      Mark Carne: I do not fully ^



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 23, 2015, 18:32:05
    Here's another extract, this time from the Permanent Secretary, Department for Transport.
    Quote
      Philip Rutnam: It was planned in from the beginning, and it was planned in concert with Network Rail in terms of the timings of the delivery of the intercity express programme and its link to electrification, because clearly we need to synchronise with an appropriate contingency the delivery of electrification and of new rolling stock.
    Under the IEP we are buying two fleets of trains for the Great Western route. One is hybrid, so the trains can operate on both diesel and electric power. Those trains start to arrive in 2017. The fleet that is of more concern and relevance to our debate is powered by electric traction only. Those trains start to arrive in February 2018. To be clear, the Department, as the ultimate customer on behalf of taxpayers and passengers, is liable to pay for the trains whether the electrification is ready or not. So we are clearly concerned ^ very concerned ^ not only about the delays to electrification and the cost overruns, but at the prospect that we might have the electric trains designed for the Great Western Main Line, ideal to provide many, many benefits to passengers, and not be able to use them.
    As you would expect, we are actively looking at a range of options to mitigate this risk. There is a range of commercial as well as technical dimensions to that, so I would rather not go into too much detail, but I want to reassure the Committee that this is right at the top of the Department^s priority list in terms of making sure not only that the trains are delivered ^ I have confidence about that ^ but that we can use them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on October 23, 2015, 18:49:48
    There is a range of commercial as well as technical dimensions to that, so I would rather not go into too much detail, but I want to reassure the Committee that this is right at the top of the Department^s priority list in terms of making sure not only that the trains are delivered ^ I have confidence about that ^ but that we can use them.

    It might not be what anyone has in mind, but aren't there high speed diesel trains running on the east and west coast main lines and spending all of their time on electrified lines.  Indeed the second phase if IEP delivery sorts out that issue at least on the east coast ... so it might be what the DfT have in mind.  Of course an IEP would be no good to replace the diesel-on-electric to Lymington, but it would make a darned fine Photoshop project!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 23, 2015, 20:29:18
    One option, though wouldn't be popular with the travelling public, would be long block possessions rather than just working at night to get the wires up.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 23, 2015, 23:53:37
    Of course an IEP would be no good to replace the diesel-on-electric to Lymington, but it would make a darned fine Photoshop project!
    That issue should have gone away in December.  450 all week was planned, but if realtimetrains is to be believed, the ECS from Salisbury depot for the 158s has been reinstated since I checked a few weeks ago.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on October 27, 2015, 11:36:17
    Hi all,

    In case anyone is interested, someone placed a FOI request for all correspondance between the Goring & South Stoke Rail Action Group, and South Oxfordshire District Council back at the end of August. There is a lot of interesting information in the emails, including meeting minutes, Q&A's and various other presentations from NR, RAG, and the magnitude of other groups that are now involved.

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/correspondence_with_goring_and_s_2 (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/correspondence_with_goring_and_s_2)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 07, 2015, 02:23:42
    From Plaid Cymru

    https://www.partyof.wales/news/2015/11/06/rail-electrification-to-swansea-faces-delay-plaid-cymru-understands/?force=1

    Quote
    Rail electrification to Swansea faces delay, Plaid Cymru understands

    Electrification of the main rail line between Cardiff and Swansea could slip by up to five years, Plaid Cymru has learnt.

    Well-placed rail industry sources have told the Party of Wales that the Swansea leg could slip into Network Rail^s next Control Period running from April 2019 to March 2024. It was originally scheduled to take place during the current Control Period running to March 2019.

    It is understood the slippage is as a result of a backlog of Network Rail works and a cut in funding.

    This summer UK Government ministers admitted that the electrification of the line to Swansea may be pushed back beyond 2018.

    Plaid Cymru^s Shadow Transport Minister, Rhun ap Iorwerth AM, said: "A review of the existing Network Rail Control Period is due to be published in the next few weeks.

    "The message I^m hearing is that there are real fears that we will face a delay in electrification between Cardiff and Swansea of between one and five years, as it will fall into a new Control Period.

    "Short-changing the people of Swansea would be totally unacceptable and I call on the UK Government to give a firm commitment on the timetable for electrification to our second city.

    and
    Quote
    "This uncertainty has not been helped by the UK Government reneging on the prioritising of South Wales electrification."

    Hmm ... I would rather suspect it's not a change of priorities but rather an element of what the review will signal.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 07, 2015, 09:21:46
    Hmm ... I would rather suspect it's not a change of priorities but rather an element of what the review will signal.
    The GWML electrification would seem to be the government's main priority for electrification, given it was the one that wasn't 'paused' earlier this year. Thus, unless Sir Peter Hendy's presents a very strong argument for re-prioritising something else ahead of parts of the GWML scheme it would seem logical for Cardiff-Swansea to follow immediately after London-Cardiff/Bristol/Oxford. Thus, unless the schedule-slip is absolutly huge I would hope it won't take until 2024 to complete. It might slip into the begining of CP6 though, Dec 2020 maybe? I'm not in the rail industry though so I'm not clear just how delayed the scheme is.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on November 07, 2015, 10:07:53
    There are though a lot of projects that have been 'agreed' and funded to the level that was indicated to be necessary by Network Rail, and are incorporated into the plans of local authorities etc, some of which are part-funding the development itself, or other developments on the periphery. East-West rail is one example, and I daresay the electrifications all are including TPE and MML.

    The credibility of  Network Rail will sink greatly locally, whichever of these may be de-prioritised and especially if this is a multi-year delay.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on November 07, 2015, 10:32:53

    The credibility of  Network Rail will sink greatly locally, whichever of these may be de-prioritised and especially if this is a multi-year delay.

    .........maybe they could consider a rebranding exercise, seems quite popular at the moment amongst rail organisations whose credibility has sunk!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on November 07, 2015, 10:46:36
    That might be as a result of privatisation  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on November 07, 2015, 15:59:33
    Hi all,

    In case anyone is interested, someone placed a FOI request for all correspondance between the Goring & South Stoke Rail Action Group, and South Oxfordshire District Council back at the end of August. There is a lot of interesting information in the emails, including meeting minutes, Q&A's and various other presentations from NR, RAG, and the magnitude of other groups that are now involved.

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/correspondence_with_goring_and_s_2 (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/correspondence_with_goring_and_s_2)


    This is a significant issue and I^m surprised it hasn^t had more publicity.  It has the potential to delay train testing and could prompt similar protest action down the line where there are AONB's and listed structures etc. 

    I think the OHLE is more intrusive than it need be ^ it looks like standard length uprights are being used which project well above (to varying degrees) the horizontal spans, which looks ugly.  It would look much neater if the uprights were cut level with the horizontals as in previous electrification schemes.

    Or maybe this will happen after final installation and alignment etc?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 07, 2015, 16:20:14
    I think the OHLE is more intrusive than it need be ^ it looks like standard length uprights are being used which project well above (to varying degrees) the horizontal spans, which looks ugly.  It would look much neater if the uprights were cut level with the horizontals as in previous electrification schemes.

    The 'excess height' is not really removable, it is there to carry the 25 kV auto transformer feeders.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oberon on November 07, 2015, 17:12:02
    I seem to remember when the ECML was electrified in the 1980s it happened very quickly and came out under initial cost projections. I'm sure I read BR gave quite a lot of money back to the government after the scheme had been completed. So the question must be asked, if BR did it so efficiently twenty odd years ago, why is Network Rail now making such a complete hash of electrification on the GW? In those days we had an anti-rail government and a relatively efficient railway, these days it seems to be something like the opposite state of affairs. It's all very sad


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 07, 2015, 18:42:47
    The biggest problem is of course that Network Rail cannot cope and this has been brought about by a significant loss of skills due to the way it treats its people and the lack of experienced leadership.

    I think I have mentioned before elsewhere on this forum that perhaps is now the time to split NR so that it becomes solely a maintenance and operating company and hand over all new works and renewals to some of the experienced Project Management companies with worldwide knowledge of significant infrastructre building (Atkins, Bectel etc.)  All you need is a very robust Handover/Handback process.  Many large projects in the past have been handled this way (WCML Four Tracking, HS1, Reading Station Reconstruction and Remodelling).

    I would cite Crossrail as a current example of a very significant infrastructure project that is (fairly) quietly progressing in the background without the issues that NR has suffered.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 07, 2015, 21:24:10
    hand over all new works and renewals to some of the experienced Project Management companies with worldwide knowledge of significant infrastructre building (Atkins, Bectel etc.)  All you need is a very robust Handover/Handback process.  Many large projects in the past have been handled this way (WCML Four Tracking, HS1, Reading Station Reconstruction and Remodelling).
    I thought the GWML electrification had been subcontracted to recognised names anyway, perhaps not Atkins specificly though.

    I would cite Crossrail as a current example of a very significant infrastructure project that is (fairly) quietly progressing in the background without the issues that NR has suffered.
    Good point, while some rail infrustructure projects in the UK are in disarray others do appear to be going fairly smoothly. For (possibly) another example, I can't recall any hicups with the new Borders railway in Scotland.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 08, 2015, 00:29:36
    The GWML electrification would seem to be the government's main priority for electrification, given it was the one that wasn't 'paused' earlier this year. Thus, unless Sir Peter Hendy's presents a very strong argument for re-prioritising something else ahead of parts of the GWML scheme it would seem logical for Cardiff-Swansea to follow immediately after London-Cardiff/Bristol/Oxford.

    In official terminology, Project W001a is called "Great Western Electrification" but only runs to Cardiff. It is clearer to call it "Great Western Main Line Electrification", though of course the line onward to Swansea is still a main line, if not the main line. As of the last plan revision in June all its future committed dates have gone and these are now "TBC". There is a note of the Hendy review, but pending its outcome most other projects were left unchanged.

    The comments are about Cardiff-Swansea, which is a separate project (W001b) called "South Wales Main Line Electrification". It has never had any committed dates beyond GRIP stage 3, which was April 2015 but has already been revised to September (and quite possibly missed again). It still has its original DfT target dates and a warning about "reprofiling", as well as the overall note of the Hendy review.

    When the control period structure was created, there may have been some notion that NR would be given a big (very big) heap of money for five years and left to get on with it (but with ORR peering over their shoulders). Of course that never happened, and it is now a reporting framework, rather than a spending control one. So if something is planned for the end of CP5 and slips a few months, it is now in CP6 - but hardly an excuse for reacting as if NR are now free to decide on their own defer it for five years.

    Not that such details would affect politicians' willingness to make incontinent comments like Plaid Cymru's. And there is still a good reason for completing to Swansea - the SET fleet ready to go there. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 08, 2015, 01:08:55
    The biggest problem is of course that Network Rail cannot cope and this has been brought about by a significant loss of skills due to the way it treats its people and the lack of experienced leadership.

    I think I have mentioned before elsewhere on this forum that perhaps is now the time to split NR so that it becomes solely a maintenance and operating company and hand over all new works and renewals to some of the experienced Project Management companies with worldwide knowledge of significant infrastructre building (Atkins, Bectel etc.)  All you need is a very robust Handover/Handback process.  Many large projects in the past have been handled this way (WCML Four Tracking, HS1, Reading Station Reconstruction and Remodelling).

    I would cite Crossrail as a current example of a very significant infrastructure project that is (fairly) quietly progressing in the background without the issues that NR has suffered.

    As I understand it, Crossrail, RSAR, and other recent large projects have used variations on the "Heathrow T5" model. That means a single project management team of the overall project managers, its main contractors, and some at least of their subcontractors. The idea was to get away from the practices that had grown up in the big Civils contractors of warily dealing with other project parties at arm's length and suing each other rather than cooperating when anything went wrong. Within this alliance they are supposed to cooperate "open-book", ignoring who works for which company.

    The model also involves fully funding analysed risk and contingency. That means working out what can go wrong, what its impact is, including cost, and what to do in that case. It often requires either risk reduction (starting more detailed work or on-site investigations early) or setting a large contingency budget that reduces as you proceed.

    When judged by the cost allocated at the start, it costs a lot more to do things that way. Some of that extra cost is real (and both T5 and RSAR were very expensive), but usually the alternative is a very optimistic budget that gets greatly overspent anyway.

    Whether it helps a lot to contract at the whole-project level is debatable. RSAR was led by NR, in alliance with a Costain/Hochtief joint venture as main contractor. The problem seems to be more in the planning and estimating than management, and as much at lower levels in areas only NR know about (like where things are in the ground and how to keep a railway running while you work) as in things that should be off-loaded.

    But as there is a review into what went wrong with CP5 planning and budgeting going on, due to report "by Autumn 2015", maybe we should wait for it. That's the one by Colette Bowe, in case you were likely to confuse it with Sir Peter Hendy's or Nicola Shaw's.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2015, 10:22:57
    I would cite Crossrail as a current example of a very significant infrastructure project that is (fairly) quietly progressing in the background without the issues that NR has suffered.

    That raises an interesting point. Crossrail may seem to be much the more complex project, but most of the work has been underground, using tried and tested technology in what is in effect virgin ground. The TBMs and the tunnel lining borrow much from the Channel Tunnel construction amongst others, and issues that cropped up 25 years ago are no longer problems. The station buildings are an exception, of course, but London is used to having big holes dug in it. What you see is in relatively compact areas, and complaining gets you nowhere in London anyway.

    The GWR electrification process, on the other hand, is using a HOPS train in part, which hasn't come up to expectation. If that can only work at half the rate it was supposed to do, then its part of the project will take twice as long. We know that for next time (if there is one  - my guess is there will be) and can build that knowledge into forecasts if it can't be sorted any other way.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 08, 2015, 10:56:37
    Back to piling for a moment.......

    If you follow this link http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/12281.aspx it will take you to the NR GW Electrification web page where down the page there are links to local area information on piling progress etc. This includes upcoming dates of work and maps of the affected area(s).  Not seen this before.  Perhaps somebody has given NR a (big) kick up the backside ;D ::) :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 08, 2015, 11:01:45
    Linked from emails I regulary get from the NR GW electrification project giving weekly pdf letters infirming about works in the areas you request when signing up. Quite detailed with dates & times


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 08, 2015, 11:41:29
    The GWR electrification process, on the other hand, is using a HOPS train in part, which hasn't come up to expectation. If that can only work at half the rate it was supposed to do, then its part of the project will take twice as long. We know that for next time (if there is one  - my guess is there will be) and can build that knowledge into forecasts if it can't be sorted any other way.

    That's probably unfair on the poor old HOPS train itself, in several ways. For one thing it works as five (or maybe six) separate parts, doing three basic activities. The first is putting in piles or other structure bases, and that's the one that has problems. The second, erecting structures, only has to keep up with that and it looks as if it can. The third part does wiring, and as that has yet to get underway I guess we don't know how fast that will work - who knows, it might exceed expectations.

    There are reports that, with adaptations on both sides (the kit and its users), the piling rig is just about up to its design speed on a good day with a straight run of adjacent pile locations. Unfortunately, due to site-specific delays in specifying some pile bases, there are few such runs. If it has to do one here, then pack up and trundle off to do the next, its work rate drops right down - it probably isn't the right machine for that kind of work.

    I can think of several things you might do for the rest of the project, rather than just plugging away with HOPS as fast as you can. You could do the job the old way (or hire someone to) for some single sites, or work out hybrid ways of using added resources to make HOPS work faster, or insert a delay (probably less then a year) on lines not yet started so the design work can catch up, or a mixture of those and others.

    All of that must be part of the Hendy review. What you can't do is take the time and cost overruns so far and apply the same factors to the whole programme as a prediction.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on November 08, 2015, 14:05:50
    I seem to remember when the ECML was electrified in the 1980s it happened very quickly and came out under initial cost projections.
    It was authorised in July 84 and was completed for the May 91 timetable change, so I'm not sure I would say that was "very quickly".  And in fairness, the GW electrification was to some extent jumped on NR, whereas BR put forward a proposal when it was ready and thus had it well planned. That may be why the original staged completion dates given in July 84 were kept to, whereas GW has slipped somewhat.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2015, 14:17:26
    As I recall from yesterday's Railfuture meeting, the original Great Western Railway was formed by a group of Bristol businessmen with an idea in 1833, got its act of parliament in 1835, and first trains rain in 1838.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 08, 2015, 14:47:55
    As I recall from yesterday's Railfuture meeting, the original Great Western Railway was formed by a group of Bristol businessmen with an idea in 1833, got its act of parliament in 1835, and first trains rain in 1838.

    I think it was a case of looking at history through rose tinted glasses!

    It may have run its first trains in 1838 - but to where? Temple Meads was not opened until 1840 nor was Reading. and the section between Challow (then called Farringdon Road) & Bath was not opened until the middle of 1841!

    I recall reading that the geology between Challow and Chippenham was a major issue - (slope stability of clay embankments and cuttings). Yes this was a construction project that was subject to significant delays - about 18 months I think. 

    It was also significantly over budget.  Swindon Station was delayed until 1842 and then had to be funded by a third party in return for a long term catering franchise - which the GWR only bought out in the 1895 to prevent them from having to stop all trains there for 10 minutes!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 08, 2015, 15:04:16
    I seem to remember when the ECML was electrified in the 1980s it happened very quickly and came out under initial cost projections.
    It was authorised in July 84 and was completed for the May 91 timetable change, so I'm not sure I would say that was "very quickly".  And in fairness, the GW electrification was to some extent jumped on NR, whereas BR put forward a proposal when it was ready and thus had it well planned. That may be why the original staged completion dates given in July 84 were kept to, whereas GW has slipped somewhat.
    BR had an electrification grand plan, which included extending the BedPan electrification North to Derby and Sheffield and then the WR Mainline staring with the Padd Oxford and Newbury services and then Bristol and South Wales. I think the GWML electrification to Bristol on BR's plan is not that far behind.

    The biggest problem with electrification of the National network today is all the experience BR had has now retired or got %$&*ed off being told by the modern "project managers" that they don't know what they were talking about and that the world had moved on.   

    There has been a large amount of political  greed as well, with politicians of all colours proclaiming they were electrifying / modernising the railways without stopping and looking where all the skilled designers and installers were.  We (the UK) are still not training enough engineers   


    As I recall from yesterday's Railfuture meeting, the original Great Western Railway was formed by a group of Bristol businessmen with an idea in 1833, got its act of parliament in 1835, and first trains rain in 1838.
    If I recall correctly the first GWR revenue earning trains ran Paddington (Bishops Bridge Road) to Maidenhead Riverside (Taplow)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2015, 20:41:57

    That's probably unfair on the poor old HOPS train itself, in several ways.

    I for one certainly hope so! My point was that, unlike Crossrail, we are dealing with relatively new kit, of a kind not used before in the UK. We know that the train was built to the exacting standards of German engineering. It is not likely to fall short of expectations because of technical deficiencies, but the problem will be one of not using it in the most efficient manner. Familiarity with the machinery, plus analysis of the other factors that have slowed things down, will surely resolve the issues. For instance, when the line between Bath and Bristol is closed next Easter for works to the tunnel at St Annes, then why not plan a way to use the HOPS train on the bit of track that is shut to traffic but not being worked upon?

    I notice that the pile of piles piled up in the siding behind Avonmeads is growing steadily, so they are definitely going through with this project. [/tongue in cheek] Once HOPS is up to speed, and in no danger of being rebranded MOPS (or heaven forbid LOPS), then the work will cease to slip further behind schedule. Short of providing extra crew and working double shifts, though, it isn't likely to make up time lost.

    There have, of course, been other factors that have slowed things up - what Donald Rumsfeld called the "unknown unknowns. They, the neighbours, and the weather, will always get in the way at times. Much of Crossrail isn't affected by these, and the tunnelling work doesn't have a busy live railway running right next to it - apart from the Underground, which it avoids at all costs.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on November 09, 2015, 09:29:21
    This is a significant issue and I'm surprised it hasn't had more publicity.

    I did try, but RAG wanted to keep it local at the time so I gave up. They have since been on Jack FM and BBC news (advertising the drop-in session NR ran a couple of weeks ago). There have been local letter drops and monthly updates in Goring Gap News, but there hasn't been a great deal outside of the locality (unlike the Tesco thing which seemed to be reported everywhere!).

    Quote
    It has the potential to delay train testing

    I doubt it will, they will go ahead regardless and deal with the consequences after.

    Quote
    and could prompt similar protest action down the line where there are AONB's and listed structures etc.

    This wouldn't surprise me - I know similar happened with the Tesco groups - for example one that lost its battle gave their remaining funds to STIG, so I suspect knowledge and experience would be shared, should other groups take up issue along the line.

    Quote
    I think the OHLE is more intrusive than it need be it looks like standard length uprights are being used which project well above (to varying degrees) the horizontal spans, which looks ugly.  It would look much neater if the uprights were cut level with the horizontals as in previous electrification schemes.

    There is a section towards South Stoke that has the grey masts and a black signal gantry across it, and that (the signals) really do not stand out as much as the masts - so even painting it all black would help. But I don't think the proposals RAG have are even remotely viable, they are looking at it 100% from the aesthetics, and completely overlooking the practicalities. That's what I found particularly interesting in all the correspondence.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 09, 2015, 10:44:21
    We know that the train was built to the exacting standards of German engineering. It is not likely to fall short of expectations because of technical deficiencies,

    I have no idea about the trains capability, but I have to pull you up on your na^ve assumption that German engineering is the best.  Seems like the train performed fabulously when under test in Germany, but in the real world its performance is not so good.  We certainly haven't heard of something like that happening to German technology have we??


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 09, 2015, 11:44:50
    Back to piling for a moment.......

    If you follow this link http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/12281.aspx it will take you to the NR GW Electrification web page where down the page there are links to local area information on piling progress etc. This includes upcoming dates of work and maps of the affected area(s).  Not seen this before.  Perhaps somebody has given NR a (big) kick up the backside ;D ::) :P
    (OT)I see they abreviate Bath and North East Somerset not with the popularly used BANES but as Bathnes. This not only avoids the negative connotations, 'bane of my life', but has a satisfying abstract-noun sound to it. 'Bathness: the quality or characteristic of the city of Bath; pertaining to honeyed stone and well-fed tourists, etc.'  :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 09, 2015, 11:55:06
    'Bathness: the quality or characteristic of the city of Bath; pertaining to honeyed stone and well-fed tourists, etc.'  :D

    That sound like pretty good translation of the French "Aixence", then.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 09, 2015, 14:41:32
    From the Henley Standard (http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=41575)

    Quote
    Network Rail to reconsider 'ugly' gantries

    NETWORK Rail might replace the ^ugly^ steel gantries it has installed along the tracks in the Goring area.

    The company, which put up the plain grey structures in preparation for the electrification of the Great Western main line, is to launch a retrospective public consultation in the new year.

    It is considering ways of making them less intrusive and will be exhibiting alternative designs.

    However, it says any changes would be subject to government funding and would have to be effective from an engineering point of view.

    Network Rail began installing the gantries in the spring. They stand about 100 metres apart and will support overhead power cables.

    A residents^ action group has campaigned against the work, saying it spoils views of the open countryside around Goring and is inappropriate development in the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

    Goring Parish Council, the Chilterns Conservation Board and the directors of the neighbouring North Wessex Downs have called for a more discreet design of gantry.

    The work didn^t need planning permission as it is permitted development but objectors claim it is unlawful because Network Rail broke the rules on building in an AONB. Under section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act, such developments must ^have regard to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the area^.

    Claire Forrest, information officer for the Chilterns Conservation Board, said: ^We are pleased by Network Rail^s promise as this is something it should have done before the work began. We are pushing very hard for the design to be revised so it is more appropriate for this protected landscape.

    ^We want to see something with a lower impact and believe it is Network Rail^s statutory duty to provide this. There are illustrations of more elegant designs in circulation so it would not be starting completely from scratch.

    ^Network Rail should have considered using these to start with and seems to have paid no attention to the location they were building in. They^ve used the heaviest and ugliest design instead, which is a real shame.^

    Ian Haslam, who leads the action group, said: ^Network Rail wrote to us saying they would like to do this but that it would depend on money and the feedback from the consultation. We^ve basically told them ^thank you, but your offer isn^t strong enough^. They^ve broken the law and shouldn^t only be willing to do it if the numbers are right. They should want to make the work lawful.^

    Two weeks ago Network Rail held a drop-in meeting about the gantries at South Stoke village hall, which was attended by about 700 people.

    Details of future meetings are yet to be announced but the company says it will aim to hold at least one in Goring. It said it could not give a timescale but promised to keep people updated.

    Since the electrification programme began in 2013, its estimated cost has rocketed from ^874million to at least ^2.5billion.

    Last month, the Commons^ public accounts committee criticised both Network Rail and the rail regulator, saying ^such poor planning^ was ^unbelievable and unacceptable^.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on November 09, 2015, 16:13:18
    Wouldn't it be cheaper (and hopefully easier) just to move the Chilterns AONB boundary so that the railway is no longer within the boundary of the AONB, looking at the map it looks like it only needs to be moved a few 100 metres  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 09, 2015, 17:10:58
    I've said it before, but there's a lot of hot air being published by these various local papers in response to what seems to be a clever pressure group.   I reckon there's no way that NR are going to replace significant numbers of gantries.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 09, 2015, 17:26:48
    Something for NR to learn from the unfortunate situation could be explanation to residents in more detail about what will happen, how it will look and why it will be like that, in addition to the normal stuff about bridge closure dates and so on.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 09, 2015, 17:28:02
    'Bathness: the quality or characteristic of the city of Bath; pertaining to honeyed stone and well-fed tourists, etc.'  :D

    That sound like pretty good translation of the French "Aixence", then.
    Presumably that's from Aix-en-Provence rather than (what once was) Aix-la-Chapelle? Though I don't know either of the places, so maybe not.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 09, 2015, 19:03:19
    Something for NR to learn from the unfortunate situation could be explanation to residents in more detail about what will happen, how it will look and why it will be like that, in addition to the normal stuff about bridge closure dates and so on.
    And prefrably produce, in advance of starting any work, come up with a list of plausable designs and present them to the public and let the public decided which design is least obtrusive and then implement using the chossen design.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 09, 2015, 19:51:06
    'Bathness: the quality or characteristic of the city of Bath; pertaining to honeyed stone and well-fed tourists, etc.'  :D

    That sound like pretty good translation of the French "Aixence", then.
    Presumably that's from Aix-en-Provence rather than (what once was) Aix-la-Chapelle? Though I don't know either of the places, so maybe not.

    Yes, Aix-en-Provence is exactly the kind of place that feels like it has been rich since Roman times. I thought of it as a cross between Cambridge and Edinburgh, but with longer history - Bath (which I don't know except as a place not to drive through) might be as good a comparison. I was surprised to find that Bury St Edmunds has a similar feel, though fewer grand buildings.

    I did once go to Aachen, ages ago, and all I can remember was being served beer in a 150 ml glass: smaller than the bar's wine glasses and smaller even than a Cologne glass (no, it's for K^lsch).

    But that's enough digressing for now, isn't it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 09, 2015, 20:27:39
    Something for NR to learn from the unfortunate situation could be explanation to residents in more detail about what will happen, how it will look and why it will be like that, in addition to the normal stuff about bridge closure dates and so on.
    And prefrably produce, in advance of starting any work, come up with a list of plausable designs and present them to the public and let the public decided which design is least obtrusive and then implement using the chossen design.

    Wheras I'd be telling the moaning Nimbys to do one. Network Rail don't need to be pandering to them. It's railway land. Put up what makes sense for cost and engineering.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 09, 2015, 23:37:20

    I have no idea about the trains capability, but I have to pull you up on your na^ve assumption that German engineering is the best.  Seems like the train performed fabulously when under test in Germany, but in the real world its performance is not so good.  We certainly haven't heard of something like that happening to German technology have we??

    What, the Four Sprung Duck Technique isn't all it's cracked up to be? I've read that HOPS performs well in emissions tests too.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 09, 2015, 23:44:23
    Something for NR to learn from the unfortunate situation could be explanation to residents in more detail about what will happen, how it will look and why it will be like that, in addition to the normal stuff about bridge closure dates and so on.
    And prefrably produce, in advance of starting any work, come up with a list of plausable designs and present them to the public and let the public decided which design is least obtrusive and then implement using the chossen design.
    If all designs are equally 'plausible' in engineering and cost terms and it's purely an aesthetic choice, then maybe. It seems unlikely that different designs would be absolute equivalent in those terms, though.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 10, 2015, 08:24:46
    Something for NR to learn from the unfortunate situation could be explanation to residents in more detail about what will happen, how it will look and why it will be like that, in addition to the normal stuff about bridge closure dates and so on.
    And prefrably produce, in advance of starting any work, come up with a list of plausable designs and present them to the public and let the public decided which design is least obtrusive and then implement using the chossen design.
    If all designs are equally 'plausible' in engineering and cost terms and it's purely an aesthetic choice, then maybe. It seems unlikely that different designs would be absolute equivalent in those terms, though
    Well yes, the costs won't be identical but there's quite a few different designs of electrification mast out there on railways around the world, so they can't be massively more expensive, and some of them are significantly less intrusive than others. If there really is a chance (doubtful I know) that Network Rail will replace structures following the complains it surely would have been better (and cheaper) to design something non-intrusive in the first place. A "retrospective public consultation" is just plain stupid, do your public consultation before you start building stuff.

    Wheras I'd be telling the moaning Nimbys to do one. Network Rail don't need to be pandering to them. It's railway land. Put up what makes sense for cost and engineering.
    I cannot agree with you about telling to NIMBYs to get lost, if I did I would be liable to be accused of double standards. I'm strongly opposed to swamping listed stations like Cardiff Central and Bristol Temple Meads with new modern architecture (lots of glass and steel, generally). In the case of the former, there's even the possibilty that the platform canopies and much of the main station building would be demolished. I am in favor of some work at Cardiff Central and I appreciate the need to increase the passenger capacity of the station, but I don't consider any of the artist's impressions released so far to be an acceptable way to treat GWR architecture. I really hope that there will be a meaningful public consultation before any work starts, so that pepole like me can work with the railway to come up with a design which delivers the necessary improvements without trashing the attractive vista of the station. Consulting after the work has been carried out would be rather fruitless, and would be grounds for complaint.

    Going back to OHLE, my main point is that there appear to be multiple designs which make sense from cost and engineering, given that a variety of designs have been implemented. It would seem sensible to have involved the locals at an early stage, to try and avoid the suituation we apparently have now with NIMBYs moaning when it really is too late for NR to realisticly do anything. Regarding any structures already errected, I would probably tell the NIMBYs 'sorry, too late to do anything about it now' but that sort of thing doesn't really go down well and it would be better not to get into the suituation of having to say that.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 10, 2015, 10:21:09
    'Bathness: the quality or characteristic of the city of Bath; pertaining to honeyed stone and well-fed tourists, etc.'  :D

    That sound like pretty good translation of the French "Aixence", then.
    Presumably that's from Aix-en-Provence rather than (what once was) Aix-la-Chapelle? Though I don't know either of the places, so maybe not.

    Bath is twinned with Aix-en-Provence


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 10, 2015, 10:28:29


    Wheras I'd be telling the moaning Nimbys to do one. Network Rail don't need to be pandering to them. It's railway land. Put up what makes sense for cost and engineering.


    Absolutely true and I'd be inclined to agree.  I do point out though that good design is about form and function and that some of the OLE by that definition is badly designed.  That is a shame.  Network Rail shouldn't be pandering to Nimbys.  It SHOULD be insisting on top quality design work though.  The inelegance of some of the OLE suggests that this was not a top quality design job (as do the delays btw) and that is not just about aesthetics, bad design also shows up in the lack of unity between the different elements and the waste of steel in having masts higher than they need to be.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 10, 2015, 10:29:58
    'Bathness: the quality or characteristic of the city of Bath; pertaining to honeyed stone and well-fed tourists, etc.'  :D

    That sound like pretty good translation of the French "Aixence", then.
    Presumably that's from Aix-en-Provence rather than (what once was) Aix-la-Chapelle? Though I don't know either of the places, so maybe not.

    Bath is twinned with Aix-en-Provence
    The denarius drops!  ::) Thanks, Tim.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: clevertrousers on November 10, 2015, 11:53:29
    Hope this is the right place to post this news but spotted a Class 800 IEP at North Pole on the way into Paddington this morning - nice and shiny looking. A bit of progress on this part of the Project at least...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 10, 2015, 12:15:21
    Welcome to the forum.

    Yes, it's being used to test facilities within the new depot and also to test the cab layout is optimised for the various shapes and sizes of staff that will be sitting in the drivers seat.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 10, 2015, 12:25:24
    On a Reading to Paddington service yesterday I saw quite a number of TTCs on the reliefs east of Maidenhead (possibly a majority) with the insulators fitted, will we see some wires before the end of the year?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on November 10, 2015, 12:30:44

    ...Going back to OHLE, my main point is that there appear to be multiple designs which make sense from cost and engineering, given that a variety of designs have been implemented. It would seem sensible to have involved the locals at an early stage, to try and avoid the suituation we apparently have now with NIMBYs moaning when it really is too late for NR to realisticly do anything. Regarding any structures already errected, I would probably tell the NIMBYs 'sorry, too late to do anything about it now' but that sort of thing doesn't really go down well and it would be better not to get into the suituation of having to say that.

    OHLE doesn't have to be fugly - like everything else, it's a choice:

    (http://www.pastandpresentpublications.com/images/IMAGES_2007/PnP_2007/Bristol_PNP_2007/Bedminster.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on November 10, 2015, 13:10:55
    Yes, but that picture is of tramway overhead. Inherently less obtrusive and of a lighter design since it would be only 550 volts not 25,000 volts. Much smaller clearances and shorter insulators, and also a much simpler design on account of the low speeds.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 10, 2015, 13:18:13
    It would be nice if a design award was in the pipeline (as a matter of fact I think the design of the small part stuff is rather pleasing, less so the gantries!), but far more important for me is that the wires don't come down when it gets windy and if a pantograph gets snagged up it only pulls down the wires above one track rather than all four so trains can keep running.  The recent installations to a similar design in the North-West seem to be achieving that aim, so I'm hopeful the GWML scheme will as well.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on November 10, 2015, 13:23:23
    I do appreciate that the BT&CC was a tramway system.   :)

    I don't accept that 25kV is intrinsically ugly: choices are made which result in an ugly appearance. NR seems to be the last bastion of brutalism; the civils on the Borders Railway look quite awful in places. Ugly doesn't necessarily mean cheap either; it can be a sign of bad (rushed?) design.









    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on November 10, 2015, 14:36:28

    I don't accept that 25kV is intrinsically ugly: choices are made which result in an ugly appearance. NR seems to be the last bastion of brutalism; the civils on the Borders Railway look quite awful in places. Ugly doesn't necessarily mean cheap either; it can be a sign of bad (rushed?) design.

    I agree. The railway industry expends a lot of effort into making trains, bridges, stations etc look aesthetically pleasing.  So why doesn^t the same effort go into OHLE design?  OHLE is never going to look pretty, but what is going up between Reading and Didcot looks far worse than it need be - just have a look of some earlier OHLE around the country eg at the detail design of the mast/gantry interface.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 10, 2015, 14:54:42
    If it makes the trains go and doesn't come down in a light breeze I care little what it looks like.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 10, 2015, 15:28:01
    Does anybody have any photographs of what has been installed in the disputed area?  I don't normally travel that way so haven't seen recent progress.  Is it anything like this http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/furrerfrey/news-overview/2015/q1/TTC-SIC-MAB.html in which case if it is then I don't really see what all the fuss is about :P ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 10, 2015, 15:33:33
    Have nothing on your railway that you do not know to be useful and believe to be beautiful.

    But what might be true for the personal seems less so for the public, due to the wide variance in what we believe to be beautiful and even what we consider useful. Despite this, beauty in the public might even be more important than in the private sphere simply because it is public. And function even more so! If a functional object is flawed in its function by attempts to make it beautiful then it cannot truly be said to be either beautiful or functional.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 10, 2015, 15:37:43
    Does anybody have any photographs of what has been installed in the disputed area? 

    (http://www.chilternsaonb.org/uploads/images/news/Goring_gantries_close.jpg)

    (http://www.chilternsaonb.org/uploads/images/news/Goring_gantries_web.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on November 10, 2015, 15:43:35
    When I saw the second photo on the campaign website I thought it didn't make a good case as it showed a built up area.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 10, 2015, 15:52:20
    Hang on a minute.  Is that a NG Powerline I see in the distance of the second photograph?  The OLE looks quite good compared with that as its obviously at a much lower level.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 10, 2015, 15:55:09
    Those lines were likely in place before the AONB was established


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on November 10, 2015, 17:21:58
    There have been power lines in the area at least since the 1940s (probably the 1930s) - albeit they would have been a lower voltage grid then.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on November 10, 2015, 18:43:38
    I'm a believer in form following function but that second photo looks awful, those stanchions are a blot on the landscape  :(


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on November 10, 2015, 19:08:45
    Has the second picture been digitally enhanced I wonder ?
    It almost looks as though the trees behind the OHLE have been rendered darker than would be natural, in order that the relatively light coloured galvanised steelwork is more conspicuous than in real life.

    Or perhaps a similar effect was achieved naturally on a day with intermittent sun and cloud, by waiting for the trees to under cloud and thereby darker, but the steelwork to be in brighter light and therefore more noticeable ?

    The viewpoint also looks a little odd, perhaps taken from an aircraft, or drone, or from atop a tower, rather than from near ground level.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on November 10, 2015, 19:34:32

    ...Going back to OHLE, my main point is that there appear to be multiple designs which make sense from cost and engineering, given that a variety of designs have been implemented. It would seem sensible to have involved the locals at an early stage, to try and avoid the suituation we apparently have now with NIMBYs moaning when it really is too late for NR to realisticly do anything.

    OHLE doesn't have to be fugly - like everything else, it's a choice:


    Something like this perhaps
    http://www.ribacompetitions.com/ols/shortlisted.html (http://www.ribacompetitions.com/ols/shortlisted.html)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2015, 20:05:25

    ...Going back to OHLE, my main point is that there appear to be multiple designs which make sense from cost and engineering, given that a variety of designs have been implemented. It would seem sensible to have involved the locals at an early stage, to try and avoid the suituation we apparently have now with NIMBYs moaning when it really is too late for NR to realisticly do anything.


    I have just come from a Network Rail Stakeholder's briefing in Bath, and (paraphrasing) comments included one that suggested that there were so many different sets of ground conditions, what needs to go on top, and what's around that "nearly every one is different".   A further comment suggested that a great dal of work has been done with interested institutional stakeholders of getting designs right for Bath to smooth the way of final designs through upcoming formal planning applications.  There is a significant issue through Sidney Gardens in terms of protecting both the look and feel of the place, and the safety of the public when electric wires at 25kV are put through and some compromises needed.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on November 10, 2015, 20:17:28
    If it makes the trains go and doesn't come down in a light breeze I care little what it looks like.

    Agree, whilst I am in favour of electrification, I do have slight doubts as to the reliability of the OHLE in windy weather, having suffered from the failed East coast scheme.
    The more substantial the better IMHO, within reason. For two or more tracks, the portal frame structures being installed at present should be far more reliable than span wire installations.
    A defective pantograph is apt to pull down the wires on all tracks if these are supported from span wires. With a portal frame, the damage should be confined to one track.
    A span wire supporting two or more overheads is inherently flexible and may be pushed out of alignment by truly exceptional winds, perhaps causing poor contact and arcing, or de wirement.
    Overheads supported by a substantial steel frame should be at less risk.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2015, 22:00:16
    Further notes from this evening:

    TPOD2
    01:30 2nd April 2016 to 05:00 11th April 2016

    TPOD3
    01:30 1st April 2017 to 05:00 18th April 2017

    Also anticipate 2 extra weekends needed between TPOD2 and TPOD3 for Pixash bridge

    Works to be done:
    Bath Goods
    Oldfield Park
    Pixash Bridge
    Keynsham Station
    Bath Station

    Noting that Keynsham will involve lowering track and platform - I though much of that was rather new?

    Bath Station at TPOD3 ...
    Widen platforms by 1 to 2 metres
    Extend Bristol-bound platform back over river bridge to accommodate full length of new trains

    TPOD2 diversions described as "as at TPOD1" though of course not entirely so.
    Paddington to Bath Spa via Chippenham hourly
    Paddington to Bristol / Weston / Taunton - hourly va Hullavington
    Portsmouth Harbour to Swindon - hourly
    Westbury to Swindon withdrawn; PMH to SWI to make limited MKM stops to compensate
    Weymouth to Bath Spa - hourly (don't believe that all the way from Weymouth?)
    Extras to make Westbury to Bath Spa every half hour

    Buses
    Castle Cary to Temple Meads 2 an hour in the peak / offpeak unsure
    Bath to Bristol - fast service in peaks, services calling Oldfield Park and Keynsham all day
    Keynsham to Bristol extras in the peak

    Edit to correct typo


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on November 10, 2015, 22:42:19
    Has the second picture been digitally enhanced I wonder ?
    It almost looks as though the trees behind the OHLE have been rendered darker than would be natural, in order that the relatively light coloured galvanised steelwork is more conspicuous than in real life.

    Or perhaps a similar effect was achieved naturally on a day with intermittent sun and cloud, by waiting for the trees to under cloud and thereby darker, but the steelwork to be in brighter light and therefore more noticeable ?

    The viewpoint also looks a little odd, perhaps taken from an aircraft, or drone, or from atop a tower, rather than from near ground level.

    I did wonder that also.  Also the metalwork is rather shiny and bright when new, but won't be in a year or two.

    Why not just paint them a darkish green?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 10, 2015, 23:00:10
    Why not just paint them a darkish green?

    Camouflage or skyblue vinyl, dependent on viewpoint of the observer?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on November 10, 2015, 23:11:11
    If the picture DOES represent reality from a typical viewing position, then I agree that painting the structures dark green would help.

    If however the picture does NOT represent a typical actual view, then dark green might make the structures more conspicuous. If for example a more typical view shows the steelwork against the sky, then the natural silver/grey is probably better.

    Are any members of this forum also members of any digital photography forums ? If so, then what about posting the picture an said forum and seeking informed opinions as to whether it is misleading or not.

    Or what about someone going and trying to repeat the shot ? if this can be done without trespassing.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Brusselier on November 10, 2015, 23:25:23
    Why not just paint them a darkish green?

    Camouflage or skyblue vinyl, dependent on viewpoint of the observer?

    Paul

    In Flanders there are wind turbines painted green at the base and light blue at the top. It's still obvious they're there, but it is surprisingly effective at toning down their presence. There is a bit of a height difference between OHLE and the turbines though.

    tins of paint would be much cheaper than replacing the lot, and by the time the paint starts to wear off, people will be used to them


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on November 10, 2015, 23:54:40
    It would be nice if a design award was in the pipeline (as a matter of fact I think the design of the small part stuff is rather pleasing, less so the gantries!), but far more important for me is that the wires don't come down when it gets windy and if a pantograph gets snagged up it only pulls down the wires above one track rather than all four so trains can keep running.  The recent installations to a similar design in the North-West seem to be achieving that aim, so I'm hopeful the GWML scheme will as well.

    That's exactly why they have chosen what they have chosen. NR stated the current design will allow them to keep any areas of disruption localised - ie. if the lines come down on the up relief, they would be able to keep the remaining lines open, plus when isolating sections to do work it would be more localised than using a different system, where by they would have to close all 4 lines for large sections. I forget the specifics, but that was the jist of it (ie. function over form, where as RAG want form over function). There was more information in the FOI request link.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2015, 00:03:46
    If the picture DOES represent reality from a typical viewing position, then I agree that painting the structures dark green would help.

    Unless I'm very much mistaken it's taken from the higher ground looking down on the village of South Stoke looking towards Cholsey.  I don't personally think it's been doctored, just that the timing was such that the wooded area was in the shade with bright sunshine behind.

    So it does represent a natural view, but the majority of the nearby land is lower, and it's arguably not within the AONB at all, if it is it's right on the border.  I thought the area of concern was the other side of Goring near Gatehampton Bridge?

    The other point is that a lot of vegetation clearance has taken place to allow the structures to be installed, which will inevitably grow back - perhaps not to how it was as that would encroach on the overheads, but it certainly would not look that stark as it does there in a couple of years.

    If a few tins of paint is enough to pacify those who are objecting, then that's not a bad solution.  Excuse the pun!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on November 11, 2015, 00:11:59
    If the picture DOES represent reality from a typical viewing position, then I agree that painting the structures dark green would help.

    If however the picture does NOT represent a typical actual view, then dark green might make the structures more conspicuous. If for example a more typical view shows the steelwork against the sky, then the natural silver/grey is probably better.

    Are any members of this forum also members of any digital photography forums ? If so, then what about posting the picture an said forum and seeking informed opinions as to whether it is misleading or not.

    Or what about someone going and trying to repeat the shot ? if this can be done without trespassing.

    This is from Hartslock field in August. I have newer ones, but I have processed those and can't find the originals. This one was untouched as far as I recall.

    https://goo.gl/photos/r6xSF1ddXxzj921t9 (https://goo.gl/photos/r6xSF1ddXxzj921t9)

    As for the photo you mention, I think its taken with a telephoto lens from the footpath through one of the fields between Icknield Road and Wallingford Road. To me, the trees look dark as they are in shadow from clouds, where as the foreground and background is in sun.

    If its not pissing down with rain at the weekend I will see if I can get a couple of photos (not promising anything as I am not sure what I am up to yet!).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 11, 2015, 09:09:38
    Something like this perhaps
    http://www.ribacompetitions.com/ols/shortlisted.html (http://www.ribacompetitions.com/ols/shortlisted.html)
    Those are certainly alot better than these:

    (https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5148/5638603616_d0aed35752.jpg)
    https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5148/5638603616_d0aed35752.jpg (https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5148/5638603616_d0aed35752.jpg)
    (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/assets/0/72/4294967297/30064771362/30064773484/30064773906/30064773920/5b8ec24e-c3bf-4b40-bb1a-ce0986902ecf.jpg)
    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/assets/0/72/4294967297/30064771362/30064773484/30064773906/30064773920/5b8ec24e-c3bf-4b40-bb1a-ce0986902ecf.jpg (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/assets/0/72/4294967297/30064771362/30064773484/30064773906/30064773920/5b8ec24e-c3bf-4b40-bb1a-ce0986902ecf.jpg)

    Both the above are really quite ugly in my view. But really, just something like the structures in the foreground of this (too big to put the image in the post) (http://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/image/0011/94799/2013_03_25_DPTI_Rail_Electification_Mast_Dimensions.jpg) is already a big improvement on the above photos which I have included in the post. Basiclly, I'd like most OHLE to be like the OHLE in that last link but with the vertical masts being a smooth cylindrical like the mast of most modern wind turbines (on some OHLE I've seen the mast is more like a section of rail stuck vertically, and I think that isn't as nice). You could possibly improve the appearance further, but diminishing returns probably applies. So, basicly, nothing stretching the whole way across the track, whether that be a solid beam, a lattice like the photos embeded in my post above or a horizontal wire like the ECML (the latter isn't good in a practical sense either, because as others have said it causes a dewirement on one line to rip the rest down with it).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on November 11, 2015, 12:49:52
    Apart from the cost involved, the major stumbling block with any new product on Network Rail is one of trials and approvals.  The Series 1 kit has been in development for some years now, and I doubt if there is much appetite for having to go through the whole rigmarole again to satisfy criticism on the grounds that it doesn't look nice.

    The Series 1 kit has been designed to remove many points of failure experienced with previous generations of OLE equipment.  Who knows what other failures could be encountered with new ones fresh off the drawing board but unproven in service.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 11, 2015, 14:09:04
    .. I agree.  No point in altering the kit now.  I also agree that safety and reliability come first and dwarf any other consideration.

    However, I remain of the view that something well designed is inherently beautiful,  perhaps not in a classic sense, but something like a National Grid pylon can still be admired for its economy in use of materials and that fact that it looks likes the elegant solution to a problem that it is.  After spending some time in Texas and seeing what a mess they have made of their highway bridges, I have come to realise that even a mundane motorway bridge in the UK, built to a budget as it is and not "pretty" by any means is still something designed with an eye on appearance.

    My concern with the OHE equipment on the GWML is not that it is obtrusive, it is that it has the appearance of being badly designed.  That is what to my mind makes it objectively ugly.  The uprights for example stick up beyond the cross bar for no real reason and that makes it look like it has been lazily (or perhaps hurriedly) designed.  Steel is wasted for the sake of convenience and that makes it ugly (as well as perhaps more expensive).

    I certainly wouldn't argue that OLE is "prettified" painted green, given ornate twirls or clad in Bath stone or whatever.  That would be horrible.  It is industrial equipment and should not apologise for that.  It should look like industrial equipment.  But it would be nice if it looked like well designed industrial equipment and I am afraid it doesn't IMHO.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on November 11, 2015, 14:17:06

    I find the accusations of doctored images and nimbyism a bit much. The fact is that NR are installing pug-ugly kit through an AONB, and we and they do no-one any favours if we try to deny what is self-evidently true.

    On the other hand, I am sure that the OHLE will look better in a few years when it has weathered and some of the vegetation has grown back.

    If NR had been watching the news at any time in the last few years they might have spotted the fact that people in the Chilterns are a bit sensitive to railway developments at the moment - perhaps a bit of 'cuddling' would helped? Or maybe NR were worried that if they opened a dialogue, the Chilterns Conservation Board might have insisted that 20 miles of the GWR were put in a tunnel...

    Apart from the cost involved, the major stumbling block with any new product on Network Rail is one of trials and approvals.  The Series 1 kit has been in development for some years now, and I doubt if there is much appetite for having to go through the whole rigmarole again to satisfy criticism on the grounds that it doesn't look nice.

    The Series 1 kit has been designed to remove many points of failure experienced with previous generations of OLE equipment.  Who knows what other failures could be encountered with new ones fresh off the drawing board but unproven in service.

    Am I wrong to imagine that there might be well-proven 25kV OHLE installations in other countries that we could learn from?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on November 11, 2015, 15:03:12
    As I understand it, various continental schemes were studied as part of the initial design works.  Indeed the small part steel (the dangly bits) is based on a Swiss design from Furrer and Frey.  Nevertheless I have to agree that they do appear to be the metallic equivalent of Lego - and not in a good way!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 11, 2015, 16:18:01
    Has the second picture been digitally enhanced I wonder ?
    It almost looks as though the trees behind the OHLE have been rendered darker than would be natural, in order that the relatively light coloured galvanised steelwork is more conspicuous than in real life.

    I think it's an effect of shadow - I'm guessing the sun is above and slightly behind the trees, making the visible side look dark, whilst the steel work behind is fully lit.

    However, I remain of the view that something well designed is inherently beautiful,  perhaps not in a classic sense, but something like a National Grid pylon can still be admired for its economy in use of materials and that fact that it looks likes the elegant solution to a problem that it is. 

    Concur. At the time of the design contest for the new generation of NG pylons, due to appear in the West country in the next few years, we were reminded that the original lattice pylon was also the winner of a design competition. To quote Spike Milligan "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Get it out with Optrex".


    I find the accusations of doctored images and nimbyism a bit much. The fact is that NR are installing pug-ugly kit through an AONB, and we and they do no-one any favours if we try to deny what is self-evidently true.

    Am I wrong to imagine that there might be well-proven 25kV OHLE installations in other countries that we could learn from?


    Fair comment. The situation of any bit of the kit will determine the effect. In a cutting, no problem. On top of a high embankment in open flat country, the impact is greater. That said, I was back oop t'North a short while back, and drove along a semi-rural A6 to a most acceptable dinner in a very nice pub / restaurant*. The line from Preston to Lancaster runs alongside for part of the way, and is electrified. Behind is the backdrop of the Pennines and the Trough of Bowland. Neither was diminished in any way by having the OLE  in the foreground.

    (* Details on request, if you are heading between Preston and Garstang)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on November 11, 2015, 17:06:10

    ...I was back oop t'North a short while back, and drove along a semi-rural A6 to a most acceptable dinner in a very nice pub / restaurant*. The line from Preston to Lancaster runs alongside for part of the way, and is electrified. Behind is the backdrop of the Pennines and the Trough of Bowland. Neither was diminished in any way by having the OLE  in the foreground.


    I had a squizz on Google Maps to see if I could find a location between Preston and Lancaster where the line was higher than the road, but couldn't. Even a slight cutting does wonders for making things less obtrusive. Also I think you'd have to agree that the OHLE on that stretch of line is considerably less clunky than the stuff they're running through the Goebbels Gap.

    Anyway, mustn't bang on - starting to sound like the man himself:

    Quote

    ^The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.^



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 11, 2015, 17:34:40
    However, I remain of the view that something well designed is inherently beautiful,  perhaps not in a classic sense, [...] it looks likes the elegant solution to a problem that it is. 
    I think it could be said that is a classic sense of beauty. As you point out, beauty and prettiness are not the same and can even be at odds with each other.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 11, 2015, 18:06:37
    The uprights for example stick up beyond the cross bar for no real reason and that makes it look like it has been lazily (or perhaps hurriedly) designed. 

    ... but what is going up between Reading and Didcot looks far worse than it need be - just have a look of some earlier OHLE around the country eg at the detail design of the mast/gantry interface.

    The uprights are above the crossbar or cantilever to carry the insulators for the autotransformer anti phase 25 kV cables, with adequate safety clearances from the steelwork.   

    This is shown on the F&F web page here:   http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/Series-1.html (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/Series-1.html)
    Please scroll lower down and select image '1 of 8'

    Earlier portal or gantry designs predate the 50 kV auto-transformer system, therefore they are not really a fair comparison.  Where an autotransformer system has been retrofitted to an existing system such as on the WCML, it has generally been done by adding more stovepipes upwards above the tracks to carry the additional cables.  It perhaps wasn't the best way, just the practical way at the time.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 11, 2015, 18:14:04
    As I understand it, various continental schemes were studied as part of the initial design works.  Indeed the small part steel (the dangly bits) is based on a Swiss design from Furrer and Frey.  Nevertheless I have to agree that they do appear to be the metallic equivalent of Lego - and not in a good way!

    I found some NR presentation slides that credit Furrer+Frey with the design of "Series 1", though I don't think it was called that when first used on the GE. The slides give these four points as the big pluses of the design:

    Series 1 ^ Designed by Furrer & Frey
    ^Mono-anchor Booms
    ^Single insulator cantilevers / registrations
    ^Reduced number of components
    ^Reduced flaking of wires

    It's no surprise that aesthetics doesn't appear on that list - you can tell just by looking that it got no more than half a second of thought in the whole design process. There are much less intrusive, and even elegant, systems elsewhere. As to whether lightweight structures have really been found to be inadequate have no idea, but the loadings involved (except for section terminations) are not that demanding.

    The really ugly aspect is those masts that stick up well above the crossbeams, and the mounting posts that do the same, with a crude bracket to join them. I think you might get away with that more easily in Switzerland, where the landscape is much bigger, and enormously taller, than ours. I guess that's how you reduce the number of components - one length of mast whatever the height you want the contact wire. I've also seen pictures that suggest the upper mast projection supports the AT feed wire on each side.

    I'm left wondering why the portals and cantilever booms at Reading are different, so apparently not to the Series 1 design. They are a bit less ugly, though no less noticeable due to being so big (in various ways). I can see that the ATFs may be routed apart through the station, but somehow I can't imagine Reading got special treatment


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 11, 2015, 22:08:40
    The masts sticking up above the crossbeams: if the crossbeams are at height n metres and the masts project 1 metre above that, would it look better if the masts were height n+1 metres and the crossbeams level with their tops? I'm unsure either way, but the answer is important (sort of).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on November 11, 2015, 22:39:48
    There are some other significant differences between the the Series 1 designs being installed on the GW and the BR Mark 3B used on the ECML.

    To permit higher speed operation with multiple pantographs the contact wire is heavier at 120mm^2 cross section instead of 107mm^2. The contact wires are tensioned at 16.5kN (and the catenary at 14kN) - I think it's that way round! - instead of 12kN and 10kN. As a result the structures need to be a bit more massive - not only for the tension but also to cope with the additional mass and wind loading.

    At the end of each wiring section there are tensioning devices. Historically the tension was applied by hanging weights and the tail wires from each section was attached to these - in a multiple track railway these tail wires have to be routed over the catenary servicing the outer tracks as the weights were attached to a vertical stanchion. This is a weak point - if the inner wires come down the flailing tail wires will almost certainly damage the catenary on the outer tracks. To avoid this occurring the tensioning devices are now a pre-loaded spring in line with its track and attached to a rigid beam running over all the tracks. Each tensioner exerts a force of some three tonnes so on a four track section the beam has to resist a horizontal bending load of some 12 tonnes applied some way from the vertical supports.

    The extra height of the vertical beams is to allow for, as has been posted earlier, the auto-transformer return feed at 25kV anti-phase to be fitted having due regard to insulation allowances. As far as i understand it the 15kV 16.67Hz electification system used in Switzerland does not use an auto-transformer return. In Germany one quite often sees additional 3 phase feeds mounted on top of the verticals - and they are very high.

    I do wish people would accept that the design engineers probably know what they are doing and that there is a reason for things being as they are.

    If one wants an electric railway with good reliability the metal work will be chunky. It will certainly be chunkier than that used on the ECML for good reasons.

    Get over it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 11, 2015, 23:46:02
    Hear hear, 4064. Hear hear.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on November 12, 2015, 08:45:39
    I do wish people would accept that the design engineers probably know what they are doing and that there is a reason for things being as they are.

    If one wants an electric railway with good reliability the metal work will be chunky. It will certainly be chunkier than that used on the ECML for good reasons.

    Get over it.

    I think people should be able to express an opinion without being told that others know best and to "Get over it", I wonder if these same people would feel the same way should they uncover plans for a wind turbine to be built or a motorway bypass to be routed near their house?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on November 12, 2015, 09:12:22
    Hear hear, TaplowGreen. Hear hear.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on November 12, 2015, 09:33:36
    I sometimes wonder what Brunel's design for 25 Kv overhead would look like!

    Just think 300 mph broad gauge trains!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on November 12, 2015, 09:42:33
    I must admit to being surprised by the ferocity of comments on each side of this discussion.   Functionality and good visual design are not mutually exclusive, and engineers (I am one) are not necessarily the best people to come up with good visual design.

    Remember that HST^s were designed by engineers, but the styling, including visual appearance, was by Sir Kenneth Grange, who was not. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 12, 2015, 10:07:20
    I sometimes wonder what Brunel's design for 25 Kv overhead would look like!

    Just think 300 mph broad gauge trains!

    Contemporary accounts show much opposition to Brunel's designs, decrying their impact on the landscape. His engineering knowledge was questioned by those who said a lot but knew little.

    Admittedly Brunel wasn't imnune from adding unnecessary adornment to structures, but this was often done to appease local opposition.

    I'm wondering if descendents of Dr Dionysius Lardner are living in the Goring Gap.  :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 12, 2015, 10:19:35
    My impression from the comments here are that NR needs to get out and educate those affected such that they fully understand what is needed & what is design & therefore what can be changed & what can't. It seems that many are commenting without being suitably informed


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 12, 2015, 12:41:34
    My impression from the comments here are that NR needs to get out and educate those affected such that they fully understand what is needed & what is design & therefore what can be changed & what can't. It seems that many are commenting without being suitably informed

    Your wording seems to say that people should not comment until they're fully - or rather "suitably" - informed Chris, and should not comment until they are.   I suspect that's not really the message you intended to give; if it is, then I would strongly say that this forum welcomes inputs and questions to help inform, and does not require people to be pre-fully-informed.

    I would agree with you that "NR needs to get out and educate those affected such that they fully understand what is needed" (though I might suggest that "fully" isn't appropriate - people probably don't need to be spring tension and high voltage engineers!).    And to some extent NR have been doing so.  I have sympathy on both sides.   

    Having been involved with the early stages of a small (25 million!) project in recent years - nothing to do with rail - you would not believe how frustratingly difficult it is to get people to input or take an interest in things years into the future at a time that it's needed to help with the planning.  A few activists will get involved and they will ask for "the earth".  Some other groups will put in zero inputs or modest requests and the voices need to be balanced.   Then there are those who say nothing, accept what's being done - just to object a bit late in the day when it's expensive or impractical to take their wishes into account.    Now - we had sought views - the Campus team had some 12 different routes to get out information and requests for input - electronic, road shows, posters, taking to groups, local newspaper ... yet still we got "didn't know" complaints and public inputs that were impractical and thus a bit frustrating.

    However, having spoken for the "developer" there are indicators on the rail side that there's not enough making of information available, or accessing it can be a bit of a nuisance.   I actually got involved with rail because of 2 lines on page 70 in a 214 page document which dramatically effected the TransWilts - a consultation that was not flagged up at the station nor in the local press until after it had closed.  And looking to just this week, a meeting to inform was held several miles from a station(!), at a venue where a cup of tea cost over 5 pounds(!), and at a time which was changed from the one notifed weeks ahead at just 36 hours notice to attendees(!).  This struck me at the time as being unfortunate and perhaps putting people off - personally I went along to learn, but the net result was that a planned journey afterwards ended up with me not getting to my destination until midnight:30 the next morning, with the final leg by taxi.    So - whilst I have sympathy with the problems of informing passengers and other stakeholders, I do thing that much more could be done and it's not always gotten right at the moment.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 12, 2015, 13:00:07
    ^5 for a cup of tea?  :o Hanging's too good for them. Drown them slowly in used tea bags, I say.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 12, 2015, 13:22:04
    My impression from the comments here are that NR needs to get out and educate those affected such that they fully understand what is needed & what is design & therefore what can be changed & what can't. It seems that many are commenting without being suitably informed

    Your wording seems to say that people should not comment until they're fully - or rather "suitably" - informed Chris, and should not comment until they are.   I suspect that's not really the message you intended to give; if it is, then I would strongly say that this forum welcomes inputs and questions to help inform, and does not require people to be pre-fully-informed.

    I referred to "...get out & educate those affected...." - and as I didn't refer to anyone else the following comments were addressed to the same people. i.e. not those here.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on November 12, 2015, 13:30:58
    I do wish people would accept that the design engineers probably know what they are doing and that there is a reason for things being as they are.

    If one wants an electric railway with good reliability the metal work will be chunky. It will certainly be chunkier than that used on the ECML for good reasons.

    Get over it.

    I think people should be able to express an opinion without being told that others know best and to "Get over it", I wonder if these same people would feel the same way should they uncover plans for a wind turbine to be built or a motorway bypass to be routed near their house?

    I was very careful to refer to 'design engineers' - being those people who designed the kit.

    There is a world of a difference between 'designing' a pylon or wind turbine and selecting the position to 'install' it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 12, 2015, 13:49:39
    My impression from the comments here are that NR needs to get out and educate those affected such that they fully understand what is needed & what is design & therefore what can be changed & what can't. It seems that many are commenting without being suitably informed

    Your wording seems to say that people should not comment until they're fully - or rather "suitably" - informed Chris, and should not comment until they are.   I suspect that's not really the message you intended to give; if it is, then I would strongly say that this forum welcomes inputs and questions to help inform, and does not require people to be pre-fully-informed.

    I referred to "...get out & educate those affected...." - and as I didn't refer to anyone else the following comments were addressed to the same people. i.e. not those here.

    Many thanks for that confirmation, Chris;  there was a second (clearly unintended) way that the text could be (and was) read.   Glad it's cleared up.   And I second the need to inform fully.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 12, 2015, 14:34:14


    The uprights are above the crossbar or cantilever to carry the insulators for the autotransformer anti phase 25 kV cables, with adequate safety clearances from the steelwork.   

    This is shown on the F&F web page here:   http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/Series-1.html (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/Series-1.html)
    Please scroll lower down and select image '1 of 8'


    Thanks for the info.  I'll reserve judgement until they are all up and we can see what bits do what.  At the risk of provoking the experts still further was anyone else noticed that the horizontal members are not horizontal?  I am sure that they are within tolerances but it look like NR has failed to buy a spirit level 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on November 12, 2015, 15:17:20
    Thanks for the info.  I'll reserve judgement until they are all up and we can see what bits do what.  At the risk of provoking the experts still further was anyone else noticed that the horizontal members are not horizontal?  I am sure that they are within tolerances but it look like NR has failed to buy a spirit level 

    Funnily enough I noticed that on a couple of masts & booms (as I see they are called!) the other day - but I wondered if the track is cambered, ie. the "horizontals" are parallel with the track ?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 12, 2015, 17:47:10
    Thanks for the info.  I'll reserve judgement until they are all up and we can see what bits do what.  At the risk of provoking the experts still further was anyone else noticed that the horizontal members are not horizontal?  I am sure that they are within tolerances but it look like NR has failed to buy a spirit level
    Funnily enough I noticed that on a couple of masts & booms (as I see they are called!) the other day - but I wondered if the track is cambered, ie. the "horizontals" are parallel with the track ?
    On curves, I guess the track is probably canted (I think that's the correct term).

    you would not believe how frustratingly difficult it is to get people to input or take an interest in things years into the future at a time that it's needed to help with the planning.  A few activists will get involved and they will ask for "the earth".  Some other groups will put in zero inputs or modest requests and the voices need to be balanced.   Then there are those who say nothing, accept what's being done - just to object a bit late in the day when it's expensive or impractical to take their wishes into account.
    Regarding the Cardiff Central refurbishment plans, I'm worrying I've missed any consultation and we're at the "bit late in the day" stage, given the aparrently quite detailed artist's impressions that have been released (maybe I should have cross-quoted that in the Cardiff Central topic instead, feel free to move this part of my post if it'd be more apropriate there). However, I'm then told
    Quote
    there is a lot more work to do to determine the business case and the affordability, together with securing funding.

    Any future public consultation exercise may be some time off, although we would clearly want to listen to people^s views before finalising any plans
    and I fear they're leaving the public consultation until they've already made their minds up and won't listen to comments anyway.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 12, 2015, 20:49:25
    Part of the original remit for GWEP was
    To reduce system failure which are inherent in the Mk3 as installed on MML (BedPan) and ECML etc,
    To be TSI compliant and to meet the requirements of BSEN 50122 neither of which was existed during the construction of the ECML OLE
    And to keep costs down by using standardised OLE structures and components

    The installation has an impact, initially it will look ugly but eventually it will just blend into the background and very few people will even notice. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 12, 2015, 22:08:04
    and I fear they're leaving the public consultation until they've already made their minds up and won't listen to comments anyway.

    It is difficult to win here.  Either you consult asking people for their ideas and they have none and accuse you of bringing nothing to the discussion or you come with ideas and they accuse you of having already decided!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 13, 2015, 09:30:19
    and I fear they're leaving the public consultation until they've already made their minds up and won't listen to comments anyway.
    It is difficult to win here.  Either you consult asking people for their ideas and they have none and accuse you of bringing nothing to the discussion or you come with ideas and they accuse you of having already decided!
    Good point. Maybe, if it is really the case that apparently quite detailed artist's impressions can be produced without determining the business case, establishing affordability and securing funding, then that would be a good time to consult. Surely you cannot secure funding until you have decided on the final design so you can work out how much it costs (although, in the case of GWML electrification it doesn't sound like they had done that, and just plucked a number out of thin air). As for what the railway could bring to the discussion, a portfolio of widely varying designs (rather than just one glass & steel monstrosity) should help avoid the view that they have already made their mind up. In the case of Cardiff Central, I'd like to see full plans of the existing structures to see where there may or may not be unused space available for the required expansion of the station.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on November 13, 2015, 10:31:35
    Moving on the discussion from the Goring gap, Network Rail (NR) have sent out a few twitter messages that the first wires for the GW electrification were installed last night.
    NR also said they did 1000m in 35 minutes, but unfortunately don't say where this is or how much was done.

    http://twitter.com/networkrailgwrm/status/665110025325682688/photo/1 (http://twitter.com/networkrailgwrm/status/665110025325682688/photo/1)
    http://twitter.com/networkrailgwrm/status/665109748438728704/photo/1 (http://twitter.com/networkrailgwrm/status/665109748438728704/photo/1)


     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on November 13, 2015, 10:42:29
    A later tweet indicated it was between Tilehurst and Pangbourne.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 13, 2015, 13:31:36
    Don't get too excited now....... Looks like its only the Earth wire. Easier than putting up the actual knitting ::) :P   But, hey ho, at least some positive (well in this case, earthing) progress at last :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on November 13, 2015, 14:22:47
    Don't get too excited now....... Looks like its only the Earth wire. Easier than putting up the actual knitting ::) :P   But, hey ho, at least some positive (well in this case, earthing) progress at last :o

    It is still progress so good news.  I assumed that the wire would be put up last minute.  Is it not eminently nickable for scrap at least before the OLE is electrified?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 13, 2015, 17:23:43
    Any future public consultation exercise may be some time off, although we would clearly want to listen to people^s views before finalising any plans and I fear they're leaving the public consultation until they've already made their minds up and won't listen to comments anyway.

    Bristol fashion, as they say...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 17, 2015, 13:27:16
    From Network Rail:

    Quote
    The next Bath Drop-in will be held in the Guildhall on Tuesday 1st December (4.30pm ^ 6.30pm).  Please note the earlier finishing time.
     
    Come along and find out more about the work we are doing to modernise the Great Western Railway.
     
    Information will be available on the TPOD 2 work planned for next Easter.

    Edit to add - I have received an email recalling this announcement - goodness knows if that means the meeting's off, retimed, relocated, or has a restricted invite list now.
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 18, 2015, 15:57:26
    Don't get too excited now....... Looks like its only the Earth wire. Easier than putting up the actual knitting ::) :P   But, hey ho, at least some positive (well in this case, earthing) progress at last :o

    Catenary wire, droppers, and contact wire have now been strung for about half a mile on the relief lines in the same location.  Starting to look like a proper electrified railway now.  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on November 18, 2015, 16:17:38
    The fact it all stayed up in yesterday's conditions is a good start too!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 18, 2015, 16:30:33
    Catenary wire, droppers, and contact wire have now been strung for about half a mile on the relief lines in the same location.  Starting to look like a proper electrified railway now.  :)

    Is half a mile a typical length of wiring run between tensioners?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 18, 2015, 19:03:17
    Don't get too excited now....... Looks like its only the Earth wire. Easier than putting up the actual knitting ::) :P   But, hey ho, at least some positive (well in this case, earthing) progress at last :o

    Catenary wire, droppers, and contact wire have now been strung for about half a mile on the relief lines in the same location.  Starting to look like a proper electrified railway now.  :)

    As the GWML is not going to be the "classic" single S&T rail and single traction return rail but will be using dual rail return with impedance bonds it is not possible to connect the OLE structures to the running rails and bond the OLE to the structures so the earth wire is being run to tie everything down to a reference.  Even though the OLE has yet to be charged from a source it will pick up an induced voltage whilst not particularly powerful it is never the less could be dangerous enough.

    Catenary wire, droppers, and contact wire have now been strung for about half a mile on the relief lines in the same location.  Starting to look like a proper electrified railway now.  :)

    Is half a mile a typical length of wiring run between tensioners?

    Paul

    The wire runs are a max of 1970 meters, wire runs can be shorter to suit sub sectioning near junctions etc


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 18, 2015, 19:29:23
    I'll try and get a more accurate measurement tomorrow.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 18, 2015, 19:31:20
    As the GWML is not going to be the "classic" single S&T rail and single traction return rail but will be using dual rail return with impedance bonds it is not possible to connect the OLE structures to the running rails and bond the OLE to the structures so the earth wire is being run to tie everything down to a reference.  Even though the OLE has yet to be charged from a source it will pick up an induced voltage whilst not particularly powerful it is never the less could be dangerous enough.

    Ah, that explains why there was an earth wire being installed. I did wonder, since in previous AT installations (WCML) doing away with the return conductor was given as an advantage. But won't the steel piles, and the structures on them, be earthing the earth wire, in a kind of PME?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on November 18, 2015, 19:33:26
    I have to ask: 1,970m? Where did that figure come from? It's not a mile and it's not 5% wastage from a 2 km drum. I'm sure there's good explanation but I'm dashed if I can think what it might be.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 18, 2015, 19:38:35
    I have to ask: 1,970m? Where did that figure come from? It's not a mile and it's not 5% wastage from a 2 km drum. I'm sure there's good explanation but I'm dashed if I can think what it might be.

    Why would it be a round number? It has to meet number of design requirements, it's not just a free choice. For a kick-off, the temperature range times expansion coefficient of the conductor times the length has to be less than the range of the tensioner minus certain setting tolerances. But in practice something else may set a lower limit.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 18, 2015, 22:35:21
    As the GWML is not going to be the "classic" single S&T rail and single traction return rail but will be using dual rail return with impedance bonds it is not possible to connect the OLE structures to the running rails and bond the OLE to the structures so the earth wire is being run to tie everything down to a reference.  Even though the OLE has yet to be charged from a source it will pick up an induced voltage whilst not particularly powerful it is never the less could be dangerous enough.

    Ah, that explains why there was an earth wire being installed. I did wonder, since in previous AT installations (WCML) doing away with the return conductor was given as an advantage. But won't the steel piles, and the structures on them, be earthing the earth wire, in a kind of PME?

    It should be remembered that the traction return rail(s) are earthy and not earthed this is to ensure the traction return current returns via the return system and not stray via terra ferma this is to reduce interference that stray current would cause.

    In PME ie TN-C-S the earth at the user end is derived from the PEN conductor, this is almost the case in the classic 25kV system where the traction rail is connected to the "Neutral" things get a bit more complex when dual traction immune (TI) track circuits are uses with impedance bonds and a whole lot more complex when Auto Transformer system is used to supply traction current. 

    Even with axel counters both rails OLE structures will be bonded by an earth wire and not at ever structure, this reduces the number holes drilled in the rail, the track engineer does not seem to like holes drilled in his (her) steel.  However the system designers still have to ensure the RoEP does not exceed the requirements of BS EN 50122

    Also an MSC (Mutual Screening Conductor) is placed in the S & T trough routes to improve immunisation these are bonded to the traction return rail(s) every 400 m.

    I have to ask: 1,970m? Where did that figure come from? It's not a mile and it's not 5% wastage from a 2 km drum. I'm sure there's good explanation but I'm dashed if I can think what it might be.

    Why would it be a round number? It has to meet number of design requirements, it's not just a free choice. For a kick-off, the temperature range times expansion coefficient of the conductor times the length has to be less than the range of the tensioner minus certain setting tolerances. But in practice something else may set a lower limit.

    Possibly more to do with either the length of copper BICC could originally draw from a single ingot of copper, or the length of conductor on a cable drum that would fit the railway loading gauge.  Personally I will go with the second one, also due to the weight of 2000m drum of 120mm sq copper.  Joints are not liked in a new wire run as they are a point of failure. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 18, 2015, 23:52:41
    I notice that the new A338 bridge at Wantage Road is taking shape.  The position of the abutments is such that the loop on the south (down) side could now be extended through the bridge if required.  Was this a deliberate provision for the future or was it just that it was so close that the additional clearance was required as a safety measure in case of a derailment of a train travelling in the wrong direction in the loop?

    Meanwhile in Wiltshire the embankment for the short diversionary road connecting the old Hay Lane alignment to the modern B4005 on the north side of the railway is now up to the full height. This is to allow the old Hay Lane bridge to be demolished at Christmas.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 19, 2015, 11:27:35
    From Network Rail:

    Quote
    The next Bath Drop-in will be held in the Guildhall on Tuesday 1st December (4.30pm ^ 6.30pm).  Please note the earlier finishing time.
     
    Come along and find out more about the work we are doing to modernise the Great Western Railway.
     
    Information will be available on the TPOD 2 work planned for next Easter.


    I have received an email to recall the email that announced this session.  Will update further as / if I hear more.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on November 19, 2015, 13:11:28
    did a run to London lots of work going on many more O/H mast erected up to Hayes since last t rip at end September..

    Work at West Drayton,  Stockley Flyover and Acton underpass also North Pole Depot branded Haitachi for SET. Is there going to be an entrance at the Padd end of the depot where flyover line branches off?



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 19, 2015, 15:08:53
    I'll try and get a more accurate measurement tomorrow.

    Measured today as 0.73 miles by my GPS iPhone app.  That equates to approx 1175 metres.

    Is there going to be an entrance at the Padd end of the depot where flyover line branches off?

    Two new 50mph entrances/exits have recently been installed, one connects off of the E&C (Engine & Carriage Line - which is the line that leads to the flyover), and the other joins Line 1 a little closer to Paddington on a new formation.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 19, 2015, 15:48:46
    Work at West Drayton, Stockley Flyover and Acton underpass also North Pole Depot branded Haitachi for SET. Is there going to be an entrance at the Padd end of the depot where flyover line branches off?

    See this post here: http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=818.msg172697#msg172697


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 19, 2015, 18:00:09
    North Pole Depot branded Haitachi for SET. Is there going to be an entrance at the Padd end of the depot where flyover line branches off?

    There is still a connection on the West London Line.

    If look carefully into the shed an Hitachi unit is often parked inside 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 19, 2015, 18:37:18
    North Pole Depot branded Haitachi for SET. Is there going to be an entrance at the Padd end of the depot where flyover line branches off?

    There is still a connection on the West London Line.

    All good depot design should always have two independent exits. Unfortunately the one I'm currently working on only has one  ::) :P   Not a good portent for the future if 36 units get trapped at the start of the service :-\


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 20, 2015, 04:13:37
    From The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/nov/20/network-rail-investment-plan-has-staggering-costs-report-finds?)

    Quote
    Network Rail investment plan has 'staggering' costs, report finds
    Future of UK railway regulator in doubt after Public Accounts Committee says it has concerns over rail investment

    A damning report by MPs into Network Rail^s aborted five-year investment plan has warned that the public will foot the bill for "staggering and unacceptable" cost increases after the government and industry agreed to pay for work that could never have been delivered in time and on budget.

    In an assessment that will put the future of the rail regulator further in doubt, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said it had serious concerns over rail investment following the admission of further delays and overspending in the 38.3bn programme of rail works.

    MPs on the committee said the track and signalling operator Network Rail had "lost its grip" and demanded clearer accountability for project costs and management. They also questioned if the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), the regulator that signed off the "unrealistic" programme, was fit for purpose.

    It said that even after the planning and budgeting failures, there remained far too much uncertainty over the costs and delivery of major rail electrification works on the TransPennine route and the Midland Main Line, and that more projects could be delayed to balance the books. Electrifying the Great Western Main Line from London to Cardiff is now expected to cost 2.8bn, rather than the 1.6bn estimated a year ago, the committee found.

    The PAC called for a fundamental review of the regulator^s role and effectiveness in planning rail infrastructure, noting: "We are concerned that the ORR lacks the capability to robustly scrutinise Network Rail^s plans."

    Meg Hillier, chair of the PAC, said: "Network Rail has lost its grip on managing large infrastructure projects. The result is a twofold blow to taxpayers: delays in the delivery of promised improvements, and a vastly bigger bill for delivering them.

    "The government has identified rail infrastructure as a vital part of its economic plans, for example in establishing what it describes as a 'Northern powerhouse'. It is alarming that, in planning work intended to support these plans, its judgment should be so flawed.

    "Our inquiry has found that the agreed work could never have been delivered within the agreed budget and timeframe. Yet Network Rail, the Department for Transport and the regulator ^ the Office of Rail and Road ^ signed up to the plans anyway.

    "Passengers and the public are paying a heavy price and we must question whether the ORR is fit for purpose."

    The first public admission from the government that the 38.3bn plan was going off the rails came in June, when the government replaced the chairman of Network Rail and announced three reviews into its investment plan and structures. The first, Sir Peter Hendy's assessment of how much work can realistically now be conducted by 2019 for the budget provided, is expected to be published next week.

    Responding to the report, Network Rail said it had now made significant changes to planning and budgeting. A spokesperson said: "It is clear that we, as an industry, have been overly ambitious about what could be accomplished with the funds and resources available. Network Rail has successfully delivered over 5,000 projects over the past five years, but our understanding of how best to plan and deliver major new electrification schemes was not good enough."

    A transport department spokesperson said: "We are proud to have a hugely ambitious investment programme, but agree that lessons should be learned on all sides. We are committed to seeing the 38bn programme through and delivering the railway that passengers deserve."

    The ORR said it welcomed the report. A spokesperson said: ^We need to learn the lessons, and agree with PAC^s recommendations that uncertainties in key projects need to be addressed differently.

    "With the changes to Network Rail's ownership and finances since it became a public sector company, ORR agrees that a review of its own role in major projects is appropriate."

    Electrification of three major routes was at the heart of rail upgrades described as vital by Network Rail and promised in the Conservative party manifesto. But just weeks after the election two of the three schemes were paused by the government, while the Great Western scheme will be delayed, potentially incurring further costs associated with new trains on order from Hitachi.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 20, 2015, 04:27:22
    And from the Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/12006595/Ballooning-costs-and-delays-of-rail-modernisation-attacked-as-staggering-and-unacceptable.html)

    Quote
    Ballooning costs and delays of rail modernisation attacked as "staggering and unacceptable"

    MPs hit out at Network Rail, industry regulator and Department for Transport over spiralling costs and delays in plans to overhaul rail network

    "Staggering and unacceptable" cost increases in the modernisation of Britain^s railway network have led MPs to call for a "fundamental" review of the way the work is organised.
    The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has condemned what it called "severe planning and budgeting" failures in Network Rail^s five-year investment plan.

    Network Rail has lost its grip on managing large infrastructure projects says Meg Hillier, chairman of Public Accounts Committee. Singled out for particular criticism on the 38.3bn 2014-2019 programme of rail investment was project to electrify the Great Western Main Line linking London and Cardiff, where costs have ballooned from an estimated 1.6bn last year to as much as 2.8bn.

    The committee also called for a review of regulator the Office of Road and Rail^s (ORR) role in planning rail infrastructure projects in light of the problems.



    Meg Hillier, chairman of the committee, said: "Network Rail has lost its grip on managing large infrastructure projects. The result is a twofold blow to taxpayers: delays in the delivery of promised improvements, and a vastly bigger bill for delivering them.
    "The potential near-doubling in cost of the electrification of the Great Western line is a symptom of seriously flawed control and planning. Another is the continuing uncertainty over electrification of both the TransPennine route and the Midland Main Line.
    "Our inquiry has found that the agreed work could never have been delivered within the agreed budget and timeframe. Yet Network Rail, the Department for Transport and the ORR signed up to the plans anyway.^
    The committee also said that rail passengers and the public are "paying a heavy price" for the problems and questioned whether the ORR was "fit for purpose."
    Findings from the committee included that the five-year programme of work agreed between the Department for Transport, Network Rail and ORR "could not have been delivered within the agreed budget". To prevent this happening again, the PAC recommended that in future the Government must check all future plans are realistic.
    The committee also said ORR^s role should be reviewed; that the current five-year planning cycle is not suitable for major investment projects and these should treated separately; and that Network Rail^s reclassification as a public body had made it harder for it to raise money and therefore it needed better budget controls.
    The committee added that there is "a risk more projects will be delayed in order to balance Network Rail^s budget" and it and the Department for Transport need to have a clear and agreed policy on which projects are achievable.
    ORR said it "welcomed" the committee^s scrutiny and the rising costs and delays were "unacceptable".
    A spokesman added: "With the changes to Network Rail's ownership and finances since it became a public sector company, ORR agrees that a review of its own role in major projects is appropriate. That review will need to cover the specification, planning and costing of major projects, their delivery and monitoring."
    Network Rail agreed it had been "overly ambitious about what could be accomplished with the funds and resources available".
    A spokesman added: "Our understanding of how best to plan and deliver major new electrification schemes was not good enough. We have now made significant changes to the way we plan and deliver our investment programme, which will see schemes progress only once they are sufficiently developed that a reliable cost estimate can be established."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 20, 2015, 04:44:42
    Also

    From UK Parliament (http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-accounts-committee/news-parliament-2015/network-rail-investment-programme-report-published-15-16/?) - "Rail users will pay price for failure in investment planning" (the original press release on which articles are based, and links to quoted reports)

    From the Bristol Post (http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Electrification-railway-Bristol-cost-taxpayer-1/story-28210050-detail/story.html?) - "Electrification of railway through Bristol to cost taxpayer 1.2bn more, amid severe project delays"

    From the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326363/Now-s-wrong-sort-RAILS-Millions-spent-new-electric-trains-wasted-not-suitable-tracks-run-on.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490) - "Now it's the wrong sort of RAILS! Millions spent on new electric trains could have been wasted because they may not have suitable tracks to run on"

    From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34868859) - "Rocketing rail electrification costs unacceptable, say MPs"

    From City a.m. (http://www.cityam.com/229166/public-accounts-committee-slams-network-rail-for-serious-planning-and-budgeting-failures-including-an-unacceptable-12bn-overspend-on-great-western-main-line-project-?) - " Public Accounts Committee slams Network Rail for serious planning and budgeting failures, including an "unacceptable" ^1.2bn overspend on Great Western Main Line project"

    From Reuters (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/11/20/uk-britain-railway-report-idUKKCN0T900120151120?rpc=401) - "MPs criticise Network Rail over upgrade failures"

    And there are a slew of other articles out there too starting from midnight ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 20, 2015, 08:51:59
    From the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326363/Now-s-wrong-sort-RAILS-Millions-spent-new-electric-trains-wasted-not-suitable-tracks-run-on.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490) - "Now it's the wrong sort of RAILS! Millions spent on new electric trains could have been wasted because they may not have suitable tracks to run on"
    Tut, tut, tut. It isn't the wrong sort of rails (unless Network Rail really are incompetent and are installing 3rd rail electrification instead of OHLE), the rails aren't being changed (are they?) The article states February 2018 as the delivery date for the new trains. Assuming that is the entry-into-service date of the first 801 ('electric') unit, since the first bi-modes are already here (for testing purposes), they only have to get the wires to Bristol Temple Meads by then in order to start using the 801s as they arrive. The other problem then is getting the network ready for the bi-modes to enter service as they are delivered. Assuming a bi-mode can keep to time on diesel provided it isn't asked to do more than 100mph then they don't need to wire Temple Meads, just Paddington to Bath and Bristol Parkway by the time the first 800 is ready for service.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 20, 2015, 17:00:06
    From the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326363/Now-s-wrong-sort-RAILS-Millions-spent-new-electric-trains-wasted-not-suitable-tracks-run-on.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490) - "Now it's the wrong sort of RAILS! Millions spent on new electric trains could have been wasted because they may not have suitable tracks to run on"
    Tut, tut, tut. It isn't the wrong sort of rails (unless Network Rail really are incompetent and are installing 3rd rail electrification instead of OHLE), the rails aren't being changed (are they?) The article states February 2018 as the delivery date for the new trains. Assuming that is the entry-into-service date of the first 801 ('electric') unit, since the first bi-modes are already here (for testing purposes), they only have to get the wires to Bristol Temple Meads by then in order to start using the 801s as they arrive. The other problem then is getting the network ready for the bi-modes to enter service as they are delivered. Assuming a bi-mode can keep to time on diesel provided it isn't asked to do more than 100mph then they don't need to wire Temple Meads, just Paddington to Bath and Bristol Parkway by the time the first 800 is ready for service.

    Doesn't even need to be that far Didcot or better still Swindon can be suitable places to raise and drop the pans.  I am still not sure is the raising and dropping is going to be done on move, if it is then almost anywhere could be used and it could alter as areas of OLE are commissioned


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 20, 2015, 20:08:17

    Doesn't even need to be that far Didcot or better still Swindon can be suitable places to raise and drop the pans.  I am still not sure is the raising and dropping is going to be done on move, if it is then almost anywhere could be used and it could alter as areas of OLE are commissioned

    The  Train Technical Specification (http://web.archive.org/web/20090219040451/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/iep/iepinvitationtotender/ieptraintechnicalspecifi.pdf) (TS1577 on page 13) says:
    Quote
    It is an essential requirement that a bi-mode IEP train shall be capable of switching between modes whilst at any speed from stationary up to line speed.

    Pans on the fly, then!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 20, 2015, 22:15:45

    Doesn't even need to be that far Didcot or better still Swindon can be suitable places to raise and drop the pans.  I am still not sure is the raising and dropping is going to be done on move, if it is then almost anywhere could be used and it could alter as areas of OLE are commissioned

    The  Train Technical Specification (http://web.archive.org/web/20090219040451/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/iep/iepinvitationtotender/ieptraintechnicalspecifi.pdf) (TS1577 on page 13) says:
    Quote
    It is an essential requirement that a bi-mode IEP train shall be capable of switching between modes whilst at any speed from stationary up to line speed.

    Pans on the fly, then!

    Just because the TSI states pan ups and drops on the fly, the GWEP OLE systems should be able to take it they might have fun trying it on the ECML  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 20, 2015, 22:28:36

    Just because the TSI states pan ups and drops on the fly, the GWEP OLE systems should be able to take it they might have fun trying it on the ECML  ;D

    They could try it. Once.

    I would think that the norm would be for the pantograph to be deployed at a station stop, but whatever. Interestingly, the spec also calls for the trains to be able to draw power from OHLE and supplement it with power from the diesel engines. I suppose this is to cover a drop in the power available from the OHLE, but not a total loss. Is this a scenario likely to happen often?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 20, 2015, 23:49:51
    Just because the TSI states pan ups and drops on the fly, the GWEP OLE systems should be able to take it they might have fun trying it on the ECML  ;D

    Or - just because it's required of IEP (and not in any TSI, I think), does that mean NR and the TOC will include that in their operating procedures? Well, you know how quick the railways are to make changes like that - so not likely in my lifetime, then.

    I would think that the norm would be for the pantograph to be deployed at a station stop, but whatever. Interestingly, the spec also calls for the trains to be able to draw power from OHLE and supplement it with power from the diesel engines. I suppose this is to cover a drop in the power available from the OHLE, but not a total loss. Is this a scenario likely to happen often?

    Where does it say that? It's not true for a single unit train, as you can see from this:
    Quote
    N084  Bi ^ Mode IEP Unit:
    Means an IEP Unit where the main power source(s) can be provided by means of a 25kV Overhead Electric Supply and by means of a Self Power Source but only one of these at a time.

    For a train of two units, one or both of which is a bi-mode, nothing demands that both operate from the same power source. So in that case you might have one train running off the OLE and one off its diesels. But why would you? Other than a fault, perhaps some out-of-the-way corners of the OLE realm might not provide enough juice for a double-length train?

    The other such case is the locomotive-hauled mode - as defined the locomotive does not provide any hotel service power, which is the original reason for insisting on a bit of on-board generation even in electric units. But ... I was going to say that locomotive-hauled mode is not now relevant, as it was only included as an alternative to making bi-modes but Hitachi chose to offer those instead. That might not be true any more ... if there's a stash of big diesel locomotives hiding somewhere, and if Hatachi designed to the full requirement rather than negotiating it away as no longer needed, then might that solve a certain little short-term problem? But of course there is no such stash.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 21, 2015, 01:32:22
    [
    Where does it say that? It's not true for a single unit train, as you can see from this:


    In TS1962 and TS2000 - although it is a desirable, rather than essential requirement.

    Quote
    TS1962 It is a desirable requirement that a bi-mode IEP train shall also be capable of operating in a combined electric and self power mode where power is primarily taken from the self power source and any additional power is taken from the electrification supply.

    TS2000 It is a desirable requirement that a bi-mode IEP train shall also be capable of operating in a combined electric and self power mode where power is primarily taken from the electrification supply and any additional power is taken from the self power source.

    The two quotes do rather contradict each other, don't they?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 21, 2015, 01:52:46
    [
    Where does it say that? It's not true for a single unit train, as you can see from this:


    In TS1962 and TS2000 - although it is a desirable, rather than essential requirement.

    Quote
    TS1962 It is a desirable requirement that a bi-mode IEP train shall also be capable of operating in a combined electric and self power mode where power is primarily taken from the self power source and any additional power is taken from the electrification supply.

    TS2000 It is a desirable requirement that a bi-mode IEP train shall also be capable of operating in a combined electric and self power mode where power is primarily taken from the electrification supply and any additional power is taken from the self power source.

    The two quotes do rather contradict each other, don't they?

    I see no contradiction, unless both apply exclusively to a single operating mode. But in any case they are not in the latest version, "Issue 05 of 19/07/02 Formal issue for Contract". I think you have been looking at "Issue 01 of 15/12/08 Formal issue for ITT". The differences should in principle be responses to suggestions in the tenders or in further negotiations with the supplier(s). The newer version is in https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/intercity-express-programme-technical-specification-and-contracts .


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 21, 2015, 08:54:51

    I see no contradiction, unless both apply exclusively to a single operating mode. But in any case they are not in the latest version, "Issue 05 of 19/07/02 Formal issue for Contract". I think you have been looking at "Issue 01 of 15/12/08 Formal issue for ITT". The differences should in principle be responses to suggestions in the tenders or in further negotiations with the supplier(s). The newer version is in https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/intercity-express-programme-technical-specification-and-contracts .


    Good thing I wasn't tendering for the job. I would have been using the wrong spec, and would have looked a right chump. Indeed, caught with my pants down!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 21, 2015, 09:02:00
    Good thing I wasn't tendering for the job. I would have been using the wrong spec, and would have looked a right chump. Indeed, caught with my pants down!

    Nonsense - tendering for the job is exactly what that issue was for. You would be a bit late for that, though.

    And as that was put in as a "desirable requirement" - which I guess means "we'd like to make this a requirement but not if it costs money" - you can still ask why they would want it. It must have been seen by someone as being useful, though note that it is still to apply to a "train" not a "unit".


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 21, 2015, 10:34:14
    From the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326363/Now-s-wrong-sort-RAILS-Millions-spent-new-electric-trains-wasted-not-suitable-tracks-run-on.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490) - "Now it's the wrong sort of RAILS! Millions spent on new electric trains could have been wasted because they may not have suitable tracks to run on"
    Tut, tut, tut. It isn't the wrong sort of rails (unless Network Rail really are incompetent and are installing 3rd rail electrification instead of OHLE), the rails aren't being changed (are they?) The article states February 2018 as the delivery date for the new trains. Assuming that is the entry-into-service date of the first 801 ('electric') unit, since the first bi-modes are already here (for testing purposes), they only have to get the wires to Bristol Temple Meads by then in order to start using the 801s as they arrive. The other problem then is getting the network ready for the bi-modes to enter service as they are delivered. Assuming a bi-mode can keep to time on diesel provided it isn't asked to do more than 100mph then they don't need to wire Temple Meads, just Paddington to Bath and Bristol Parkway by the time the first 800 is ready for service.

    Doesn't even need to be that far Didcot or better still Swindon can be suitable places to raise and drop the pans.  I am still not sure is the raising and dropping is going to be done on move, if it is then almost anywhere could be used and it could alter as areas of OLE are commissioned
    I was assuming that they would only want to raise/lower the pan in a station, and I think the linespeed is 125mph (or at least 110mph) between Swindon and Box, and in places between Swindon and the junction from Yate. I suppose the 800s won't all go into service at once so for the first few you'd only need one route (the Cotswolds requiring the least wiring, just PAD to Didcot assuming the service stops there). Then you could add Didcot to either Bath or Bristol Parkway (for either Bristol or Wales services) then the other of the two when more sets are introduced.
    ----------------------------
    As for the 'desirable requirement' of using both electric and diesel power together, I wonder whether the idea was to use both together to give more power to accelerate faster if the train was delayed?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 21, 2015, 13:13:01
    From the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3326363/Now-s-wrong-sort-RAILS-Millions-spent-new-electric-trains-wasted-not-suitable-tracks-run-on.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490) - "Now it's the wrong sort of RAILS! Millions spent on new electric trains could have been wasted because they may not have suitable tracks to run on"
    Tut, tut, tut. It isn't the wrong sort of rails (unless Network Rail really are incompetent and are installing 3rd rail electrification instead of OHLE), the rails aren't being changed (are they?) The article states February 2018 as the delivery date for the new trains. Assuming that is the entry-into-service date of the first 801 ('electric') unit, since the first bi-modes are already here (for testing purposes), they only have to get the wires to Bristol Temple Meads by then in order to start using the 801s as they arrive. The other problem then is getting the network ready for the bi-modes to enter service as they are delivered. Assuming a bi-mode can keep to time on diesel provided it isn't asked to do more than 100mph then they don't need to wire Temple Meads, just Paddington to Bath and Bristol Parkway by the time the first 800 is ready for service.

    Doesn't even need to be that far Didcot or better still Swindon can be suitable places to raise and drop the pans.  I am still not sure is the raising and dropping is going to be done on move, if it is then almost anywhere could be used and it could alter as areas of OLE are commissioned
    I was assuming that they would only want to raise/lower the pan in a station, and I think the linespeed is 125mph (or at least 110mph) between Swindon and Box, and in places between Swindon and the junction from Yate. I suppose the 800s won't all go into service at once so for the first few you'd only need one route (the Cotswolds requiring the least wiring, just PAD to Didcot assuming the service stops there). Then you could add Didcot to either Bath or Bristol Parkway (for either Bristol or Wales services) then the other of the two when more sets are introduced.
    ----------------------------
    There is not technical reason why a pan cannot be raised on the move, it has been done in the UK on the original Channel Tunnel link to Waterloo, it has not been practice on the UK national mainlines.

    As for the 'desirable requirement' of using both electric and diesel power together, I wonder whether the idea was to use both together to give more power to accelerate faster if the train was delayed?

    The trains using 25kV traction the help of a diesel engine will be miniscule, as for use in normal running the generator will have to be taken off load so as to allow for re-gen braking. 

    Also with all the carbon reduction required the less the diesels are used the less tax will be paid.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 21, 2015, 14:07:35

    Also with all the carbon reduction required the less the diesels are used the less tax will be paid.

    And the fewer diesel pollutants will be found in the air near the railway.

    It seems most likely that the ability to draw from both would be an emergency feature, unless it is to allow the diesels to be fired up before reaching the end of the wires. That would mean the train would be ready to leave on diesel power alone within moments of arrival, the engines having warmed up and having conducted whatever self-testing is required.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 21, 2015, 14:10:03
    As for the 'desirable requirement' of using both electric and diesel power together, I wonder whether the idea was to use both together to give more power to accelerate faster if the train was delayed?
    The trains using 25kV traction the help of a diesel engine will be miniscule, as for use in normal running the generator will have to be taken off load so as to allow for re-gen braking. 

    Also with all the carbon reduction required the less the diesels are used the less tax will be paid.
    I never said I thought it was a good idea, I was just wondering why the person who wrote the spec put that requirement in.

    to allow the diesels to be fired up before reaching the end of the wires. That would mean the train would be ready to leave on diesel power alone within moments of arrival, the engines having warmed up and having conducted whatever self-testing is required.
    That would make more sense.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: PhilWakely on November 21, 2015, 15:07:19
    There is not technical reason why a pan cannot be raised on the move, it has been done in the UK on the original Channel Tunnel link to Waterloo, it has not been practice on the UK national mainlines.

    Is it not done on the move on the Southern services between Croydon and Milton Keynes? I was on one the other day and, whilst it wasn't 'at speed', I am sure we didn't actually stop.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 21, 2015, 17:02:04
    I think the WLL service when running to timetable doesn't require a changeover on the move, because to fit in with the Southern and WCML pathing it has a fairly leisurely progress between the two 'networks'.  However if they ever get a relatively fast run through they can and do changeover on the move, I have experienced it myself on a 377/2 a few years ago.

    I read that LO 378s routinely changeover on the move on the WLL now, following a change to operating practices within the last year or so.

    The Thameslink infrastructure has a complex are of dual voltage provision between Farringdon and City T/L, and that has also been engineered to allow for changeover without stopping, even though all services do stop anyway.

    Paul

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 21, 2015, 18:33:30

    The Thameslink infrastructure has a complex are of dual voltage provision between Farringdon and City T/L, and that has also been engineered to allow for changeover without stopping, even though all services do stop anyway.

    Paul

    The Thameslink Dual Electrified Area does not do an on the move change over, there is no need in fact.  The pans go down at Farringdon on South bound and go up at City Thameslink going North bound this was actually the TOC choice as they believe it gives a degree of safety.  One train's Pan has already hit Blackfriars roof this was due to a defective pan on a 319.

    The DC AC isolation on Thameslink is by a series of contactors in the DC third rail which operated by the track circuits, the one on the WLL is done with 25kV isolation transformers


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 21, 2015, 18:44:29
    Surely when the Class 802s (AT300) are running to the West they will change from OLE to diesel on the move. I doubt the operator will want to stop every service at Newbury.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 21, 2015, 23:11:35
    From City a.m. (http://www.cityam.com/229166/public-accounts-committee-slams-network-rail-for-serious-planning-and-budgeting-failures-including-an-unacceptable-12bn-overspend-on-great-western-main-line-project-?) - " Public Accounts Committee slams Network Rail for serious planning and budgeting failures, including an "unacceptable" ^1.2bn overspend on Great Western Main Line project"
    ...
    And there are a slew of other articles out there too starting from midnight ...

    The headlines of course, tell us nothing we didn't know months ago, long before the commons hearings. Some of the written submissions to the committee (http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-accounts-committee/inquiries/parliament-2015/network-rail-2014-2019-rail-investment-programme-inquiry/) look more informative, but on closer examination are rather depressing.

    The ORR's are huffily trying to justify their existence, and cite an explanation of how they assess Network Rail's efficiency (http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/19535/pr13-efficiency-assumptions-note-october-2015.pdf) against benchmarks. The trouble is that for the particular costs in question here, i.e. the estimated cost of enhancements in general and electrification in particular, they don't really have any benchmarks. They work mostly by comparison with NR's costs over time, and with other similar businesses. I don't think they ever had that for electrification, nor could have found any even if they had looked abroad for it.

    Then there's NR's own submission (http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/public-accounts-committee/network-rail-20142019-rail-investment-programme/written/24334.html) containing a programme to review and "improve" top-level management and relations with their customers (starting with DfT). One part of that looks relevant: "3. Cost planning, Estimating, Risk and Whole Life Costs (Executive Lead: Francis Paonessa)". I'm not sure its content is that much use, though. As to the rest - starting with "1. Clienting and Governing the Enhancements Portfolio" - oh dear. I'd like to add a package 8 to this programme: "Use of English". A short introduction to the importance of writing clear prose that can be understood by readers from a wide range of backgrounds.  Examples will be drawn from the Economist style guide and other sources of good practice. The objective is to prevent the future use of fashionable business (or other) jargon that has no well-defined meaning and serves primarily to prove the writer is up to date.

    It's probably pointless for the ORR to try to judge the accuracy of one of these engineering estimates as a number. With inside access (which I think the ORR do not have) one could check that the process is adequate - based on the best data, with inflation added where needed, and well-supported tolerance and risk values accompanying the costs right up the chain. These estimates need to be protected from self-opinionated management alteration, and from being used as bargaining counters in an ego conflict between macho senior managers of a political power struggle with or within government.

    I did rather like this, at the end of Mark Carne's introduction:
    Quote
    If it would be helpful for any committee members, my team would be proud to host you on a visit to see our railway works in action. This could be in your constituency or perhaps a visit to the Great Western Electrification Project.  Regrettably the best time to visit is in the middle of the night as this gives you a first-hand view of how most of our work has to be done. But if that is not possible, we would be very happy to arrange a suitable visit to fit with your schedule.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 21, 2015, 23:26:43
    The fashion these days is for benchmarking to look at efficiency.  This has the benefit for most regulators that it requires no engineering knowledge whatsoever. Most such regulators are the domain of economists not engineers.  If on the other hand an engineer had been asked to critique NR estimates, they might have asked how well the scope of the works was understood and what work had been done to confirm this. 

    If you do not know how many bridges will need to be rebuilt and whether they can be closed to road traffic for the duration or indeed whether demolition is to be permitted (leading to expensive track lowering) - If you are trusting in an electrification train but you do not know the conditions it will be piling into - Then how will you ever know the cost. 

    And just to put ensure that politicians are not exonerated - if you ask for an estimate of the cost at short notice how do you expect it to be robust.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 21, 2015, 23:50:32
    I did rather like this, at the end of Mark Carne's introduction:
    Quote
    If it would be helpful for any committee members, my team would be proud to host you on a visit to see our railway works in action. This could be in your constituency or perhaps a visit to the Great Western Electrification Project.  Regrettably the best time to visit is in the middle of the night as this gives you a first-hand view of how most of our work has to be done. But if that is not possible, we would be very happy to arrange a suitable visit to fit with your schedule.

    Yes, I think that's rather neat, too.  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on November 22, 2015, 08:48:38
    I did rather like this, at the end of Mark Carne's introduction:
    Quote
    If it would be helpful for any committee members, my team would be proud to host you on a visit to see our railway works in action. This could be in your constituency or perhaps a visit to the Great Western Electrification Project.  Regrettably the best time to visit is in the middle of the night as this gives you a first-hand view of how most of our work has to be done. But if that is not possible, we would be very happy to arrange a suitable visit to fit with your schedule.

    Yes, I think that's rather neat, too.  ;D

    I agree, I wonder if any will take him up on the offer, Christmas Day or Boxing Day would be a good choice if the MP's don't want to go out at night lots of work going on


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: PhilWakely on November 22, 2015, 09:14:00
    I agree, I wonder if any will take him up on the offer, Christmas Day or Boxing Day would be a good choice if the MP's don't want to go out at night lots of work going on

    Just think of the expenses  ;) :P :-X :-*


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 22, 2015, 10:06:45
    .....and just where does NR think its going to get the highly experienced staff it needs to deliver all of this? ::) :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 22, 2015, 11:34:43
    Something I learned a long time ago about politics is that politicians talk a lot. It is, of course, a prerequisite of being a politician at any level, if not 90% of the job description. Some talk because they feel they have something to say, others because they feel they have to say something. As I have begun to mature, however, I have realised that the office of chair of the Public Accounts Committee demands someone who is particularly fond of the sound of their own voice, especially since the telly cameras were allowed into their meetings. The previous incumbent (excumbent?), barking Barking MP Margaret Hodge, was an absolute star in this regard. The spectacle of some poor unfortunate executive from any corporate body, public or private, being wire-brushed, debagged and radished live on the BBC with highlights on the 6 o'clock news, is an unedifying one, yet strangely compelling. That Mrs Hodge was born too late to be of service to the Spanish Inquisition is a loss to history and to Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain - it would have been much more brutal and fun to watch. The new girl in town, Meg Helier, is shaping up nicely, and is clearly well-taught, in two senses of the phrase.

    The PAC's latter-day version of the 15th century interrogations do, however, serve to make sure that the public purse-strings are not loosened lightly, and that those who have access to such funds are held to account for them. Or do they?

    On Saturday Kitchen yesterday the special guest, BBC's dancing weather woman Carol Kirkwood (I would), was asked whether we would have snow for Christmas this year. "Ask me on Boxing Day", she answered. The point has been made earlier in this thread that the estimates for the electrification work were always likely to prove less than accurate to say the least, and it comes as no surprise to me to learn that the cost has spiralled. It is a long time since those estimates were drawn up, and the usual creep of inflation in material costs has taken its toll, though that alone could never explain the difference. The real cost will only be estimated with any degree of accuracy long after the first class 801 trundles into Swansea station.

    There are a number of possible reasons as to why the cost of the job was so inaccurately estimated by National Rail and DfT.

    • NR is a flawed outfit with weak management, and does not have the expertise to do this sort of work effectively
    • NR isn't weak, but realised at the time of producing estimated costs for the work that the real total would be unacceptable, both financially and politically, and deliberately under-estimated to ensure the project went ahead, safe in the knowledge that it would have to be completed once begun
    • DfT were culpable of one or both of these lapses
    • The actual work has proved much more complex than anticipated because of factors that should have been foreseen
    • The actual work has proved much more complex than anticipated because of factors that could not have been foreseen until work began
    • The actual work has proved much more complex than anticipated because the estimation process was deliberately kept light. This could be because the cost of finding the cost of every nut and bolt would have been horrendous instead of just enormous, money which could have ended up down the drain had the answer been too big to allow the project to continue
    • ORR is culpable for either not intervening when it should, or meddling when it shouldn't. (It seems in any case to be trying the old old method of trying to blame everybody else)
    • The whole idea of the move to an electric GWR has been lacking firm strategic direction at the higher political level for too long
    • Contractors have not performed as they promised
    Nothing I have read suggests that the PAC's machinations have gone any distance towards finding out which of these possible causes is at the root of the problem. Because of this, lessons for future electrification projects may not be learned from the mistakes of this one.The issues may have been resolved behind closed doors, in which poor old Mark Carne has been figuratively dragged through the streets on a hurdle purely for public appeasement.

    His invitation to the committee to pop along at 3am on Christmas Morning to play choo-choo is a good idea, even if the words used came across as a a bit fawning. When I was flying at Filton, a local protest group sprang up in Henbury, half a mile or so off the end of runway 27. They, or at least their chairman, complained noisily and unnecessarily about the perceived high likelihood of a light aircraft coming down in their streets, destroying many houses and killing hundreds. When the noise became unbearable, we invited the chairman to come along to see for himself the safety procedures involved, both prior to take off and on departure from the runway, to keep him and his members safe. He was shown maps and diagrams, given explanations, then taken for a demonstration ride by the chief flying instructor, during which he got to have a go at driving. Problem solved, although I don't think the PAC could be bought off in the same way. Not while there is a chance to humiliate somebody who is paid more than they are, anyway.

    My two penn'orth? Politics has got in the way, although without politics we would be lucky to still have a railway, let alone an electrified one. The job should have been finished more than 30 years ago, but the then government blinked, took fright, and cancelled. NR has not covered itself with glory, but the enormity of the task of upgrading hundreds of miles of 19th century (and still live) railway is difficult to overstate. DfT is the pair of handcuffs that links the NR to the government. It isn't brilliant at the job, but what do you expect from the civil service? ORR is busy getting on with finding new things to regulate , to justify its existence. Its motto could be a Cartesian "Tempero, ergo sum". Whatever happens, the dust will settle, and time will almost certainly tell that the correct result was obtained in the end. This will prove over decades to have been a more cost-effective way of keeping people moving en masse than any alternative that is currently feasible.

    And I'm not perfect, before you ask.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 22, 2015, 11:46:19
    I did rather like this, at the end of Mark Carne's introduction:
    Quote
    If it would be helpful for any committee members, my team would be proud to host you on a visit to see our railway works in action. This could be in your constituency or perhaps a visit to the Great Western Electrification Project.  Regrettably the best time to visit is in the middle of the night as this gives you a first-hand view of how most of our work has to be done. But if that is not possible, we would be very happy to arrange a suitable visit to fit with your schedule.

    Yes, I think that's rather neat, too.  ;D

    I agree, I wonder if any will take him up on the offer, Christmas Day or Boxing Day would be a good choice if the MP's don't want to go out at night lots of work going on

    I really hope an MP does take him up on his offer, and on Christmas Day or Boxing Day. Insisting he and his top team come along too. That might make him think twice about making glib suggestions in the future.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 22, 2015, 11:54:50

    The Thameslink infrastructure has a complex are of dual voltage provision between Farringdon and City T/L, and that has also been engineered to allow for changeover without stopping, even though all services do stop anyway.

    Paul

    The Thameslink Dual Electrified Area does not do an on the move change over, there is no need in fact. 

    I did write that all services stop anyway, however the original Thameslink infrastructure and train specifications published by DfT both required changeover on the move to be made possible, long before the 700s were even ordered, and before the current TOC was in place.  I would suggest that the OHLE equipment has probably been engineered to allow this, even though from what you have explained, it is pretty much redundant.

    However the main reason for mentioning Thameslink was to show that the concept of changeover on the move was not without precedent...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 22, 2015, 12:23:29
    The actual work has proved much more complex than anticipated because the estimation process was deliberately kept light. This could be because the cost of finding the cost of every nut and bolt would have been horrendous instead of just enormous, money which could have ended up down the drain had the answer been too big to allow the project to continue

    I think this encapsulates very well what I was trying to say.  If you wanted  robust estimate you would have had to have to have done a feasibility on the method of construction of each bridge and then liaised with the relevant local authority and engaged with the public to establish what method of working might be acceptable. 

    DfT is the pair of handcuffs that links the NR to the government. It isn't brilliant at the job, but what do you expect from the civil service?

    A civil service where policy staff actually stayed in the same department long enough to learn something about the subject and where having some people with technical skills is considered necessary, might have done a better job. 

    ORR is busy getting on with finding new things to regulate , to justify its existence.

    The same comment about technical skills.  Asking questions rather just benchmarking. Though in their defence they did not sign off on the scheme  because they knew the data was not there - instead they did this curious half way house of signing off a budget then getting NR to come back with more information later.  Presumably this was because saying it was not going to happen was not politically acceptable. So perhaps the finger really needs to point back at DfT - though Ministers rather than Civil Servants. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 22, 2015, 12:27:36

    A civil service where policy staff actually stayed in the same department long enough to learn something about the subject and where having some people with technical skills is considered necessary, might have done a better job. 

    Very true. I am a civil servant. Though I have done many different jobs, they have all been within the same department, and I have acquired a depth of knowledge and experience that is hard to find elsewhere. Which is why I am retiring soon.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 22, 2015, 15:56:41
    When the noise became unbearable, we invited the chairman to come along to see for himself ...

    That approach stood out for me as a reminder of the way this forum sometimes works ... helping to inform 'both ways', by informing understand, and by understanding being much less concerned,  more appreciate, and more helpful in feedback for the common good  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Jason on November 26, 2015, 12:28:17
    Green Park station blow as electrification delayed until after 2019

    http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-blow-electrification-10504284 (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-blow-electrification-10504284)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 26, 2015, 23:14:13
    Thanks for posting that update, Jason.  ;)

    Unfortunately, as so often happens whenever I catch such headlines, I think it's referring to Bath.  Sorry.  :-[


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 27, 2015, 07:45:36
    Thanks for posting that update, Jason.  ;)

    Unfortunately, as so often happens whenever I catch such headlines, I think it's referring to Bath.  Sorry.  :-[


    ???????????


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on November 27, 2015, 08:20:16
    For lovers of the S&D, there's only one Green Park station. Ever.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 27, 2015, 08:58:36
    For lovers of the S&D, there's only one Green Park station. Ever.

    Where Piccadilly and Victoria come together with a blooming long walk between them, as I remember from my yoof  ;) - but I think there's more to it these days.   Nearest tube for HM on her way home to Buck House - at least the nicest walk home for her.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on November 27, 2015, 09:51:35
    Green Park station blow as electrification delayed until after 2019

    http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-blow-electrification-10504284 (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-blow-electrification-10504284)

    Having worked at Green Park for a few years in the past, this is is a considerable blow to the area.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 27, 2015, 10:49:39
    Unfortunately, as so often happens whenever I catch such headlines, I think it's referring to Bath.  Sorry.  :-[

    ???????????

    Sorry, ellendune, for my rather oblique reference: I was thinking of the old Green Park station in Bath - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_Green_Park_railway_station  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 27, 2015, 10:50:08
    Thanks for posting that update, Jason.  ;)

    Unfortunately, as so often happens whenever I catch such headlines, I think it's referring to Bath.  Sorry.  :-[
    Me too! It's always a bit of a puzzler.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 27, 2015, 17:36:50
    Green Park station blow as electrification delayed until after 2019

    http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-blow-electrification-10504284 (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-blow-electrification-10504284)
    Err, isn't that a 158 in the picture used to illustrate that article? If the services are to be provided by 158s, why is lack of electrification a problem?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 01, 2015, 12:45:54
    Bath drop in session today ...

    1 December 2015 16:00 - 18:30   Brunswick Room, Guildhall, Bath, BA1 5AW

    I had an email about this a couple of weeks ago, followed by a "recall" so I wondered if the session had been cancelled.   However, I've just done a search and found it's still on the meeting list at

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/banes/

    and that page was "updated 30th November2015" so it's declared as being up to date.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Cruithne3753 on December 02, 2015, 18:58:39
    I've noticed they've got wires up at the Stoke Gifford depot, just seem to be single wires, not the full catenary.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 02, 2015, 19:56:43
    I've noticed they've got wires up at the Stoke Gifford depot, just seem to be single wires, not the full catenary.

    Depots use what is called a "trolley wire" system it is just a single wire usually fixed tension.  The trolley wire is used in depots because of the low speeds in depots; it is simpler system and requires less maintenance than catenary system


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on December 02, 2015, 23:01:30
    As the trains are supposed to enter under diesel power, the reduced standard seems acceptable.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on December 03, 2015, 08:10:59
    I thought they were supposed to use electric power at Stoke Gifford? Anyway the trolley wire OLE is also installed at the Reading Depot and is pretty standard at electrified depots elsewhere where speeds are low and a simpler system will suffice.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on December 03, 2015, 09:32:14
    Are electric trains in depots ever able to move under electric power supplied from a plugged in cable (ie with the pan down)?  or would such a system be too low power to work?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 03, 2015, 11:02:36
    Are electric trains in depots ever able to move under electric power supplied from a plugged in cable

    Errrrrrrr ... isn't that a bit difficult?   As the train moves away from the socket, it pulls the plug out, and to move any great distance there are going to need to be some very long cables.    As a layman, it sounds reasonable for turning wheels to get another bit to the top for attention, but not for relocating trains.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on December 03, 2015, 11:16:38
    Are electric trains in depots ever able to move under electric power supplied from a plugged in cable

    Errrrrrrr ... isn't that a bit difficult?   As the train moves away from the socket, it pulls the plug out, and to move any great distance there are going to need to be some very long cables.    As a layman, it sounds reasonable for turning wheels to get another bit to the top for attention, but not for relocating trains.

    DC third rail, and LU fourth rail, systems do not normally extend through shed maintenance roads, at the speeds the trains enter they run until nearly 'off the end' of the external DC and then get plugged into a shore traction power system that is fed by cables from trolleys at roof level, that trolley can then move with the train.  But the trains only need to move the last few yards using this power, and on leaving they only have to move until the first shoe is in contact with the normal third rail outside the shed. On most current DC units the main risk to personnel is that the pick up shoes are always live throughout the train when ever there is traction power on, the shoes have fuses but are not individually switched.

    You cannot safely provide 25kV down a portable plug and socket system though, so I think in AC sheds the solution is just to run in and then isolate the OHLE prior to roof access, using key access systems.  Sometimes the depot power is supplied through a conductor bar system that can be moved out of the way to give better roof access.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 03, 2015, 11:19:17
    Errrrrrrr ... isn't that a bit difficult?   As the train moves away from the socket, it pulls the plug out, and to move any great distance there are going to need to be some very long cables. 

    Well, it can be done if you put your mind to it. Not long ago, when this country had an iron ore industry, there was a huge Ransomes and Rapier electric walking dragline (called "Sundew" - the biggest in the world in its day) that was powered via a long cable from a fixed substation. I came across it as an example on a management course - it was more memorable than the rest of the course. The project we looked at was its famous cross-country walk in 197 (http://www.northantstelegraph.co.uk/news/community/retro/retro-sundew-s-epic-walk-to-corby-1-5967745)4 to get 13 miles to a new quarry near Corby.

    Anyway, I can't find its power rating just now, but its cable (11 kV?) needed a Scammel tractor to drag it around the quarry, or across the fields, following the dragline.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on December 03, 2015, 11:23:15
    Are electric trains in depots ever able to move under electric power supplied from a plugged in cable (ie with the pan down)?  or would such a system be too low power to work?

    I do not see why it could not be done, but AFAIK it never is these days. The length of cable would be limited by cost and weight, it would be a trip hazard if at floor level, and the risk of mishap if driving beyond the limit of cable length.
    If a standard industrial supply was used, say 400 volts 3 phase, then a converter on the train would be needed thereby adding weight and complexity.

    IIRC a plug in trailing cable WAS used in the distant past to power DC EMUs in depots, but not these days. I think that the voltage was a then fairly standard 250 volts DC, sufficient to power 750 volt DC traction equipment at much reduced power.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 03, 2015, 18:17:32
    Are electric trains in depots ever able to move under electric power supplied from a plugged in cable

    Errrrrrrr ... isn't that a bit difficult?   As the train moves away from the socket, it pulls the plug out, and to move any great distance there are going to need to be some very long cables.    As a layman, it sounds reasonable for turning wheels to get another bit to the top for attention, but not for relocating trains.

    All third rail traction maintenance sheds have a 750V dc trolley wire system (note this is different to the 25kV discussed above) with a cable with a plug that goes into the unit, the unit is then able to creep out of the shed, it is not normally required to enter the shed.  The trolley wire can also be used to power the unit to aid fault finding.  Once the unit is sufficiently out of the shed and the shoes are on the con rail the plug can be removed. For long units 8s and 12s two trolley wire cable are plugged in.  The trolley wire has contactor which has an inter-lock key that is part of the depot safety system (de-railers and signals etc)

    Modern dc traction maintenance sheds have the running rails earthed to the depots main earth terminal this is to ensure there is no greater than 25V touch potential; the normal main line dc the running rails are earth free (they are earthy but not directly connected to the general mass of the earth) this means all modern sheds need their own dedicated rectifiers dc switchgear and a switched buffer zone on the shed approach road.

    For 25kV maintenance sheds most if not all roads are wired at 25kV.  There is a dedicated switch for each road which isolates the 25kV and applies an earth to the OLE on that road, the OLE switch has an inter-lock key that is part of the depot safety system (de-railers and signals etc) releases gates to access platforms, overhead hoists etc



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Cruithne3753 on December 06, 2015, 00:59:29
    I've noticed they've got wires up at the Stoke Gifford depot, just seem to be single wires, not the full catenary.

    Depots use what is called a "trolley wire" system it is just a single wire usually fixed tension.  The trolley wire is used in depots because of the low speeds in depots; it is simpler system and requires less maintenance than catenary system

    From where I am (I work at the NHS blood centre just to the West of the new depot) it looks like it's on the curve just South of Patchway... part of the main line?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 06, 2015, 07:50:22
    I've noticed they've got wires up at the Stoke Gifford depot, just seem to be single wires, not the full catenary.

    Depots use what is called a "trolley wire" system it is just a single wire usually fixed tension.  The trolley wire is used in depots because of the low speeds in depots; it is simpler system and requires less maintenance than catenary system

    From where I am (I work at the NHS blood centre just to the West of the new depot) it looks like it's on the curve just South of Patchway... part of the main line?

    Depots have things called head shunts these will often run parallel to the main running lines, it could also be one of the depot reception roads both these are low speed so can use simple OLE system such as a trolley wire


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on December 07, 2015, 10:05:19
    Wow.  Thanks for everyone's input.  Rather typical of this forum, ask a simple question and learn more than you imagined.

    Thanks


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 08, 2015, 02:46:45
    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/residents-invited-to-drop-in-event-to-find-out-more-about-electrification-of-the-great-western-main-line-through-pilning?

    Quote
    Residents invited to drop-in event to find out more about electrification of the Great Western Main Line through Pilning

    Pilning residents are invited to attend a drop-in event to find out more about the work taking place in their area to prepare the Great Western Main Line for the arrival of a new fleet of electric trains.

    The event will take place between 3.30pm and 6.30pm on Thursday, December 17 at the Mafeking Hall, Redwick Road, Pilning. Members of the Network Rail project team will be on hand throughout to explain the plans and to answer any questions.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rower40 on December 08, 2015, 10:40:43
    Does this mean there'll be piling in Pilning?

    (Will they be using Tubular steel in Oldfield Park?)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on December 08, 2015, 12:32:56
     ;D  :D Curiously enough, someone was talking about you, Rower, when one Ursus maritimus stopped us all near a railway bridge somewhere in the Greater West Midlands Conurbation.


    As for Pilning, it's ironic that a place with two trains a weeks gets an electrification event, but it's just the sort of place that would have a Mafeking Hall. Goes with the Indian Orthodox Church! In a way...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 09, 2015, 19:04:21
    ;D  :D Curiously enough, someone was talking about you, Rower, when one Ursus maritimus stopped us all near a railway bridge somewhere in the Greater West Midlands Conurbation.


    As for Pilning, it's ironic that a place with two trains a weeks gets an electrification event, but it's just the sort of place that would have a Mafeking Hall. Goes with the Indian Orthodox Church! In a way...

    Maybe the piles at Piling will by Boers  unless of course Mafeking get relived  ;D  Mafeking did have an earlier version of the "orange army" - From his headquarters, the British commander directed Major Alick Godley and B Squadron (Protectorate Regiment) to smother the attack and dispatched D Squadron, some armed railway employees and others to help.  Which given the hostility of some of the modern day "customers" many railwayman wishes they still were armed ;D :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 09, 2015, 21:58:55
    Tasers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser) for train managers - now there's an idea!  :o ::) ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on December 09, 2015, 22:09:40
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUC9FZ2GEfc


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Jason on December 14, 2015, 13:07:15
    http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-letter-demands-10595790 (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-letter-demands-10595790)

    Reading councillor Tony Page wants Network Rail and the secretary of state for transport to confirm that trains will stop at Green Park Station when it opens.

    Councillor Tony Page , lead councillor for strategic environment, planning and transport has written a letter to chairman of Network Rail Peter Hendy and transport secretary Patrick McGloughlin.

    In November, the Hendy Report meant Network Rail announced that the installation of an electrified railway line will be pushed back until sometime between 2019 and 2024 .

    Without the electrification, trains may not be able to stop at the station when it opens in 2018 because of timetabling conflicts with other stations on the line.

    However, Network Rail has stated that an additional diesel service could operate on the line.

    Cllr Page was angered about the delay, as he has described the station as "a key piece of regional and local infrastructure."

    The station would enable passengers to access Green Park business park and the Madejski Stadium as well as the planned Royal Elm Park development.

    His letter to Peter Hendy reads: "We have invested substantial resource in developing the scheme to date and the local community and businesses are fully expecting the station to open in December 2018.

    "The council, Thames Valley Berkshire LEP and the Berkshire Local Transport Body have agreed the station remains a priority for investment through the Local Growth Fund and that we should continue to progress the scheme in line with the agreed programme.

    "Therefore, as previously requested, could you please confirm that the Department for Transport and Network Rail will ensure that the necessary rolling stock resource is both made available and fully funded to allow the station to open in December 2018 with a diesel operation until electrification on the line."

    The letter continues: "Reading Green Park Station is a key piece of regional and local infrastructure, which will achieve central government's objectives of promoting economic growth, delivering much needed housing provision, unlocking significant private sector investment and enabling access to the area by sustainable transport.

    "I hope you and ministers would agree it is essential to deliver a solution that enables trains to serve the station from the first day it opens in December 2018."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 14, 2015, 13:35:52
    Wasn't there a delay by the council in getting its funding together for their project? And now he's complaining about someone else's? he has a cheek....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on December 14, 2015, 15:42:26
    Tasers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser) for train managers - now there's an idea!  :o ::) ;D

    Didn't you hear? Electrification has been delayed!!!  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Cruithne3753 on December 14, 2015, 19:00:17
    Does this mean there'll be piling in Pilning?

    (Will they be using Tubular steel in Oldfield Park?)

    Moaybe you should ask Ponting of Ponting Punting... https://youtu.be/r56wlRsHric


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on December 14, 2015, 20:38:51
    http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-letter-demands-10595790 (http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/reading-berkshire-news/green-park-station-letter-demands-10595790)

    Quote
    Reading councillor Tony Page wants Network Rail and the secretary of state for transport to confirm that trains will stop at Green Park Station when it opens.

    Surely if trains don't call there it won't have opened. So no problem  ???


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on December 27, 2015, 18:44:40
    Does anyone know what is planned for Steventon High Street Bridge.  The website has not been updated for over a year and if they haven't made a decision yet on what to do it will surely delay the project. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on December 28, 2015, 14:48:57
    The wires are up :)!

    Over Christmas the O/H has been slung over the Up and Down Mains at around milepost 22.25 (between Burnham and Taplow) which is right by my house.

    They were bright and shiny in the sun this morning when I was trimming the fast growing ??? shrubs in the front garden.

    Mileage corrected 22.5 is Taplow station wires stop short of station.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on December 28, 2015, 14:53:11
    The wires are up :)!

    Over Christmas the O/H has been slung over the Up and Down Mains at around milepost 22.5 (between Burnham and Taplow) which is right by my house.

    They were bright and shiny in the sun this morning when I was trimming the fast growing ??? shrubs in the front garden.



    Thanks for the update. Given that there is probably no power flowing through the cables at the moment :) is there a potential risk for them being stolen and sold as scrap?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on December 28, 2015, 15:33:02
    The wires may have been energised for test purposes of course, though this does deter theft to an extent.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on December 28, 2015, 16:01:10
    Further update just a caught road rail cherry picker finishing off Up Relief O/H by means of hitting the drop wire connections with a spanner! plus fixing return wire. They hope to be finished today testing tomorrow All four lines around 1400 yards!



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on December 28, 2015, 16:56:02
    The wires are up :)!

    Over Christmas the O/H has been slung over the Up and Down Mains at around milepost 22.5 (between Burnham and Taplow) which is right by my house.

    They were bright and shiny in the sun this morning when I was trimming the fast growing ??? shrubs in the front garden.



    Thanks for the update. Given that there is probably no power flowing through the cables at the moment :) is there a potential risk for them being stolen and sold as scrap?

    That's a very good point!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on December 28, 2015, 17:01:56
    Does anyone know what is planned for Steventon High Street Bridge.  The website has not been updated for over a year and if they haven't made a decision yet on what to do it will surely delay the project. 

    I haven't heard anything officially but my understanding is that the bridge will not be replaced but the track will be lowered in the area beneath it. This will necessitate the closure of Stocks Lane crossing as there would be too great a change in contact wire height between under the High St bridge and the crossing in order to maintain a minimum safe clearance at the latter (i.e. presumably there is a need to avoid excessive pantograph bounce and associated arcing at 125mph). However I believe The Causeway crossing will remain open.

    Whilst I would not consider the Steventon Parish Council website an authoritative source on the subject (and the page is undated), I have heard this from elsewhere:

    http://www.steventon.info/Railway.html

    I have no idea when this work is planned but when I hear more I will post about it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 28, 2015, 17:45:23
    Further update just a caught road rail cherry picker finishing off Up Relief O/H by means of hitting the drop wire connections with a spanner! plus fixing return wire. They hope to be finished today testing tomorrow All four lines around 1400 yards!



    The testing will be heights & staggers and  "panning" I doubt section proving will be done as this is done at the time of commissioning.  Anti theft measures will be in place which could prove lethal if anyone tries to nick the wire


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on December 29, 2015, 14:17:28
    The wires are up :)!

    Over Christmas the O/H has been slung over the Up and Down Mains at around milepost 22.5 (between Burnham and Taplow) which is right by my house.

    They were bright and shiny in the sun this morning when I was trimming the fast growing ??? shrubs in the front garden.



    Thanks for the update. Given that there is probably no power flowing through the cables at the moment :) is there a potential risk for them being stolen and sold as scrap?

    They may well be energised at least some of the time.  Either as part of testing or as a theft deterrent.  There are of course thieves who have attempted to steal energised cable before (and either killed or injured themselves as a result) so even fully energised cable is at some risk of theft.  Hopefully, the current low scrap prices and the new regulations regarding sales to scrap yards have reduced the theft risk.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on December 29, 2015, 18:25:23
    Over Christmas the O/H has been slung over the Up and Down Mains ... right by my house.

    They were bright and shiny in the sun this morning when I was trimming the fast growing ??? shrubs in the front garden.

    I do hope that you didn't allow any unwelcome leaves to fall onto the tracks, eightf48544?  :P ::) ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on December 30, 2015, 11:13:08
    All safely in the green bin. It's my garden railway that suffers from leaves on line!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 05, 2016, 13:54:39
    From BBC Berkshire News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-35231278):
    Quote
    Goring Gap 'ugly' rail gantries go to consultation
    (http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/898C/production/_86221253_1.jpg)
    Campaigners describe the gantries near Goring Gap as "huge metal goalposts"

    New metal gantries criticised by residents as "ruining" an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty are to be scrutinised by Network Rail.

    Installed near Goring Gap in the Chilterns, they are the latest step in the electrification of the Great Western Railway.

    Resident Emreys Barrell described them as like "something out of War of the Worlds striding across the landscape".

    Network Rail said a consultation would happen "as early as possible".

    The rail operator is undertaking a 10-year modernisation programme on the line at a cost of up to ^1.74bn.

    This includes upgrades to stations and electrification of parts of the route, including the section between Reading and Didcot, Oxfordshire.
    'They stare at you'

    In the Autumn it ran a series of drop-in events with information about the current look of the overhead line equipment, other designs considered and options for possible "mitigation measures".

    Mr Barrell said they looked "dreadful", "huge", and "obtrusive".

    "They stare at you in the face. A very simple camouflage would be just to paint them green. Dark green would at least make them look like they somehow blend into the background rather than standing out and staring at you.

    "They are shining bright silver. They are galvanised steel, completely inappropriate for the background of the Goring Gap."

    Annette Alport said the "horrendous" gantries "totally altered the landscape"

    "The beautiful Goring Gap, now when you drive in, looks like the entrance to Paddington Station," she added.

    A Network Rail spokesman said: "This consultation will be based on the feedback we received at our first drop-in event and on possible alternative designs, which are currently being commissioned, for the overhead line equipment.

    "We are working with both the Chilterns and North Wessex Downs Conservation Boards and will seek their feedback on any proposed alternative designs."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 05, 2016, 14:22:15
    (http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/898C/production/_86221253_1.jpg)

    ..snipped..
    Credit for Picture goes to the BBC Berkshire News web pages

    I often get annoyed by what I refer to as "Nimby residents" and I don't know exactly where that picture was taken along the route BUT to me this is one of the major downsides of electrification - the fact that what may have been an unspoilt view becomes more industrialised with the erection of the OLE equipment.

    So if (for example) I had a property on the northern side of the GWML with a view down to the Thames and these appeared in my line of sight I don't think I would be that favourable!



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on January 05, 2016, 14:31:31
    Quote
    Resident Emreys Barrell

    Emrhys. He was my boss about 15 years ago!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 05, 2016, 14:47:25
    (http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/898C/production/_86221253_1.jpg)

    ..snipped..
    Credit for Picture goes to the BBC Berkshire News web pages

    I often get annoyed by what I refer to as "Nimby residents" and I don't know exactly where that picture was taken along the route BUT to me this is one of the major downsides of electrification - the fact that what may have been an unspoilt view becomes more industrialised with the erection of the OLE equipment.

    So if (for example) I had a property on the northern side of the GWML with a view down to the Thames and these appeared in my line of sight I don't think I would be that favourable!



    Were there any other options? I guess form follows function - are there any less obtrusive gantries? (...couldn't they paint them green?, I think GWR have a few pots of green paint lying around!)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 05, 2016, 14:51:14

    I often get annoyed by what I refer to as "Nimby residents" and I don't know exactly where that picture was taken along the route BUT to me this is one of the major downsides of electrification - the fact that what may have been an unspoilt view becomes more industrialised with the erection of the OLE equipment.

    So if (for example) I had a property on the northern side of the GWML with a view down to the Thames and these appeared in my line of sight I don't think I would be that favourable!

    Were there any other options? I guess form follows function - are there any less obtrusive gantries? (...couldn't they paint them green?, I think GWR have a few pots of green paint lying around!)

    Well, I tried to be careful about my wording but my feeling is they are a necessary by product of OLE. As for your suggestion of painting them GWR green (other shades are available) I'm guessing unless they were anodised then there would be on going maintenance issues



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on January 05, 2016, 15:07:42
    Well they'd only need to paint them once...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on January 05, 2016, 15:14:54
    Were there any other options? I guess form follows function - are there any less obtrusive gantries? (...couldn't they paint them green?, I think GWR have a few pots of green paint lying around!)

    Thats why I asked about 3rd rail rather than OHLE back near the start of this process - for this very reason. It was explained the pro's and con's (Electric Train explained it if I recall). I must admit, I never realised the gantries were so close (in distance) to one another, but then I never had any experience of electrified railways - the first time I went into Paddington after about 15 years of not travelling there, I was shocked how it looked with all the Heathrow Express stuff from Hayes onwards!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on January 05, 2016, 15:22:14
    Well, I tried to be careful about my wording but my feeling is they are a necessary by product of OLE. As for your suggestion of painting them GWR green (other shades are available) I'm guessing unless they were anodised then there would be on going maintenance issues

    They don't even need to be green. Outside of South Stoke (if I recall) there is one that has masts that are 3/4 silver, and the top and the signal gantry is black. Even with the huge black signal boxes stuck on top it doesn't stand out anywhere near as much as the silver parts.

    I noticed this morning they now have the supports in place on the Gatehampton bridge, so I see the RAG's efforts of reporting NR to the police for disturbing the nesting barn owls (the ones nesting less than a meter from IC125 traffic rattling past all day long), obviously did not work.

    One thing that surprised me are the gantries by Goring bridge (on the station side) - they seem scarily close to the pavement along that part!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bob_Blakey on January 05, 2016, 15:26:35
    I wonder if Mr. Barrell and his mates had anything to say about the much more obtrusive electricity supply pylons, which also appear in the published images, when they were erected.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 05, 2016, 15:30:24

    They don't even need to be green. Outside of South Stoke (if I recall) there is one that has masts that are 3/4 silver, and the top and the signal gantry is black. Even with the huge black signal boxes stuck on top it doesn't stand out anywhere near as much as the silver parts.


    I seem to remember there are some mobile phone masts in West Berkshire that have been painted to make them less intrusive (and they are on the edge of a forest from memory)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 05, 2016, 16:34:24
    From the above linked article:
    Quote
    A Network Rail spokesman said: "This consultation will be based on the feedback we received at our first drop-in event and on possible alternative designs, which are currently being commissioned, for the overhead line equipment.

    "We are working with both the Chilterns and North Wessex Downs Conservation Boards and will seek their feedback on any proposed alternative designs."

    Being polite?   There's no way now these gantries are going to be replaced with something different.  I suggest all that will be done at this stage is to try and camouflage or hide things at some specific locations.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on January 05, 2016, 16:58:09
    Quote
    I seem to remember there are some mobile phone masts in West Berkshire that have been painted to make them less intrusive (and they are on the edge of a forest from memory)

    Do you mean the ones disguised as pine trees by the M4 at Yattendon? Quite well done...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 05, 2016, 17:01:09
    Quote
    I seem to remember there are some mobile phone masts in West Berkshire that have been painted to make them less intrusive (and they are on the edge of a forest from memory)

    Do you mean the ones disguised as pine trees by the M4 at Yattendon? Quite well done...

    Those are the ones...when they were first planted there were reports of drivers on the M4 having near misses because they were distracted trying to spot them!



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on January 05, 2016, 17:28:46
    Quote
    They are shining bright silver. They are galvanised steel

    They will however weather quite rapidly to a fairly unobtrusive flat, dull grey colour.

    Painting surely is a bad option as it will need to be maintained and is likely to contribute to future corrosion problems if the paint isn't 100% bonded to its substrate.

    I guess certain parts of the home counties were always going to produce issues like this!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on January 05, 2016, 17:33:40
    I'm not sure if anyone on here's old enough to remember it  ;D but I understand that in Mr Brunel's day when the railway was being built, there were some pretty strong objections to certain proposals / structures ... and indeed some changes.   Yet these days, so much that would have been regarded as a major industrial-style change to the landscape has metamorphosed into a celebrated eloquence, and some of the things done to beautify are classified as "follies".

    Today's engineering works may become tomorrow's celebrated beauty, and today's masts hidden as trees may become tomorrow's follies.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 05, 2016, 18:37:50
    I'm not sure if anyone on here's old enough to remember it  ;D but I understand that in Mr Brunel's day when the railway was being built, there were some pretty strong objections to certain proposals / structures ... and indeed some changes.   Yet these days, so much that would have been regarded as a major industrial-style change to the landscape has metamorphosed into a celebrated eloquence, and some of the things done to beautify are classified as "follies".

    Today's engineering works may become tomorrow's celebrated beauty, and today's masts hidden as trees may become tomorrow's follies.

    I hardly think you can compare a few steel gantries to Box Tunnel or the line along the coast in Dawlish, and if we're around long enough to hear the former described as a "celebrated beauty" I will happily buy you beer all evening before eating my hat!!!  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 05, 2016, 19:05:29
    ...before eating my hat!!!  ;D

    A stovepipe one presumably?   ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: dviner on January 05, 2016, 20:42:01
    Of course, to maintain an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, we really need to get rid of all of the man-made monstrosities that detract from the natural landscape - the roads and houses.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on January 05, 2016, 21:33:51
    Of course, to maintain an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, we really need to get rid of all of the man-made monstrosities that detract from the natural landscape - the roads and houses.

    No only the modern ones (say post 1800) and you could just restore the roads to cart tracks. Surely that would be the landscape that was to be preserved. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on January 05, 2016, 21:50:11
    At the risk of being slightly provocative, it had never even occurred to me in many years of travelling to and from London that I was indeed passing through an AONB. Indeed, I've not even given it a second glance.  Whereas Dawlish, lots of the Cornish main line, the Lune Gorge, etc, etc....



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 05, 2016, 22:17:45
    Those gantries are a lot less intrusive than the 9 110m tall wind turbines being built a few miles from my (rural) abode. In a part of Devon where you would struggle to get permission to build a kennel for the Jack Russell, 18 huge pools of concrete are being laid into the slow draining culm that soaks up the rain and releases it slowly, or at least used to. The good people living by the new gantries will at least be able to take consolation in the knowledge that they will do some good, and not just line a few pockets with subsidies (though doubtless some of that will still happen).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: dviner on January 05, 2016, 22:29:28
    Of course, to maintain an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, we really need to get rid of all of the man-made monstrosities that detract from the natural landscape - the roads and houses.

    No only the modern ones (say post 1800) and you could just restore the roads to cart tracks. Surely that would be the landscape that was to be preserved. 

    Nope, unless you can prove that the thatch on the cottage was placed there by the wind, and the walls were the result of sedimentary rock formation, you're out of luck.

    Cart tracks - you must be kidding.

     ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on January 05, 2016, 23:03:02
    Of course, to maintain an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, we really need to get rid of all of the man-made monstrosities that detract from the natural landscape - the roads and houses.

    Yes but what about the fields ? if one looks back far enough, most of England was covered in dense forest, until the discovery of agriculture !
    The heritage industry never seem very clear as to what era they are seeking to restore/return to/preserve.
    Prehistoric, complete with dinosaurs
    stone age
    iron age
    Ancient Roman
    Medieval
    Early industrial revolution
    Victorian
    Pre ww1
    Between the wars
    Just post ww2
    1960s
    1970s
    1980s
    1990s


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 06, 2016, 05:47:15
    I don't think anyone (with the possible exception of Jeremy Corbyn/the RMT/ASLEF) is seriously suggesting a return to a medieval idyll/or a time when dinosaurs walked the Earth, just that perhaps a little more thought could have been given to the surrounding environment when these gantries were designed/chosen?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on January 06, 2016, 08:11:47
    I don't think anyone (with the possible exception of Jeremy Corbyn/the RMT/ASLEF) is seriously suggesting a return to a medieval idyll/or a time when dinosaurs walked the Earth, just that perhaps a little more thought could have been given to the surrounding environment when these gantries were designed/chosen?

    I think I read somewhere that the gantries they're using are of a design that's rather like a Meccano  set - lots of standard parts that bolt together differently to suit the location / needs of each gantry.  And I recall that was said to make the electrification works a lot easier, cheaper and faster rather than having to do a 'special' at each location.  It struck me, though, that this could mean a certain amount of excess / needless metalwork providing attachment points for things not attached, and perhaps rather chunkier / heavier elements than were always needed as it would have to be manufactured to match worst case use scenario.   

    Did I get this right, or was I having a "funny" dream??


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 06, 2016, 08:23:16
    I don't think anyone (with the possible exception of Jeremy Corbyn/the RMT/ASLEF) is seriously suggesting a return to a medieval idyll/or a time when dinosaurs walked the Earth, just that perhaps a little more thought could have been given to the surrounding environment when these gantries were designed/chosen?

    I think I read somewhere that the gantries they're using are of a design that's rather like a Meccano  set - lots of standard parts that bolt together differently to suit the location / needs of each gantry.  And I recall that was said to make the electrification works a lot easier, cheaper and faster rather than having to do a 'special' at each location.  It struck me, though, that this could mean a certain amount of excess / needless metalwork providing attachment points for things not attached, and perhaps rather chunkier / heavier elements than were always needed as it would have to be manufactured to match worst case use scenario.   

    Did I get this right, or was I having a "funny" dream??

    ..........far be it from anyone else to pass judgement on whether a dream about railway gantries constitutes "funny"...........I guess it depends on what you normally dream about?   ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on January 06, 2016, 08:56:55
    I think I read somewhere that the gantries they're using are of a design that's rather like a Meccano  set - lots of standard parts that bolt together differently to suit the location / needs of each gantry.  And I recall that was said to make the electrification works a lot easier, cheaper and faster rather than having to do a 'special' at each location.  It struck me, though, that this could mean a certain amount of excess / needless metalwork providing attachment points for things not attached, and perhaps rather chunkier / heavier elements than were always needed as it would have to be manufactured to match worst case use scenario.   

    Did I get this right, or was I having a "funny" dream??

    The NR Series 1 25kv overhead electrification system is indeed designed as a kit of parts that can be selected to make up what is required at each site.  So far, in my travels around, I have not noted any bespoke components.  Personally, I don't think its that bad compared with some of the 1950s designs used for the 1500v DC overhead electrification schemes (as used on the Woodhead and original Great Eastern schemes).

    Perhaps ET can respond in a bit more detail?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on January 06, 2016, 09:29:49
    I don't think anyone (with the possible exception of Jeremy Corbyn/the RMT/ASLEF) is seriously suggesting a return to a medieval idyll/or a time when dinosaurs walked the Earth, just that perhaps a little more thought could have been given to the surrounding environment when these gantries were designed/chosen?

    This issue, ultimately, is all of NR's own making. They have freely and openly admitted they did not follow the rules for the development through an AONB, so now they are getting jumped on.

    Those complaining (RAG and both the conservation boards) are just as bad and equally to blame. Rather than engaging with NR at the start to ensure the rules were being followed, they waited until structures were going up and then kicked off about it. Heck the two conservation boards didn't even seem to care until RAG was formed and they all grouped together!

    I've only lived in Goring since 2008, but its clear they are a funny old bunch and pretty split down the middle on these things. The fuss over Tesco taking over the pub, over HSBC closing, over the house that appeared on Streatley Hill, over the Goring Lock Hydro-Electric scheme, over the parking down Streatley High Street, over the SOHA development in Cleeve, over the electrification, over the lifts at the station, over the 200+ houses that have to be developed .... they are pretty much always 50/50 for and against and it's just those against that seem to shout loudest...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on January 06, 2016, 10:09:38
    I think that's true of any smallish community. Always wanting things preserved in aspic and no consideration of future generations.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 06, 2016, 10:30:08
    I think that's true of any smallish community. Always wanting things preserved in aspic and no consideration of future generations.

    I agree. I lived in a small Oxfordshire village for 20 years and don't think it changed too much from the day we moved there to the day I moved out.

    Had the Banbury to Cheltenham line survived it would be interesting to know how communities along the line would have reacted had the line been electrified.  Although some communities slightly north are having to deal with the possible threat of HS2 passing through their unspoilt countryside



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 06, 2016, 10:41:10
    I think that's true of any smallish community. Always wanting things preserved in aspic and no consideration of future generations.

    ............rather like those in Sipson, Harmondsworth etc objecting to Heathrow expansion I guess?  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on January 06, 2016, 10:47:20
    I think that's true of any smallish community. Always wanting things preserved in aspic and no consideration of future generations.

    Hmmm ...I think we would be very happy to have wires strung up just above the track ...

    (http://www.wellho.net/pix/pylonesque.jpg)

    ... but then we're the fourth largest urban area in Wiltshire, so I suppose "smallish" isn't the word to use.  And the line connects no.s 1,2,3 and 4 in terms of size (Chippenham, Salisbury, Trowbridge and Melksham) so electrification in the next phase or two might not be such a silly idea!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on January 06, 2016, 14:58:43
    Television reception isn't as good as it might have been in parts of Oxfordshire (north in particular) because the mast at Beckley is about 100 metres shorter than originally planned as a result of objections.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 06, 2016, 21:06:32
    I think I read somewhere that the gantries they're using are of a design that's rather like a Meccano  set - lots of standard parts that bolt together differently to suit the location / needs of each gantry.  And I recall that was said to make the electrification works a lot easier, cheaper and faster rather than having to do a 'special' at each location.  It struck me, though, that this could mean a certain amount of excess / needless metalwork providing attachment points for things not attached, and perhaps rather chunkier / heavier elements than were always needed as it would have to be manufactured to match worst case use scenario.   

    Did I get this right, or was I having a "funny" dream??

    The NR Series 1 25kv overhead electrification system is indeed designed as a kit of parts that can be selected to make up what is required at each site.  So far, in my travels around, I have not noted any bespoke components.  Personally, I don't think its that bad compared with some of the 1950s designs used for the 1500v DC overhead electrification schemes (as used on the Woodhead and original Great Eastern schemes).

    Perhaps ET can respond in a bit more detail?

    Most OLE electrification schemes have worked from a standard design range, the 1500V dc GE and Woodhead were a BICC design some of that would have been licenced from the likes of ASEA, Brown Boveri etc, later in the 1950 with adoption of "industrial frequency" ie 50Hz ac quite a lot of French design was adopted.  BR's principle OLE contractors through the 1960, 70, 80 were BICC (Balfour Beatty) and Pirelli with BR hold 50% of the licence for the standard components there by allowing interchangeability, the range today is called OLEMI   

    There are a number of things that have governed the GWEP OLE design. 

    The requirement to improve reliability of the OLE over the Mk3 (headspan as per ECML) by making it IMR (Independently Mechanically Registered)
    Built for a future line speed of 140mph
    TSI (interoperability) compliance.
    Compliance with BS EN 50122 electrical clearances, especially the case in public accessible areas.
    Standardised design of structures.

    The GWEP structures look and are very substantial they have a life expectance of 100 years, also to achieve the TSI and future line speed the structures are closer together typically 50 meters where as the ECML is typically 70 meters


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 06, 2016, 22:44:12
    The usual comprehensive and easily understood explanation from ET - always appreciated.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Surrey 455 on January 06, 2016, 23:00:56
    I think that's true of any smallish community. Always wanting things preserved in aspic and no consideration of future generations.

    ............rather like those in Sipson, Harmondsworth etc objecting to Heathrow expansion I guess?  ;)

    There is a difference. The overhead line structures are being put up above existing railway lines (obviously). Heathrow want to demolish houses and communities to get a third runway. Those who want that runway at Heathrow have no consideration for future generations who will be affected by noise both in London and Berks / Bucks / Surrey. New flight paths will come into force for that runway that will inconvenience residents previously not affected.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 07, 2016, 07:03:30
    I think that's true of any smallish community. Always wanting things preserved in aspic and no consideration of future generations.

    ............rather like those in Sipson, Harmondsworth etc objecting to Heathrow expansion I guess?  ;)

    There is a difference. The overhead line structures are being put up above existing railway lines (obviously). Heathrow want to demolish houses and communities to get a third runway. Those who want that runway at Heathrow have no consideration for future generations who will be affected by noise both in London and Berks / Bucks / Surrey. New flight paths will come into force for that runway that will inconvenience residents previously not affected.

    And Taplow will become part of the flight path for the expanded Heathrow.

    There is always objections at first to OLE structures when first installed, they are bright galvanised, not a natural shape and new on the horizon, the zinc will tarnish to a dull grey which helps to camouflage them into the skyline.  Painting them green never works because a square box shape that is green sticks out like a sore thumb more so than grey.  Whilst there is a visual impact when the new trains start to run the noise level diminishes because there is no infernal combustion engine


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 07, 2016, 07:07:08
    <Snip>

    There is always objections at first to OLE structures when first installed, they are bright galvanised, not a natural shape and new on the horizon, the zinc will tarnish to a dull grey which helps to camouflage them into the skyline.  Painting them green never works because a square box shape that is green sticks out like a sore thumb more so than grey. 

    I agree - in my post of a few minutes ago (see below) I have drawn the comparison between this and the Newbury bypass that was in the news 20 years ago.

    http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=16626.0 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=16626.0)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on January 08, 2016, 21:34:47
    The OHLE used on the East coast route is in my view less visually obtrusive than that currently being installed in the West.
    I would however observe that the East coast scheme seems to fail regularly in even moderately windy weather, and I would hope that the more robust looking structures being installed at present will be reliable.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 09, 2016, 08:53:30
    The OHLE used on the East coast route is in my view less visually obtrusive than that currently being installed in the West.
    I would however observe that the East coast scheme seems to fail regularly in even moderately windy weather, and I would hope that the more robust looking structures being installed at present will be reliable.

    The system on the ECML (and HEX on the GWML) is known as Headspan it was part of BR's Mk3 OLE range.   

    Its main vulnerability is the across track wire support spans, when there is a di-wirement of the contact wire on one road there is a tendency for the contact wire on all other roads to get displaced prevent trains from running, even non electric because the wire can foul gauge.  GWEP has adopted independent mechanical registration.  Also they have adopted electrical separation between Main Lines and Relief Lines to allow for safe maintenance
    Blow off due to high wind speed on the ECML is in part due to the spacing of the OLE support structures typically 70 meters GWEP the spacing is closer to 50 meters.  20 meters may not sound much but over 194 km (120) miles that's a lot of extra cost


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on January 11, 2016, 20:52:47
    New Network Rail time lapse video of Stratton Green Bridge works over Christmas available via the Swindon Advertiser (http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/14196224.Timelapse_video_shows_Christmas_bridge_replacement/)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on January 12, 2016, 08:45:11
    I don't know why, but I was reminded in this time lapse video of the grasshopper type Martians in the ethnic cleansing scenes, seen as ESP, in 'Quatermass and the Pit'. Crossrail 2 watch out !


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 12, 2016, 08:49:04
    Meanwhile in Newbury local residents are being very vocal about the closure of the Boundary Lane bridge (over the railway lines) for a year to allow for the spacing for OLE. This is compounded by the fact the is a new bridge (out of the racecourse) which can not be used due to stipulations agreed by the council. I also understand there will be road works on the A339 which will happen for part of the time the bridge is closed.

    Fun times ahead!

     I am really surprised it will take a year to replace that bridge but then I am not an engineer.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 12, 2016, 16:47:13
    Meanwhile in Newbury local residents are being very vocal about the closure of the Boundary Lane bridge (over the railway lines) for a year to allow for the spacing for OLE. This is compounded by the fact the is a new bridge (out of the racecourse) which can not be used due to stipulations agreed by the council. I also understand there will be road works on the A339 which will happen for part of the time the bridge is closed.

    Fun times ahead!

     I am really surprised it will take a year to replace that bridge but then I am not an engineer.

    Was there talk of widening it for full 2 lanes of road traffic, if that is the case then it will take that long.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on January 12, 2016, 16:51:48
    Meanwhile in Newbury local residents are being very vocal about the closure of the Boundary Lane bridge (over the railway lines) for a year to allow for the spacing for OLE. This is compounded by the fact the is a new bridge (out of the racecourse) which can not be used due to stipulations agreed by the council. I also understand there will be road works on the A339 which will happen for part of the time the bridge is closed.

    Fun times ahead!

     I am really surprised it will take a year to replace that bridge but then I am not an engineer.
    Was there talk of widening it for full 2 lanes of road traffic, if that is the case then it will take that long.

    Yes (I didn't know that,thanks). But if I read this article correctly there is other work that needs to be done for the full benefit to be appreciated

    http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/news/16549/Boundary-Road-won-t-be-two.html (http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/news/16549/Boundary-Road-won-t-be-two.html)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 14, 2016, 23:06:27
    Took my first trip to PAD from Thatcham for about a month today, and I think the fact that I haven't made the journey for a while means the progress that's being made is more noticeable (than if was looking at no/small changes every day).

    There's a lot more OHLE infrastructure in place (vertical and horizontal) between Maidenhead and West Drayton than a month ago, including the wires in the Taplow/Burnham area (that have been previously reported). Quite a bit more piling than I remember between Twyford and Reading also. This progress does however serve to highlight that the areas around the larger stations (eg, Maidenhead, Slough) still look pretty bare.

    I also noticed that at Theale and Midgham there are what appear to be electrical feed "substations" (sorry for untechnical/incorrect description!). The one at Midgham is behind the up platform and at Theale it's to the east of the Station on the up side.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on January 15, 2016, 09:21:05
    BBC Oxford tweeted

    Quote
    BBC Oxford (@BBCOxford)

    15/01/2016 07:43

    There's a threat of legal action by campaigners in South #Oxfordshire unhappy about large metal gantries brought in over a railway line.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 15, 2016, 09:37:43
    BBC Oxford tweeted

    Quote
    BBC Oxford (@BBCOxford)

    15/01/2016 07:43

    There's a threat of legal action by campaigners in South #Oxfordshire unhappy about large metal gantries brought in over a railway line.

    Hurray!! (Signed: A Lawyer). We'll sue them for what's rightfully mine I mean yours!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on January 15, 2016, 11:49:27
    Was interesting that the BBC Radio Oxford spin towards this on the news was rather anti the protesters; comments about hoping this wouldn't cause any delay and Network rail regretting they hadn't had an up front consultation.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 15, 2016, 16:18:46
    ...........This progress does however serve to highlight that the areas around the larger stations (eg, Maidenhead, Slough) still look pretty bare.

    This may be because the civils works on the stations is being done by a different contractor to the trackside OLE civils.  Either the station civils contractor will be installing the foundations or the project is waiting for the stations contractor to finish, my guest its a bit of both.  The foundations are unlikely to be driven piles in platform areas.

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on January 15, 2016, 20:39:52
    ...........This progress does however serve to highlight that the areas around the larger stations (eg, Maidenhead, Slough) still look pretty bare.

    This may be because the civils works on the stations is being done by a different contractor to the trackside OLE civils.  Either the station civils contractor will be installing the foundations or the project is waiting for the stations contractor to finish, my guest its a bit of both.  The foundations are unlikely to be driven piles in platform areas.

     

    From what I've seen the platform area foundations are concrete. They certainly are at Didcot and it looks like the same at Cholsey and Goring. On the station approaches at Cholsey they appear to be installing twin track cantilevers on driven piles between the main and relief lines where there is plenty of room. Same at Burnham and Taplow I think.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on January 16, 2016, 10:17:12
    From the BBC Network Rail apologises for Goring Gap gantries (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-35321340)

    And they wonder why this project is overspending!

    Quote
    Network Rail has apologised for building large new gantries in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty without consulting nearby residents.

    Installed near Goring Gap in the Chilterns, they are the latest step in the electrification of the Great Western Railway.

    Residents have criticised the gantries for ruining the landscape.

    The rail operator met with villagers on Thursday and promised a consultation on alternative designs.

    'Absolutely horrible'

    The company is undertaking a 10-year modernisation programme on the line at a cost of up to ^1.74bn.

    This includes upgrades along the section between Reading and Didcot, Oxfordshire.

    Goring resident Roy McMillan said: "There was no foreknowledge of the actual design Network Rail has used... it is heavily, heavily over-engineered."

    Roy McMillan, chair of South Stoke Parish Council, said there was an "absolute forest" of the new gantries "stretching over in the distance towards Didcot".

    He added: "They're absolutely horrible... people see them the whole time, every day of their life".

    But Lucy Murfitt, from the Chiltern Conservation Board, said the meeting at the village hall had been positive.

    She added: "They've now conceded there's a problem and they're going to look at redesigning and removing them which is fantastic, and they're going to involve us in it and consult the public."

    But she said campaigners needed to keep the pressure up because of "significant caveats".

    Network Rail said developing new designs was a "complex process" that involved "balancing the need for the designs to be less visually intrusive with requirements around safety, reliability and operational efficiency".

    It added: "We apologise to residents for not carrying out the public consultation before the installation of the existing overhead line equipment.

    "Going forward we are committed to working with them and other stakeholders on alternative designs."

    Quote
    ...it is heavily, heavily over-engineered.
    Presumably their commentator is a qualified electrification engineer


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on January 16, 2016, 22:17:22
    I noticed today that in the past week there's been significant tree-felling at the western end of Sonning Cutting. The trees on the left-hand side of this Google Street View image (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4599392,-0.9201257,3a,75y,25.57h,99.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smqV59A7oLk1-IDHk2JgX7Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) have now all gone but they were still there last Saturday.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 21, 2016, 20:09:00
    Paul Clifton was reporting on tonight's South Today that the due dates for electrification had been put back still further (but nothing on the BBC site yet). This was based on some kind of Network rail announcement, though as usual I can't find one (yet).

    Coincidentally (or perhaps not), DfT have announced a consultation on their response to the Hendy Review. Basically, they are minded to accept all the recommendations, such as that almost all of the enhancements should still be delivered, but later. In the document for that consultation (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/494091/network-rails-investment-programme-the-hendy-report-consultation.pdf), it says:
    Quote
    Network Rail has also published its draft updated Enhancements Delivery Plan (EDP).
     This document can be found here.

    That link, inevitably, does not work. But maybe it will sometime soon...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on January 21, 2016, 20:20:20
    Looking at least two years delay to each of the previous section completion dates. Pathetic.

    Scroll down to 16:43 for a summary of revised dates: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-oxfordshire-35284853?

    To watch Paul Cliftons report:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b06wddv9/south-today-21012016 from 08:10 onwards.

    Worth watching but very concerning going forward with regard to the delays and the knock on implications.

    Expires 7pm 22nd


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on January 21, 2016, 20:22:46
    Yes, NR have released an update on the Hendy Report.  There's a lot to plough through (170 pages). Most notably its showing no electrification available west of Maidenhead until Dec 17 (to Didcot) and beyond to Bristol Parkway and Cardiff until Dec 18. Wootton Basset to Temple Meads is somewhat vague at Feb 19 to Apr 20.  Newbury by Dec 18, and Oxford by June 19.

    That must surely delay the cascade of 165 and 166 to the west services?

    Four tracking on Filton Bank to be completed by Dec 18, but not electrified at that point.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on January 21, 2016, 20:30:36
    Here's the link to what John R is referring to:
    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Enhancements-Delivery-Plan-Update.pdf


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 21, 2016, 22:14:42
    Marked "Draft" - but looks pretty solid. So Bi-mode first, then the wires, but not to the depot immediately.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on January 22, 2016, 00:13:32
    Heads need to roll.

    Top of the list should be Mark Carne and Patrick McLoughlin.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 22, 2016, 00:15:09
    What puzzles me about the new milestones - in what is really a reworking of the CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan, supporting the Hendy review report - is the gap between "EIS: Infrastructure authorised for passenger use" and "First timetabled public use of the infrastructure". In the last real delivery plan (March 2015, rather than June) this gap was mostly 6 months or even nothing. Now while the EIS dates are much the same as indicated in the Hendy Review, with some glaring exceptions, the first timetabled use is always given as CP6 - which starts in April 2019.

    So while the first stage out to Didcot is still shown as EIS in December 2017, and Bristol Parkway and Newbury as a year later, for some reason this usable infrastructure is not used until "CP6". Oxford and Bristol (Temple Meads) by either route are about 6 months later, which does put them into CP6.

    At the same time, it assumes that "the enhanced IEP timetable will start in December 2018". Which is? Even if it means "the operable parts of ..." that should include Paddington-Reading-Didcot, shouldn't it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on January 22, 2016, 05:54:05
    Heads need to roll.

    Top of the list should be Mark Carne and Patrick McLoughlin.
    Well someone needs to put their hand up who was involved at the start who said 'yep we can do this for ^xxx million and have it complete by 2018' as it's become very clear this was well wide of the mark both in terms of cost and time taken.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on January 22, 2016, 08:41:49
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35376805

    Quote
    Great Western Railway electrification 'four years late'

    The electrification of some routes across the south of England is running four years late, Network Rail has said.

    The rail infrastructure owner, which has estimated its project could cost ^2.8bn, is carrying out the work on the Great Western railway line.

    It was originally due to be finished by 2018, with most diesel trains replaced.

    However, some routes due to be completed before then will not be ready until 2020, resulting in new trains sitting in sidings.

    Under the original plan Reading to Didcot should have already been completed, with Oxford and Bristol next in 2016.

    But because work has fallen behind, Didcot is expected to be two years late in 2017, and Newbury and Oxford three years late in 2018 and 2019, respectively.

    Bristol will not see electric trains until 2020, and the East West rail link from Oxford to Bletchley is delayed until the early 2020s.

    'Dreadful' news

    Julian Burnell, from Network Rail, called it a "very large and complicated project which involves a vast number of variables across a very large area of the country".

    He added: "We're in a much better position to define exactly when we'll be able to complete the work."

    Dan Panes, from Great Western Railway, said: "It's not good news today but what we've got to do is make sure that we deliver those improvements."

    Christopher Irwin, from passenger Group TravelWatch Southwest, said the news was "dreadful".

    He added: "We've got to have trains - electric, diesel, or whatever. We need more trains and more seats."

    Network Rail's chief executive Mark Carne told MPs in October the estimate for the project had been ^874m in January 2013 and ^1.5bn in September 2014.

    He said because of "inadequate planning" it could now reach ^2.8bn.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on January 22, 2016, 09:47:58
    Heads need to roll.

    Top of the list should be Mark Carne and Patrick McLoughlin.

    I don't think that I am usually a particularly tolerant or patient person when it comes to the railways (for example I think that First should have been stripped of their franchise years ago because unlike NR which has managed to get difficult things wrong, FGW has managed to get easy things like ticketing and information provision wrong) , but I do have a fair degree of sympathy with NR over these delays.  It was clear that what they were originally proposing was not achievable.  I expect that they agreed to the unrealistic timescales and costs because that was what the politicians asked of them and they found it hard to say no.

    The important thing (and all credit to those involved in this) is that it will all eventually happen.  The frustrating thing is that this screw up was due to poor and inadequate planning.  It we are to avoid a similar problem on the next electrification project, someone needs to start planning it now for work to start in 5 to 10 years time.  I don't see that happening. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: PhilWakely on January 22, 2016, 10:45:56
    Heads need to roll.

    Top of the list should be Mark Carne and Patrick McLoughlin.

    I don't think that I am usually a particularly tolerant or patient person when it comes to the railways (for example I think that First should have been stripped of their franchise years ago because unlike NR which has managed to get difficult things wrong, FGW has managed to get easy things like ticketing and information provision wrong) , but I do have a fair degree of sympathy with NR over these delays.  It was clear that what they were originally proposing was not achievable.  I expect that they agreed to the unrealistic timescales and costs because that was what the politicians asked of them and they found it hard to say no.

    I am inclined to agree with the thought that the original timescales were imposed with significant input from HM Government. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Network Rail currently publicly owned? It is my belief that some public institutions are being deliberately interfered with by government ministers in an effort to give the public the impression that these institutions would be better off in the private sector and Network Rail is no exception to this cynical interference by HM Governent.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on January 22, 2016, 10:59:47
    Didn't believe me did you!   ;)

    Quote
    Perhaps this thread needs to be re-named again to "Class 387 coming to Thames Valley (eventually)"

    Railway industry groundswell indicates that Oxford - Didcot route electrification will most likely be a casualty of the Hendy report, and completion delayed until CP6.  Effort will be kept up to electrify from Reading to Didcot for rolling stock testing purposes and then to infill from Maidenhead to Reading for Crossrail then Didcot to Swindon.  Having all those expensive bi-mode IEP's land-locked in sidings with nowhere to go will be unacceptable to the DfT.  In the short term, on the juice to Swindon, on the diesel to Bristol.

    I suspect we'll be keeping the Turbos for a while longer.  How that plays with GWR's overall rolling stock cascade plans will have to be seen.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on January 22, 2016, 11:20:00
    Heads need to roll.

    Top of the list should be Mark Carne and Patrick McLoughlin.

    I don't think that I am usually a particularly tolerant or patient person when it comes to the railways (for example I think that First should have been stripped of their franchise years ago because unlike NR which has managed to get difficult things wrong, FGW has managed to get easy things like ticketing and information provision wrong) , but I do have a fair degree of sympathy with NR over these delays.  It was clear that what they were originally proposing was not achievable.  I expect that they agreed to the unrealistic timescales and costs because that was what the politicians asked of them and they found it hard to say no.

    I am inclined to agree with the thought that the original timescales were imposed with significant input from HM Government. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Network Rail currently publicly owned? It is my belief that some public institutions are being deliberately interfered with by government ministers in an effort to give the public the impression that these institutions would be better off in the private sector and Network Rail is no exception to this cynical interference by HM Governent.

    Gosh that is cynical.  You may be right though.  Most doctors think that the NHS is deliberately being set up to fail as a prelude for privatisation. 
    I'm more inclined to think that it is more a case of being ideologically opposed to the public sector. If you are ideologically opposed to the public sector, then you kind of expect it to fail and that can become a self fulfilling prophesy.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on January 22, 2016, 11:20:58
    I am inclined to agree with the thought that the original timescales were imposed with significant input from HM Government. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Network Rail currently publicly owned? It is my belief that some public institutions are being deliberately interfered with by government ministers in an effort to give the public the impression that these institutions would be better off in the private sector and Network Rail is no exception to this cynical interference by HM Governent.
    The initial announcement goes back to 2009 and Adonis. However, the number of 'extensions' to the original concept are legion - extending it out through South Wales, 140 mph running, E-W, spines etc. That's without considering all the other electrification elsewhere. Ultimately there will be a corporate, even national capacity for the amount of work that can be done at any one time.

    Notwithstanding this, they seemed to vastly underestimate the cost and difficulty of upgrading very old structures, often in unknown condition until they start work on them, while they largely remain in use. For example a bridge near me which was supposed to be raised in about 10 weeks in the end took about 4 times that and has effectively been rebuilt. And we haven't even got on to the signalling cables ....

    Seems like the original total sum would have been an optimistic assessment based on generic structures and costings.





    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on January 22, 2016, 11:21:47
    Didn't believe me did you!   ;)


    I for one believed you....well....all the IEP stock is very likely to become bi-mode....387s to Hayes from May - that's nearly Thames Valley :-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 22, 2016, 11:53:07
    I was certainly more sceptical, and it certainly now appears that Oxford-Didcot will indeed slip into CP6, though its completion is now scheduled to only just slip into CP6 by a couple of months, so the vast majority of work will still be in CP5.  Still very disappointing though, and who knows if it will slip even further!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on January 22, 2016, 12:07:20
    Meaning that Chiltern are likely to be rubbing their hands with glee, as the nly direct Oxford services would be the (then) hourly bi-mode service along the Cotswold Line, unless they retain some turbos to augnment these.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on January 22, 2016, 18:08:53

    I don't think that I am usually a particularly tolerant or patient person when it comes to the railways (for example I think that First should have been stripped of their franchise years ago because unlike NR which has managed to get difficult things wrong, FGW has managed to get easy things like ticketing and information provision wrong) , but I do have a fair degree of sympathy with NR over these delays.  It was clear that what they were originally proposing was not achievable.  I expect that they agreed to the unrealistic timescales and costs because that was what the politicians asked of them and they found it hard to say no.

    I am inclined to agree with the thought that the original timescales were imposed with significant input from HM Government. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Network Rail currently publicly owned? It is my belief that some public institutions are being deliberately interfered with by government ministers in an effort to give the public the impression that these institutions would be better off in the private sector and Network Rail is no exception to this cynical interference by HM Governent.

    Gosh that is cynical.  You may be right though.  Most doctors think that the NHS is deliberately being set up to fail as a prelude for privatisation. 
    I'm more inclined to think that it is more a case of being ideologically opposed to the public sector. If you are ideologically opposed to the public sector, then you kind of expect it to fail and that can become a self fulfilling prophesy.

    Maybe cynical, but in fact exactly the same as how the last Labour Government engineered the downfall of the privately-owned Railtrack for their ideological reasons.  So your point against political interference is well made, but it^s not confined to one political party.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on January 22, 2016, 18:52:22
    Good to see GWR have listed on their 'Planned Engineering Work' page all the major engineering work projects due to take place between now and the end of the year. Best check this page from time to time as more info becomes available, particularly for the work between Didcot and Oxford in August and when the Severn Tunnel is closed September/October:

    https://www.gwr.com/travel-updates/planned-engineering


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 22, 2016, 19:28:17
    Meaning that Chiltern are likely to be rubbing their hands with glee, as the nly direct Oxford services would be the (then) hourly bi-mode service along the Cotswold Line, unless they retain some turbos to augnment these.

    GWR will continue to operate 2tph between Oxford and London.  It's part of their SLC as well as making financial sense.  Could be that Turbos operate it or Bi-Mode SET's, or a combination of the two, perhaps even HST's. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on January 23, 2016, 05:43:37
    Indeed, comment elsewhere that naybe HSTs may be retained. They also own 5 of these that obviously aren't part of the cascade to Scotrail either


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 23, 2016, 09:49:52
    ...........strangely there don't seem to be quite so many FGW/GWR "We're building a Greater West" posters around these days.......funny that!  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on February 03, 2016, 16:52:12
    ...........strangely there don't seem to be quite so many FGW/GWR "We're building a Greater West" posters around these days.......funny that!  ;)

    Not so sure about that.  There's still seven full size billboards advertising GWR on the walk up the ramp to Praed Street at Paddington.  Difficult to imagine how they could be much more in your face!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on February 04, 2016, 10:13:57

    I don't think that I am usually a particularly tolerant or patient person when it comes to the railways (for example I think that First should have been stripped of their franchise years ago because unlike NR which has managed to get difficult things wrong, FGW has managed to get easy things like ticketing and information provision wrong) , but I do have a fair degree of sympathy with NR over these delays.  It was clear that what they were originally proposing was not achievable.  I expect that they agreed to the unrealistic timescales and costs because that was what the politicians asked of them and they found it hard to say no.

    I am inclined to agree with the thought that the original timescales were imposed with significant input from HM Government. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Network Rail currently publicly owned? It is my belief that some public institutions are being deliberately interfered with by government ministers in an effort to give the public the impression that these institutions would be better off in the private sector and Network Rail is no exception to this cynical interference by HM Governent.

    Gosh that is cynical.  You may be right though.  Most doctors think that the NHS is deliberately being set up to fail as a prelude for privatisation. 
    I'm more inclined to think that it is more a case of being ideologically opposed to the public sector. If you are ideologically opposed to the public sector, then you kind of expect it to fail and that can become a self fulfilling prophesy.

    Maybe cynical, but in fact exactly the same as how the last Labour Government engineered the downfall of the privately-owned Railtrack for their ideological reasons.  So your point against political interference is well made, but it^s not confined to one political party.


    I don't disagree with you on that at all, although I would suggest that engineering the bankruptcy of Railtrack was not just ideological.  I think it was also about saving a huge amount of money (or to put it slightly more cynically, it was about jumping at the opportunity to make an ideological move during a brief time period when affordability and public acceptability coincided)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on February 04, 2016, 16:19:11
    It wouldn't have happened if Railtrack hadn't managed the engineering side of their business so incompetently. Remember the meltdown post Hatfield, with journey times doubled for weeks on end?  That was one of the blackest periods for the railway in my lifetime.

    In contrast, we're now around 9 years since the last passenger fatality due to a crash. Yes, a lot of that is due to TPWS, and improvements in rolling stock crashworthiness, but Network Rail's stewardship of the track will also be a major contributory factor. 

    Which is why I really don't get the rumblings of returning NR to the private sector...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 04, 2016, 18:25:51
    Which is why I really don't get the rumblings of returning NR to the private sector...

    John R, what you say makes perfect common sense. Much of the actual engineering work is contracted out, but it makes no sense to have the overall responsibility for the infrastructure outside of direct government ownership.

    Which worries me a bit...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 04, 2016, 21:23:25
    It wouldn't have happened if Railtrack hadn't managed the engineering side of their business so incompetently. Remember the meltdown post Hatfield, with journey times doubled for weeks on end?  That was one of the blackest periods for the railway in my lifetime.

    The major problem with maintenance was they way that day to day maintenance was outsourced.  The contractor was in charge of deciding what was done and at what price, and if it got so bad it needed renewal then it was another contractors job to replace it from another budget.  I've heard of subcontractors having their quotes sent back because they were too small and would show up the inflated prices of the main contractor. 

    It incentivised rising costs and declining condition.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 04, 2016, 22:00:15
    Which is why I really don't get the rumblings of returning NR to the private sector...

    There is no common sense about just pure political dogma


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on February 04, 2016, 22:57:30
    RTT shows Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea late night trains running down the B&H (then via Bath) tonight - I assume some work underway between Reading and Didcot?

    Edit: Answered my own question (probably) - NR website says work underway between Royal Wooton Bassett and Hullavington.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on February 05, 2016, 09:15:35
    Going back to the AONB issues around Cholsey, The Henley Standard carries this item:

    http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=140072 (http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=140072)

    As I^ve said before, the extension of the masts (at random heights) above the booms looks ugly.   I acknowledge that the auto-transformer cables need to be carried above the booms, but extending the masts for this purpose is an over-engineered and visually intrusive way of doing this.  Far better to have light tube-type supports bolted to the boom, as happens elsewhere.

    I suspect NR^s response to the objectors will be no more than this and may be even less.  I for one am not arguing that the basic mast/boom design is unacceptable.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Stroud Valleys on February 16, 2016, 09:49:54
    I travelled between from Cam and Dursley to Bath via Bristol Parkway and Temple Meads, and travelling along this stretch for the first time in a couple of months. Noticed a few holes between Westerleigh Junction and Bristol Parkway, but nothing of noteworthy apart from that, and no sign of electrification work between Bristol Temple Meads and Bath. When will either stretch be complete - any timetables of the plans?

    How is Bristol Temple Meads going to be electrified? I saw a document stating that the X's were being replaced at Temple Meads with coloured signals, but no news about electrification. How will this fit in with the signalling work and any other redevelopments works in and around the station?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on February 16, 2016, 11:46:12
    I travelled between from Cam and Dursley to Bath via Bristol Parkway and Temple Meads, and travelling along this stretch for the first time in a couple of months. Noticed a few holes between Westerleigh Junction and Bristol Parkway, but nothing of noteworthy apart from that, and no sign of electrification work between Bristol Temple Meads and Bath. When will either stretch be complete - any timetables of the plans?

    How is Bristol Temple Meads going to be electrified? I saw a document stating that the X's were being replaced at Temple Meads with coloured signals, but no news about electrification. How will this fit in with the signalling work and any other redevelopments works in and around the station?

    Focus is on the Reading to Didcot section to enable IEP testing, thence to Swindon and Cardiff. Bear in mind that Maidenhead to Airport Junction electrification is a different contract anyway as part of Crossrail, and there's no way TfL will allow that to be messed with, so no electric services beyond Airport Junction until that is in place. Various dates have been mooted for public services, but Network Rail's current philosophy seems to 'right first time', and that short-cuts will not be taken and the introduction of electric services will not be rushed..

    Lots of piling going on between Bath and Bristol, though no masts going up at this point. Two more blockades to lower track, one this April, one next (see http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/banes/). Bath Spa is having platforms extended and rebuilt to allow for longer trains and to provide clearance for overhead wires, leaving canopies intact as far as I know. Based on that, no public electric services until at least summer 2017, if not later.

    Bristol resignalling and Filton Bank redoubling work is going slowly, so rather than the original plan, which was to wire Parkway to TM first, Wootton Bassett to Bristol TM will open first. I *think* that means that the Bristol Signalbox will be required longer than expected, so trains will not run into reopened platforms on the north side of the station, but instead will be somewhere in the main train shed. As the new trains are 26m long, I'd guess that they might move away from 13/15. 

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on February 16, 2016, 16:18:06
    I travelled between from Cam and Dursley to Bath via Bristol Parkway and Temple Meads, and travelling along this stretch for the first time in a couple of months. Noticed a few holes between Westerleigh Junction and Bristol Parkway, but nothing of noteworthy apart from that, and no sign of electrification work between Bristol Temple Meads and Bath. When will either stretch be complete - any timetables of the plans?

    How is Bristol Temple Meads going to be electrified? I saw a document stating that the X's were being replaced at Temple Meads with coloured signals, but no news about electrification. How will this fit in with the signalling work and any other redevelopments works in and around the station?

    Focus is on the Reading to Didcot section to enable IEP testing, thence to Swindon and Cardiff. Bear in mind that Maidenhead to Airport Junction electrification is a different contract anyway as part of Crossrail, and there's no way TfL will allow that to be messed with, so no electric services beyond Airport Junction until that is in place. Various dates have been mooted for public services, but Network Rail's current philosophy seems to 'right first time', and that short-cuts will not be taken and the introduction of electric services will not be rushed..

    Lots of piling going on between Bath and Bristol, though no masts going up at this point. Two more blockades to lower track, one this April, one next (see http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/banes/). Bath Spa is having platforms extended and rebuilt to allow for longer trains and to provide clearance for overhead wires, leaving canopies intact as far as I know. Based on that, no public electric services until at least summer 2017, if not later.

    Bristol resignalling and Filton Bank redoubling work is going slowly, so rather than the original plan, which was to wire Parkway to TM first, Wootton Bassett to Bristol TM will open first. I *think* that means that the Bristol Signalbox will be required longer than expected, so trains will not run into reopened platforms on the north side of the station, but instead will be somewhere in the main train shed. As the new trains are 26m long, I'd guess that they might move away from 13/15. 

     

    Welcome to the forum, Noggin, and thanks for the update! The stock of piles by North Somerset Junction has remained steady over the past week. I shall be watching for any reduction.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oberon on February 16, 2016, 16:23:02
    I noticed today actual masts on the main line extending as far as west of Steventon


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 16, 2016, 19:23:13
    I thought something was posted recently that suggested Parkway route would come before TM

    Ah  yes found it from Timmer http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5066.msg190006#msg190006 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5066.msg190006#msg190006)  See p89


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on March 01, 2016, 10:14:07
    Stratton Green Bridge in Swindon now reopened and an update to the time-lapse video in this article from the Swindon Advertiser:

    http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/14308934.Stratton_Green_Bridge_re_opens_on_time/ (http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/14308934.Stratton_Green_Bridge_re_opens_on_time/)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 18, 2016, 14:16:31
    800101 that was reported on a trip to North Pole Depot is allocated to Virgin East Coast - Branson unveiled it this morning

    (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cd0mYUMWwAAhi3V.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on March 18, 2016, 17:01:38
    800101 that was reported on a trip to North Pole Depot is allocated to Virgin East Coast - Branson unveiled it this morning.....

    I read about this on the BBC Web site today and was surprised about the quoted time savings on the Edinburgh to Kings Cross journey. I am surprised this is possible because doesn't it depends on what traffic there is on the line?



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 18, 2016, 18:23:46
    Made its way as far as Southall then, it's a start I suppose  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 18, 2016, 18:34:20
    800101 that was reported on a trip to North Pole Depot is allocated to Virgin East Coast - Branson unveiled it this morning.....

    I read about this on the BBC Web site today and was surprised about the quoted time savings on the Edinburgh to Kings Cross journey. I am surprised this is possible because doesn't it depends on what traffic there is on the line?

    Yes, the time saving is more than 5 x 40 seconds, isn't it?

    In the current timetable**, faster trains only do four stops, and take varying times of around 4:20. Before the current fashion for regular hourly (or half hourly) services, the Flying Scotsman did it with three stops in 4:13 (in 2000). 

    The IEP spec called for a journey time* of 3:49 or less with five stops, zero dwell time, and no signalling delays. That also assumed the line itself was as described at the time (2011, or perhaps earlier) in terms of speed limits and other improvements. Adding in 5 x 2 minutes dwell doesn't leave a lot to spare, does it?

    Can a path, or a set of hourly paths, that would realise such a timing be fitted into the timetable? I'm sure it's possible. You would expect there to be conflicts with other services (i.e. other TOCs' services, in the present set-up), and I suspect NR's timetablers are not allowed to respond directly to customer preferences (e.g. by taking backhanders from Richard Branson). But it may be possible to fit them all in just by being clever.

    * This applies to single-unit trains, either electric or bi-mode with an odd number of cars. Multiple-unit trains or bi-mode units with an even number of cars can take a minute more.

    ** Northbound timings, which make more sense. Southbound there is now a "Flying Scotsman" taking 4:00, but with one stop and at the wrong time of day. In 2000, FS wasn't even the fastest southbound train.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on March 18, 2016, 18:49:23
    In the current timetable, faster trains only do four stops, and take varying times of around 4:20. Before the current fashion for regular hourly (or half hourly) services, the Flying Scotsman did it with three stops in 4:13 (in 2000). 

    Fastest overall is 4 hours exactly. But only one stop.

    However, that service, the 0540 from Edinburgh, has an on time arrival at King's Cross averaging just 5% in the past 12 weeks. Average delay being 11.5 minutes. Which does rather suggest the timetabling of that service is over ambitious.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 18, 2016, 20:16:41
    Don't they also (surprisingly) intend running hourly fast trains to Edinburgh that have two intermediate stops, York and Newcastle, alternating with single stops at Newcastle only, in the period from 2020 onwards? 

    Found it in the TAA currently being negotiated with ORR:

    http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/17535/east-coast-main-line-company-limited-application-form-p-section-17.pdf

    Table at the end of section 4.1 refers.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on March 19, 2016, 09:48:32
    Don't they also (surprisingly) intend running hourly fast trains to Edinburgh that have two intermediate stops, York and Newcastle, alternating with single stops at Newcastle only, in the period from 2020 onwards? 

    Found it in the TAA currently being negotiated with ORR:

    http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/17535/east-coast-main-line-company-limited-application-form-p-section-17.pdf

    Table at the end of section 4.1 refers.

    Paul

    With the plan to use 7 coach class 91s for these limited stop services? Thus not getting the benefit of the superior acceleration of the class 800s.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 21, 2016, 10:44:21
    Press release from NR regarding the electrification programme for the Severn Tunnel, which includes a short video:

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/130-year-old-severn-tunnel-to-get-railway-upgrade (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/130-year-old-severn-tunnel-to-get-railway-upgrade)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on March 21, 2016, 12:27:01
    If the video shows drilling holes in the tunnel, why isn't the water cascading through ????????


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on March 21, 2016, 12:35:09
    They just need a longer hole!  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 21, 2016, 14:42:06
    Closed from 12/9 to 21/10.....diversions via Gloucester.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on March 21, 2016, 19:11:38
    Closed from 12/9 to 21/10.....diversions via Gloucester.

    And to be a little more specific (poor formatting courtesy of Network Rail!):

    • Trains between London Paddington and South Wales High Speed Services from London Paddington will divert non-stop from Swindon to Newport, adding up to 40 additional minutes to the journey time. An additional train service will run from London Paddington to Bristol Parkway. Buses will run between Swindon and Bristol Parkway, and between Bristol Parkway and Newport.
    • Trains between Cardiff Central and Portsmouth Harbour/TauntonCardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour and Taunton services will start and end at Bristol Parkway.
    • Replacement busesBuses will run between Newport and Bristol Parkway, and between Severn Tunnel Junction and Bristol Parkway.This will add up to 40 minutes to journey times.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 21, 2016, 19:52:16
    If the video shows drilling holes in the tunnel, why isn't the water cascading through ????????

    Because the artesian groundwater source (called IIRC the "Great Spring") is controlled by pumping it down rather than sealing it in.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 21, 2016, 21:11:01
    If the video shows drilling holes in the tunnel, why isn't the water cascading through ????????

    That's because the water does not come in through the roof, the spring is actually lower than track level; also the brick lining is more than one of two bricks thick  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on March 22, 2016, 10:22:48
    I see the knitting is making its way through Goring.

    Network Rail presenting a fait accompli to the 'Gap' moaners?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 22, 2016, 10:31:17
    Spoke with new NR MD Western and Robbie Burns on Thursday - they are talking to interested parties but are adamant that work continues, so will be looking at measures to reduce impact, and to be done after the wires are up & running.

    Oh, at the same meeting, I asked about the Reading escalator that ran backwards & is now out of order. Still under warranty, so back with the suppliers, hence the delay in fixing. I suggested relocating the stop boards on that platform to allay pax having to walk the length of the platform. They'll positively consider this with GWR.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 22, 2016, 10:39:06
    That's also what the http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/ website is reporting.  Get it finished to allow SET testing to take place, then possibly replace much of it with a less intrusive design before passenger services on electric power commence at the end of next year.  No wonder the project is over-budget!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 22, 2016, 10:47:47
    No chance of replacement NR say - it will be mitigating only.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 22, 2016, 10:53:35
    I'll be interested to see how they can mitigate against its impact without replacing some of the structures.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 22, 2016, 10:57:30
    Painting?....I didn't get a chance to explore what they might consider. But cost is obviously material.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 22, 2016, 13:36:38
    Oh, at the same meeting, I asked about the Reading escalator that ran backwards & is now out of order. Still under warranty, so back with the suppliers, hence the delay in fixing. I suggested relocating the stop boards on that platform to allay pax having to walk the length of the platform. They'll positively consider this with GWR.

    Thanks for raising that.  I originally suggested this back in January and again a couple of weeks ago, I would have thought that GWR ("going the extra mile for the customer") would have taken the initiative on this as I know the station staff get complaints from passengers arriving on P15A.

    edit for grammar


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 22, 2016, 14:08:35
    I suspect a disconnect between customer-facing & technology staff there. I will persue, seeing as the escalator might be out for a while yet.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 22, 2016, 14:53:07
    Press release from NR regarding the electrification programme for the Severn Tunnel, which includes a short video:

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/130-year-old-severn-tunnel-to-get-railway-upgrade (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/130-year-old-severn-tunnel-to-get-railway-upgrade)
    Four tonnes of soot inside the tunnel! And the last steam services ran, what, forty years ago, probably fifty?

    There'll probably be room for the wires just by removing the layers of soot!  :D

    (yes, I know diesel engines produce soot too)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 22, 2016, 15:26:06
    Four tonnes of soot inside the tunnel! And the last steam services ran, what, forty years ago, probably fifty?

    There'll probably be room for the wires just by removing the layers of soot!  :D

    More to the point, it's a big old tunnel. 7 km long, by (say) 5 m width, means there's only 0.1 kg/sq m. So even if the density of soot is as low as 0.1 (100 kg/cu m), it would only be a 1 mm layer.

    Is it really just me that reacts to a fact like that by reaching for my trusty two-backed envelope?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 22, 2016, 20:14:44
    That's also what the http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/ website is reporting.  Get it finished to allow SET testing to take place, then possibly replace much of it with a less intrusive design before passenger services on electric power commence at the end of next year.  No wonder the project is over-budget!

    The word possibly does not appear on their website.  They are optimistically reading the words
    Quote
    Any works to modify the apparatus already installed to allow for the train testing will be undertaken retrospectively, subject to funding agreements; we have written to the Conservation Boards to confirm this, and a copy of the letter can be found
    as they will change things.

    The words "Any" and "subject to funding agreements" seem to have passed them by. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 22, 2016, 20:36:23
    The word possibly does not appear on their website. 

    Indeed not.  I chose 'possibly' as a compromise between NR's 'perhaps at a later date with lots of caveats' and savegoringgap's 'NR have confirmed a commitment to do it'.   ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 22, 2016, 20:57:18
    The word possibly does not appear on their website. 

    Indeed not.  I chose 'possibly' as a compromise between NR's 'perhaps at a later date with lots of caveats' and savegoringgap's 'NR have confirmed a commitment to do it'.   ;)

    The "Save Goring Gap" campaign suggests that the National Grid have it right ...

    Quote
    How the National Grid is 'Getting It Right'
    National Grid is ^getting it right^. Why can^t Network Rail?

    In 1964, in the Goring Gap, the National Grid buried the cable underground under Streatley hill (North Wessex Downs AONB) because it considered the natural beauty of the Goring Gap was so important.

    at http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/how-the-national-grid-is-getting-it-right.html


    I suspect the answer to "Why can't Network Rail?" is that it's not really practical to power the trains from a buried cable - it needs to be overhead ...   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 22, 2016, 21:05:03
    The word possibly does not appear on their website. 

    Indeed not.  I chose 'possibly' as a compromise between NR's 'perhaps at a later date with lots of caveats' and savegoringgap's 'NR have confirmed a commitment to do it'.   ;)

    The "Save Goring Gap" campaign suggests that the National Grid have it right ...

    Quote
    How the National Grid is 'Getting It Right'
    National Grid is ‘getting it right’. Why can’t Network Rail?

    In 1964, in the Goring Gap, the National Grid buried the cable underground under Streatley hill (North Wessex Downs AONB) because it considered the natural beauty of the Goring Gap was so important.

    at http://www.savegoringgap.org.uk/how-the-national-grid-is-getting-it-right.html


    I suspect the answer to "Why can't Network Rail?" is that it's not really practical to power the trains from a buried cable - it needs to be overhead ...  


    I think they might compromise on third rail.  But I don't think IEP's will work on 650V DC and they don't have shoes.  Perhaps if HSE demanded an ugly fence to protect people from the rail it might get them to change their mind. Also I do not think NR could or should afford the costs. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 22, 2016, 22:46:45
    No one is going to modify the IEPs to run on conductor rail.
    It would be very expensive, delay entry into service, and anyway the HSE are strongly opposed to any more third rail schemes, other than possibly minor infill works in existing third rail areas.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 23, 2016, 09:53:35
    "modify the apparatus already installed" seems to be key here. That doesn't mean "replace" in any way.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: mjones on March 23, 2016, 11:47:05
    "modify the apparatus already installed" seems to be key here. That doesn't mean "replace" in any way.
    Would 'modify' cover painting?..


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 23, 2016, 11:49:33
    yes, I'm sure.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 23, 2016, 11:58:20
    Having now seen the "Goring Gap" (GG) masts/stanchions and portals, I must confess to being very disappointed with the product.

    In the '60's when a visible change to the railway environment was to be made it was referred to the Design Panel. This produced the neat front ends of the later locomotives and stimulated the Corporate Image.

    The heavy GG masts protrude needlessly and wastefully above the portals, although this is partly compensated by hanging the feeder wire on them. The portals extend beyond the masts in a way that would produce a sharp metal-rulered rap across the knuckles to any junior draughtsman who drew that carelessly.

    The OLE in other areas does not seem to have these faults. This casual approach to appearance and materials use is not what I expect from Chartered Engineers that have had to pass an "engineer in society" exam.

    Spec 1 OLE must make some intrusion into the countryside through which lines pass. It ought at least to be finished neatly and with balance, the main aspects of good visual design.

    The houses at Basildon , especially NT's wonderful Basildon Park, complement the scenary in a way that NR's OLE does not.

    Shame on NR

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 23, 2016, 13:08:48
    "modify the apparatus already installed" seems to be key here. That doesn't mean "replace" in any way.

    Yes, as well as painting, might "modification" include the removal of surplus lengths of steelwork ?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 23, 2016, 13:41:52
    here's hoping so....it was mentioned the other night


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 23, 2016, 19:44:15
    The heavy GG masts protrude needlessly and wastefully above the portals, although this is partly compensated by hanging the feeder wire on them.

    Are the protrusions needless?  I seem to recall it being said they were for the 50kV cables that fed the autotransformers.

    The OLE in other areas does not seem to have these faults. This casual approach to appearance and materials use is not what I expect from Chartered Engineers that have had to pass an "engineer in society" exam.

    Sadly these days designs are not done by Chartered Engineers for a location They are standard designs for standard manufactured product that will fit everywhere with little thought to location.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 23, 2016, 19:50:29
    I'm certainly not going to defend them as works of art, but, slightly bizarrely, I find the various designs of gantry fit into the landscape better when the wires have been strung on them as they don't look so irregular.  Perhaps that's just me though!  As I've said before, I'm personally more concerned the design means better much reliability than aesthetics.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 23, 2016, 22:52:26
    The heavy GG masts protrude needlessly and wastefully above the portals, although this is partly compensated by hanging the feeder wire on them.

    Are the protrusions needless?  I seem to recall it being said they were for the 50kV cables that fed the autotransformers.

    The OLE in other areas does not seem to have these faults. This casual approach to appearance and materials use is not what I expect from Chartered Engineers that have had to pass an "engineer in society" exam.

    Sadly these days designs are not done by Chartered Engineers for a location They are standard designs for standard manufactured product that will fit everywhere with little thought to location.   

    The system design, the system spec, the structural design, the OLE mechanical design etc will all have been done and signed off by Chartered Engineers or Engineers with many years of railway experience.

    The constraints placed on NR by DfT and the ORR was to design and build a robust electrification system that had a long (100 year) life expectancy, that would not suffer the same failures as Mk3 OLE also meets the requirements of Electricity at Work Regs, BS EN 51022, and TSI's.

    OLE is to some elegant to others it is a abomination. Not even Mk3 headspan is low impact


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 24, 2016, 13:41:16
    I'm certainly not going to defend them as works of art, but, slightly bizarrely, I find the various designs of gantry fit into the landscape better when the wires have been strung on them as they don't look so irregular.  Perhaps that's just me though!  As I've said before, I'm personally more concerned the design means better much reliability than aesthetics.
    That makes sense, actually. Once the wires are up it will (maybe) look like a whole rather than a series of protrusions. Moreover, I think once it's been in use a few years, it will be accepted as having a purpose. (And in a hundred years it will be subject to a preservation order, like an early Victorian mill that was once dark and satanic but is now a National Trust destination.)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 26, 2016, 12:18:57
    That makes sense, actually. Once the wires are up it will (maybe) look like a whole rather than a series of protrusions. Moreover, I think once it's been in use a few years, it will be accepted as having a purpose. (And in a hundred years it will be subject to a preservation order, like an early Victorian mill that was once dark and satanic but is now a National Trust destination.)

    Not quite.

    The Victorian railways took care with amenity whether visual or physical as the architecture of their stations shows, having both style and air/light/shelter. Even their engineering structures were balanced and tidy and so won acceptance. After Victorian opulence, the grouping companies' and early LT/BR's leaner art deco designs are still widely admired (and copied abroad).

    I admire the Japanese design approaches, which major on eliminating waste, whether of material or effort. If one allows 100kg/m for the projections, we have about 160t of under- or not used steelwork between Reading and Didcot alone producing the appearance of temporary but substantial scaffolding. The GWR and NR's superb technical design deserve a better visual finish.

    If it looks a mess it probably is a mess.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 26, 2016, 12:29:02
    I admire the Japanese design approaches, which major on eliminating waste, whether of material or effort.

    So this isn't what you'd call a mess?   ;)

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/JRE-TEC-E5_omiya.JPG/1920px-JRE-TEC-E5_omiya.JPG (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/JRE-TEC-E5_omiya.JPG/1920px-JRE-TEC-E5_omiya.JPG)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 26, 2016, 13:46:52
    That makes sense, actually. Once the wires are up it will (maybe) look like a whole rather than a series of protrusions. Moreover, I think once it's been in use a few years, it will be accepted as having a purpose. (And in a hundred years it will be subject to a preservation order, like an early Victorian mill that was once dark and satanic but is now a National Trust destination.)

    Not quite.

    The Victorian railways took care with amenity whether visual or physical as the architecture of their stations shows, having both style and air/light/shelter. Even their engineering structures were balanced and tidy and so won acceptance. After Victorian opulence, the grouping companies' and early LT/BR's leaner art deco designs are still widely admired (and copied abroad).

    I admire the Japanese design approaches, which major on eliminating waste, whether of material or effort. If one allows 100kg/m for the projections, we have about 160t of under- or not used steelwork between Reading and Didcot alone producing the appearance of temporary but substantial scaffolding. The GWR and NR's superb technical design deserve a better visual finish.

    If it looks a mess it probably is a mess.

    OTC

    I agree with OTC.  As I^ve said before, it isn^t about reliability or aesthetics, it^s about reliability and aesthetics.  Good design can and should achieve that. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 16:53:21
    Design is almost always a series of compromises in my experience. 

    Many of the Victorian structures which we regard as aesthetically pleasing were criticised as being ugly in their time. 

    The difficulty here is that they the ole equipment needs to be about reliability, economy and aesthetics. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 26, 2016, 17:01:47
    So this isn't what you'd call a mess? 


    Nice one!

    Depends on setting and context of course. And you could do a lot more than 140mph under it.

    The image is trimmed and in perspective, maximising the impact of the supports.

    All I hesitantly ask is that NR show some awareness of its surroundings, aka good manners.

    OTC



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 26, 2016, 17:10:30
    Design is almost always a series of compromises in my experience. 

    Many of the Victorian structures which we regard as aesthetically pleasing were criticised as being ugly in their time. 

    The difficulty here is that they the ole equipment needs to be about reliability, economy and aesthetics. 

    Aluminium is about ^1,000 per tonne, so nothing very economical about ^160,000 of underused aluminium above the booms which does nothing for reliability. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 26, 2016, 17:19:18
    Aluminium is about ^1,000 per tonne, so nothing very economical about ^160,000 of underused aluminium above the booms which does nothing for reliability. 

    I thought it was made of galvanised mild steel, but that is of little relevance.

    If (and I do not know) the extra steel is to allow them all to be made to a standard size, rather than each one being different.  Then the reduced manufacturing and logistics costs could easily outweigh the additional cost of metal.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 26, 2016, 17:49:43
    Mark 1 seemed to work.  (without the siding!)

    (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/new-sidings-keeps-deliveries-on-track-at-stafford-rail-development)


    try:

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/new-sidings-keeps-deliveries-on-track-at-stafford-rail-development

    (link won't embed)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 26, 2016, 18:03:33
    You mean this?

    (http://cdn.prgloo.com/media/3a9a383670d248e18514e50088f37fc8.jpg?width=640&height=960)

     ;)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 26, 2016, 20:13:54
    Well a lot of work went into the Mark 1 design during the late 1950s/early 1960s.  if you want to really understand how it came about this document gives the full story with the particular part on structures etc. on pages 308-321 and 350-399 here: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BTC_ElectrificationConference1960.pdf

    Health Warning: This is a very large PDF file and may take some time to download ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 26, 2016, 20:41:07
    There are photographs of the Series 1 booms at the bottom of the page here and personally I don't think they are as bad as some are making out.  In particular look at Photos 7 and 8 (click on the photographs to enlarge them).  http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/Series-1.html


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 26, 2016, 20:59:55
    In the 1960 document I quoted above I thought this was the telling moment on page 308:

    1.5 Aesthetic Design
    To ensure structure designs which are individually and collectively
    satisfying, a Design Consultant has been employed to
    examine and advise on all basic proposals with beneficial
    results. The effect will be noticed particularly on later sections,
    where this consideration has not had to give way to the need
    to work to a very close programme.


    ........and on page 340:

    Special attention in design, detailing and workmanship has
    been given to ensure a high degree of resistance to corrosion,
    and also to aesthetical considerations in the appearance of the
    structures, not only in standard equipment, but in special
    designs connected with important station construction, so that
    the appearance of the electrical equipment will merge successfully
    with the architectural features of new station buildings


    Of course as a Signal Engineer I am not really qualified to comment too much (however, the look of some modern signal structures is truly horrendous and far worse than the Series 1 OLE :P)

     ;) ::) :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 26, 2016, 21:22:47
    If you'd had highlighter pens in the 1960s, I'm sure you'd have marked those particular paragraphs.  ;) :D ;D

    In fact, having researched my point, I discover that highlighter pens were invented in 1962.  :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 26, 2016, 21:33:49
    Errmmm... I don't think "dark, satanic mills" was an aesthetic reference. Or rather, it was aesthetic, but not primarily visual. The National Trust does appear to be largely aesthetically motivated, but I'm not too sure it would meet Blake's approval either. Perhaps I should have followed my post with a (!).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 27, 2016, 10:03:53
    Errmmm... I don't think "dark, satanic mills" was an aesthetic reference. Or rather, it was aesthetic, but not primarily visual. The National Trust does appear to be largely aesthetically motivated, but I'm not too sure it would meet Blake's approval either. Perhaps I should have followed my post with a (!).

    The Mk1 OLE you see on the WCML and its secondary routes has been modified quite a bit over the years; the compound design was simplified in the 80's and 90's.  The compound design had 3 OLE wires - contact wire, catenary wire (the very top wire) and the compound wire in between the 2 all of which was copper with ceramic insulators and very heavy.  The Mk1 has had its issues bridal wires parting, birds nesting in amongst the gondola insulators are just some.    The Mk1 structures have there limitations when it comes to supporting the auto transformer feed in some locations.

    GEWP will be using a much harder drawn contact wire with polymeric insulators tensioned with "tensorex" and not counter weights.  The tension will be higher on GWML to allow for the 225 kmh (140 mph) aspiration also for TSI compliant pans.

    Are the GEWP structures ugly yep and so are the WCML, ECML and the GE / LTS, the railways in the UK needs to finally convert to electric traction we are 60 or 70 years late in doing this.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on March 27, 2016, 11:28:19
    Are the GEWP structures ugly yep and so are the WCML, ECML
    While all three may be considered ugly by some, I'm sure they aren't considered equally ugly. The East Coast OHLE in this pic (not one of mine) (http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/42541) is a little unsightly, but far less obtrusive than most of the new stuff Network Rail is installing. One way this ECML OHLE could be further improved aestheticly I think would be making the main vertical posts cylindrical (like lamposts) (I've probably already posted this earlier in the topic, but I can't remember for sure).

    Quote from: Electric train link=topic=5066.msg192995#msg192995 date=14Aesthetic 59069433
    the railways in the UK needs to finally convert to electric traction we are 60 or 70 years late in doing this.
    Agreed, but I'd much rather we did it with a strong regard for aesthetics.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 27, 2016, 15:50:35
    Certainly the railways need to electrify, with regard for aesthetics in all measures ^ which might mean accepting some structures which are ugly but efficient or have other values.

    Moving away from the pretty><ugly, to the wider scope of electrification, beyond what is currently being done on the GWML: it's my understanding ^ which could well be incorrect, I'm not an engineer ^ that the main benefits of electric traction over diesel are efficiency and cost of energy, reduced pollution (air and noise pollution). In performance terms, the first would seem to be much improved acceleration, with higher top speeds being more dependent on track and signalling as well as arguably benefiting fewer services. With this in mind, would it not be more beneficial to prioritise electrification of stopping services? Every stop is followed by acceleration, so the more stops, the more time is gained by higher acceleration.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 27, 2016, 16:20:50
    In terms of performance it certainly would be, you could argue either way in terms of capacity, but in terms of not having loads of SET trains idle but being paid for it definitely isn't.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 27, 2016, 17:53:18
    With this in mind, would it not be more beneficial to prioritise electrification of stopping services? Every stop is followed by acceleration, so the more stops, the more time is gained by higher acceleration.

    To be fair this is generally what has happened in the past, when the railway had overall control of its projects. Electrification would start from the terminal spreading out to include the stopping services initially. These were the ones most in need of greater capacity and the hardest to work with steam. Some enormous tank locos were devised for these purposes. The lower marginal costs then allowed outer suburban services to be electrified progressively, until, on the Southern, they reached the beach!

    The first WC electrification was criticised for starting at the wrong (Manchester) end but 25kV was very experimental and needed proving outside of a London main line. In any case the Watfords were already dc.

    What has complicated the GWEP is Crossrail being quite separate and the need for proving the new (and on-time!) bought out Hitachis. Otherwise the sensible and cost effective approach would have been to convert the Oxfords as soon as possible, much earlier than 2017/8. The scheme would have begun to pay for itself sooner and avoided the excessive apparent first cost. I'm sure GWR would have preferred to compete with Chiltern using 319's rather than turbos.

    Roll out the wires,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 27, 2016, 18:16:22
    Are the GEWP structures ugly yep and so are the WCML, ECML
    While all three may be considered ugly by some, I'm sure they aren't considered equally ugly. The East Coast OHLE in this pic (not one of mine) (http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/42541) is a little unsightly, but far less obtrusive than most of the new stuff Network Rail is installing. One way this ECML OHLE could be further improved aestheticly I think would be making the main vertical posts cylindrical (like lamposts) (I've probably already posted this earlier in the topic, but I can't remember for sure).

    The price paid for the very slender design of the ECML OHLE is its poor reliability. The very poor reliability of the ECML equipment was one reason electrification was opposed by many - indeed you can read some on this community making that point when there was an OHLE failure outside Paddington recently.  But that is old style OHLE.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 27, 2016, 18:29:55
    The price paid for the very slender design of the ECML OHLE is its poor reliability. The very poor reliability of the ECML equipment was one reason electrification was opposed by many - indeed you can read some on this community making that point when there was an OHLE failure outside Paddington recently.  But that is old style OHLE.

    Indeed, I have previously expressed doubts about the potential unreliability of the GW electrification, having previously suffered from the failed East Coast scheme.
    I find the very substantial structures being erected at present on the GWR route to be at least somewhat re-assuring.

    I remain a little doubtful, but less so than in the past.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on March 27, 2016, 19:49:26
    And to clarify, headspan suffers from a) being easier to bring down b) when it comes down, all four lines are taken out and c) it takes much longer to put back together again.  So both the frequency and severity of disruptions are magnified several-fold.

    If money were no object then the overlap between the introduction of IEP and the withdrawal of the HSTs would be used to run the east coast on diesel for a few months whilst they replaced the east coast headspan (at least north of Hitchin). It's a once in a generation opportunity to do it at a lower cost and less disruption.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 27, 2016, 20:22:17
    Moving away from the pretty><ugly, to the wider scope of electrification, beyond what is currently being done on the GWML: it's my understanding ^ which could well be incorrect, I'm not an engineer ^ that the main benefits of electric traction over diesel are efficiency and cost of energy, reduced pollution (air and noise pollution). In performance terms, the first would seem to be much improved acceleration, with higher top speeds being more dependent on track and signalling as well as arguably benefiting fewer services. With this in mind, would it not be more beneficial to prioritise electrification of stopping services? Every stop is followed by acceleration, so the more stops, the more time is gained by higher acceleration.

    In practice, acceleration from a stop may not be that much better than with diesel power - in part because it's limited by adhesion, and by "weight over the wheels". In addition, electric motors (especially with a modern variable-frequency drive) give pretty much a constant torque (and traction force) at low speed, with power slowly rising with speed. When the power reaches the maximum for the motor (or the source) then at higher speeds it's the power that is constant, with torque falling off with speed.

    So the real advantage of electrics is better acceleration at high speed. How high is "higher"? For IEP it was expected the power limit threshold would be at about 55 km/hr, or only 35 mi/hr. So electrics do still have a big advantage, not just at stops but when speeding up after every speed check.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 27, 2016, 22:42:49
    The price paid for the very slender design of the ECML OHLE is its poor reliability. The very poor reliability of the ECML equipment was one reason electrification was opposed by many - indeed you can read some on this community making that point when there was an OHLE failure outside Paddington recently.  But that is old style OHLE.

    Let's not be too hard on the Mark 3 OLE. The system was supplied to the KCR (Kowloon Canton Railway) in 1982 in Typhoon proof mode!

    It was half the price of the previous Mark 1 but required more and cleverer maintenance, such as an  O level or two in geometry. At the low point in RT/NR's privatised maintenance history, this wasn't around. Today's powers and speeds need roundly double the tension in the contact wire and catenary, so a bit more than washing line needs to be strung between the masts, if enhanced use is to be made of the system.

    Time marches on,

    OTC 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 27, 2016, 23:26:51
    It was half the price of the previous Mark 1 but required more and cleverer maintenance, such as an O level or two in geometry. At the low point in RT/NR's privatised maintenance history, this wasn't around. Today's powers and speeds need roundly double the tension in the contact wire and catenary, so a bit more than washing line needs to be strung between the masts, if enhanced use is to be made of the system. 

    Priceless!  ;) :D ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 28, 2016, 10:47:03
    If money were no object then the overlap between the introduction of IEP and the withdrawal of the HSTs would be used to run the east coast on diesel for a few months whilst they replaced the east coast headspan (at least north of Hitchin). It's a once in a generation opportunity to do it at a lower cost and less disruption.

    They have already done a trial fit to replace headspan with portal on the ECML near Potters Bar, it would probably be done overnight and/or during normal weekend possessions in the same way as it is being done between Paddington and Airport Junction at the moment.   There'd be no real need for running on diesel for a few months,  as it could only be done when trains were not running anyway.

    There's a contractor's video/photos of the procedure as used in the Paddington approaches here:   https://vimeo.com/150907486 (https://vimeo.com/150907486)

    Shame about the music, but it does show how the new registration arms etc are fitted around the existing catenary and contact wires, which remain in use.

    Paul   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 28, 2016, 10:59:25
    Thanks for linking the video, Paul.  Hopefully the strong winds today aren't affecting such planned work too much!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on March 28, 2016, 11:27:07
    That's interesting, so thanks Paul. I'm not convinced it could be done in an overnight possession, so wonder how long it would take to do a meaningful amount of the ECML.  That's why I thought a period where the power were switched off, the headspan removed and portal built could be a much more cost effective approach. Yes, the work would still be done overnight, but as we've seen on the GWML, that's perfectly feasible. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on March 28, 2016, 18:31:37
    And guess what - long delays on the ECML tonight because of overhead line problems at Sandy. Delays showing of up to 3 1/2hrs, although things starting to move again.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 28, 2016, 19:11:09
    That's interesting, so thanks Paul. I'm not convinced it could be done in an overnight possession, so wonder how long it would take to do a meaningful amount of the ECML.  That's why I thought a period where the power were switched off, the headspan removed and portal built could be a much more cost effective approach. Yes, the work would still be done overnight, but as we've seen on the GWML, that's perfectly feasible. 

    The vid does say all done in 20 hours, and that will be an all lines block.

    The ECML have been concentrating their headspan to portal conversations at the Neutral Section locations and a few key junctions / locactions


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 28, 2016, 20:57:10
    With this in mind, would it not be more beneficial to prioritise electrification of stopping services? Every stop is followed by acceleration, so the more stops, the more time is gained by higher acceleration.

    To be fair this is generally what has happened in the past, when the railway had overall control of its projects. Electrification would start from the terminal spreading out to include the stopping services initially. These were the ones most in need of greater capacity and the hardest to work with steam. Some enormous tank locos were devised for these purposes. The lower marginal costs then allowed outer suburban services to be electrified progressively, until, on the Southern, they reached the beach!

    The first WC electrification was criticised for starting at the wrong (Manchester) end but 25kV was very experimental and needed proving outside of a London main line. In any case the Watfords were already dc.

    What has complicated the GWEP is Crossrail being quite separate and the need for proving the new (and on-time!) bought out Hitachis. Otherwise the sensible and cost effective approach would have been to convert the Oxfords as soon as possible, much earlier than 2017/8. The scheme would have begun to pay for itself sooner and avoided the excessive apparent first cost. I'm sure GWR would have preferred to compete with Chiltern using 319's rather than turbos.

    Roll out the wires,

    OTC
    Moving away from the pretty><ugly, to the wider scope of electrification, beyond what is currently being done on the GWML: it's my understanding ^ which could well be incorrect, I'm not an engineer ^ that the main benefits of electric traction over diesel are efficiency and cost of energy, reduced pollution (air and noise pollution). In performance terms, the first would seem to be much improved acceleration, with higher top speeds being more dependent on track and signalling as well as arguably benefiting fewer services. With this in mind, would it not be more beneficial to prioritise electrification of stopping services? Every stop is followed by acceleration, so the more stops, the more time is gained by higher acceleration.

    In practice, acceleration from a stop may not be that much better than with diesel power - in part because it's limited by adhesion, and by "weight over the wheels". In addition, electric motors (especially with a modern variable-frequency drive) give pretty much a constant torque (and traction force) at low speed, with power slowly rising with speed. When the power reaches the maximum for the motor (or the source) then at higher speeds it's the power that is constant, with torque falling off with speed.

    So the real advantage of electrics is better acceleration at high speed. How high is "higher"? For IEP it was expected the power limit threshold would be at about 55 km/hr, or only 35 mi/hr. So electrics do still have a big advantage, not just at stops but when speeding up after every speed check.
    Thanks.

    To be clear, I wasn't meaning GWML electrification should have been done differently, it was a general question. Partly from my observation off the electrified suburban tracks around eg Birmingham and that in some countries "electric train" and "local train" are equivalent. (And I'm also not saying they've done it right and we've done it wrong; different places have different needs and possibilities, obviously.)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on March 29, 2016, 11:53:31
    And to clarify, headspan suffers from a) being easier to bring down b) when it comes down, all four lines are taken out and c) it takes much longer to put back together again.  So both the frequency and severity of disruptions are magnified several-fold.
    I don't think all ECML OHLE is the same. I'm 99% sure that the picture I posted does NOT show the type you are talking about, I think the OHLE which comes down on all tracks has a horrizonal wire going across all the tracks, from which the contact wires are hung, apparently. The picture I showed does not have this horrizontal contact wire, the tracks have their own independent supports.

    As well as being poor operationally (because of the tendancy to de-wire all tracks), I think the horrizonal wire version looks more cluttered than the OHLE in the link I posted. The 'portals' in the 'headspan conversions' video somebody posted are also messy; basically I think any form of OHLE I have seen that has a horrizontal element spanning more than a single line looks very ugly. Are there loading guage constraints that prevent the installation of independent structures for the middle tracks of a 4-track railway?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 29, 2016, 15:53:02
    I don't think all ECML OHLE is the same. I'm 99% sure that the picture I posted does NOT show the type you are talking about, I think the OHLE which comes down on all tracks has a horrizonal wire going across all the tracks, from which the contact wires are hung, apparently. The picture I showed does not have this horrizontal contact wire, the tracks have their own independent supports.
    You're right that the whole ECML is not done in the same way, some sections do have completely independent single track cantilevers as in your linked picture.

    Elsewhere there are either four track or two track headspans, which have a collection of various span wires, insulators and registration arms, forming a support 'mesh' but the contact wire is still supported in the same way as any other, with a catenary running along the length of the track with droppers every few yards to hold the contact wire.

    This earlier thread was about the MML, but it's basically the same stuff as much of the ECML:
    http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=13665.0
    includes this pic:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Otterington_railway_station_MMB_01.jpg

    Even if the other wires don't fall down, they'll go out of normal alignment and a pantograph will go off the wire, rise too high, then be automatically dropped...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Billhere on March 29, 2016, 16:31:27
    ECML was known in the trade as being built on the cheap and they have suffered the consequences ever since.

    As this is the first major electrification scheme for years perhaps they aren't taking any chances with this one and making it really substantial to avoid any problems when the wind blows.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on March 29, 2016, 22:13:37
    ECML was known in the trade as being built on the cheap and they have suffered the consequences ever since.

    As this is the first major electrification scheme for years perhaps they aren't taking any chances with this one and making it really substantial to avoid any problems when the wind blows.

    Whisper it quietly, but it's partially about meeting new European technical standards for interoperability (TSI's) which require heavier gauge wires under greater tension so you get less lateral and horizontal movement. That way you can run trains with multiple pantographs at speeds of up to 140mph.

    Part of the design also facilitates quick assembly, so the cross-spans pretty much clip onto the uprights rather than having to be drilled in-situ.

    Not just the GWML, I think I saw Noel Dolphin of Furrer+Frey quote that there was something like ^1.5bn being spent on replacing electrification kit elsewhere on the network. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on March 29, 2016, 22:30:48
    I don't think all ECML OHLE is the same. I'm 99% sure that the picture I posted does NOT show the type you are talking about, I think the OHLE which comes down on all tracks has a horrizonal wire going across all the tracks, from which the contact wires are hung, apparently. The picture I showed does not have this horrizontal contact wire, the tracks have their own independent supports.

    No, because that picture is only 2 track. Headspan is (was) typically used on the four track sections where there is rarely room in the middle for separate structures.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 30, 2016, 11:31:30
    ...
    includes this pic:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Otterington_railway_station_MMB_01.jpg
    ...
    There's been some talk about painting portals and uprights green in order for them to blend in better with the landscape, but that photo shows that weathered, dirty, maybe slightly corroded unpainted metal actually matches agricultural land very well.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on March 30, 2016, 12:29:39
    I say chrome plate them and adorn with fairy lights.  :P ;) ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on April 20, 2016, 07:59:04
    I have not travelled this way for  wile and have now bee a couple of times in the last week.

    Between Didcot and Reading almost all the columns are up and progress is being made on the knitting. Is there a current date for this section to be finished?

    West of Didcot The bridges at Wantage Road and Shrivenham seem to be nearly complete and the bridge at Hanney seems well under way. Virtually all the piling seems to have been done and the metalwork is going up east of Wantage Road.  The only remaining big barrier is the silence over when work will take place, to close Stocks Lane crossing and lower the track under High Street Bridge at Steventon


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 20, 2016, 08:53:56
    September is when the testing is due to start Reading-Didcot, and NR insist they're still on schedule with this


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on April 20, 2016, 08:56:22
    Most posts complete with dangly bits ready for wiring are installed from Taplow towards Maidenhead.

    But this is crossrail not GWML.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 20, 2016, 11:05:30
    Most posts complete with dangly bits ready for wiring are installed from Taplow towards Maidenhead.

    But this is crossrail not GWML.
    Relief lines only then? Crossrail aren't going to be using the main lines are they.

    Press release from NR regarding the electrification programme for the Severn Tunnel, which includes a short video:

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/130-year-old-severn-tunnel-to-get-railway-upgrade (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/130-year-old-severn-tunnel-to-get-railway-upgrade)
    Is absolutely everything required to electrify the line through the tunnel being done in this long closure in September and October? Will the Severn Tunnel be a fully electrified line (perhaps just waiting for the power to be switched on to energise the conductor rail) on 22nd October or is there another long closrue planned nearer the new target date of complete electrification between Cardiff and Paddington in 2018?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 20, 2016, 11:32:47
    Relief lines only then? Crossrail aren't going to be using the main lines are they.

    The Crossrail part of the project, (although being undertaken by NR's contractors), already included the full four track railway as far as Maidenhead.   This is also why certain main line side platforms are being extended, because Crossrail would still have had to be able to run on the mains during routine maintenance work on the reliefs resulting in a two track timetable.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on April 20, 2016, 16:02:02
    September is when the testing is due to start Reading-Didcot, and NR insist they're still on schedule with this

    I'm being pedantic, but I think it's technically Tilehurst to Didcot that has to be available for testing, would have thought that could be comfortably achieved looking at current progress, though I'm sure they will want to do a *lot* of testing before the IEPs get anywhere near it, last thing they will want is a dewirement or other failure being caught on camera.

    Incidentally, the technical term for the "dangly bits" is "small part steelwork".

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 20, 2016, 16:09:53
    I'm sure the trains will be running into/out of Reading?

    They won't want to (can they even?) turn back at Tilehurst? And they surely win't want to be testing raising pantographs on the miove each time?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxman on April 20, 2016, 16:22:49
    I have been told that wiring of Reading station is excluded from the September deadline.

    Two points:

    - Bi modes simplify the problem - could stop and change mode at Tilehurst if they did not want to do this on the move, but I would have thought this will be a key part of the testing anyway.
    - it may be the intention to wire the western entrance into the depot or, alternatively, the passenger loop, which would allow reversal.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 20, 2016, 16:24:41
    They could, and my guess is probably will, exit from the western end exit of the depot initially.  That would mean the station area would not need to be ready.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on April 20, 2016, 19:36:53
    Incidentally, the technical term for the "dangly bits" is "small part steelwork".

    Thank you for that clarification, Noggin: I've taken the opportunity to add that to the Coffee Shop forum's 'acronyms / abbreviations (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/acronyms.html)' page.  ;) :D ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on April 20, 2016, 20:40:28
    Think I prefer the more sophisticated sounding term of 'dangly bits'


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 20, 2016, 22:10:12
    Comfirmed by Mark Hopwood as "just west of Reading"...so dies exclude Reading station


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 21, 2016, 08:37:25
    The additional Hayes-Pad electric services have been postponed & will now start in September....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on April 21, 2016, 09:49:07
    Noel Dolphin at Furrer+Frey tweeted yesterday that energisation would be in 43 days


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 21, 2016, 09:51:18
    Mark Hopwood showed a slide last night that had "Energisation Complete Date September 30" for the test track


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on April 21, 2016, 10:38:25
    Mark Hopwood showed a slide last night that had "Energisation Complete Date September 30" for the test track

    Which is the date quoted in the Hendy report when the test track section would be available for IEP testing.

    I'd expect the contractors would want to have the section energised well before that though I'm sceptical whether it'll be live by the end of next month. However they seem to be making good progress though there's still plenty of work to do at the Didcot end.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on April 21, 2016, 18:13:22
    Hmm.  ::)

    Firstly, I haven't understood more than a few words of it, and secondly, this discussion has gone off at something of a tangent from the original heading of Great Western Main Line electrification. :o

    I'm therefore inclined to go back over the past few pages of posts, and split some of them off into a specific topic of their own. If that's alright with everyone, I'll do it later this evening, when I'll hopefully have a few spare minutes. ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on April 21, 2016, 19:36:00
    Now done: the new topic, covering a wide-ranging discussion on the subject of electricity generally, is at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=16962.0  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on April 22, 2016, 16:46:01
    I^ve noticed, particularly on the UM between Pangbourne and Tilehurst, that some of the ^small part steelwork^ (ie dangly bits) appears to be below the level of the contact wire.  I can see that the support arm for the wire is cranked, but at some locations the cranked arm is almost horizontal nearest the wire, so that the other end of the support arm, and the upright support to which it is fixed, appear to be lower than the contact wire. 

    So, taking into account the width of the pantograph, the dynamic movement of the train, and the lateral stagger of the contact wire, is this situation OK?  Or is there some more adjustment to do to the small part steelwork to ensure it is all above the level of the contact wire?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 22, 2016, 17:48:21
    Might it possibly be where the track is canted over significantly on the faster curves?    (Just a thought though, being finished later is probably the more likely answer...)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on April 22, 2016, 18:12:43
    There are drawings that show the bottom of that fixed arm going below the pantograph, but it's just outside the swept envelope of the pantograph, no doubt including worst-case sway. And very odd it looks sitting here, too.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on April 22, 2016, 18:18:13
    Interesting note in Modern Railways on the Sevrn Tunnel. Apparently there is to be a 5 week stoppage from September to install "conductor rails". Didn't know APT is Dual volatgae as well as bi-mode.

    Probably copied straight from a press release.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 22, 2016, 18:26:07
    Interesting note in Modern Railways on the Sevrn Tunnel. Apparently there is to be a 5 week stoppage from September to install "conductor rails". Didn't know APT is Dual volatgae as well as bi-mode.

    Probably copied straight from a press release.

    It is however how Furrer and Frey usually refer to their rigidly mounted overhead system:

    Quote
    Rigid Overhead Conductor Rail System (ROCS) for narrow tunnels, high reliability and for special applications...

    http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/conductor_rail.html

    I think many people refer to it as bar or beam conductor, but the fixed rail actually carries normal conductor wire in a longitudinal clamping mechanism - which I expect eases the transitions between fixed and 'normal' stuff...

    Their brochure mentions the Severn Tunnel towards the end: 
    http://www.furrerfrey.ch/dam/jcr:5beace53-28a1-40a4-92ab-fe91780f607d/ROCS%20brochure%20Sept%202015.pdf (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/dam/jcr:5beace53-28a1-40a4-92ab-fe91780f607d/ROCS%20brochure%20Sept%202015.pdf)

    Paul






    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on April 22, 2016, 18:57:07
    Thanks for the link Paul, very interesting.  I shall read the F & F brochure over the weekend. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 22, 2016, 20:40:07
    Interesting note in Modern Railways on the Sevrn Tunnel. Apparently there is to be a 5 week stoppage from September to install "conductor rails". Didn't know APT is Dual volatgae as well as bi-mode.

    Probably copied straight from a press release.

    Conductor beam is a good solution for tunnels, I belive Box is also going to be beam.  Whilst it requires more supports than conventional wire every 7 to 12 metres
    where as wire is 50 to 70 metres; the fact it dose not need tensioning just restraining and there is no catenary wire makes for a very compact and low maintanance solution.

    I was the Designated Project Engineer (aka senior client engineer) for TLP Canal Tunnels and St Pancras low level station we install OLE conductor beam in both of those, the section through St Pancras has been in service for over a year and the section just south of the station for 3 years

    The photo shows the beam being installed at Canal Tunnel Jcn.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Worcester_Passenger on April 23, 2016, 04:42:22
    Does the beam zig-zag like the contact wire so as to even out pantograph wear?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on April 23, 2016, 09:27:11
    The beams are under constant pressure in order to maintain the contact with the over head line which is why the line runs from side to side to prevent wear occurring in just one contact area  hope this helps .


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 23, 2016, 12:35:01
    Does the beam zig-zag like the contact wire so as to even out pantograph wear?

    Yes there is still a stagger across the four foot.

    The beams are under constant pressure in order to maintain the contact with the over head line which is why the line runs from side to side to prevent wear occurring in just one contact area  hope this helps .

    There is a low tension used at the mid pont between overlaps to prevent the beam migrating, and I do mean a low tension there are no counter wieghts or auto tension units the tension for the beam is done by a turn buckle.  The contact wire is held in the beam by the shape of the extrusion and insetred by a special tool, the ends of the contact wire have bolted clamps the beam has a ramp up and the clamp is right at then 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on April 25, 2016, 10:15:13
    CAD rendering of the masts to go in Sydney Gardens in case anyone is interested https://twitter.com/NoelDolphin/status/723532084359385088


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 25, 2016, 11:27:41
    CAD rendering of the masts to go in Sydney Gardens in case anyone is interested https://twitter.com/NoelDolphin/status/723532084359385088
    Is there a consultation on this I can send comments too? The vertical section (on the wall) needs to extend to the ground, things that stop in mid air look odd. That's the only part I can see that could be improved, there are other aspects I don't like the look of but I can't think how they could be sorted.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 25, 2016, 11:34:08
    I think the council will have had vast input into this and if they're happy.....but you can try


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on April 25, 2016, 11:39:49
    Does it stop in mid-air? The first frame of the rendering seems to suggest it is sitting on some protruding masonry but, as the drawing rotates, that seems to vanish. Hard to tell really.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 25, 2016, 12:54:14
    Does it stop in mid-air? The first frame of the rendering seems to suggest it is sitting on some protruding masonry but, as the drawing rotates, that seems to vanish. Hard to tell really.
    They definately stop in mid air in this illustration (https://richardwyattblog.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/tpod-2-bath-stakeholder-event-presentation-2-dragged.jpg?w=640), though unlike the rotating drawing it looks like there may be loading gauge issues.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on April 25, 2016, 13:00:02
    Agreed - that makes it much clearer. And I'd suggest you may be right about gauging issues.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on April 25, 2016, 13:14:07
    While I don't think it is likely to find universal favour, I can't think how it could be done better. It seems about as elegant as it could be.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 25, 2016, 16:21:11
    I can't think how it could be done better. It seems about as elegant as it could be.
    I agree. While I don't like several elements, I can't see how it could be done better except for extending those verticals down to the ground if there is room within the loading gauge. Some images suggest there is room, others suggest otherwise.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on April 25, 2016, 17:40:22
    It is of course rather regrettable that Brunel didn't have the foresight to 'future-proof' his Great Western Railway when he built it through the Sydney Gardens in 1840.  ::) :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on April 25, 2016, 18:27:08
    I think however that Brunel would approve of this elegant solution to run OLE through Sydney Gardens. No uprights on the Gardens side and the fencing looks good too.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on April 26, 2016, 14:19:35
    Agreed.  Not a bad design at all.  My hope is that prior to installation of this, they clean and repair the retaining wall and kill off all the buddleia.  Allowing trees to grow in the stonework is a much more serious threat to our heritage that some relatively tasteful OLE equipment.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on April 27, 2016, 10:05:45
    "The first Super Express Trains will enter into passenger service in Summer 2017, and will bring more frequent services, reduced journey times, and more seats once electrification of the line is complete."

    Summer 2017? Where?

    Edit - I've just noted that the Hendy Update report p88 states  "Bi-mode IEP trains will be introduced in Summer 2017".  But question still stands.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on April 27, 2016, 10:29:31
    "The first Super Express Trains will enter into passenger service in Summer 2017, and will bring more frequent services, reduced journey times, and more seats once electrification of the line is complete."

    Summer 2017? Where?

    Edit - I've just noted that the Hendy Update report p88 states  "Bi-mode IEP trains will be introduced in Summer 2017".  But question still stands.

    AFAIK, this first batch (class 800, class 801) are intended to replace the HSTs on everything but long-distance services to Devon and Cornwall via Newbury, which will be given over to the 802's, which have been procured separately and have a slightly different spec.

    However, the 80x's potentially need some gauge clearance work to be complete before they can be introduced, so they might be limited to certain services at first, perhaps Cardiff services?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on April 27, 2016, 10:36:52
    So they'll be on diesel (so 100 mph max) the whole way initially, which will extend journey times.  Difficult PR exercise - "here are the new trains, but it's now 10 minutes longer to London".

    edit .... but I suppose the alternative is that they sit in the sidings doing nothing.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on April 27, 2016, 11:03:18
    However, the 80x's potentially need some gauge clearance work to be complete before they can be introduced, so they might be limited to certain services at first, perhaps Cardiff services?

    I'm getting the impression this isn't as significant a problem as first mooted.   They seem to cope with the North London Line OK on the way to North Pole, (so far), and there's not been any news of them hitting platforms all the way up and down the ECML either.

    Could it be that the design has met the existing infrastructure, rather than the other way around?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on April 27, 2016, 11:35:48
    So they'll be on diesel (so 100 mph max) the whole way initially, which will extend journey times.  Difficult PR exercise - "here are the new trains, but it's now 10 minutes longer to London".

    edit .... but I suppose the alternative is that they sit in the sidings doing nothing.

    ... but ...
    for "all the way" read "just the part of the route where the speed limit is over 100 mi/hr and an HST could have wound itself up to above that",
    we know that (officially) they are allowed to go faster if their little engines can come up with enough horses for the gradient,
    the power:mass ratio of an 800 is slightly higher (7 vs 6.2 by my reckoning - kW/t including all auxiliaries),
    the DMU has far better adhesion so can use its power from lower speed.

    Note that in this quote:
    "The first Super Express Trains will enter into passenger service in Summer 2017, and will bring more frequent services, reduced journey times, and more seats once electrification of the line is complete."
    the new timetable and all its goodies are not promised until after "electrification is complete". So any use until that change will be on individual services.

    I'd imagined that during the first year (800s due May 2017 to Feb 2018) priority would be to get the HST refurb/cascade for Scotrail underway, by reducing fleet size, so something like:
    1. replace HSTs pretending to be big turbos on peak services
    2. replace a few power cars so unreliable they need scrapping (if any).
    3. replace any other HST services with more stops than most.

    It will be interesting to see if they runs in ones or twos during this period, won't it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 27, 2016, 11:43:37
    My understanding is that the first services will be replacing HSTs on the North Cotswolds. Those HStTs allocated to Scotrail are on a tight deadline with no opportunity for delay.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Stroud Valleys on April 27, 2016, 12:42:03
    that would tie in with the long dwell times on the existing timetable, plus not many 125 mph areas for this route. That line and the golden valley would make sense as the first delivery of services to release some trains for the scots


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 27, 2016, 13:39:53
    So they'll be on diesel (so 100 mph max) the whole way initially, which will extend journey times.
    Summer 2017 is some time away yet, there will be some sections electrified by then, so they probably won't be on diesel 'all the way'. Alot of the way maybe. Also I think there have been claims that the pre-series 800s have reached 125mph on diesel on the ECML during tests, and there's apparently no rule saying a lower linespeed applies if they're running on diesel. Thus it is just a question of whether they have enough power to reach 125mph on diesel on an adverse gradient, downhill they'd get to 125mph eventually. As most of the 125mph sections of the GWML are relatively level the journey times probably won't be much slower, particularly if enough wires are up by then.

    I'm getting the impression this isn't as significant a problem as first mooted.   They seem to cope with the North London Line OK on the way to North Pole, (so far), and there's not been any news of them hitting platforms all the way up and down the ECML either.

    Could it be that the design has met the existing infrastructure, rather than the other way around?
    Or it could be that only a small amount of work was required to clear them on those routes and Network Rail has already done it. As for platforms on the ECML, have the 800s gone as far as York yet? As far as I know all/most ECML stations south of York aren't sharply curved, and the 800s are probably no wider than existing stock so on straight track there should be few if any issues.

    My understanding is that the first services will be replacing HSTs on the North Cotswolds. Those HStTs allocated to Scotrail are on a tight deadline with no opportunity for delay.
    Interesting question of where the first 800s will be used. As well ScotRail wanting their IC125s, it is said elsewhere on this forum that Gand Central are taking on the current 5 Great Western class 180s from 2017, so perhaps the first route will be the Cotswolds line as you suggest but with the 180s going first followed by IC125s when sufficient 800s are available. Just a guess.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 27, 2016, 14:29:53
    No "when...available" as I understand it - those Scots IC125s are going on a set date.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 27, 2016, 15:09:05
    My understanding is that the first services will be replacing HSTs on the North Cotswolds. Those HStTs allocated to Scotrail are on a tight deadline with no opportunity for delay.
    Interesting question of where the first 800s will be used. As well ScotRail wanting their IC125s, it is said elsewhere on this forum that Gand Central are taking on the current 5 Great Western class 180s from 2017, so perhaps the first route will be the Cotswolds line as you suggest but with the 180s going first followed by IC125s when sufficient 800s are available. Just a guess.

    The North Cotswold Line, and indeed Paddington-Oxford's that are HSTs (which are increasing from May) are indeed the obvious first services to be 800s, replacing the 180s and HSTs will at least get a small number of them into service on a route that won't be impacted at all journey time wise.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on April 27, 2016, 18:12:45
    I accept the point about journey times not being adversely affected if Class 800^s replace HST^s on North Cotswold.  Realtime Trains shows that the major point to point timings on this route for HST^s and Turbos are within a minute or two, so Class 800^s should be OK.

    I presume that Class 800 acceleration on diesel is better than Turbos but worse than HST^s.  As a bonus their automatic doors may help dwell times compared to HST^s (assuming, of course, that the door closing process is quicker than Voyagers).   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 27, 2016, 18:42:54
    I presume that Class 800 acceleration on diesel is better than Turbos but worse than HST^s.  As a bonus their automatic doors may help dwell times compared to HST^s (assuming, of course, that the door closing process is quicker than Voyagers).   

    There will be a big difference in dwell times - even if the rather pedestrian doors of a Voyager are fitted.  ;)

    Acceleration wise, on diesel I'd imagine that they will be better than HSTs in the lower ranges (up to 40mph) and comparable from then until the higher ranges (90+ mph) where they'll start to struggle.  So, not as good as a 180, but not too far off them and absolutely fine (probably better than a Turbo/HST) on routes with fairly frequent stops and a 100mph top speed like the North Cotswold Line.  After all, they've been specified to run on diesel on the route beyond Oxford for the foreseeable future.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on April 27, 2016, 20:16:08
    Acceleration wise, on diesel I'd imagine that they will be better than HSTs in the lower ranges (up to 40mph) and comparable from then until the higher ranges (90+ mph) where they'll start to struggle.  So, not as good as a 180, but not too far off them and absolutely fine (probably better than a Turbo/HST) on routes with fairly frequent stops and a 100mph top speed like the North Cotswold Line.  After all, they've been specified to run on diesel on the route beyond Oxford for the foreseeable future.

    That sounds about right. The gross power:weight is a little better than an HST, but nothing like as high as a 220 or 180. Its traction should be better than any of them, with more than half its axles driven. How much of that gross power gets to the wheels is one of the unknowns. The others kick in at high speed, where air resistance dominates. Longer is better for this, as the ends are a big drag, so a 9-car 800 should beat an HST. For a 5-car, or two of them, it's less clear - ten cars is good, but a big notch halfway along to screw up the airstream is bad. So it could go either way.

    Two little puzzles:

    How much energy would be saved by putting a decent faired join between streamlines train units? I'm sure that's not so hugely difficult to do as everyone makes out, and would be as green (but maybe not the new GWR green). And it would give you bragging rights over TGVs.

    And Hitachi draw their train with 25m carriages and 1m gaps, which would, of course, add to drag. Isn't that a huge gap - far bigger than other trains? Of course, it might be draughtsman's licence. So, if anyone comes face to side with one and has a tape measure on them ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on April 27, 2016, 21:54:17
    Quote
    but it's now 10 minutes longer to London

    Not sure what route was being referred to, but I was recently on a 166 that managed PAD to RDG non-stop in 29 mins. I think the fastest HST's do it in 24 or 25.

    So if a 90mph Turbo can do it in that time, an 800 (of whatever flavour/speed capability) isn't going to make a lot of difference.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Billhere on April 27, 2016, 22:58:18
    Horses for courses. I had a cab ride on an HST from Oxford to Worcester and back to Reading a few years ago. The Driver said they struggled over the Cotswolds because of the gradients and the distance between stops didn't allow them time to really get going, and I have to say the engines behind my head didn't sound comfortable.

    On the other hand we had a dead stand at Didcot East to let a Turbo go by Up Relief and it was at Goring before we caught it on the Up Main. It was once we actually got to a ton that you could feel the engine stretching out into a gallop, the nearest analogy was a race horse lengthening its stride and was really doing what it was made for. It sounded very comfortable at 125mph.

    Never a popular choice with Drivers over the Cotswolds especially with the ones that terminated at Great Malvern and went into the turn back siding at Malvern Wells. Because of complaints from residents they had to switch the London end engine off, and the track wasn't level enough to restart it until they got to Shrub Hill.

    An educational trip, and a real eye opener in managing to keep time with a big heavy train in varying circumstances.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on April 27, 2016, 23:38:09
    Not sure what route was being referred to, but I was recently on a 166 that managed PAD to RDG non-stop in 29 mins. I think the fastest HST's do it in 24 or 25.

    Paddington to Reading could be done in just under 23 minutes. I used to regularly catch the 0800 HST from Paddington, and if it had a clear run, I could sprint down Platform 4 as was (I was younger then...) and catch the 0824 to Wokingham from 4A. That was in 1998/9, though, before the advent of defensive driving or Heathrow Express.

    Agreed that 800s should fare well on the Cotswold Line, and 802s should be even better.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 28, 2016, 08:38:16
    high speed, where air resistance dominates.

    ...

    a big notch halfway along to screw up the airstream is bad.
    A streamlined notch though, which I'm guessing is not as bad as a class 90 when coupled to some stock
     /[][]\ |[][][][][][][][][][][][]||[][]\
     /[][][][][][][][]\ /[][][][][][][][]\

    How much energy would be saved by putting a decent faired join between streamlines train units? I'm sure that's not so hugely difficult to do as everyone makes out
    Or just stop messing around with the idea of multiple working with units that can do over 110mph and hence will have large cab zones and can't have UEGs. If it can do more than 110mph, build it long enough for the job so you don't need to work it in multiple, save all that cab space and duplicate kitchens etc..

    UEGs = Unit End Gangways


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on April 28, 2016, 08:53:43
    If it can do more than 110mph, build it long enough for the job so you don't need to work it in multiple, save all that cab space and duplicate kitchens etc..

    So you mean either run uneconomically long trains to some places where demand is insufficient for a full train or say they cannot have 110mph trains. If you run over long trains we will either need more 800's or run less trains.  More trains cost money which this government will want to put on increasing fares still further.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on April 28, 2016, 09:46:59
    If it can do more than 110mph, build it long enough for the job so you don't need to work it in multiple, save all that cab space and duplicate kitchens etc..

    So you mean either run uneconomically long trains to some places where demand is insufficient for a full train or say they cannot have 110mph trains. If you run over long trains we will either need more 800's or run less trains.  More trains cost money which this government will want to put on increasing fares still further.  

    Bearing in mind that the fast running is likely to be at the London end ... you could come up with a 10 car unit, streamlined at both ends, with intermediate non-steamlined cabs for the slower speed more local operation on the outer sections.   Problem being to ensure they come back in the right order to the joining station, and that the Penzance section doesn't get turned on the St Erth triangle  ;D

    IF you couldn't rely on the timetable working accurately at almost all times, of course ... but you could dream of ...

    Split at Exeter or Newton Abbott for Paignton and Penzance
    Split at Swindon for Cheltenham Spa and Weymouth
    Split at Oxford for Hereford and to work back into Paddington
    Split at Swansea for Carmarthen and work back into Paddington
    Split at Temple Meads for Weston-super-Mare and work back into Paddington

    Serious improvement in through services ... and remember you loose 38% to 44% of your potential passengers if you give them a journey on which they have to change. So there may be serious business sense in an idea written half in jest (and far too late in the day for it tone implemented, I'm afraid!)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2016, 09:53:03
    Split at Exeter or Newton Abbott for Paignton and Penzance
    Split at Swindon for Cheltenham Spa and Weymouth
    Split at Oxford for Hereford and to work back into Paddington
    Split at Swansea for Carmarthen and work back into Paddington
    Split at Temple Meads for Weston-super-Mare and work back into Paddington

    Some of these are under serious consideration.....

    Split at Exeter or Newton Abbott for Paignton and Penzance
    (or Plymouth)

    Split at Oxford for Hereford and to work back into Paddington
    (although there has been talk of running the other half to Banbury in the peaks)

    Split at Swansea for Carmarthen and work back into Paddington
    (More likely split at Cardiff for Swansea/Carmarthen/return to Paddington)

    Split at Temple Meads for Weston-super-Mare and work back into Paddington


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on April 28, 2016, 12:36:56
     Problem being to ensure they come back in the right order to the joining station, and that the Penzance section doesn't get turned on the St Erth triangle  ;D


    Where is this St Erth triangle then?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on April 28, 2016, 12:50:58
    If it can do more than 110mph, build it long enough for the job so you don't need to work it in multiple, save all that cab space and duplicate kitchens etc..
    So you mean either run uneconomically long trains to some places where demand is insufficient for a full train or say they cannot have 110mph trains.
    Yep; except that a 110mph train is ok (350s are 110mph units and have UEGs), but something faster than 110mph is not.

    There's a third option though, use a short 125mph train to places where demand is insufficient for a long 125mph train (basiclly what FirstGWR do with the 180s at the moment), the problem with this being the demand between Oxford/Reading and PAD probably does need a longer train, so (for example) you need a way of stopping more than a small number of pre-booked passengers for Oxford and Reading boarding a Worcester train at PAD.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Andrew1939 from West Oxon on April 28, 2016, 17:06:46
    If the Hitachi trains are coming to the CL next year, will the platform extensions that are planned to be built for almost all CL stations going to be built in time. Without an extension Hanborough would only be able to have 2 coaches of an SET on the platform so loading and unloading would take several minutes. Dwell time for peak hour services for an HST is often 3 or 4 minutes whilst passengers alight from the maximum 3 coaches on the platform and then collect their bikes.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2016, 17:09:51
    Question to be raised at the CLPG AGM?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2016, 17:13:36
    sorry mods


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on April 28, 2016, 17:25:40
    If the Hitachi trains are coming to the CL next year, will the platform extensions that are planned to be built for almost all CL stations going to be built in time.

    Have we got any access to more details regarding who's got the contract and what stations, platforms and lengths are going to be added?  I guess there's still a fair amount of time if there's still over a year to go, but obviously it won't be long before things will need to start happening.  The Thames Valley platform extension contract has recently been awarded.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Worcester_Passenger on April 28, 2016, 17:29:37
    A streamlined notch though, which I'm guessing is not as bad as a class 90 when coupled to some stock
     /[][]\ |[][][][][][][][][][][][]||[][]\
     /[][][][][][][][]\ /[][][][][][][][]\
    First TransPennine Express seem to have the answer. On the front of their 'Engage' (connecting with our passengers) Issue 3 of Feb/Mar 2016, there is the new SANCU(D) - single-axle nose cone unit (driving).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 03, 2016, 16:40:38
    Although not as extensive as at Xmas and Easter, good to see another programme of works (costing ^14.5m) completed on time over the May Day Bank Holiday:

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/gbp-145m-bank-holiday-railway-improvement-work-in-the-south-west-and-thames-valley-will-deliver-bigger-better-more-reliable-railway-for-passengers


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on May 10, 2016, 09:17:39
    Network Rail time-lapse video of the replacement of Broad Town Bridge in Royal Wootton Bassett via the Gazette & Herald:

    http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/14480639.VIDEO__See_Royal_Wootton_Bassett_s_Broad_Town_bridge_rebuilt_in_two_minutes (http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/14480639.VIDEO__See_Royal_Wootton_Bassett_s_Broad_Town_bridge_rebuilt_in_two_minutes)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 11, 2016, 14:07:20
    Just an update on the wiring progress between Didcot and Airport Junction for those that don't travel on the route too often:

    Didcot to Tilehurst is now largely completed with virtually all structures now up, the vast majority of small parts attached, and wires up on around 75% of the tracks miles.  Areas still a little behind are between Cholsey and east of Goring where few, if any, of the wires are yet up.  Not sure if this is directly related to the AONB issues we've covered elsewhere.  So, as this link states, the revised September date is very achievable:

    http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/2016/05/11/great-western-wires-in-use-by-september

    The Reading area itself has quite a few gantries up, but not much in the way of small parts fitted and (the depot excepted) no wires as yet.

    East of Reading to Twyford is still virtually unstarted, save for the completion of most of the bore holes and foundations.

    Twyford to Maidenhead is now starting to take shape following the recent construction of a compound at Ruscombe.  All bore holes and foundations are complete and around 100 or so structures have been fitted, about 25% of the total required.  Very little has yet happened in the area immediately surrounding Maidenhead station.

    East of Maidenhead to Airport Junction is coming along nicely.  The vast majority of structures are up (a notable exception being Brunel's Maidenhead Thames bridge) and a high proportion of the small parts are also installed.  Wiring has been completed between Taplow and Burnham, though (aside from a tiny section near Iver) that is it so far.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 11, 2016, 14:42:34
    Just an update on the wiring progress between Didcot and Airport Junction for those that don't travel on the route too often:

    Didcot to Tilehurst is now largely completed with virtually all structures now up, the vast majority of small parts attached, and wires up on around 75% of the tracks miles.  Areas still a little behind are between Cholsey and east of Goring where few, if any, of the wires are yet up.  Not sure if this is directly related to the AONB issues we've covered elsewhere.  So, as this link states, the revised September date is very achievable:

    http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/2016/05/11/great-western-wires-in-use-by-september

    The Reading area itself has quite a few gantries up, but not much in the way of small parts fitted and (the depot excepted) no wires as yet.

    East of Reading to Twyford is still virtually unstarted, save for the completion of most of the bore holes and foundations.

    Twyford to Maidenhead is now starting to take shape following the recent construction of a compound at Ruscombe.  All bore holes and foundations are complete and around 100 or so structures have been fitted, about 25% of the total required.  Very little has yet happened in the area immediately surrounding Maidenhead station.

    East of Maidenhead to Airport Junction is coming along nicely.  The vast majority of structures are up (a notable exception being Brunel's Maidenhead Thames bridge) and a high proportion of the small parts are also installed.  Wiring has been completed between Taplow and Burnham, though (aside from a tiny section near Iver) that is it so far.

    Gap between Cholsey and Goring probably relates to the Moulsford Viaduct where I believe the masts (which are custom low-impact ones) have recently been fitted, so presumably small parts and wires to follow soon. Can't remember the exact date but GWML electrification is supposed to be considered live by contractors at some point this month, when exactly it is energised remains to be seen, but that will allow 3-ish months for testing, tweaking, training and general commissioning before the 800s start running underneath. 

    The gantries in Reading were installed a while ago as part of the station contract. Note that Airport Jcn to Maidenhead is being done as part of Crossrail by separate contractors, someone suggested that they were also doing Maidenhead to Reading, in which case its conceivable that they are basically working west.   

    A fair amount has also been done to the west of Didcot, lots of piles in place between Swindon and Bristol PW (the new Hitachi depot is complete including electrification). Also, lots of electrical switchgear being installed lineside including at Bristol TM.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 11, 2016, 15:01:31
    Gap between Cholsey and Goring probably relates to the Moulsford Viaduct where I believe the masts (which are custom low-impact ones) have recently been fitted, so presumably small parts and wires to follow soon.

    The 'custom low-impact ones' are themselves pretty beefy and are similar to the ones installed over Gatehampton Bridge near Goring.  The principle difference being that at Gatehampton they're fitted to the outside of the structure which holds all four tracks, whereas at Moulsford there are two connected structures carrying the Main and Relief lines, so they've managed to hide the supports between the two structures, thus minimising the impact on the bridge.  IIRC correctly wires have been installed over Gatehampton Bridge on the Up Relief line in the last couple of weeks.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on May 11, 2016, 23:02:48
    Noticed while driving home on the A4 this evening that OHLE uprights have started to appear on the B&H between Midgham and Thatcham  :)

    Was quite surprised by that as you would think that the focus would be on the bits of the GWML between Reading and Airport Jct that still need a lot of work (although there has been a lot of progress recently).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 11, 2016, 23:30:07
    Noticed while driving home on the A4 this evening that OHLE uprights have started to appear on the B&H between Midgham and Thatcham  :)

    Was quite surprised by that as you would think that the focus would be on the bits of the GWML between Reading and Airport Jct that still need a lot of work (although there has been a lot of progress recently).

    Separate contractors and separate plans. It must have been covered earlier in the thread, but I believe that west of Reading has been known to be happening before Maidenhead to Reading for some time now, with the latter section transferred to the Crossrail contractor in some sort of work re-allocation.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 12, 2016, 10:20:36
    Buried in the latest e-newsletter from NR Oxford area is the following -

    Quote
    Electrification ^ going live!
     
     From May 28 we reach another big milestone in the Great Western Electrification Programme, as power starts to flow in the overhead wires.  Not all of the wires which are currently in place will be turned on all the time, but it^s impossible to tell by looking, so it^s important to steer clear.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 12, 2016, 12:08:05
    Buried in the latest e-newsletter from NR Oxford area is the following -

    Quote
    Electrification ^ going live!
     
     From May 28 we reach another big milestone in the Great Western Electrification Programme, as power starts to flow in the overhead wires.  Not all of the wires which are currently in place will be turned on all the time, but it^s impossible to tell by looking, so it^s important to steer clear.

    Yes, don't get too excited though, AFAIK its just the date that from which NR, TOCs, FOCs, contractors, emergency services etc. are supposed to consider it live and apply proper safe working procedures. That said, I'm sure that NR will be very keen to flick the switch on that date, even if only to take some photos and check the box on the spreadsheet, before turning it back off again.

    As for the B&H, good to hear. Possibly a case of giving the uprights crew something constructive (if you pardon the pun) to do rather than signs of the B&H programme getting into full swing, but you never know.     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 12, 2016, 19:21:47
    Buried in the latest e-newsletter from NR Oxford area is the following -

    Quote
    Electrification ^ going live!
     
     From May 28 we reach another big milestone in the Great Western Electrification Programme, as power starts to flow in the overhead wires.  Not all of the wires which are currently in place will be turned on all the time, but it^s impossible to tell by looking, so it^s important to steer clear.

    Yes, don't get too excited though, AFAIK its just the date that from which NR, TOCs, FOCs, contractors, emergency services etc. are supposed to consider it live and apply proper safe working procedures. That said, I'm sure that NR will be very keen to flick the switch on that date, even if only to take some photos and check the box on the spreadsheet, before turning it back off again.

    As for the B&H, good to hear. Possibly a case of giving the uprights crew something constructive (if you pardon the pun) to do rather than signs of the B&H programme getting into full swing, but you never know.     

    There is a declared live date and time as Noggin said this when the new electrification come under "Rules" not only internally to the railway, the local Fire Brigade, Ambulance and Police will have been informed and briefings given if required, all local schools should have been visited and a rail safety presentation given.  Also local flying clubs should have been informed.

    From when the OLE is declared live it is dangerous to touch, the construction earth will have been removed and any permanent earths on any buffer zones removed, for staff to work on the OLE they will need to test and apply earths and issue safety documentation via an ECR.

    Before the OLE is actually made live an number of system tests need to be done -
    Section proving - this checks that all the switches, circuit breakers control the correct sections, that there are no incorrect jumpers between sections and that no construction earths or binding wire has been left
    Steady current tests - this proves the protection relays are looking in the right direction (they are directional relays) also telecom will do Vl-Vt immunisation tests
    Short circuit test - to check rise of earth potential is within the BSEN 510122 limits also part of the telecom Vl-Vt test

    All these test are done in a possession with no other engineering work taking place, the test train for the steady current tests may be authorised to run up to 40 mph and to pass at danger all signals between two points.

    What could possibly go wrong I always enjoyed being part of system testing ..  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Cruithne3753 on May 19, 2016, 17:18:10
    Spotted one of those flashy new IEPs at the Stoke Gifford depot today being slowly trundled back and forth a few times, no panto raised though.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on May 19, 2016, 20:36:04
    Spotted one of those flashy new IEPs at the Stoke Gifford depot today being slowly trundled back and forth a few times, no panto raised though.
    It's behind you! Oh no it isn't!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 19, 2016, 20:43:13
    Buried in the latest e-newsletter from NR Oxford area is the following -

    Quote
    Electrification ^ going live!
     
     From May 28 we reach another big milestone in the Great Western Electrification Programme, as power starts to flow in the overhead wires.  Not all of the wires which are currently in place will be turned on all the time, but it^s impossible to tell by looking, so it^s important to steer clear.

    Has been suggested on WNXX that the date might now be 28th June.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 20, 2016, 09:30:04
    Buried in the latest e-newsletter from NR Oxford area is the following -

    Quote
    Electrification ^ going live!
     
     From May 28 we reach another big milestone in the Great Western Electrification Programme, as power starts to flow in the overhead wires.  Not all of the wires which are currently in place will be turned on all the time, but it^s impossible to tell by looking, so it^s important to steer clear.

    Has been suggested on WNXX that the date might now be 28th June.

    There has to be a lot of things in place, some physical like the OLHE being fit for purpose, then there is interdisciplinary reviews with the likes of signalling and Ops also all warning  sings, staff briefings complete etc before the Designated Project Engineer and Project Manager will sign off the necessary paperwork and the Program Director say yes.  There is quite a complex matrix to work through done in the usual red, green amber ranking


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 20, 2016, 11:03:58
    Buried in the latest e-newsletter from NR Oxford area is the following -

    Quote
    Electrification ^ going live!
     
     From May 28 we reach another big milestone in the Great Western Electrification Programme, as power starts to flow in the overhead wires.  Not all of the wires which are currently in place will be turned on all the time, but it^s impossible to tell by looking, so it^s important to steer clear.

    Has been suggested on WNXX that the date might now be 28th June.

    There has to be a lot of things in place, some physical like the OLHE being fit for purpose, then there is interdisciplinary reviews with the likes of signalling and Ops also all warning  sings, staff briefings complete etc before the Designated Project Engineer and Project Manager will sign off the necessary paperwork and the Program Director say yes.  There is quite a complex matrix to work through done in the usual red, green amber ranking

    I'm not surprised, good luck to all concerned! Should additional stretches be more straightforward then?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on May 21, 2016, 16:01:22
    According to the Henley Standard, NR are considering new gantries through the Goring gap.  This obviously fuels expectation that something will be done to reduce the visual impact of the OHLE, which as someone mentioned earlier may create a precedent for further down the line.

    http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=42176 (http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=42176)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 21, 2016, 16:07:33
    From the article:

    "The new gantries could include thinner support poles and wire head spans across the track instead of solid steel girders."

    I bet they don't...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on May 21, 2016, 17:41:18
    From the article:

    "The new gantries could include thinner support poles and wire head spans across the track instead of solid steel girders."

    I bet they don't...

    Paul

    I won't be putting any money on it either.  At least they don't mention 3rd rail. 

    I am glad to see the paint option in there.  I think it would make quite a difference.  I also see that they are still looking at legal action. I am concerned that it will cost a lot of money to satisfy them. If they have so much money to pay lawyer perhaps they would like to pay the extra cost instead.   

    But I suppose they don't have to worry about that, after all its only public money.  I wonder what they would want if the local council tax payers had to pay the additional cost.  I suspect most would tell the campaigners to shut up.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 21, 2016, 19:32:00
    From the article:

    "The new gantries could include thinner support poles and wire head spans across the track instead of solid steel girders."

    I bet they don't...

    Paul

    I won't be putting any money on it either.  At least they don't mention 3rd rail. 

    I am glad to see the paint option in there.  I think it would make quite a difference.  I also see that they are still looking at legal action. I am concerned that it will cost a lot of money to satisfy them. If they have so much money to pay lawyer perhaps they would like to pay the extra cost instead.   

    But I suppose they don't have to worry about that, after all its only public money.  I wonder what they would want if the local council tax payers had to pay the additional cost.  I suspect most would tell the campaigners to shut up.

    Indeed, so this is the bit where they say:

    We've considered all the options carefully:

    1) We can't do headspans because they don't meet modern specs
    2) We can replace with different masts for ^xxxxxxxxx, and a number of weekend closures, bear in mind this is public money and we'll be very vocal that this is to keep you happy
    3) We can paint the masts for ^xxx (and perhaps you might like a donation to the village hall)
    4) You can decide that on reflection you are happy with the masts and we will make some significant ongoing donations to the projects of your choice



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on May 22, 2016, 02:44:26
    Or...

    5) It's our land, it's public money, we don't need external consent, so will just get on and do what's best from an engineering perspective. You're living in an affluent area - support your own village hall.  >:(


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 22, 2016, 08:51:37
    Is this process consultation or negotiation?

    Consultation = we listen to what you say, we understand what you are saying; we will do our best with our budget to address your concerns.

    Negotiation = you (Local Authority / Government / Statutory Body) have or are intending to use your powers to bare on us what can we agree what we can do to meet your demand.


    Consultation is all about pacifying the natives, negotiation is about complying with the Law.   GWEP (West of Maidenhead) is being done under (I believe) permitted development; the exceptions are place like Sydney Gardens, Maidenhead Bridge which are listed, the current plan to electrify the GW Main Line have been around for almost a decade so why is only now the structures are up are folks getting up in arms, even Mk3 headspands would not look a lot different in terms of visual impact


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on May 22, 2016, 09:09:23
    Or...

    5) It's our land, it's public money, we don't need external consent, so will just get on and do what's best from an engineering perspective. You're living in an affluent area - support your own village hall.  >:(

    ......can I take this opportunity to welcome Kim Jong-un to the Coffee shop forum?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 22, 2016, 12:10:18
    Is this process consultation or negotiation?

    Consultation = we listen to what you say, we understand what you are saying; we will do our best with our budget to address your concerns.

    Negotiation = you (Local Authority / Government / Statutory Body) have or are intending to use your powers to bare on us what can we agree what we can do to meet your demand.

    I was reading some Kensington and Chelsea stuff about Crossrail 2 a few weeks ago, and the point being made was that it was a consultation and not a referendum.   They were really making the point that thousands of pro-forma responses just stating do not build it at all, as though that were the question being asked, were not exactly useful.

    I got the impression that the whole debate in Chelsea has been hijacked by a few high profile individuals, it will be interesting to see how the council carry on in their seemingly sensible discussions with TfL...

    Paul 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on May 22, 2016, 19:30:18

    ......can I take this opportunity to welcome Kim Jong-un to the Coffee shop forum?

    Kim Wrong 'Un, more like...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on May 22, 2016, 20:55:47
    According to the Henley Standard, NR are considering new gantries through the Goring gap.  This obviously fuels expectation that something will be done to reduce the visual impact of the OHLE, which as someone mentioned earlier may create a precedent for further down the line.

    http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=42176 (http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=42176)

    This was an amazing statement by NR - can one imagine trying to replace bits of steelwork, after the system has been commissioned and is live  and in daily use?

    In 2011, Atkins produced an Environmental Impact Assessment Report that had a section (8.1,2) on the Historic Environment. I cannot see anywhere where the Chilterns, and North Wessex Downs AONB's were even mentioned. This may well be the root of the problem that NR has been set. Had they used people with local knowledge this would not have been missed (if it has). The original BR Mark 1 diagonally braced supports, now with AT feeder posts above, offered a better visual balance than the crude Italian sourced structures being installed. They give a further meaning to the phrase "Spaghetti Western".

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on May 23, 2016, 09:12:00
    Or...

    5) It's our land, it's public money, we don't need external consent, so will just get on and do what's best from an engineering perspective. You're living in an affluent area - support your own village hall.  >:(

    quite.  Although they could donate their used paint brushes to the village hall I suppose.

    Largely this sort of thing is less a serious objection and more people with time on their hand wanting to feel like they are listened to rather than having things done to them over which they have no control.  NR, needs to send a charming lady or gentleman to a few meetings to explain and show that people are being listened to.  They should do no more no less.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on May 23, 2016, 09:39:03
    In 2011, Atkins produced an Environmental Impact Assessment Report that had a section (8.1,2) on the Historic Environment. I cannot see anywhere where the Chilterns, and North Wessex Downs AONB's were even mentioned. This may well be the root of the problem that NR has been set.

    As I understand it (and I don't follow it to that level of detail), that is the crux of the issue. Whilst NR were and are able to build under permitted development, there are tighter restrictions for work carried out in AONB. One or some of those restrictions included visual impact, and NR have admitted, repeatedly, that they did not comply to those restrictions. I believe that is where the basis for the legal challenge will come from.

    Living in Goring and using the trains daily has me split. I think the things are bloody horrendous when out walking and taking photos - the view from Hartslock looking back over the river and across Goring is horrible with these huge glistening things blighting the lovely country side.

    But anything that makes it quieter, cleaner, faster, more comfortable and reliable for my day-to-day commute is highly welcomed.

    My only previous experience of electrification was when traveling in Sweden, and the area I was in I believe was wire-span and the supports were very thin. It had very little visual impact to me, so I was expecting something similar when the electrification of the main line was announced - which was one reason I was so surprised how chunky it all looked.

    But having had it explained on here and having had other discussions about 3rd rail etc etc, I understand the reasons and accept it is what it is.

    Personally, the last thing I want is more upheaval for the next x months/years while it's all replaced.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on May 23, 2016, 13:04:48
    Is this process consultation or negotiation?

    Consultation = we listen to what you say, we understand what you are saying; we will do our best with our budget to address your concerns.

    Negotiation = you (Local Authority / Government / Statutory Body) have or are intending to use your powers to bare on us what can we agree what we can do to meet your demand.


    Consultation is all about pacifying the natives, negotiation is about complying with the Law.   GWEP (West of Maidenhead) is being done under (I believe) permitted development; the exceptions are place like Sydney Gardens, Maidenhead Bridge which are listed, the current plan to electrify the GW Main Line have been around for almost a decade so why is only now the structures are up are folks getting up in arms, even Mk3 headspands would not look a lot different in terms of visual impact
    You are Ford Prefect and I claim my five pounds!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on June 02, 2016, 18:33:15
    This from Rail News.  NR are certainly not holding back in raising expectations about changes to the OHLE through the Goring Gap.  Problem will come if ^ or more likely when - realisation falls below expectation.

    http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2016/05/16-network-rail-set-to-replace.html (http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2016/05/16-network-rail-set-to-replace.html)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 02, 2016, 19:18:54
    I am not sure that is is NR's doing it seems to be Journalists picking up one NR statement and failing to read between the lines.  What NR have said is just what they need to say legally to ensure that the review is a real review not just window dressing. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on June 02, 2016, 20:11:15
    This from Rail News.  NR are certainly not holding back in raising expectations about changes to the OHLE through the Goring Gap.  Problem will come if ^ or more likely when - realisation falls below expectation.

    http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2016/05/16-network-rail-set-to-replace.html (http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2016/05/16-network-rail-set-to-replace.html)


    Conceivably it might not be that difficult, especially if you do it before full electric services start running.

    I'm sure that on the GWML out of Paddington they've replaced some of the headspans without doing a full dewire - just prop up the wires with a crane, slot in the new gantry, then do the small part steel and fix to the existing wires.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 03, 2016, 10:48:48
    According to the Henley Standard, NR are considering new gantries through the Goring gap.  This obviously fuels expectation that something will be done to reduce the visual impact of the OHLE, which as someone mentioned earlier may create a precedent for further down the line.

    http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=42176 (http://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/news.php?id=42176)

    This was an amazing statement by NR - can one imagine trying to replace bits of steelwork, after the system has been commissioned and is live  and in daily use?

    In 2011, Atkins produced an Environmental Impact Assessment Report that had a section (8.1,2) on the Historic Environment. I cannot see anywhere where the Chilterns, and North Wessex Downs AONB's were even mentioned. This may well be the root of the problem that NR has been set. Had they used people with local knowledge this would not have been missed (if it has). The original BR Mark 1 diagonally braced supports, now with AT feeder posts above, offered a better visual balance than the crude Italian sourced structures being installed. They give a further meaning to the phrase "Spaghetti Western".

    OTC

    I think thats being a bit unfair to the consultants and NR.  The statutory bodies were consulted (noting that some didn't bother to respond).  Its not if they weren't aware of the nature of the structures at the time.  Quote from the NR website:

    Quote
    Environment

    In August 2011 a full environmental impact assessment of the Great Western route was carried out.

    As part of the process our consultants submitted an environmental scoping report to local authorities and statutory consultees in October 2011 to agree the detail of the assessments and surveys.

    Environmental Impact Assessment Scoping Report
    The feedback provided by the local authorities and statutory consultees was used to produce an Environment Statement (ES) covering the whole project. Information from the ES was then used to produce a series of volumes, enabling the production of reports relevant to each of the 15 local authorities the scheme will pass through. Separate general volumes have also been produced to take into account the differences in legislation between England and Wales.

    We've taken this approach to provide robust and consistent supporting documentation for use with the various planning, listed building, conservation area and environmental consent applications that will be required along the length of the scheme.

    The Environmental Statement considers the environmental impacts and our proposed mitigation during both the construction and operation phases of the scheme.

    In particular the West Berkshire consultation and response can be found here
    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browseDirectory.aspx?root=\projects\Great%20Western&dir=%5cprojects%5cGreat%20Western%5cElectrification%20Environmental%20Statements%5cEngland%5cWest%20Berkshire

    And the South Oxfordshire consultation and response can be found here
    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browseDirectory.aspx?root=\projects\Great%20Western&dir=%5cprojects%5cGreat%20Western%5cElectrification%20Environmental%20Statements%5cEngland%5cSouth%20Oxfordshire


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 03, 2016, 11:42:52
    Interesting indeed.  This puts a rather different perspective on the issue and seems to place responsibility at the door of SODC planning department. 
    I note the report said:

    Quote
    Impacts on landscape character during operation are most likely to arise from the removal of vegetation to allow the installation of OLE gantries and associated infrastructure. Significant effects would be generated by the permanent presence of additional infrastructure. This includes permanent significant slight to moderate adverse effects to parts of the North Wessex Downs and Chilterns AONBs.

    I note the proposed measure were:

    Quote
    Landscape and Visual
    Investigate the potential of planting replacement trees outside Scheme boundary, for example in areas
    adjacent to the Scheme.

    Investigate the potential for hedgerow planting within Network Rail land, in areas that would not impact the
    vegetation clearance area.

    Investigate the potential for grass, wildflower, heathland planting within Network Rail land.

    What is being suggested now goes a long way beyond that. I don't see the residents of Goring voicing their concerns at SODC and I suppose since NR wish to reach a settlement with the planners they are unlikely to put blame on them either - at least in public. 

    I had thought the fire at SODC offices might be a mitigating factor, but this is 2 years before the fire. 

    Updated to add proposed measures.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Stroud Valleys on June 03, 2016, 14:33:30
    As much as I like to have pretty looking structures, at the end of the day there have been numerous consultations and amble time for various bodies and organisations to get 100% satisfaction before any work has started.

    In any event, the electrification work is years behind schedule and millions of pounds over budget. The priority is to get the job done, i.e. get the wires to Bristol, Newbury, Oxford and Swansea. Only once this has been completed should the Goring Gap be considered. We cannot allow any further delays. That's the problem with no getting fully involved with the planning stage, and that is not Network Rail's fault.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 03, 2016, 14:54:12
    That is what NR is saying...they will revisit once the wires are up


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on June 03, 2016, 15:39:40
    As much as I like to have pretty looking structures, at the end of the day there have been numerous consultations and amble time for various bodies and organisations to get 100% satisfaction before any work has started.
    On the other hand, while we knew about electrification a while before work started, I visit this forum very frequently, and am a subscriber to a railway magazine, and as far as I can recall was never aware of any consultation on the design of OHLE structures for the Great Western project. If somebody with an interest in railways such as myself isn't aware of a consultation, then I would imagine that others were even less aware than myself, and thus I can hardly blame the Goring complainers for being supprised when the substantial portal structures appeared.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 03, 2016, 15:52:44
    Deposited with Council Oplanning Department, yhe allocation of a planning reference number would require advertising. This they had the same notification (incl the Parish Council) as they would for a new build.

    I suspect that is a reason that NR lodges these type of plans with Councils even though they don't need planning consent


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 03, 2016, 15:57:26
    As much as I like to have pretty looking structures, at the end of the day there have been numerous consultations and amble time for various bodies and organisations to get 100% satisfaction before any work has started.
    On the other hand, while we knew about electrification a while before work started, I visit this forum very frequently, and am a subscriber to a railway magazine, and as far as I can recall was never aware of any consultation on the design of OHLE structures for the Great Western project. If somebody with an interest in railways such as myself isn't aware of a consultation, then I would imagine that others were even less aware than myself, and thus I can hardly blame the Goring complainers for being supprised when the substantial portal structures appeared.

    But that is the point I was trying to clarify above.  There was consultation between NR and West Berkshire and South Oxfordshire, and those organisations are there to represent and support residents.  Do we have any evidence that there wasn't any such consultation?

    The structures are referenced in the consultation documents and have been well publicised in the railway and non-railway press.

    Its like any other planning application I have been involved in, its no good complaining once the thing is built.  I always make a point of going to any public consultation meetings for issues surrounding the area where I live, even if ultimately they don't directly affect me.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 03, 2016, 16:06:07
    Ditto. Plus looking at ALL local-to-me planning adverts just to check. Someone on their PC will have done this too...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 03, 2016, 16:07:32
    If you want to know about the OLE structures you only have to look here:
    http://www.furrerfrey.ch/de/systeme/Series-1.html and specifcally this document to be found there:
    http://www.furrerfrey.ch/dam/jcr:98f3522c-51ff-4d89-9fd7-dc16601d1db3/20130717_F+F_Series1_Web.pdf


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 03, 2016, 16:19:38
    But that is the point I was trying to clarify above.  There was consultation between NR and West Berkshire and South Oxfordshire, and those organisations are there to represent and support residents.  Do we have any evidence that there wasn't any such consultation?

    Yes there is evidence - See South Oxfordshire DC Planning reference P13/S1892/ES

    I assume that SODC would have consulted Goring Parish Council. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 03, 2016, 16:25:52
    Quite.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on June 03, 2016, 18:25:04
    There are some "Example Photographs of Proposed Overhead OLE Designs" included in the Environmental Statement Volume 2: Appendix E. However, the 4 track portals shown are significantly different in detail from the Furrer & Frey Series 1 that have been installed. In particular they are lattice rather than a solid structure. There are also illustrative pictures of headspans at a station.

    So anyone who had seen these examples could well have been surprised by the metal work actually installed, especially its 'chunkiness' to be non technical.

    I understand that it is the absence of any consultation at the detailed design phase that the AONB have been not happy about. The AONB extends way beyond Goring - from just east of Didcot to the east of Pangbourne although some areas are more beautiful than others ....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on June 05, 2016, 21:30:19
    I noticed today that the first masts have now appeared at the east end of Sonning Cutting and the Twyford West crossover area.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 05, 2016, 21:40:07
    There are some "Example Photographs of Proposed Overhead OLE Designs" included in the Environmental Statement Volume 2: Appendix E. However, the 4 track portals shown are significantly different in detail from the Furrer & Frey Series 1 that have been installed. In particular they are lattice rather than a solid structure. There are also illustrative pictures of headspans at a station.

    So anyone who had seen these examples could well have been surprised by the metal work actually installed, especially its 'chunkiness' to be non technical.

    A good point.

    I understand that it is the absence of any consultation at the detailed design phase that the AONB have been not happy about. The AONB extends way beyond Goring - from just east of Didcot to the east of Pangbourne although some areas are more beautiful than others ....

    Ah yes.  A reputable planning consultant ought to have identified that need.  I would also have expected South Oxon DC and West Berks DC to have pointed that out at the time if it was an issue. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on June 05, 2016, 22:22:40
    Yes there is evidence - See South Oxfordshire DC Planning reference P13/S1892/ES

    I assume that SODC would have consulted Goring Parish Council. 

    Considering GPC are taking SODC to court over two particular recent planning approvals (the Goring Hydro-Electric scheme - and another one which I can't recall off hand), I wouldn't expect or assume anything!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 06, 2016, 08:56:00
    People quite often cofuse "consult" with referenda.....meanings are quite different


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on June 09, 2016, 10:02:27
    Technical question. I live by the only (?) fully wired stretch (4 lines) between Burnham and Taplow, which was done at Christmas 2015.

    Now we are getting a kind of gibbet being fitted on top of the horizontal arm which holds the hangers (dangly bits) for the wires. Looks like there will be another wire slung between them. What's it for?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on June 09, 2016, 14:00:04
    Technical question. I live by the only (?) fully wired stretch (4 lines) between Burnham and Taplow, which was done at Christmas 2015.

    Now we are getting a kind of gibbet being fitted on top of the horizontal arm which holds the hangers (dangly bits) for the wires. Looks like there will be another wire slung between them. What's it for?

    From your description that's for the 'Auto Transformer Feeder' or ATF.   

    As a modern design the GW OHLE is actually fed at 50 kV, with two anti phase 25 kV conductors.  So you get a 25 kV - Ov - 25 kV feed where the rails are the Ov line, the contact wire (and its support catenary) is at 25 kV, and your newly observed line is also at 25 kV but anti phase to the contact wire.  So the ATF needs similar insulators to the contact wire, similar clearances from structures, and needs to be positioned where it cannot accidentally touch the contact wire under fault conditions.

    It's all a bit complicated electrically, but it all helps make the system far more efficient than the earliest simple 25 kV with traction return down the rails.

    The autotransformers themselves are mounted in various track side compounds along the line, how they actually work in terms of detail is above my pay grade, so I think although they should be mentioned as existing, that'll do for now...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on June 09, 2016, 20:13:01
    I noticed yesterday that a fair section of the route between Airport Jn and Maidenhead appears to be being wired with two separate stanchions, unconnected by an overall girder.  So, as an example, both up and down relief line wiring are supported solely by the stanchion to the outside of the track. 

    It occurred to me that this is likely to look marginally less obtrusive than the design used in the Goring Gap, and could be a possible solution.  There's no obvious reason to me why the spacing of the tracks at the latter location would be unsuitable for this design, and it could be relatively simple to convert.  Am I missing something obvious here, as it it were that obvious, I'm sure it would have been suggested by now.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 09, 2016, 21:13:07
    Separated structures have usually been used when there's a significant difference in height between the leftmost and rightmost line - not uncommon with the cant required on high speed corners.  Could possibly have been used in more areas between Didcot and Reading but obviously more pulling forces are loaded onto the uprights, so perhaps that's why full ones have been used?  There's also more places with wider gaps between main and relief lines east of Reading which might also have been a factor.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 10, 2016, 22:20:01
    Technical question. I live by the only (?) fully wired stretch (4 lines) between Burnham and Taplow, which was done at Christmas 2015.

    Now we are getting a kind of gibbet being fitted on top of the horizontal arm which holds the hangers (dangly bits) for the wires. Looks like there will be another wire slung between them. What's it for?

    From your description that's for the 'Auto Transformer Feeder' or ATF.   

    As a modern design the GW OHLE is actually fed at 50 kV, with two anti phase 25 kV conductors.  So you get a 25 kV - Ov - 25 kV feed where the rails are the Ov line, the contact wire (and its support catenary) is at 25 kV, and your newly observed line is also at 25 kV but anti phase to the contact wire.  So the ATF needs similar insulators to the contact wire, similar clearances from structures, and needs to be positioned where it cannot accidentally touch the contact wire under fault conditions.

    It's all a bit complicated electrically, but it all helps make the system far more efficient than the earliest simple 25 kV with traction return down the rails.

    The autotransformers themselves are mounted in various track side compounds along the line, how they actually work in terms of detail is above my pay grade, so I think although they should be mentioned as existing, that'll do for now...

    Paul


    The use of Auto Transformer feeding basically doubles the distance between Grid sites; GWML Kensal Green and Didcot approx. 50 miles with the mid point (MPATS at Maidenhead (which has AT's) there are also AT's at West Ealing, Hayes, Slough these are intermediate IATS.

    The IATS and MPATS are to manage the return current and to ensure the OLE voltage is constant.  The reason for 50kV is simple Ohms Law I2R

    Also the fault levels on AT systems are higher 12kA where as classic 25kV is 6kA.

    AT is a more complex system, especially the protection (fuses) scheme and the level of immunisation that has to be done is more complex, however it is more efficient as it reduces the number of Grid Sites which are now at 400kV locations.  Its worth noting that the Kensal Green Grid Lines are in a tunnel 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on June 12, 2016, 22:52:49
    I noticed the other day that something is being constructed or some work is being done on the southeast side of the Foss Way Bridge between Partway and Wootton Bassett. The bridge itself was reconstructed last year, so could it be a grid site? Or is it something else?

    http://streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=386135&Y=182740&A=Y&Z=120


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 13, 2016, 17:05:12
    Another excellent article from railengineer, this time concerning the Severn Tunnel electrification:

    http://www.railengineer.uk/2016/06/02/preparing-for-severn-tunnel-electrification/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on June 13, 2016, 17:32:31
    Did a run from Oxford to Reading and back via Didcot so could see progress on completing the test section between Didcot and Tilehurst.

    Up and down main lines are fully wired from Scours Lane, Reading to Moreton Cutting east of Didcot, including the crossover between the lines at Tilehurst East Junction. Relief lines are also mostly wired from just east of Tilehurst to Moreton Cutting. There are some wire runs missing through Goring and between South Stoke and Moreton Cutting but these don't look big jobs to complete.

    The Didcot station area is still to be wired though there's an earth return wire in place on the main lines through platforms 1 & 2. Most of the small part steelwork is in place and all the main steelwork too from what I could see.

    West of the station there is a wire run on the main lines at Foxhall Junction but nothing else wired through to Milton Junction.

    The autotransformer stations at Pangbourne and Moulsford are being wired up (presumably the National Grid feeder at Foxhall Junction is too, but I couldn't see that). There's a run of autotransformer feeder wire around Pangbourne but I didn't notice any more in place, though several brackets an insulators have been added to the gantries for it.

    So it looks like the test section is nearing completion with just the Didcot area to complete (and presumably the relief lines east of Tilehust to Scours Lane).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 13, 2016, 19:51:24
    I have seen a lot of lorries carrying electrification large metal parts on the A4361 through Wroughton, both towards Swindon and away from Swindon. Does anyone know where is it going to/from? 

    If it were going towards the track west of Swindon it is on the wrong road. If it is coming to Swindon I cannot think where it would be coming from. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on June 13, 2016, 20:54:38
    I have seen a lot of lorries carrying electrification large metal parts on the A4361 through Wroughton, both towards Swindon and away from Swindon. Does anyone know where is it going to/from? 

    If it were going towards the track west of Swindon it is on the wrong road. If it is coming to Swindon I cannot think where it would be coming from. 

    Are we talking the bases or the all above ground bits?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 13, 2016, 20:57:34
    Did a run from Oxford to Reading and back via Didcot so could see progress on completing the test section between Didcot and Tilehurst.

    Up and down main lines are fully wired from Scours Lane, Reading to Moreton Cutting east of Didcot, including the crossover between the lines at Tilehurst East Junction. Relief lines are also mostly wired from just east of Tilehurst to Moreton Cutting. There are some wire runs missing through Goring and between South Stoke and Moreton Cutting but these don't look big jobs to complete.

    The Didcot station area is still to be wired though there's an earth return wire in place on the main lines through platforms 1 & 2. Most of the small part steelwork is in place and all the main steelwork too from what I could see.

    West of the station there is a wire run on the main lines at Foxhall Junction but nothing else wired through to Milton Junction.

    The autotransformer stations at Pangbourne and Moulsford are being wired up (presumably the National Grid feeder at Foxhall Junction is too, but I couldn't see that). There's a run of autotransformer feeder wire around Pangbourne but I didn't notice any more in place, though several brackets an insulators have been added to the gantries for it.

    So it looks like the test section is nearing completion with just the Didcot area to complete (and presumably the relief lines east of Tilehust to Scours Lane).

    It is likely the "test track" will be configured as classic 25kV rail return, the Auto Transformers not commissioned they are not required at this stage because there is only likely to be one or two units running intially.  Setting up the OLE protection and control running in classic is a much simpler arrangement and is often done on the UK main lines, the ATF being commissioned at a latter stage


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 14, 2016, 07:29:00
    I have seen a lot of lorries carrying electrification large metal parts on the A4361 through Wroughton, both towards Swindon and away from Swindon. Does anyone know where is it going to/from? 

    If it were going towards the track west of Swindon it is on the wrong road. If it is coming to Swindon I cannot think where it would be coming from. 

    Are we talking the bases or the all above ground bits?

    Above ground bits


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on June 14, 2016, 07:56:41
    Ahead of the wires, the signs are also going up warning trains where they can't go....

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/didsig.jpg)

    Aren't they officially the Chester lines?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 14, 2016, 11:47:20
    Aren't they officially the Chester lines?

    They are indeed.  A mistake?  Or perhaps a (sensible) renaming to coincide with the electrification work?  Anyone know the date of the last Paddington to Chester service via Oxford?  I reckon it might have been as long ago as the 1960s!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 14, 2016, 12:19:48
    They are indeed.  A mistake?  Or perhaps a (sensible) renaming to coincide with the electrification work?  Anyone know the date of the last Paddington to Chester service via Oxford?  I reckon it might have been as long ago as the 1960s!

    I would imagine that they would have used the High Wycombe and Bicester route once that was open so it could have been a lot earlier than that. Though there may have been some rerouting during WCML electrification in the 1960's when the London Birmingham express services were all concentrated on the Paddington route.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on June 14, 2016, 12:54:06
    According to the WR Sectional Appendix (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/sectional%20appendix/western%20sectional%20appendix.pdf) (p. 148 of Mod. WR2; document page 320), the photograph is of 'Chester Line Junction' but the route is now called the Up and Down Oxford.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on June 14, 2016, 13:12:40
    According to the WR Sectional Appendix (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/sectional%20appendix/western%20sectional%20appendix.pdf) (p. 148 of Mod. WR2; document page 320), the photograph is of 'Chester Line Junction' but the route is now called the Up and Down Oxford.

    There are different names for different purposes, the boxes at the top of the page still show the route number GW 200 as being Didcot to Heyford, but having the engineer's line reference (ELR) of "DCL". 

    Whether or not it is hierarchical, I don't know, but sections of line can change name every few miles.  I bet the bridges are all still labelled DCL/x...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on June 14, 2016, 14:00:00
    According to the WR Sectional Appendix (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/sectional%20appendix/western%20sectional%20appendix.pdf) (p. 148 of Mod. WR2; document page 320), the photograph is of 'Chester Line Junction' but the route is now called the Up and Down Oxford.

    There are different names for different purposes, the boxes at the top of the page still show the route number GW 200 as being Didcot to Heyford, but having the engineer's line reference (ELR) of "DCL". 

    Whether or not it is hierarchical, I don't know, but sections of line can change name every few miles.  I bet the bridges are all still labelled DCL/x...

    Paul

    They are!!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on June 14, 2016, 15:16:10
    Ahead of the wires, the signs are also going up warning trains where they can't go....

    Aren't they officially the Chester lines?

    The junction at the end of the platform is called 'Chester Line Jcn' see P62 of the Western Route Sectional Appendix.

    That sign is also interesting in that the electrification steelwork is in place along the Down and Up Oxford lines as far as Didcot West Jcn, so presumably electric trains could go that far. Note there is no steelwork in place on either Didcot Avoiding Curves or Didcot West Curve.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 14, 2016, 19:29:33
    Apparently all the Crossrail OLE wire will be run out between Airport Jcn and Maidenhead by the end of November


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on June 14, 2016, 20:51:40
    Does that mean they could shortly afterwards start electric services?  Could release a few turbos and start the cascade if they could.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 14, 2016, 21:09:12
    Driver training would probably mean the December timetable change


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 14, 2016, 22:34:59
    The wire will be run does not mean it will be juiced up, there will still be a number of system tests.  Earliest electric service would be May 17 and that would be stretching it but they my have to terminate at Maidenhead, not sure when the Maidenhead Reading bit will be completed as that is being delivered by GWEP and not Crossrail


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on June 14, 2016, 23:13:41
    The wire will be run does not mean it will be juiced up, there will still be a number of system tests.  Earliest electric service would be May 17 and that would be stretching it but they my have to terminate at Maidenhead, not sure when the Maidenhead Reading bit will be completed as that is being delivered by GWEP and not Crossrail

    IIRC, the contracts were changed so Crossrail's contractors are doing Maidenhead to Reading (I think that the contract boundary is Kennet Bridge). The last time I went through (about a month ago), there weren't many masts west of Maidenhead, but much of the piling appeared to have been done, so it's possible that masts and wires could be completed fairly quickly once Maidenhead has been reached and Crossrail's milestones have been achieved. Reading station of course had masts fitted as part of the rebuild, so just needs small part steel and wires, I suspect that will be the focus once Tilehurst to Didcot is fully wired. 

    As Electric Train says, there's an awful lot of testing and tweaking needs to be done before the power even gets turned on, and there may be some signalling work required too. The Tilehurst to Didcot section is the first big installation of the new F+F OHLE so there may be issues that have to be resolved, hence in part the long time between wiring and passenger services being due to start. Realistically, electric services on the new section are going to need Reading to Airport Jcn at least to be wired, a significant number of drivers to be trained and a significant number of 387s to have been delivered.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on June 15, 2016, 12:13:19
    Didn't Mark Hopwood do an interview in Rail at the end of last year, and he suggested an EMU service to Maidenhead would be possible in 'early 2017'.   So assuming it unlikely to have been possible to advance that timing, May 2017 does seem the most probable start date, all things considered.

    Found an online short version:

    Quote
    “We get our first EMUs in the early months of 2016. We already have wires to Hayes in west London, and we intend to start using them within a few weeks of receiving those trains.

    “The dates Network Rail has published are back-stop dates. It is saying to us that it will try to outperform those dates. So we expect to see electrification to Maidenhead in early 2017, and that gives us our next opportunity to use EMUs.”

    http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/2015/12/08/hopwood-upbeat-as-gwr-revises-rolling-stock-plans

    I'm also wondering if the proposed 8 car 387 service in lieu of some peak Greenfords could ever have started as planned in May this year, due to infrastructure alterations still required at that time such as:

    West Ealing Bay?
    Hayes and Harlington Bay - (the temporary solution being reversing on the Heathrow spur).
    and then
    Paddington P14 wiring delayed due to overhead clearance problems?
    Paddington P12/13 reworking?
    Those last two may not have been explicitly announced as required for early EMU operation, but there must be some impact on Paddington platforming...

    Delays to rolling stock availability have possibly covered up a certain amount of Network Rail embarrassment...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on June 15, 2016, 17:33:41
    Above ground bits

    Sorry - don't know.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 15, 2016, 18:04:38
    Didn't Mark Hopwood do an interview in Rail at the end of last year, and he suggested an EMU service to Maidenhead would be possible in 'early 2017'.   So assuming it unlikely to have been possible to advance that timing, May 2017 does seem the most probable start date, all things considered.

    Found an online short version:

    Quote
    “We get our first EMUs in the early months of 2016. We already have wires to Hayes in west London, and we intend to start using them within a few weeks of receiving those trains.

    “The dates Network Rail has published are back-stop dates. It is saying to us that it will try to outperform those dates. So we expect to see electrification to Maidenhead in early 2017, and that gives us our next opportunity to use EMUs.”

    http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/2015/12/08/hopwood-upbeat-as-gwr-revises-rolling-stock-plans

    I'm also wondering if the proposed 8 car 387 service in lieu of some peak Greenfords could ever have started as planned in May this year, due to infrastructure alterations still required at that time such as:

    West Ealing Bay?
    Hayes and Harlington Bay - (the temporary solution being reversing on the Heathrow spur).
    and then
    Paddington P14 wiring delayed due to overhead clearance problems?
    Paddington P12/13 reworking?
    Those last two may not have been explicitly announced as required for early EMU operation, but there must be some impact on Paddington platforming...

    Delays to rolling stock availability have possibly covered up a certain amount of Network Rail embarrassment...

    Paul

    I suspect the will be a drive for "political" electric service to Maidenhead even if its a semi fast with limited stops.

    Also prising the 387 out of GTR hands may prove challenging they are making all the excuses under the sun not to accept the Class 700


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 15, 2016, 18:28:09
    I'm also wondering if the proposed 8 car 387 service in lieu of some peak Greenfords could ever have started as planned in May this year, due to infrastructure alterations still required at that time such as:

    West Ealing Bay?
    Hayes and Harlington Bay - (the temporary solution being reversing on the Heathrow spur).
    and then
    Paddington P14 wiring delayed due to overhead clearance problems?
    Paddington P12/13 reworking?
    Those last two may not have been explicitly announced as required for early EMU operation, but there must be some impact on Paddington platforming...

    The bay at West Ealing has finally been 'finished'.  Now open for 2-car trains.  To be extended to 4-car later on, but as 2-car trains will only be using it for the foreseeable future, that can only really be useful to keep a service running in the event of a failure?

    It would have been tight to have got it open for the May date, but perhaps boarding covering the platform construction could have been used whilst it was finished off?

    The wires have been up on Platform 14 since the turn of the year, though not able to accept an 8-car EMU as yet.

    I suspect the will be a drive for "political" electric service to Maidenhead even if its a semi fast with limited stops.

    Also prising the 387 out of GTR hands may prove challenging they are making all the excuses under the sun not to accept the Class 700

    The GTR 387s are no longer coming to GWR, so a cascade delay won't be the issue.  Whether enough of the new build are here is a different matter, but my money would be on a limited electric service between Maidenhead and Paddington from next May, slowly being ramped up until the route as far as Didcot becomes available a year or so later.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on June 15, 2016, 19:03:00
    Hayes and Harlington Bay - (the temporary solution being reversing on the Heathrow spur).

    The track & signalling has been installed here for several months now and the platform has seen use during some recent disruption (when HEx was stuffed as I recall) - it just needs finishing off to get to its full (8 car?) length.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on June 20, 2016, 09:23:18
    Some wiring is now up in the Didcot station area. The down main is now wired from just east of the station through platform 1 to Foxhall Junction (I think - couldn't see from the car), and the up main is wired from Foxhall Junction (presumably) to Milton Junction.

    Someone has posted elsewhere that the switch-on date has been revised to 2nd July for the mains and 16th July for the reliefs.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 21, 2016, 19:44:50
    This was posted on the WNXX forum
    https://vimeo.com/166803000


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on June 22, 2016, 13:18:57
    This was posted on the WNXX forum
    https://vimeo.com/166803000

    Good isn't it? I thought that the holes were pre-drilled judging by the captions, but someone on WNXX corrected me that there were just trial pits to check that no signalling cables. Apparently the crane has some kind of vibrating hammer on it. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on June 22, 2016, 18:20:41
    This was posted on the WNXX forum
    https://vimeo.com/166803000

    Good isn't it? I thought that the holes were pre-drilled judging by the captions, but someone on WNXX corrected me that there were just trial pits to check that no signalling cables. Apparently the crane has some kind of vibrating hammer on it. 

    Twas me that posted it. Very impressive bit of kit. I've cycled past the compound at Knighton where the loading was filmed and wondered what they were doing there as I couldn't see any electrification equipment in there at the time. There's another compound nearby at Uffington but that's set back from the line.

    Received the latest copy of Modern Railways this morning and there's what looks like a very interesting article on GW electrification written by their Technical Editor, Roger Ford. Not had the chance to read it yet but I will this evening!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: LiskeardRich on June 22, 2016, 18:32:34
    I've just caught the 1824 at Truro and it may be delayed after Didcot Parkway due to problems with the OHL after Didcot. What has gone wrong do we know?

    It created a little amusement amongst passengers that a Diesel will be delayed by electrification problems.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 22, 2016, 19:58:56
    Quote
    What has gone wrong do we know?

    see here: http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14689.msg197627#msg197627


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on June 27, 2016, 11:42:15
    Over the last week, some masts have now appeared immediately to the west of Thatcham Crossing  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Billhere on July 01, 2016, 16:11:13
    Notices coming round now about the juice being on at various times between Scours Lane and Milton Junction as from the 2nd July.

    Nothing specific, just the standard safety notices saying they are available for going live under supervision, and giving various safety details. Being run from the Electrical Control Room at TVSC.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on July 01, 2016, 16:40:48
    Those masts that appeared immediately west of Thatcham (4, I think) are the only ones between there and Newbury (confirmed during a trip last evening).

    Also noticed that although quite a few more piles have appeared between the 2 above stations, there is still nothing at all between Newbury Racecourse and Newbury, or at Newbury Station itself.

    Time is ticking on chaps!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 01, 2016, 21:45:04
    Notices coming round now about the juice being on at various times between Scours Lane and Milton Junction as from the 2nd July.

    Nothing specific, just the standard safety notices saying they are available for going live under supervision, and giving various safety details. Being run from the Electrical Control Room at TVSC.

    The plan I believe is to commence section proving this weekend.  The Electrical Control Room at Didcot is not yet operational, the energisation is being managed form Romford ECR!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 02, 2016, 09:43:33
    Have just done a couple of journeies to Padd and Reading from Taplow. There still appears to be a lot of masts still to erect  particualrly between Slough and Hayes and part of Maidenhead Twford and through Sonning Cutting.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Billhere on July 02, 2016, 22:06:18
    Notices coming round now about the juice being on at various times between Scours Lane and Milton Junction as from the 2nd July.

    Nothing specific, just the standard safety notices saying they are available for going live under supervision, and giving various safety details. Being run from the Electrical Control Room at TVSC.

    The plan I believe is to commence section proving this weekend.  The Electrical Control Room at Didcot is not yet operational, the energisation is being managed form Romford ECR!

    The poster gives the contact point as the TVSC, although I still thought it was Romford as well.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 03, 2016, 08:06:04
    Notices coming round now about the juice being on at various times between Scours Lane and Milton Junction as from the 2nd July.

    Nothing specific, just the standard safety notices saying they are available for going live under supervision, and giving various safety details. Being run from the Electrical Control Room at TVSC.

    The plan I believe is to commence section proving this weekend.  The Electrical Control Room at Didcot is not yet operational, the energisation is being managed form Romford ECR!

    The poster gives the contact point as the TVSC, although I still thought it was Romford as well.

    TVSC is still the controlling centre, they just don't yet have the staff with the ECR competence based there yet, hence Romford which has and is also training the TVSC operators much of the training and competence assessment is experience based which takes time to build up the full team required for a 24 / 7 .  Romford is currently the ECR for Padd to Heathrow OLE   

    The ECR "desk" at Romford  can have the TVSC electrification phone lines diverted to it and the operator will answer the phone according to what is in the Sectional Appendix (to the Rule Book) for the area there are covering.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on July 06, 2016, 16:56:23
    A few days ago I commented, re: Newbury area electrification:

    Quote
    Time is ticking on chaps!

    Then this has come to light in the last few days.....
    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/electrification-of-the-railway-enters-next-crucial-stage-in-the-newbury-area (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/electrification-of-the-railway-enters-next-crucial-stage-in-the-newbury-area)

    Work to start end of this month apparently :)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on July 07, 2016, 09:19:19
    Last week, my nine year old son's school in Bath got a visit (I assume from NR/BTP) about the dangers of electrified lines (he came home telling me that electricity could jump 3 meters).  All very good, but seems a bit premature.  Or is Bath being wired sooner than I thought?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on July 07, 2016, 09:31:43
    The school visit might have been booked some time ago, perhaps before the present degree of delay was known about.

    Keeping at least 3M away from live overhead is sensible advice, but it wont actually jump that far. The top of the train is less than 3M from the over head as are the undersides of many bridges.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 07, 2016, 09:36:31
    But the train is connected to the current by the pantograph, giving a path of minimal resistance, and most bridges do not make much of an electrode, or are engineered for safety. That said, and I'm no expert on Paschen's law, it is almost certain that the arc would never cover 3m, but you won't find me taking any chances.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on July 07, 2016, 10:22:35
    My son's school, in Bristol, had a similar visit from BTP a few months ago. I don't think they were told 3m though! Surely the roof of a lorry or bus is less than 3m from the wires at a level crossing?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 07, 2016, 10:43:35
    Surely the roof of a lorry or bus is less than 3m from the wires at a level crossing?

    It doesn't provide the same tempting target as a small finger stuck on the end of of a body full of water and pointed incautiously close. Think why lightning hits the conductor rather than the roof.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on July 07, 2016, 12:19:50
    Although Didcot - Oxford isn't due to be electrified until 2019 I noticed today that they have started installing what looks like an electrical sub-station/feed-in at Radley.
    This is the first noticeable work on electrification on this route for several months, although still loads of piling to complete.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on July 07, 2016, 13:19:47
    I confess that 3m took me by surprise.  I thought he must have meant 3 feet, but no, electricity jumping  3m (or half the height of a giraffe to use a non-SI unit favoured by NR) is a key part of NR's safety message to children.  See this schools worksheet for an example...
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ)

    I assume that there is a rounding error and a safety margin added in somewhere.  The key points are that it jumps and it jumps further than you think.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on July 07, 2016, 13:45:36
    3m is standard HSE guidance for 11kv and 33kv electrical transmission cables, so that would also make sense for 25kv rail traction supply. The 'live zone', which is where you are basically guaranteed a shock, is somewhat less. I can try to dig out my notes from my 'electrical awareness' training if anyone is particularly interested.

    There is a degree of safety margin in these values as the likelihood of a flashover can be influenced by many factors such as atmospheric humidity, the presence of smoke and so on, which can make air.p more conductive.

    As I recall, the 440kv transmission lines (on the biggest metal pylons) have a live zone of several metres, which is why the cables are so high off the ground.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on July 07, 2016, 16:19:00
    I confess that 3m took me by surprise.  I thought he must have meant 3 feet, but no, electricity jumping  3m (or half the height of a giraffe to use a non-SI unit favoured by NR) is a key part of NR's safety message to children.  See this schools worksheet for an example...
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ)

    I assume that there is a rounding error and a safety margin added in somewhere.  The key points are that it jumps and it jumps further than you think.
    Have to add that to the list with the Wales and the Olympic Swimming Pool.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 07, 2016, 17:08:44
    ...3m (or half the height of a giraffe to use a non-SI unit favoured by NR)...

    What is that expressed in terms of double-decker buses or Nelson's Column?

    My first flying instructor said he had gone metric with his units a couple of years before I started. I was taught to level out for landing at "the height of a medium-sized white van". Previous students began the landing flare at "the height of a baby dinosaur". You have to move with the times.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 07, 2016, 22:31:20
    I confess that 3m took me by surprise.  I thought he must have meant 3 feet, but no, electricity jumping  3m (or half the height of a giraffe to use a non-SI unit favoured by NR) is a key part of NR's safety message to children.  See this schools worksheet for an example...
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ)

    I assume that there is a rounding error and a safety margin added in somewhere.  The key points are that it jumps and it jumps further than you think.

    The original BR standard for a safe distance was 9 feet or 2.75 meters, if I recall correctly BS EN 50122 states 3 meters.  Often the challenge to achieve even the 2.75 meters is the train pantograph horns in stations which has a low wire height and there are a couple of stations on the network where the ORR has given NR a derogation after a risk assessment has been done on each location.

    3 meters is a much simpler distance to use than 2.75 and school children will not understand 9 feet.

    The "jumping" distance for 25kV is less than 6 inches 150 mm.  The normal min clearance for 25kV is 2 feet 600mm  although there are some areas of special reduced electrical clearance of 175 mm.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: LiskeardRich on July 07, 2016, 22:33:22
    Quote
    3 meters is a much simpler distance to use than 2.75 and school children will not understand 9 feet.

    If you start telling my daughter about 9 feet, she would start by walking heel to toe for 9 steps. She only has little feet.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Trowres on July 07, 2016, 23:10:05
    In the early days of 25kV electrification in UK, it was reported that a test was conducted by deliberately sagging the overhead wire above the chimney of a steam loco until a flashover occurred. The gap had to be reduced to about one inch, if I recall correctly. This fits with other sources of information. e.g:(from USA):-
    https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9870 (https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9870)

    Of course allowance would have to be made for transient overvoltage and movements - but the schools document does seem to suggest that the electricity can arc over 3m. If it did, I don't think I'd want to go anywhere near a platform on an electrified route. ???


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on July 08, 2016, 07:41:26
    Of course if you have metal objects in proximity you can get induced currents in them without touching the cable. I assume permanent metal objects such as bridges are earthed to avoid this but what if a person is carrying something metal such as a metal walking stick, umbrella or golf club - who close would that need to be to be a problem?



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 08, 2016, 07:55:25
    Thanks ET, for the explanation. Purely for interest - I can't figure out if the "jump" distance is proportionate to the voltage. If it is, would the values be different with the autotransformer setup, and an effective 50kV, than for a simple 25kV catenary?

    3 metres seems a very sensible thing to tell young children - and grown ups for that matter. My own boyhood experiments on conductivity of various materials in various states, conducted with an electric cattle fence and lengths of grass and straw of varying wetness, led to a short sharp shock rather than anything serious. I'm sure the curious mind is present in modern-day children still, at least some of them, and the message must be to take absolutely no chances with the electrics on the railway.

    "Grown-ups" have been known to do daft things, like driving across a level crossing in a lorry with an aerial on top, or walking under power lines with a long carbon-fibre fishing rod. Blindingly obvious after the event, of course.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on July 08, 2016, 09:32:38
    "Grown-ups" have been known to do daft things, like driving across a level crossing in a lorry with an aerial on top, or walking under power lines with a long carbon-fibre fishing rod. Blindingly obvious after the event, of course.

    Probably blindingly obvious during the event...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on July 08, 2016, 10:33:40
    Quote
    3 meters is a much simpler distance to use than 2.75 and school children will not understand 9 feet.

    If you start telling my daughter about 9 feet, she would start by walking heel to toe for 9 steps. She only has little feet.
    I'm pretty sure schools use both feet and metres nowadays.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on July 08, 2016, 11:48:23
    Quote
    3 meters is a much simpler distance to use than 2.75 and school children will not understand 9 feet.

    If you start telling my daughter about 9 feet, she would start by walking heel to toe for 9 steps. She only has little feet.
    I'm pretty sure schools use both feet and metres nowadays.

    Indeed they start off using "natural" units of measurements like handspans, feet and strides.  I don't think my kids would know what an inch is yet though, although they talk about miles. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 08, 2016, 14:09:37
    Network Rail confirm in their Oxford area e-update that IEP testing between Reading & Didcot commences 16 July


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on July 08, 2016, 15:44:01
    ChrisB, how do you sign up for these updates?  I can't find any info on the NR website.

    Thanks.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 08, 2016, 15:46:57
    Via a paper sign-up sheet st a briefing, in this case.

    If you drop me an IM with your name & email address, I can ask the person that sends thdm out to add you....I think. Worth a try


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Trowres on July 09, 2016, 00:56:41
    I confess that 3m took me by surprise.  I thought he must have meant 3 feet, but no, electricity jumping  3m (or half the height of a giraffe to use a non-SI unit favoured by NR) is a key part of NR's safety message to children.  See this schools worksheet for an example...
    http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwi546ePquHNAhWHKsAKHYebDSEQFggiMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.networkrail.co.uk%2FWorkArea%2FDownloadAsset.aspx%3Fid%3D30064786520&usg=AFQjCNFp2vLwL_BrrRY4SwJ3Yo-4thP18A&sig2=Vg0Gcilrpok2xw8-RANZUQ)

    I assume that there is a rounding error and a safety margin added in somewhere.  The key points are that it jumps and it jumps further than you think.

    Hmm. I followed this link. One of the exercises shows a TV, phone charger and desk lamp. It then asks:
    Quote
    See if you can guess which one uses the most electricity

    The answers are given at the bottom of the page as follows:

    Quote
    A TV (42” HD) carries 240 volts (i.e. it uses the most electricity). A mobile phone charger carries 24 volts (i.e. it uses the least
    electricity). A desk lamp (with 60 Watt bulb) carries 120 volts.

     ???  ???  ???  ::)  ::)  ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 09, 2016, 09:02:44
    I don't believe it.

    Volta Ampere and Watt must be spinning in their graves. Is this the level of science we are  teaching our kids?

    We'll certainly be able to compete outside the EU with this  level of scientific knowledge.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 09, 2016, 09:06:25
    On the main topic had a trip back from Bristol (TM) to Slough last night.

    Surprised: hadn't realised that there are almost no visible signs of work  West of Swindon except for piles stacked in a couple of yards.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 09, 2016, 09:19:11
    Thanks ET, for the explanation. Purely for interest - I can't figure out if the "jump" distance is proportionate to the voltage. If it is, would the values be different with the autotransformer setup, and an effective 50kV, than for a simple 25kV catenary?

    3 metres seems a very sensible thing to tell young children - and grown ups for that matter. My own boyhood experiments on conductivity of various materials in various states, conducted with an electric cattle fence and lengths of grass and straw of varying wetness, led to a short sharp shock rather than anything serious. I'm sure the curious mind is present in modern-day children still, at least some of them, and the message must be to take absolutely no chances with the electrics on the railway.

    "Grown-ups" have been known to do daft things, like driving across a level crossing in a lorry with an aerial on top, or walking under power lines with a long carbon-fibre fishing rod. Blindingly obvious after the event, of course.

    Yes the AT system is 50kV between the ATF (auto transformer feeder wire) and the catenary both of which are 25kV to earth, therefore the electrical clearances and safety distances are the same.


    It is extremely unlikely for a power arc at 25kV to "jump" 3 metres but that would need to be initiated by almost direct contact and the atmospheric conditions would have lend themselves to ionisation, and finally the protection schemes (circuit breaker trips) would clear the fault before the arc got established over that distance.

    The rule of thumb electrical clearance in air for 25kV is 600mm, however there are reduced clearances down to 150mm in the Thameslink tunnels in the Kings Cross area.

    The railways and the ORR take a lot of care to keep people away from live OLE, before any new scheme is energised a screening and protection walkout is done 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 09, 2016, 10:02:01
    Thanks ET, I'll get the hang of this one day. Because of a change of schools, and the modular nature of the physics O-level course, I was not actually taught the basics of electricity, doing magnetism and Newton's laws twice instead. I found it so fascinating though that I taught myself from the book, and still ended up with my only Grade 1 result, but the practicalities of two 25kV feeds to earth coming from the same transformer are slow to dawn on me!

    O, that I had found history and latin so equally absorbing. Still, Sic Transit Gloria Swanson, as they say.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on July 09, 2016, 11:22:21
    On the main topic had a trip back from Bristol (TM) to Slough last night.

    Surprised: hadn't realised that there are almost no visible signs of work  West of Swindon except for piles stacked in a couple of yards.

    There are around 30 uprights in place west of Wootton Bassett junction, all but 4 on the down line side.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 09, 2016, 12:07:27
    Network Rail confirm in their Oxford area e-update that IEP testing between Reading & Didcot commences 16 July

    Possibly this train:  http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/U35547/2016/07/16/advanced


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 09, 2016, 14:39:39
    What would they be using to do the test?

    This does come down from Derby earlier in the day:
    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/U35546/2016/07/16/advanced


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 09, 2016, 15:02:20

    There are around 30 uprights in place west of Wootton Bassett junction, all but 4 on the down line side.

    Must have missed them eating my free fruit cake! 2 pieces!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 09, 2016, 18:16:06
    What would they be using to do the test?

    This does come down from Derby earlier in the day:
    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/U35546/2016/07/16/advanced

    Possibly this? Used to be known as test coach Mentor, for testing OLE, based at RTC Derby.

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/ews60002/10473767754

    (Pic courtesy of Mathew Bailey)




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 09, 2016, 19:25:51
    What would they be using to do the test?

    This does come down from Derby earlier in the day:
    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/U35546/2016/07/16/advanced

    Possibly this? Used to be known as test coach Mentor, for testing OLE, based at RTC Derby.

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/ews60002/10473767754

    (Pic courtesy of Mathew Bailey)




    Mentor has been broken for nearly 2 years or up until a few weeks ago when I wanted to book it for a run.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on July 09, 2016, 19:37:06
    Saw this poster at Paddington

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/padelec.jpg)

    Most of it is commonsense, but I'd would not have considered balloons - not that I regularly carry one anyway!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 09, 2016, 20:55:16
    I don't believe it.

    Volta Ampere and Watt must be spinning in their graves. Is this the level of science we are  teaching our kids?


    So must John Ambrose Fleming, in a left-hand direction, naturally.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 10, 2016, 00:05:08
    Saw this poster at Paddington

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/padelec.jpg)

    Most of it is commonsense, but I'd would not have considered balloons - not that I regularly carry one anyway!

    Please be reassured, however, that helium balloons are not 'extremely dangerous when in vicinity of' Ollie at Paddington.  ;) :D ;D




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on July 10, 2016, 11:56:17
    I doubt that umbrellas of normal size are much of a risk, but it is well to be cautious. So surely umbrellas should be kept well BEHIND the yellow line  and not BEYOND the yellow line as is instructed in the poster.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 10, 2016, 13:46:42
    Saw this poster at Paddington

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/padelec.jpg)

    Most of it is commonsense, but I'd would not have considered balloons - not that I regularly carry one anyway!

    The problem with helium balloons is the string, the balloon floats away gets trapped on live equipment and then some reaches out and grabs the string ..................... !!!!

    I doubt that umbrellas of normal size are much of a risk, but it is well to be cautious. So surely umbrellas should be kept well BEHIND the yellow line  and not BEYOND the yellow line as is instructed in the poster.

    Umbrellas are not too much of an issue on a platform, the live equipment is kept far enough away, they do become a problem on windy days when they get blow out the owners hand and the get caught up in the OLE, can cause a bank and flash or damage a train pan


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on July 10, 2016, 15:21:59
    Helium balloons (the toys) do not seem to me to be a very good use of the dwindling world resources of exploitable Helium.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 10, 2016, 15:45:03
    Helium balloons (the toys) do not seem to me to be a very good use of the dwindling world resources of exploitable Helium.

    A huge new deposit has been found in Tanzania - see here (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jun/28/huge-helium-gas-tanzania-east-africa-averts-medical-shortage) for details. Significantly, this is the first deposit to be found by any means other than pure chance.

    That said, I agree that cooling the coils in medical scanners is a much better purpose to use helium for.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rob on the hill on July 11, 2016, 11:13:28
    Reported on Facebook that this is an IEP move today:
    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97238/2016/07/11/advanced


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 11, 2016, 13:02:50
    It's a shame I'm not at home, or I would have nipped up towards BPW to film it coming into the Stoke Gifford depot. It looks as though it will be standing on P4 for quite a while.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 11, 2016, 13:23:19
    Thankyou so much for posting that Rob on the Hill, sadly due to unfortunate circumstances I wasn't able to see the launch last week as I was stuck up at John Radcliffe, but managed to quickly get to Tilehurst just now to see it go past. As expected it is the green one


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 11, 2016, 14:27:52
    It's a shame I'm not at home, or I would have nipped up towards BPW to film it coming into the Stoke Gifford depot. It looks as though it will be standing on P4 for quite a while.

    My son and I managed to nip down to Baulking, between Didcot and Swindon and saw it pass from the overbridge. It was 800 004, the green machine. Here's his video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMIK21Zf5tg

    We thought it was very quiet, particularly compared to the HSTs which passed beforehand, however it was probably coasting as it was running 3 mins early and following an HST which was 3 mins late.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on July 11, 2016, 22:14:27
    Test post


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on July 11, 2016, 23:21:38
    Test post


    Thanks for the 'like' Chris from Nailsea - I was sorting out some database issues.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 11, 2016, 23:22:37

     ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 12, 2016, 08:58:14
    For those based at the eastern end of our network, another unit is running down from Old Dalby today as far as Reading and back to North Pole:
    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97239/2016/07/12/advanced

    With the same likely to happen again on Friday.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 13, 2016, 11:59:05
    An interesting article, based on an interview with NR's Andrew Haynes:

    http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-Industry-Focus-/getting-great-western-electrification-back-on-track


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 15, 2016, 10:02:08
    Reported on WNXX forum that IEPs 800 001 and 800 002 are due to do live testing between Tilehurst and Didcot on Sat night/Sun morning

    Looks like they are running from North Pole depot to Wantage Road then to and from Reading

    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97549/2016/07/16/advanced

    Though the above schedule doesn't appear to show any stops at Tilehurst and Didcot, so are these running on diesel only or changing over on the move?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 15, 2016, 15:20:31
    800001 came down from Old Dalby this morning, saw it at Reading, it could certainly do with a wash, looked very grubby


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 15, 2016, 18:48:08
    Allegedly North Pole Depot OLE becomes energised this weekend


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 17, 2016, 13:59:22
    Technical question for ET.

    Going up to London yesterday (Sat) I notice a number of drums hanging from the gantries. In one case the O/H line seemed to be attached to the drum.

    What are they?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on July 17, 2016, 14:25:59
    Can not be certain without a photo, but I suspect that they may be weights that are connected to the overhead via insulators.
    As the overhead changes in length due to changing temperatures, the weight which hangs vertically, moves up and down. Some types consist of a number of segmented disks of cast iron in order that each individual weight may be handled manually and the total weight be adjusted.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on July 17, 2016, 14:50:33
    Technical question for ET.

    Going up to London yesterday (Sat) I notice a number of drums hanging from the gantries. In one case the O/H line seemed to be attached to the drum.

    What are they?

    Did they look like this?
    (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/.imaging/stk/furrer_frey/promo/dam/furrerfrey/images/systeme/Series1/S1-monoboom.jpg/jcr:content/S1-monoboom.jpg.2014-10-29-09-50-56.jpg)
    (Sorry it's so small).

    They are Tensorex C+ spring tensioners - as generally used in Series One instead of hanging weights.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on July 17, 2016, 16:39:04
    Thanks stuving exactly what they look like.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on July 18, 2016, 11:19:53
    Looks like the first 800's ran under GWML wires this weekend.

    Video at https://twitter.com/networkrailwest/status/754958864693530624 (https://twitter.com/networkrailwest/status/754958864693530624)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 18, 2016, 12:06:32
    Looks like the first 800's ran under GWML wires this weekend.

    Video at https://twitter.com/networkrailwest/status/754958864693530624 (https://twitter.com/networkrailwest/status/754958864693530624)

    Both IEPs and the Network Rail test train made several runs between Reading and Wantage Road. While the test train (with test coach Mentor) stopped at Tilehurst and Didcot to raise and lower the pantograph, it appears from the RTT schedules that the IEPs ran non-stop between Reading and Wantage Road so presumably this was done on the move?

    Link to Network Rail press release with above video at Moreton Cutting and vid of Network Rail test train leaving Tilehurst.

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/first-all-electric-train-runs-on-great-western


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on July 18, 2016, 12:45:18
    Technical question for ET.

    Going up to London yesterday (Sat) I notice a number of drums hanging from the gantries. In one case the O/H line seemed to be attached to the drum.

    What are they?

    Did they look like this?
    (http://www.furrerfrey.ch/.imaging/stk/furrer_frey/promo/dam/furrerfrey/images/systeme/Series1/S1-monoboom.jpg/jcr:content/S1-monoboom.jpg.2014-10-29-09-50-56.jpg)
    (Sorry it's so small).

    They are Tensorex C+ spring tensioners - as generally used in Series One instead of hanging weights.

    Temperatures forecast to rise to 30 deg C around here (Pangbourne) to-day.  This will be a good test for the tensioners.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on July 18, 2016, 13:02:57
    Both IEPs and the Network Rail test train made several runs between Reading and Wantage Road. While the test train (with test coach Mentor) stopped at Tilehurst and Didcot to raise and lower the pantograph, it appears from the RTT schedules that the IEPs ran non-stop between Reading and Wantage Road so presumably this was done on the move?

    Since it's specified to do that, you would expect testing to include it. Of course what you don't know is whether it switched mode more often, while under the wires, so as to fully test this capability against the requirement:
    Quote
    TS1576 A Bi-mode IEP Unit must deliver Full Functionality in any of the following modes;
    • Electric Mode; and
    • Self Power Mode.
    TS1964 A Bi-mode IEP Unit must allow the driver to select any of the modes identified in TS1576.
    TS1577 A Bi-mode IEP Unit must be able to switch between any of the modes identified in TS1576 whilst at any speed from stationary up to the maximum speed of an IEP Train identified in TS261.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on July 18, 2016, 13:07:36
    Temperatures forecast to rise to 30 deg C around here (Pangbourne) to-day.  This will be a good test for the tensioners.

    It would be a serious gaffe if they didn't cope - presumably it would be down to installation and set-up, rather than selecting the tensioners. After all, this is the easy bit; tensioning the rails is a lot more difficult (it's so hard to get them to wrap round the drum).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 18, 2016, 14:01:42
    Both IEPs and the Network Rail test train made several runs between Reading and Wantage Road. While the test train (with test coach Mentor) stopped at Tilehurst and Didcot to raise and lower the pantograph, it appears from the RTT schedules that the IEPs ran non-stop between Reading and Wantage Road so presumably this was done on the move?

    Since it's specified to do that, you would expect testing to include it. Of course what you don't know is whether it switched mode more often, while under the wires, so as to fully test this capability against the requirement:
    Quote
    TS1576 A Bi-mode IEP Unit must deliver Full Functionality in any of the following modes;
    • Electric Mode; and
    • Self Power Mode.
    TS1964 A Bi-mode IEP Unit must allow the driver to select any of the modes identified in TS1576.
    TS1577 A Bi-mode IEP Unit must be able to switch between any of the modes identified in TS1576 whilst at any speed from stationary up to the maximum speed of an IEP Train identified in TS261.

    Yes, I was aware that this was in the spec, I was just a little surprised that they did this on the first run under the new OLE. Hitachi would have tested the capability on the Old Dalby test track which is fitted with a length of F+F Series 1 OLE so they would know that changeover on the move works OK.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 18, 2016, 22:17:15
    Temperatures forecast to rise to 30 deg C around here (Pangbourne) to-day.  This will be a good test for the tensioners.

    It would be a serious gaffe if they didn't cope - presumably it would be down to installation and set-up, rather than selecting the tensioners. After all, this is the easy bit; tensioning the rails is a lot more difficult (it's so hard to get them to wrap round the drum).
    The tensorex type units have been used all over Europe for 20 years plus.  Probably more effective than the counter balance weights in that the counter balance weights have to tension both contact and catenary wire were as with these units there is one for the contact wire and one for the catenary


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on July 19, 2016, 15:21:07

    I returned from Oxford to Reading on the 2252 stopper last night (18/7) and counted 22 separate working electrification vehicles (platforms with telescopic arms etc) on the main lines with 6 trackside work areas.

    Very impressive.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxman on July 19, 2016, 16:03:04
    Worth noting though that it is only the main lines that are complete. There are still sections of the contact wire missing on the relief lines, for example, at Goring and Cholsey.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on July 19, 2016, 16:26:56
    Worth noting though that it is only the main lines that are complete. There are still sections of the contact wire missing on the relief lines, for example, at Goring and Cholsey.

    Yes, and also between Moreton Cutting and through Didcot station to Milton Junction where none of the relief lines are wired (yet).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 19, 2016, 20:11:42

    I returned from Oxford to Reading on the 2252 stopper last night (18/7) and counted 22 separate working electrification vehicles (platforms with telescopic arms etc) on the main lines with 6 trackside work areas.

    Very impressive.

    OTC

    Them things are called MEWP

    For those vaugly interested class 800 running on GW juice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrNF2euHs_0&feature=player_embedded


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on July 20, 2016, 00:20:33

    I returned from Oxford to Reading on the 2252 stopper last night (18/7) and counted 22 separate working electrification vehicles (platforms with telescopic arms etc) on the main lines with 6 trackside work areas.

    Very impressive.

    OTC

    Them things are called MEWP

    For those vaugly interested class 800 running on GW juice https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrNF2euHs_0&feature=player_embedded

    Just to elaborate on that acronym for anyone unfamiliar - Mobile Elevating Work Platform


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on July 20, 2016, 00:48:48
    Indeed - it's also already in our acronyms / abbreviations page, above, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/acronyms.html  ;) :D ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on July 21, 2016, 00:25:57


    Them things are called MEWP



    Yes but are they driving, trailer, brake, first, standard, composite, corridor, open, lavatory or if used on LUL uncoupling? (etc)

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 21, 2016, 11:00:05
    They were specified as being able to change over on the move.....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 23, 2016, 23:14:41
    "On the fly" to use the jargon. Pants up or down.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: NickB on July 28, 2016, 18:24:57
    Apologies for the digression, and also if this has been asked before.
    As I was standing at Maidenhead station this morning admiring the new gantries I was struck with the question of what happens as the track crosses the Thames at brunel's lovely bridge?
    Will the cabling span the bridge, in which case should I admire the view now before it is spoilt forever by suspended cabling, or does something else happen to break the overhead continuity before it picks up again on the other side (perhaps slip it in neutral and coast over?) 😀


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 28, 2016, 18:54:31
    Sorry to disappoint, but yes, the normal cables will definitely go over the bridge.  The support structures may well be tailored to the location, (I don't think we've seen the details yet) and will be positioned to suit the piers of the bridge, rather than the normal distances apart. 
    Something different to the usual has already been fitted at Moulsford, a more lightweight centrally mounted cantilever system.  So I suggest that Maidenhead bridge may be similar.

    There are any number of listed bridges around the country with OHLE added, on both the ECML and WCML for a start.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on July 28, 2016, 19:23:21
    There is a bit of info here on how Maidenhead bridge will be but no pictures (yet): http://openbuildings.com/buildings/maidenhead-railway-bridge-profile-10598?_show_description=1

    ...but later I did find this : https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/pam/docservlet%3FdocId%3D139756288%26filename%3D1985224.pdf%26mimeType%3Dapplication/pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiH98-X8JbOAhXLDMAKHZkZCugQFghTMBA&usg=AFQjCNF99o9MRtp_cvz53jXMfO5klEWpow&sig2=RdWenYh-q3KdhB9h5MhvjQ



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 29, 2016, 01:16:20
    Can they not reduce the amount of knitting, a rackets and insulators etc by running the ATF and screen conductor along the ground using insulated cable within troughing like they apparently do in tunnels?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on July 29, 2016, 08:51:58
    I think we need to keep this in perspective a bit here - the bridge is listed due to its significance from an engineering point of view, not for it's visual appearance, architectural or cultural importance, so I think adding the electrification stuff really is not an issue.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on July 29, 2016, 09:15:15
    The things that run over it are not original Brunel either - despite what some would have us believe.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on July 29, 2016, 09:36:43
    Can they not reduce the amount of knitting, a rackets and insulators etc by running the ATF and screen conductor along the ground using insulated cable within troughing like they apparently do in tunnels?

    Paul

    The screen conductor is always with the other (non-OLE) cables. That "Heritage Deed Method Statement" makes the point that the revised ATF design has fewer overhead cables than the previous "booster" transformer one (10 vs 15). And putting the ATF right over the pillar on a small mast does use the least metal to hold it up. Also, I'm sure there are some special rules about working on cables near ground-level 25 kV conductors.

    The performance of the AT system does ultimately depend on the impedance balance between the two current paths (conductor/catenary and ATF), so perhaps that limits the amount of those you can use.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on July 29, 2016, 10:11:03
    The things that run over it are not original Brunel either - despite what some would have us believe.

    Indeed! I think Brunel would be really rather impressed to see how his creation has evolved/is evolving into a modern electric railway with 125mph trains and also with the equipment that assists with its construction. He should/would also be rightly proud of his groundbreaking (literally!) civil engineering that gave us the flat, straight GWML as a basis to work with - far fewer barriers in the way of running fast trains and an efficient timetable on the GWML than that stood in the way of the various WCML modernisations.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 29, 2016, 11:25:50
    The support structures may well be tailored to the location, (I don't think we've seen the details yet) and will be positioned to suit the piers of the bridge, rather than the normal distances apart. 
    Something different to the usual has already been fitted at Moulsford, a more lightweight centrally mounted cantilever system.  So I suggest that Maidenhead bridge may be similar.

    Some concrete bases with fixings have appeared in each of the recesses in the cess each side of the bridge, so I'd expect that to mean structures fitted there rather than in the middle.  Moulsford is essentially two separate bridges bolted together so much easier to fit structures down the middle - not sure there's the room over Maidenhead Bridge.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 29, 2016, 11:33:14
    The screen conductor is always with the other (non-OLE) cables.

    I thought as installed between Tileshurst and Didcot the screen conductor was the lower one linking all the masts, not mounted on an insulator - is that just another earthing conductor?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on July 29, 2016, 11:49:34
    I thought as installed between Tileshurst and Didcot the screen conductor was the lower one linking all the masts, not mounted on an insulator - is that just another earthing conductor?

    Paul

    I've not seen anything about a wire like that - but this is a description off the screen conductor, written about the change to ATF on the WCML:
    Quote
    Further changes see the introduction of a return screen
    conductor installed in parallel with the traction return
    rail and is positioned within 200mm of telecoms cable
    routes or normally within the same trough. This cable is
    a 19/4.22mm (170mm2) and is connected to the
    traction return rail every 400 metres this is normally via
    structure to rail bonds or by dedicated spider plates


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 29, 2016, 20:54:45
    The screen conductor is always with the other (non-OLE) cables.

    I thought as installed between Tileshurst and Didcot the screen conductor was the lower one linking all the masts, not mounted on an insulator - is that just another earthing conductor?

    Paul

    The lower one on the masts is the earth wire which bonds all the structures together.  The screening conductor is laid in the trough routes and its called a "Mutual Screening Conductor" (MSC), this is connected to the running rails approx. every 400 metres, either directly to both where axel counters are used for train detection or via impedance bonds where conventional track circuits are used.   The principle of the MSC is it carries a small amount of return current which is anti-phase the contact wire, the MSC being placed right next to signal and telecom cables means it negates any induced voltage these cables may pick up, things like Signalling Loc cases are also bonded to the MSC.  The MSC is effectively earth but does not pick up every OLE structure this done by the earth wire.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on July 30, 2016, 12:49:30
    Thanks to Electric train for the additional details confirming that the cable on the masts is there for conventional earthing, and the screen is separate and located with the non-OHLE cabling.

    I've found a photo I had taken at Pangbourne so I've added it just for interest to show the mast mounted cable I was referring to.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 03, 2016, 21:03:41
    Definatly the earth wire.

    I did get my screen conductors muddled up  :'(  There are 2 types MSC and RSC - Mutual Screening Conductor and Return Screening Conductor.  The tpye use on the GW is actually an RSC as it use part of the return current, the MSC is still a conductor in the cable trough routes but it is not connected the traction retun, it has earth rods placed approx every 400 meters this type of screening is used on the "clasic booster transformer return" 25kV system.

    The MSC is not as effective as the RSC, the MSC requiring more maintenace as the earth rods need testing every ew years


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on August 10, 2016, 11:42:56
    New structures have appeared in the last 2 days in Sonning Cutting between Duffield Road and Butts Hill Road bridges on the Woodley/Sonning border.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on August 14, 2016, 12:09:28
    ...and as I type, this is happening at the bottom of my garden (apologies for the state of my compost heap! :))



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on August 14, 2016, 12:42:01
    Have you set up a Facebook page yet "Save BBM's View", demanding different, less visually intrusive, overheads behind your garden?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on August 14, 2016, 13:06:46
    Have you set up a Facebook page yet "Save BBM's View", demanding different, less visually intrusive, overheads behind your garden?

    As long as I get a better train service from Twyford they can do whatever they like!  ;D

    (as you might guess from the photo my view of the structures is somewhat hidden by vegetation etc anyway)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on August 14, 2016, 17:47:27
    Perhaps regular travellers will set up a Facebook page demanding a more visually appealing BBM compost heap!  :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on August 15, 2016, 09:07:44
    Noticed lots of chaps in yellow with surveying instruments around the station area at Newbury the other day - perhaps work is due to start soon ;-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on August 16, 2016, 08:10:41
    Although fully wired pass my house in Taplow I can't see the O/H or the trains for the trees!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on August 16, 2016, 08:18:48
    Although fully wired pass my house in Taplow I can't see the O/H or the trains for the trees!

    Ditto - and let's hope it stays that way!!!  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on August 17, 2016, 09:27:47
    I notice that the OHLE on the UM and DM between Pangbourne and Tilehurst is earthed (ie cables across the insulators), so it looks like following the publicity run with the 80x on electric it’s been switched off for now so installation work can be continued. 

    Notice also that the autotransformer cables (ie the ones above the gantries) on the UM and DM between Pangbourne and Tilehurst are not yet all installed: presumably the test run with just the one train drawing power didn’t need the voltage stabilisation that the auto-transformer system provides (I’ve tried to understand what ET and others have explained re OHLE!).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 17, 2016, 18:21:39
    I’ve tried to understand what ET and others have explained re OHLE!.


    Me too - very technical, but I think thanks to our experts here, I am getting the hang of it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 17, 2016, 19:08:06
    I notice that the OHLE on the UM and DM between Pangbourne and Tilehurst is earthed (ie cables across the insulators), so it looks like following the publicity run with the 80x on electric it’s been switched off for now so installation work can be continued. 

    The system is only enegised for the test runs at the moment, the full immunisation test have not been done, also there is no full time ECR yet, so the blue leads (portable earths, technically the ones they are using are construction earths) this so safety documentation can be issued for the OLE construction teams to continue working
     

    Notice also that the autotransformer cables (ie the ones above the gantries) on the UM and DM between Pangbourne and Tilehurst are not yet all installed: presumably the test run with just the one train drawing power didn’t need the voltage stabilisation that the auto-transformer system provides
    The system will be configured as classic 25kV for the test runs, the AT system is only needed for the service timetable


     (I’ve tried to understand what ET and others have explained re OHLE!).

    Its simple really ....... feisty wiggly Amps into the OLE and tiered and worn out wiggly Amps come back in the running rails   ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on August 17, 2016, 20:45:55
    Its simple really ....... feisty wiggly Amps into the OLE and tiered and worn out wiggly Amps come back in the running rails ;D

    Yes ET but those tired and worn out wiggly amps don't half play havoc with our signalling system if you don't send them off to their beds straight away and they want to go out and play first ::) :P :D ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 17, 2016, 21:57:13
    It's the other lots of wiggly amps with there 25,000 friends the extra Volts in the AT system that I remain unsure of.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 18, 2016, 08:07:40
    Its simple really ....... feisty wiggly Amps into the OLE and tiered and worn out wiggly Amps come back in the running rails ;D

    Yes ET but those tired and worn out wiggly amps don't half play havoc with our signalling system if you don't send them off to their beds straight away and they want to go out and play first ::) :P :D ;)

    I did say tired and worn out, they still have some life left in them and like their feisty friends they are still mischief makers  ;D

    It's the other lots of wiggly amps with there 25,000 friends the extra Volts in the AT system that I remain unsure of.

    Ah the 25kV from the AT gives the feisty wiggly Amps in the OLE a bit of an extra zing by making the 50kV (its bit like Redbull for electricity it gives it wings  ;D  ) It also help to keep the tired and worn out wiggly Amp under control.

    If you are still confuzlzzzed get some mirrors and smoke .............. its all done with magic  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 18, 2016, 09:11:22
    If you are still confuzlzzzed get some mirrors and smoke .............. its all done with magic  ;D

    For this concise and scientific answer, I am obliged to you, ET!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Worcester_Passenger on August 18, 2016, 10:00:12
    "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on August 18, 2016, 10:27:03
    "the electricity is sent out from the electric light works via a copper wire that is covered with gutta-percha in order to prevent escape of the electricity.  After passing through the electric lighting burners, the used electricity is returned to the works via a second wire in order that it may be re-used.
    If this was not done, the electric light works would have to find a continual supply of new electricity.
    This necessity for two wires (that must be kept separated at all times) is a decided drawback if compared to gas lighting, which as we all know requires but a single pipe"

    From a very early account of the new electric light.

    This was of course "continuous current" that flows nice and steadily, no silly wiggling around. Much simpler, only needs two wires.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on August 18, 2016, 11:01:21
    I took a late night trip out from Paddington last night and I've never seen so much activity.  Pretty much constant (wo)men and machinery from West Drayton to Didcot all busy fitting and testing the various stages of works that have been reached in those areas.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on August 18, 2016, 11:12:41
    I took a late night trip out from Paddington last night and I've never seen so much activity.  Pretty much constant (wo)men and machinery from West Drayton to Didcot all busy fitting and testing the various stages of works that have been reached in those areas.

    Amazing what some people will do to avoid their kids in the summer holidays eh?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 18, 2016, 18:34:43
    I took a late night trip out from Paddington last night and I've never seen so much activity.  Pretty much constant (wo)men and machinery from West Drayton to Didcot all busy fitting and testing the various stages of works that have been reached in those areas.

    The plan is apparently to have all wiring complete between Airport Jcn and Maidenhead by the end of November (2016) so the planned EMU services from Maidenhead can commence as of the May 2017 timetable.

    The difficult part is getting the foundations done and the structures erected on top, the 4 track portals requiring and all lines block, not to many of the on the GWML.


    Now back to this electric power stuff, what makes the Amps is the dancing pixies they dance to the tune of 50Hz :P

    Now seriously the reason for the AT system, the concept is not new its been around for about 100 years, the Auto Transformer system of 25kv - 0 - 25kV allows the transmission of power at 50kV yet retain the  use of standard OLE 25kV components such as insulators and cables. 

    Why 50kV? it is all to do with I2R which is power loss in effect doubling the Voltage halves the current which has dramatic effect in reducing the power loss for the same size conductors.  This allows for doubling the space between Grid supply points.  If the GWML had been electrified in the 1980/90's as original planned by BR between Paddington and Reading there would have been 3 Grid supply points, Old Oak Common, Iver, and Reading, all these would have come off of the 132kV network.  The largest 132/25kV transformers are 26MVA
    Even in the 1980/90's the Electricity Supply Network were getting concerned over the impact of the railway large single phase loading, the ECML had to have a number of addition Feeder Stations added on the railway even though the 25kV supply came from the same Grid point, Grantham and Newark are examples of this, it was done to even the load on the 132kV network.

    The GWML now has 3 Grid supply points between Paddington and Bristol!!  The BR classic 25kV scheme would have needed 8 or 9 and that does not include on the Berks n Hants.  The supply being taken from the 400kV Grid which allows for larger transformers of 50MVA, although this increases the fault level from 6kA to 12kA.  Kensal Green feed to the Mid Point at Maidenhead to Abbey Wood / Bow and Didcot Mid Point at Maidenhead to Wooton Basset (I believe), also to Oxford and Bedwyn (although if there is a service increase a new Grid supply from Bramley to Southcote Jcn is in the outline plan.  Each 400kV Grid supplies approx. 50 miles in each direction.

    Didcot can feed right into Paddington if need to, with the Crossrail tunnels being fed from the Bow end.  I believe Didcot can even do emergency feeding into the Crossrail Tunnels although this would not be for service running.

    See told you its all smoke n mirrors and dancing pixies   ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 18, 2016, 19:22:08

    Why 50kV? it is all to do with I2R

    Or P=IV, as V=IR. So P=I*(IR) which equals I2R. Lower current  because of higher voltage equals lower loss, hence why we don't run 240V from power stations. Eureka! I now know why the effective 50KV supply is so useful.

    Now for the how. AAUI, there is only one winding in an autotransformer, and both 25KV feeds are taken from it with a common terminal. The catenary wire is energised to 25KV, the second feed is 25KV, but antiphase. But it doesn't seem to be involved in the circuit as the little sprites all run to the running rail. The antiphase feed merely connects to the next transformer, which leaves me puzzled still.

    Edit: I see my mistake. The train does not at any time draw 50KV - that is the voltage between the two conductors, giving the economy. The 25KV to the train is returned via the running rail.

    No, it is magic.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on August 18, 2016, 20:27:01
    Quote
    Now for the how. AAUI, there is only one winding in an autotransformer,

    A single winding centre tapped at 0 (rail) voltage ?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 18, 2016, 20:36:58

    Why 50kV? it is all to do with I2R

    Or P=IV, as V=IR. So P=I*(IR) which equals I2R. Lower current  because of higher voltage equals lower loss, hence why we don't run 240V from power stations. Eureka! I now know why the effective 50KV supply is so useful.

    Now for the how. AAUI, there is only one winding in an autotransformer, and both 25KV feeds are taken from it with a common terminal. The catenary wire is energised to 25KV, the second feed is 25KV, but antiphase. But it doesn't seem to be involved in the circuit as the little sprites all run to the running rail. The antiphase feed merely connects to the next transformer, which leaves me puzzled still.

    Edit: I see my mistake. The train does not at any time draw 50KV - that is the voltage between the two conductors, giving the economy. The 25KV to the train is returned via the running rail.

    No, it is magic.

    The magnetic circuit in the auto transformer forces the winding to balance (simplistically) Its difficult to explain without diagrams.  There are strange current flows in the system as the train (load) moves.  

    Large grid transformers 400/132kV are auto transformers, they are used as it reduces the amount of copper and iron over a conventionally wound transformer.  auto transformers are not used in the UK for domestic supplies as we require isolation between the high voltage winding and the low voltage winding, they are quit common (or were) in the USA.   Veriacs are auto transformers


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 18, 2016, 20:40:01
    Quote
    Now for the how. AAUI, there is only one winding in an autotransformer,

    A single winding centre tapped at 0 (rail) voltage ?

    Yes

    If you all want some bedtime reading - http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/track%20access/2%20completed%20consultations/2010/2010.06.11%20west%20coast%20trains%209th%20sa%20-%20consultation%20closed%2007%20july%202010/ec4t%20loss%20report%20v1.0.pdf


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on August 18, 2016, 20:55:44

    If you all want some bedtime reading -

    Thanks ET. I've given the sheep the night off.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on August 26, 2016, 12:52:39
    Well I haven't been to or through Didcot for over a year now and this is how it looked yesterday (25 August 2016):

    (http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m92/cbrailways/P1010538_zpsdxhzbhnu.jpg)
    Image (c)2016 SandTEngineer


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on August 26, 2016, 13:36:06
    As well as on Platform 1 and 2 at Didcot Parkway there are also wires through Platform 4.
    There also appears to be wires for the Down Relief from the Cow Lane Bridge towards Cholsey ( but I don't know how far) and there are also wires on all 3 tracks from Foxhall Road Bridge to Milton Junc.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on August 26, 2016, 19:16:34
    The wire goes up quick once all the main steel, the small part steel with insulators and registration arms are in place.  If they have set the registration arms correctly there will be very little along track heights and staggers to do, the finessing will be at the overlaps


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on August 26, 2016, 21:36:08
    According to the annual report of the Great Western Society (GWS) there is going to be an EMU depot at Didcot.

    Is this temporary until the line to Oxford is electrified or something more permanent?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on August 27, 2016, 07:25:57
    Something more permanent I believe.  Long before the electrification delays it was determined several current stabling points, such as Oxford, would not be able to cope with the large increase in the fleet size, so Didcot was proposed as a small ancillary stabling point.  Likewise, I think the work currently going on between West Ealing and Hanwell is to provide additional stabling.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on August 27, 2016, 08:05:08
    Where is the stabling point to be at Didcot? What with the GWS taking more space and the DBS facility there can't be much space left.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Billhere on August 27, 2016, 08:48:25
    You might also find that the current restrictions on noise and movement in place at Oxford at night might affect things there as well.

    Lots of old railway land sold off for housing, and then the complaints started about the nearby trains causing noise - surprize, surprize. One of the leaders of the campaign moved into property on the old Rewley Road site and then said she hadn't noticed the railway. Right or wrong, I don't know, but restrictions there are on movement of trains at night in the current sidings.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on August 27, 2016, 12:46:03
    Isn't one of the purposes of a stabling point at Didcot being to run am peak extra EMU services to Paddington starting from Didcot?  In which case to avoid shunting backwards and forwards would it be better positioned west of the station in the Swindon direction?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on August 27, 2016, 12:54:43
    Isn't one of the purposes of a stabling point at Didcot being to run am peak extra EMU services to Paddington starting from Didcot?  In which case to avoid shunting backwards and forwards would it be better positioned west of the station in the Swindon direction?

    Paul

    There is a large rail connected site just to the west of Didcot West Curve on the route to Swindon.  Plenty of space there now. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: FremlinsMan on August 29, 2016, 13:51:57
    Isn't one of the purposes of a stabling point at Didcot being to run am peak extra EMU services to Paddington starting from Didcot?  In which case to avoid shunting backwards and forwards would it be better positioned west of the station in the Swindon direction?

    Paul

    There is a large rail connected site just to the west of Didcot West Curve on the route to Swindon.  Plenty of space there now. 
    Didcot Power Station?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on August 29, 2016, 16:23:41
    Isn't one of the purposes of a stabling point at Didcot being to run am peak extra EMU services to Paddington starting from Didcot?  In which case to avoid shunting backwards and forwards would it be better positioned west of the station in the Swindon direction?

    Paul

    There is a large rail connected site just to the west of Didcot West Curve on the route to Swindon.  Plenty of space there now. 
    Didcot Power Station?

    Yep


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: signalandtelegraph on August 31, 2016, 13:57:22
    Training runs to Bristol?

    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97143/2016/08/31/advanced (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97143/2016/08/31/advanced)

    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97145/2016/09/01/advanced (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/K97145/2016/09/01/advanced)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 05, 2016, 14:24:51
    387s definitely running to Hayes & Harlington from today

    https://anonw.com/2016/09/05/a-low-key-launch-of-new-electric-trains/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on September 05, 2016, 15:09:42
    387s definitely running to Hayes & Harlington from today

    https://anonw.com/2016/09/05/a-low-key-launch-of-new-electric-trains/

    Either that or bobm has done some superb photoshoping!
    http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14927.0


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on September 05, 2016, 16:42:22
    I think I saw him. He was a new face to me.

    I guess it was low key. Except the MD was on the first inbound service and the deputy MD on the first outbound....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 06, 2016, 07:05:54
    An event in Swindon by the IET "Electrification of the Great Western Mainline" 12 October 2016 - 18:30-21:30 at Swindon Collage.

    http://www.theiet.org/events/local/241367.cfm?nxtId=239561

    These are free events, registration for the event is simple


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on September 06, 2016, 13:48:16
    I notice that the OHLE on the UM and DM between Pangbourne and Tilehurst is earthed (ie cables across the insulators), so it looks like following the publicity run with the 80x on electric it’s been switched off for now so installation work can be continued. 

    The system is only enegised for the test runs at the moment, the full immunisation test have not been done, also there is no full time ECR yet, so the blue leads (portable earths, technically the ones they are using are construction earths) this so safety documentation can be issued for the OLE construction teams to continue working

    With test/training runs starting on 12th September between Reading Depot and Didcot (as reported on the "387's coming to the Thames Valley" page), can it be assumed that installation work (apart from AT cables!) on all 4 lines will be finished by that date and that the wires will normally be live?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on September 06, 2016, 15:42:06
    This question has just been answered by Insider (Reply 358) on the "Class 387's coming to the Thames Valley" page.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 06, 2016, 20:40:08
    Do you remember there was a discussion somewhere back in this thread about safe distances to 25 kV OLE? I wondered at the time whether 3 m was meant as the clearance from a place people stand, rather than from their closest body part.

    Well, it turns out that's the case. I found this pretty comprehensive NR "electrification for dummies" (or councillors) document (http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/sites/default/files/sitedocuments/Planning-and-Building-Control/Planning/nr_a_guide_to_overhead_electrification.pdf) on BaNES website. Look at section 12 (from p 27) for safe clearances and the reasons.

    This, from the introduction, explains the intended audience:
    Quote
    The purpose of this guide, therefore, is to help all those with an interest in the current Network Rail  electrification projects – whatever that interest may be – to understand why the line is being electrified, and  why some changes to existing structures are required.  It has been produced by Alan Baxter & Associates on  behalf of Network Rail with information supplied by, and with the assistance of, a number of the company’s  engineers.  Its contents have been reviewed and signed-off by Network Rail.   

    The document has been written for the non-specialist, not the expert, and explains with the aid of diagrams  how OLE works and why it has to look the way it does.

    Most importantly, it explains in ways we can all understand what is and what is not technically and legally  possible – from attaching OLE to listed stations and putting up masts on prominent viaducts, to getting wires  under historic bridges and through famous tunnels .

    We hope you find this useful.  You may even find it interesting!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on September 06, 2016, 20:55:03
    I can tell you from experience that standing on the track under the OLE on a wet day with a plastic mac on certainly gives a tingle down your neck and back...... ::) :P :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 07, 2016, 07:13:48
    I can tell you from experience that standing on the track under the OLE on a wet day with a plastic mac on certainly gives a tingle down your neck and back...... ::) :P :D

    That's because you forgot to attach the earth rod  ;D

    There certainly is discharging across insulators in the rain especially light drizzle type rain where there is a lot of pollution on the insulator; this discharges safely to earth and presents no risk.  A lot of effort is put into the design stage for touch and step potentials to keep them below the requirements of BSEN 50122



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on September 07, 2016, 08:53:02
    You can feel the same walking under high voltage transmission pylons on a damp day.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on September 09, 2016, 12:44:07
    Whether as a one off or permanently I don't know but Reading Depot is being energised from 29th October.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 10, 2016, 09:49:42
    Whether as a one off or permanently I don't know but Reading Depot is being energised from 29th October.

    Once the OLE has been energised once it has to be regarded as LIVE at all times and will come under the rules for a live system. 

    Once it has been energised ait may well be switched out and an OLE "Form B" issued (Form B is part of the OLE isolation planning and safe working system it is the "Authority to test and apply earths" after this has been confirmed by the OLE Level A (a person authorised to issue Form C) Form C can be issued (Form C is a Permit to Work on OLE) to the person in charge of a work group.

    And that is just a simplistic view :) 

    Within the maintenance sheds a different system is used which is tied in with the Depot safety System and involves red and green lights, interlocks, padlocks and paperwork


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on September 10, 2016, 10:43:06
    Let me get this right: a Form B allows a Level A to issue a Form C? Or have I slipped into an episode of Yes Minister?  :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 10, 2016, 12:15:29
    Let me get this right: a Form B allows a Level A to issue a Form C? Or have I slipped into an episode of Yes Minister?  :D

    No, this is the real world, a lot of which (called industry) is full of dangerous stuff.

    If you are asked to climb up a ladder to wave your spanner at some OLE, you'll want good evidence it's off and that "off means off".  A permit to work is standard practice in much of industry, and it must come from the right person to know what control is up to - and that the back-up insurance measure (big earthing straps) is in place.

    Can you think of a better way to manage safety in a big organisation?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on September 10, 2016, 13:43:03
    I wasn't poking fun at electrical safety - I spent a lot of my younger years working on live 3-phase and the fact I'm still here is a testimony to all the health and safety that was drilled into us. No the terminology just struck me as amusing - that's why I put the smiley in!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on September 11, 2016, 08:16:54
    Let me get this right: a Form B allows a Level A to issue a Form C? Or have I slipped into an episode of Yes Minister?  :D

    I wasn't poking fun at electrical safety - I spent a lot of my younger years working on live 3-phase and the fact I'm still here is a testimony to all the health and safety that was drilled into us. No the terminology just struck me as amusing - that's why I put the smiley in!

    Errrrrr yes.

    It sounds complex and is complex but as staving railway traction conductor systems have the dangers of electricity, the dangers of moving trains whilst ensuring the rest of the railway remains operational.

    The form B and C more often than not also have to tie in with possession which are set up by a PICOP who may have several  ES's working in his possession.

    This whole safe system of work, both the possession and electrical isolation, have evolved over many many decades and I do mean many decades.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on September 11, 2016, 11:40:09
    I think it's the just off alphabetical order that is amusing, rather than the existence of a comprehensive safety system.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 11, 2016, 18:40:43
    Large crane and part of new bridge in situ at Boundary Road, Newbury, although no actual WIP, when I passed earlier this afternoon.

    Engineering notices up at the Station indicating evening bustitution between RDG and BDW, every week (Mon-Thurs) between tomorrow and 21/10.

    Are we about to see a "surge" in OHLE installation activity on the B&H?

    Edit: Looks like the above may be the case - piling between Midgham and Newbury various nights this week
    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/west-berkshire/ (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/west-berkshire/)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 21, 2016, 08:33:02
    From a quick look (from what I can see from the A4, not from a train), uprights now appearing between Aldermaston and Midgham and around Ufton Nervet crossing (where the overbridge is now also in place).

    Will provide another update in a few days (when I will have been on a train!).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on September 23, 2016, 09:51:24
    There was a piece on the Severn Tunnel work on BBC Points West last night. A few shots of the OLE being installed. The reporter, Alice Bouverie, is Sir John Hawkshaw's great, great, great granddaughter.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07v2gv2/points-west-evening-news-22092016 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07v2gv2/points-west-evening-news-22092016)

    Starts around 12' 00"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on September 23, 2016, 12:56:18
    There was a piece on the Severn Tunnel work on BBC Points West last night. A few shots of the OLE being installed. The reporter, Alice Bouverie, is Sir John Hawkshaw's great, great, great granddaughter.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07v2gv2/points-west-evening-news-22092016 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b07v2gv2/points-west-evening-news-22092016)

    Starts around 12' 00"
    Very good, I saw it last night. Get in quick as local news programs are only on iplayer for 24 hours from broadcast.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 26, 2016, 16:54:39
    I know. I missed it!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on September 26, 2016, 21:42:14
    Quote
    Will provide another update in a few days (when I will have been on a train!)

    In addition to what I posted above, quite a lot of uprights also in place in the Theale sidings area. Quite a lot of the "dangly bits" (ie, what the wires hang from) around the curve from Reading West towards Reading. Not too much evidence of more work between Reading West and Southcote Junction though, or between there and Theale.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 30, 2016, 21:07:16
    At last! The OLE fairy has blessed Reading station with some dangly bits. Though you might quibble that chunks of steel rigidly bolted on like those don't so much dangle as stick out awkwardly.

    And aren't they awkward? Series One has been criticised for being so chunky, but that's mainly the supporting structures (portals, posts, and cantilevers). The OLE stuff that gets attached looks - well at least it looks like it was designed. This looks like whatever was around in the steelyard when the job needed to be done.

    As I recall it, Reading was to be fitted out for OLE within RSAR, but the design work started before it was decided to electrify the GWML (or for Crossrail to come all the way). Series One was designed for the GW, from 2011 to 2015.

    I wonder what's going to fix onto the end of those skyhooks? I don't think Series One will fit. Perhaps Series two, or the design Furrer and Frey did for the GE (which must be similar to Series Two)?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 01, 2016, 00:09:51
    There are portals exactly like that (same crossbar section anyway) further along towards Pangbourne supporting normal Series 1 off those vertical tubes.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 01, 2016, 09:09:41
    At last! The OLE fairy has blessed Reading station with some dangly bits. Though you might quibble that chunks of steel rigidly bolted on like those don't so much dangle as stick out awkwardly.

    And aren't they awkward? Series One has been criticised for being so chunky, but that's mainly the supporting structures (portals, posts, and cantilevers). The OLE stuff that gets attached looks - well at least it looks like it was designed. This looks like whatever was around in the steelyard when the job needed to be done.

    As I recall it, Reading was to be fitted out for OLE within RSAR, but the design work started before it was decided to electrify the GWML (or for Crossrail to come all the way). Series One was designed for the GW, from 2011 to 2015.

    I wonder what's going to fix onto the end of those skyhooks? I don't think Series One will fit. Perhaps Series two, or the design Furrer and Frey did for the GE (which must be similar to Series Two)?

    The pointy up "stove pipes" are for the ATF (Auto Transformer Feed) some will have a "gallows" arm fitted which will have an insulator hung from it others will have the insulator side fitted.

    The down wards  "stove pipes" will have the registration arm assemblies.

    An then there are the auto tensioning devices, the look like big cable reels, mounted up on some of the portals usually the ones with back stays


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 03, 2016, 20:23:45
    By kind permission of Network Rail, I was given the chance to go inside the Severn Tunnel and view the electrification works at first hand today.

    The whole operation, and that of the works at the nearby Patchway Tunnels, is being masterminded from a temporary headquarters in a series of portable buildings on the edge of Filton airfield.

    It was actually my second visit to the tunnel.  The first was in 1986 for the centenary and the safety culture has certainly changed since.  Back then it was a question of parking at the access point, please don't wear open-toed shoes and that was about it.  For today's visit a medical questionnaire needed to be returned 72 hours beforehand followed by the issue of full safety kit on the day and a half hour briefing at Filton before setting off to the access point. There is a strictly enforced 5mph speed limit throughout the compound at Filton and as you'd expect everyone has to sign in.  It is not just for security but also as a physical check that workers are fit for duty and are even quizzed on where they are going on departure so travelling time is monitored to prevent fatigue. 

    I should offer my excuses for any less than perfect shots from inside the tunnel.  It is not the easiest place to take photos hand-held without using flash.

    We started from the English end and rode into the tunnel on the back of a Road/Rail Vehicle.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevent.jpg)
    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevent2.jpg)

    It is well known the tunnel suffers from water ingress and although there were occasional drips from the tunnel roof I was surprised how dry the tracks were - even if the walls were a little damp! 50 million litres are pumped everyday from the tunnel into the River Severn (so it can come back in the next day).  That's around 20 Olympic swimming pools.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevwat.jpg)

    We travelled about two miles into the tunnel - nearly halfway - and caught up with a party working on the new overhead

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevwork.jpg)
    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevwork2.jpg)

    From the English end the overhead on the down line looked complete from the portal to the midpoint with work progressing well on the up.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevcant.jpg)

    As has been discussed before the overhead consists of a solid conductor rail rather than a wire to combat problems with the damp.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevcant2.jpg)

    You could also see the preparatory work for the overhead to be installed on the up line.

    Kitted out in a full orange army outfit meant it actually felt quite pleasant in the tunnel with the lower temperatures and a breeze running through from the Welsh end.

    There were four gangs working in the tunnel today.  There are three shifts a day seven days a week as work which would otherwise take five years if it was done at night and weekends continues for just under another three weeks.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevblue.jpg)

    We reached the point where the tunnel levels out for a short while before climbing to the Welsh end.  The two blue lights on the walls indicate the end of the descent for drivers. 

    It was a fascinating insight into the project which has clearly been meticulously planned, as you would expect, but has also enthused the workforce who without exception were keen to talk about their role and their satisfaction in getting it done safely and on time.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on October 03, 2016, 20:37:21
    Envious? Not half!

    How many were in your group permitted into the tunnel?

    And is there a picture of bobm in full PPE?!  ;)  :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 03, 2016, 20:42:13
    Orange bobm? Not sure we are ready for that!

    That is a fantastic insight into the work going on, and I for one am very grateful to bobm and to those who facilitated his visit for it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 03, 2016, 20:44:38
    Seven - accommodation is limited by the number you can fit on an RRV.

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevrrv.jpg)

    There was a bi-lingual crew from BBC Wales so I suspect there will be something from them on screen later in the week.

    As for a picture.....

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevbob.jpg)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 03, 2016, 21:09:23
    As for a picture.....

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevbob.jpg)



    Ah a blue hat ........... that tells a tale  ;D

    Looks like they are using stainless steel for the stovepipes and registration arms, whilst more expensive than the usual galvanised should last a lot longer

    The beam has not had the contact wire fitted yet, that is one of the last bits of the install and then its panned


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 03, 2016, 21:57:41

    There was a bi-lingual crew from BBC Wales so I suspect there will be something from them on screen later in the week.


    I love those fillums with the bored housewives...

    Is that my coat?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 03, 2016, 22:44:21
    Very interesting write up and photos.

    As for a picture.....

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/sevbob.jpg)



    Ah a blue hat ........... that tells a tale  ;D
    UN peacekeepers separating the armies of Offa and Tewdric?  :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 04, 2016, 00:45:29

    UN peacekeepers separating the armies of Offa and Tewdric?  :o

    Bloody Corbynistas getting in everywhere.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on October 04, 2016, 11:42:33
    At last! The OLE fairy has blessed Reading station with some dangly bits. Though you might quibble that chunks of steel rigidly bolted on like those don't so much dangle as stick out awkwardly.

    And aren't they awkward? Series One has been criticised for being so chunky, but that's mainly the supporting structures (portals, posts, and cantilevers). The OLE stuff that gets attached looks - well at least it looks like it was designed. This looks like whatever was around in the steelyard when the job needed to be done.

    As I recall it, Reading was to be fitted out for OLE within RSAR, but the design work started before it was decided to electrify the GWML (or for Crossrail to come all the way). Series One was designed for the GW, from 2011 to 2015.

    I wonder what's going to fix onto the end of those skyhooks? I don't think Series One will fit. Perhaps Series two, or the design Furrer and Frey did for the GE (which must be similar to Series Two)?

    Perhaps my artistic judgement isn't up to much but I think the appearance of the supports pictured is much better than the Series 1 plonked (illegally?) in the Goring Gap AONB's. The diagonal latticework is quite elegant - it's the same as BR Mark 1 I believe and must be a more efficient material design than the crude square cut-outs of NR Series 1. Also, the solid I sections at least meet at the ends rather than overlapping like temporary scaffolding. The various risers and droppers don't show so much in the distance and are at least functionally necessary. I do though wonder why the prominent ATF feed needs to be run above the portal as it has to drop down to troughers for bridges etc frequently. A neater solution would have been to run it at ground level like the 33kV feed for 750V dc substations.

    OLE Nerd,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 04, 2016, 11:50:51
    I've been for a ride into PAD this morning from THA, and more and more OLE uprights are appearing on the B&H (aside from between Theale and Reading where I only noted a couple).

    What I also noticed is that some of the uprights look quite thin/lightweight in nature, and don't look like they would support the heavy lattice-type crossbeams that seem to predominate between RDG and PAD.

    Does this mean that lighter-weight OHLE is being installed on the B&H?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 04, 2016, 12:06:06
    I do though wonder why the prominent ATF feed needs to be run above the portal as it has to drop down to troughers for bridges etc frequently. A neater solution would have been to run it at ground level like the 33kV feed for 750V dc substations.


    Running a bare cable at a height will cost a small fraction of a replacement 25kV insulated cable to go into troughs.  AIUI the insulated cable has to have a greater cross-section for the same current, because it will not radiate heat into free air.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on October 04, 2016, 12:08:04
    Typically on double track lines there is no span across the whole width, with each track having completely independent structures.  So yes, they would be lighter, but it's completely normal.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 04, 2016, 13:02:31
    Typically on double track lines there is no span across the whole width, with each track having completely independent structures.  So yes, they would be lighter, but it's completely normal.

    The top picture on page 4 of the Furrer and Frey Series 1 pamphlet (link below) shows the typical set up for a two track railway, they mention that they would use a twin track cantilever on one side if they needed to provide a gap for signal sighting.

    http://www.furrerfrey.ch/dam/jcr:98f3522c-51ff-4d89-9fd7-dc16601d1db3/140918_F%20F_Series1_pamphlet_onlinePub.pdf

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 04, 2016, 18:56:49
    I do though wonder why the prominent ATF feed needs to be run above the portal as it has to drop down to troughers for bridges etc frequently. A neater solution would have been to run it at ground level like the 33kV feed for 750V dc substations.


    Running a bare cable at a height will cost a small fraction of a replacement 25kV insulated cable to go into troughs.  AIUI the insulated cable has to have a greater cross-section for the same current, because it will not radiate heat into free air.

    Paul

    As Pauls said.  The cable used for ground level is 400mm2 has to be placed in troughing, general rule is at lease 1m from other cables all of which makes it an expensive option.  Also its screening effect is less effective when run as a cable.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on October 04, 2016, 20:33:28
    The cable used for ground level is 400mm2 has to be placed in [t]roughing...

    So that is nearly an inch in diameter.  How thick is the insulation wrapped around that for a 25kV service?

    Me thinks that this will become a mighty cable - worthy of its own trough!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 04, 2016, 22:22:45
    Thanks to JohnR and Paul7755 for the explanations, supported by documentation. Guess I was forgetting that this is a 2 track railway (in the main) which will have independent structures over each side of it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 05, 2016, 09:55:45

    There was a bi-lingual crew from BBC Wales so I suspect there will be something from them on screen later in the week.


    This popped up this morning:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-37553620 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-37553620)

    There could well be something related on the BBC Wales/S4C news this evening


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 05, 2016, 13:58:42
    Intersting. I looked at the flights from Cardiff to London City - there are three daily, operated by Flybe. The aircraft is a Bombardier Dash 8 Q400. If you don't want the sparrowfart flight, you can do the return for under £100, with a journey time today of 33 minutes. The early (8.00am) plane costs £115 to LCY with hand luggage only, which seems rather competitive for the busy executive. Shame then that the flights are only for the duration of the tunnel closure.

    Stats etc here on Flightradar24 (https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/be1324#b36cf97). I love the routing into London City - that is nothing unusual. I have seen flights from Dublin taken almost to France to fit in with the traffic. The approach from the east is almost the same as Heathrow.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on October 05, 2016, 14:00:07
    I suispect that the margins on those prices wouldn't stand up for any length of time....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 05, 2016, 14:10:52
    I suispect that the margins on those prices wouldn't stand up for any length of time....

    Possibly there is a contract with the Welsh government. Margins on aircraft are tiny compared to the capital cost of the kit. I once had the privilege of the jump seat in the cockpit of a 737 flying into Stanstead. After we landed, the pilot switched to ground power before shutting the engines down. He told me that cost £16 per hour, whereas running the auxilliary power unit cost £36 per hour. The turnround time was 40 minutes, and the difference in the two costs could be the difference between profit and loss on a flight.

    If Flybe haven't anything else for a Dash 8 and a crew to do, this would seem a good idea in the long term, but I reckon they have put special measures into place, maybe cancelling a bit of leave and chartering an aircraft - although they own the one used on the flights yesterday.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Surrey 455 on October 05, 2016, 17:24:26
    I suispect that the margins on those prices wouldn't stand up for any length of time....

    Possibly there is a contract with the Welsh government. Margins on aircraft are tiny compared to the capital cost of the kit. I once had the privilege of the jump seat in the cockpit of a 737 flying into Stanstead. After we landed, the pilot switched to ground power before shutting the engines down. He told me that cost £16 per hour, whereas running the auxilliary power unit cost £36 per hour. The turnround time was 40 minutes, and the difference in the two costs could be the difference between profit and loss on a flight.

    If Flybe haven't anything else for a Dash 8 and a crew to do, this would seem a good idea in the long term, but I reckon they have put special measures into place, maybe cancelling a bit of leave and chartering an aircraft - although they own the one used on the flights yesterday.

    It's curious that an aircraft shuts it's engines down when stationery but an HST (and sometimes 165/6) keep theirs running. Knowing that there are issues starting up an HST engine, I wonder what the financial cost of keeping those engines on are.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on October 05, 2016, 17:42:34
    Quote
    It's curious that an aircraft shuts it's engines down when stationery but an HST (and sometimes 165/6) keep theirs running.

    If you fly with Flybe on their Q400's (as I have done 6 times in the last year or so), you will notice that they taxy on 1 engine (plenty of pure jets do too, but harder to spot without that big stationary prop).

    Jet engines (pure jets and turboprops) really have to be shut down (eg, during turnaround), as they represent a significant H&S hazard if nothing else, aside from burning a lot of fuel and making quite a lot of noise.

    In a former life, when I was involved in "weight and balance" on some types of wide-bodied jets, we would allow up to 2 tonnes (for planning) of fuel burn for the aircraft to get from the parking stand to the end of the runway!

    One suspects that a stationary HST burns quite a bit. I often notice when they arrive at PAD that the engines are cut within seconds of coming to a halt (on arrival) but seem to be running a good while before departure.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 05, 2016, 17:50:01
    One suspects that a stationary HST burns quite a bit. I often notice when they arrive at PAD that the engines are cut within seconds of coming to a halt (on arrival) but seem to be running a good while before departure.

    It's just the inner power car that is shut down at the terminus, primarly I think for air quality reasons - not sure if you remember but Paddington used to be a complete fug of diesel fumes in the 80's when everything was left running - HST's on Valenta engines and Class 47/50's used to leave a lovely aroma  ;D ;D. The 'modernisation' generation of diesel engines (mostly marine derived) were mostly designed to be left running 24/7 and can be very problematic to cold start, especially English Electric types.

    Currently HST's are fired up about 10 mins prior to departure when the driver arrives and is presumably doing the brake tests etc


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 05, 2016, 18:43:08

    So that is nearly an inch in diameter.  How thick is the insulation wrapped around that for a 25kV service?

    Me thinks that this will become a mighty cable - worthy of its own trough!

    I think you could reasonably be looking at 3 inch overall diameter, once the various layers of insulation and armour are added. 

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 05, 2016, 18:49:16
    Quote
    It's curious that an aircraft shuts it's engines down when stationery but an HST (and sometimes 165/6) keep theirs running.

    If you fly with Flybe on their Q400's (as I have done 6 times in the last year or so), you will notice that they taxy on 1 engine (plenty of pure jets do too, but harder to spot without that big stationary prop).

    Jet engines (pure jets and turboprops) really have to be shut down (eg, during turnaround), as they represent a significant H&S hazard if nothing else, aside from burning a lot of fuel and making quite a lot of noise.

    Most jet aircraft, both turbofan and turboprop, taxy on one engine these days, purely as an economy measure. Apart from saving fuel, and jet engines are hugely ineffecient at sea level, it reduces the engine running time, and this can be significant at busy airports. The start-up procedure is simple, and most of the systems that take power from the engine will have been started up on the other one. The "angry dog" noise you hear in Airbus aircraft is an indication that only one engine is running - it is the hydraulic power transfer unit pressurising the hydraulic circuit normally powered by the other engine. Indeed, a certain bearded airline owner suggested that aircraft should be towed by tugs to the end of the taxyway with motors off. They don't take long to warm up, unlike the big diesels in the HSTs, I'll bet - there's a lot of oil to warm and circulate there.

    Which does rather advance the case for electrification, where no fuel other than enough to keep the lights and aircon running, is consumed by the train whilst standing at the platform.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: patch38 on October 05, 2016, 19:43:35
    Angry dog! I always amuse myself imagining there is somone in the hold hacksawing a length of scaffolding pole.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 05, 2016, 22:21:59
    The cable used for ground level is 400mm2 has to be placed in [t]roughing...

    So that is nearly an inch in diameter.  How thick is the insulation wrapped around that for a 25kV service?

    Me thinks that this will become a mighty cable - worthy of its own trough!

    The overall diameter is 63mm

    The cable will be the only thing in the trough, the exceptions are earthing conductors, pilot cables used in protection / SCADA although general telecom fibre optic cables can be placed in HV routes it does mean the telecoms teams need an HV switchout should they need to get to the cable.

    Oh and there is only 1 HV circuit per trough


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 05, 2016, 22:24:22

    So that is nearly an inch in diameter.  How thick is the insulation wrapped around that for a 25kV service?

    Me thinks that this will become a mighty cable - worthy of its own trough!

    I think you could reasonably be looking at 3 inch overall diameter, once the various layers of insulation and armour are added. 

    Paul

    No armour on 25kV cables just a screen, which does not offer mechanical protection, hence the cable being in a trough and not buried direct


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 06, 2016, 00:45:19
    They don't take long to warm up, unlike the big diesels in the HSTs, I'll bet - there's a lot of oil to warm and circulate there.

    Which does rather advance the case for electrification, where no fuel other than enough to keep the lights and aircon running, is consumed by the train whilst standing at the platform.

    The dry mass for one of the MTU prime movers in the GWR HST's is around 7930kg, so I suspect they will hold much of their oil temperature for many hours after shutdown! The main issue with cold starting in a large Diesel engine is getting enough heat into the fuel for it to combust, rather than oil temperature. The more modern prime movers (such as those fitted in the reengineered HST's) are designed to be shut down and restarted frequently - locos in the US that are stabled tend to shut down and restart automatically to maintain basic 'life support' and air pressure. As I recall, 60's engines didn't have any sort of pre-heat, so were reliant solely on the compression of the fuel/air mixture in the cylinders to generate heat for combustion.

    There's some fairly amusing clips on YouTube of assorted preserved English Electric types cold starting. Worth a search/watch as you can see how the start process progresses as heat is gradually built up in the cylinders and the engine goes from partial combustion at the start (dense white smoke) gradually through to normal running (grey/black smoke) via lots of pops, bangs, smoke rings and firey exhausts!





    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 06, 2016, 00:53:06

    There was a bi-lingual crew from BBC Wales so I suspect there will be something from them on screen later in the week.


    This popped up this morning:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-37553620 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-37553620)

    There could well be something related on the BBC Wales/S4C news this evening

    The anticipated video clip has surfaced on the BBC, not sure if a certain forum member is featured in the background...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Steevp on October 06, 2016, 07:59:54
    Angry dog! I always amuse myself imagining there is somone in the hold hacksawing a length of scaffolding pole.

    Thank you! I have always wondered what that noise was - hacksawing a scaffold pole made me realise exactly what was being talked about - never thought the answer to the question I'd had for years would have been answered on a railway forum  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 06, 2016, 08:16:15

    Thank you! I have always wondered what that noise was - hacksawing a scaffold pole made me realise exactly what was being talked about - never thought the answer to the question I'd had for years would have been answered on a railway forum  ;)

    That's education! You can now smile smugly next time you're sat next to an anxious passenger, and say "That? Oh, it's just the hydraulic power transport unit. After the other engine is switched on, it does a quick self-test, then goes quiet."


    The dry mass for one of the MTU prime movers in the GWR HST's is around 7930kg, so I suspect they will hold much of their oil temperature for many hours after shutdown!

    And that's education too, possibly more appropriate to here! I've seen some video of those cold starts - it is difficult to tell when the engine actually has kicked in on some of them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on October 06, 2016, 08:35:54

    Thank you! I have always wondered what that noise was - hacksawing a scaffold pole made me realise exactly what was being talked about - never thought the answer to the question I'd had for years would have been answered on a railway forum  ;)

    That's education! You can now smile smugly next time you're sat next to an anxious passenger, and say "That? Oh, it's just the hydraulic power transport unit. After the other engine is switched on, it does a quick self-test, then goes quiet."


    The dry mass for one of the MTU prime movers in the GWR HST's is around 7930kg, so I suspect they will hold much of their oil temperature for many hours after shutdown!

    And that's education too, possibly more appropriate to here! I've seen some video of those cold starts - it is difficult to tell when the engine actually has kicked in on some of them.

    In times gone by it was not unknown to place a newspaper soaked with lighter fluid into the air intake of a Mayback engine light it up and then try to start the bugger from cold !.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 06, 2016, 08:37:42
    The anticipated video clip has surfaced on the BBC, not sure if a certain forum member is featured in the background...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550)

    I thought the rail would be more curvy, to avoid wearing the pantographs down.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on October 06, 2016, 10:16:54
    The anticipated video clip has surfaced on the BBC, not sure if a certain forum member is featured in the background...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550)

    I thought the rail would be more curvy, to avoid wearing the pantographs down.

    AFAIK it's staggered like regular OLE, you just can't really see it in the clip.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on October 06, 2016, 10:29:50

    Thank you! I have always wondered what that noise was - hacksawing a scaffold pole made me realise exactly what was being talked about - never thought the answer to the question I'd had for years would have been answered on a railway forum  ;)

    That's education! You can now smile smugly next time you're sat next to an anxious passenger, and say "That? Oh, it's just the hydraulic power transport unit. After the other engine is switched on, it does a quick self-test, then goes quiet."
    And if the self-test fails it tries again and again and gets louder and louder.

    Happened to me earlier this year taxiing to the runway on a flight back to the UK from Madrid. Credit to Iberia though in that they rustled up another plane and we were transferred across. Benefit of being at home base I guess.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 06, 2016, 10:30:30
    The stuff I saw on a thread about Crossrail looked distinctly s-shaped. Presumably, this is fixed at different angles to spread the wear? It looks very nifty for sure.

    And if the self-test fails it tries again and again and gets louder and louder.

    Happened to me earlier this year taxiing to the runway on a flight back to the UK from Madrid. Credit to Iberia though in that they rustled up another plane and we were transferred across. Benefit of being at home base I guess.

    While an in-flight failure of the compressor on one engine would not be a major safety issue, there being not only the other engine-driven pump, and an electric pump, but also a ram-air turbine for real extreme cases, you wouldn't want to start off to go anywhere without it all being tickety-boo. The PTU only operates when there is a difference between hydraulic circuits greater than 500 psi. If the self-test fails, the question is which bit of the system is actually bust. So back to the stand, and let the engineer get the printout from the computer.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 06, 2016, 13:19:16
    Angry dog! I always amuse myself imagining there is somone in the hold hacksawing a length of scaffolding pole.

    Surely it is the sound you get when you punch a baboon. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 06, 2016, 20:27:33
    Angry dog! I always amuse myself imagining there is somone in the hold hacksawing a length of scaffolding pole.

    Surely it is the sound you get when you punch a baboon. 

    My wife says she has heard similar from our bathroom in the morning, especially during the curry season. Even though there are only the two of us in the house.

    I couldn't possibly comment...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 06, 2016, 20:53:08
    The anticipated video clip has surfaced on the BBC, not sure if a certain forum member is featured in the background...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550)

    I thought the rail would be more curvy, to avoid wearing the pantographs down.

    AFAIK it's staggered like regular OLE, you just can't really see it in the clip.

    The beam is installed straight, then the copper contact wire is run out and inserted in the beam, it is easier to do this before the stagger is set.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 06, 2016, 23:35:58
    Angry dog! I always amuse myself imagining there is somone in the hold hacksawing a length of scaffolding pole.

    Surely it is the sound you get when you punch a baboon. 

    My wife says she has heard similar from our bathroom in the morning, especially during the curry season. Even though there are only the two of us in the house.

    I couldn't possibly comment...

    So, what you are saying is, the morning after a curry, you take a baboon to your bathroom and punch it? How very curious!  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 06, 2016, 23:58:19
    So, what you are saying is, the morning after a curry, you take a baboon to your bathroom and punch it? How very curious!  ;)

    Well, curiosity killed the cat, so maybe the baboon should reckon it go off lightly!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 07, 2016, 10:44:17

    There was a bi-lingual crew from BBC Wales so I suspect there will be something from them on screen later in the week.


    This popped up this morning:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-37553620 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-37553620)

    There could well be something related on the BBC Wales/S4C news this evening

    The anticipated video clip has surfaced on the BBC, not sure if a certain forum member is featured in the background...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37569550)
    "The England to Wales line is already finished." Oh really? !!1!!(!)?

    Or did I mishear the video?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on October 07, 2016, 10:56:19

    "The England to Wales line is already finished." Oh really? !!1!!(!)?

    Or did I mishear the video?

    I think the translation is probably:   

    "We have completed installing the rigid conductor system on the down line through the length of the tunnel and we will now do the up line."

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on October 07, 2016, 13:09:06

    "The England to Wales line is already finished." Oh really? !!1!!(!)?

    Or did I mishear the video?

    I think the translation is probably:   

    "We have completed installing the rigid conductor system on the down line through the length of the tunnel and we will now do the up line."

    Paul

    That was my understanding too. Have they started on the Patchway tunnels yet?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on October 07, 2016, 13:24:55
    From the Swindon Advertiser

    Swindon railway station prepares for the arrival of electricity (http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/14789188.Swindon_railway_station_prepares_for_the_arrival_of_electricity/)

    Quote
    NETWORK Rail has unveiled a year-long programme of works around Swindon station as the electrification programme arrives in the town from next month.

    But they have promised to keep disruption to residents living nearby to a minimum as they carry out drilling for the new electric pylons.

    The Greater West Programme is being implemented to transform the mainline from London Paddington to Swansea to bring Brunel’s railway into the 21st century, and will pave the way for the long-awaited new longer, electric intercity trains which are currently undergoing testing.

    Network Rail contractors are expected on site at Swindon railway station from next month where they will be carrying out a number of works to prepare the station for the arrival of the new high-speed services. This will see them extend Platform 1, where services for Cheltenham typically depart from, which is currently too short for the new nine and ten car trains.

    They will also be installing the overhead line equipment through the station, including masts, booms and the wires, which will require some of the canopies to be cut back to make way for them, as well as removing and replacing four signal gantries dating from the 1960s and 70s.

    A Network Rail spokesman said: “In order to keep disruption to train services to a minimum, most of our work will take place overnight and over weekends when fewer trains are running. The station will remain open for the majority of the work. However, please check before you travel.

    “We recognise that our work can be disruptive to those living or working nearby. Some disturbance is unavoidable, but please be assured that every effort is made to minimise any unnecessary noise and we have reminded all staff and contractors to be considerate of the environment they are working in.”

    On Thursday evening Network Rail held a public drop-in session at UTC Swindon to outline the plans to residents. On hand to answer questions were senior sponsor Michelle Scoggins and project manager David Brown.

    Michelle explained a lot of work had already been carried out on the route to prepare other stations for the arrival of the new electric trains, which were a slightly different shape to the current High Speed Trains, to ensure there was sufficient clearance between the train and the platforms. “We will be extending platform one by about 10 metres – it’s minor but it does mean that all platforms will be compliant with the new trains,” she said.

    Does anyone know which end they will be extending it?  Is it by extending the East end or by moving Platform 2 over to allow it to be extended at the west end?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on October 07, 2016, 14:03:22
    Does anyone know which end they will be extending it?  Is it by extending the East end or by moving Platform 2 over to allow it to be extended at the west end?

    You may notice that the planters, etc, at the London end are looking sadly uncared for at the moment - perhaps because there's not much point in investing effort into making them spick and span for a very short period.   I'm putting 2 and 2 together and may be getting 5, mind you.  Also aware of the lack of shelter / facilities for people awaiting a train thats quickly turning around in the bay.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 12, 2016, 10:56:10

    "The England to Wales line is already finished." Oh really? !!1!!(!)?

    Or did I mishear the video?

    I think the translation is probably:   

    "We have completed installing the rigid conductor system on the down line through the length of the tunnel and we will now do the up line."

    Paul
    Line as in one of the two lines through the Tunnel; that makes sense then! Thanks.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 12, 2016, 21:30:41
    An event in Swindon by the IET "Electrification of the Great Western Mainline" 12 October 2016 - 18:30-21:30 at Swindon Collage.

    http://www.theiet.org/events/local/241367.cfm?nxtId=239561

    These are free events, registration for the event is simple

    Thanks for the tip on this. A very interesting talk tonight and although some of it was above my head (!) I did come away having learned more about the complexities and challenges of the project.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on October 13, 2016, 09:46:26
    An event in Swindon by the IET "Electrification of the Great Western Mainline" 12 October 2016 - 18:30-21:30 at Swindon Collage.

    http://www.theiet.org/events/local/241367.cfm?nxtId=239561

    These are free events, registration for the event is simple

    Thanks for the tip on this. A very interesting talk tonight and although some of it was above my head (!) I did come away having learned more about the complexities and challenges of the project.

    And thanks from me too. As Bobm says it was a very interesting talk. Some parts of the presentation on the power-feeding arrangements were beyond my 1970s A-Level Physics but the slides on the challenges and testing described by Chris Wilson who is Network Rail Programme Manager for the electrification were fascinating.

    There were some rather spectacular videos of testing neutral sections for the Series 1 OLE at Old Dalby (disable the APC magnets and drive a class 395 through it on full power - it draws quite an arc!) and testing the fault protection on the 25kV feeder station at Foxhall Junction Didcot (more fireworks). There were also some photos of what went wrong when they tried to energise the relief lines between Tilehurst and Milton Junction earlier this month, which resulted in a cable fire.

    Some of the design problems raised included the issue of the proximity of over-bridges to level crossings on the route which require a steep change in wire height over a relatively short distance. Towey Bridge was quoted (where's that?) and I asked about Steventon where the listed bridge for the High Street is closely followed by Stocks Lane and Causeway crossings. This is apparently their "worst nightmare" as they cannot demolish the bridge and need maximum clearance on the crossings. Apparently they are having to impose a solution which does not meet current (TSI) standards - which probably explains why there is a gap in the OLE works between the end of the loop by the A34 bridge and about 1/2 mile west of Causeway crossing while they work out what to do and secure the necessary derogations.

    Sorry I didn't recognise you, Bobm, if I'd known you were going I would have introduced myself.

    Acronym buster:

    APC - Automated Power Control - trackside magnets which activate the circuit breakers on the train so it doesn't draw current across a neutral section
    TSI - Technical Standards for Interoperability - EU regulations governing the interoperability capabilities of infrastructure and rail vehicles (I think - someone can word it better than me)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 13, 2016, 09:52:15
    Sorry I didn't recognise you, Bobm, if I'd known you were going I would have introduced myself.

    Likewise - I was near the sandwiches...  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on October 13, 2016, 09:53:37
    Sorry I didn't recognise you, Bobm, if I'd known you were going I would have introduced myself.

    Likewise - I was near the sandwiches...  ;D

    Must have been close - I hadn't had dinner either!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 13, 2016, 13:28:34

    TSI - Technical Standards for Interoperability - EU regulations governing the interoperability capabilities of infrastructure and rail vehicles (I think - someone can word it better than me)

    You are too modest, Didcot Punter!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 4064ReadingAbbey on October 18, 2016, 13:48:50
    Curiously enough, I went as well!

    One of the other interesting things spoken about was what in the aerospace business is called an 'iron bird', that is all the power and hydraulic systems are laid out in frame to hold all the bits is the same relative positions and orientations as they would be in the final aircraft to check that they all play together.

    Network Rail have done the same thing with all the power supply control and monitoring circuits to duplicate the control system between Maidenhead and Didcot. Every single sensor and switch in all the feeder stations and track sectioning cabins is duplicated in a 20 metre long test bed.

    It is clear that the change in the international and national standards since the last electrifications have meant that all the control systems have had to be completely rethought. A huge programme of testing is the result.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 18, 2016, 19:18:18
    An event in Swindon by the IET "Electrification of the Great Western Mainline" 12 October 2016 - 18:30-21:30 at Swindon Collage.

    http://www.theiet.org/events/local/241367.cfm?nxtId=239561

    These are free events, registration for the event is simple

    Thanks for the tip on this. A very interesting talk tonight and although some of it was above my head (!) I did come away having learned more about the complexities and challenges of the project.


    And thanks from me too. As Bobm says it was a very interesting talk. Some parts of the presentation on the power-feeding arrangements were beyond my 1970s A-Level Physics but the slides on the challenges and testing described by Chris Wilson who is Network Rail Programme Manager for the electrification were fascinating.

    There were some rather spectacular videos of testing neutral sections for the Series 1 OLE at Old Dalby (disable the APC magnets and drive a class 395 through it on full power - it draws quite an arc!) and testing the fault protection on the 25kV feeder station at Foxhall Junction Didcot (more fireworks). There were also some photos of what went wrong when they tried to energise the relief lines between Tilehurst and Milton Junction earlier this month, which resulted in a cable fire.

    Some of the design problems raised included the issue of the proximity of over-bridges to level crossings on the route which require a steep change in wire height over a relatively short distance. Towey Bridge was quoted (where's that?) and I asked about Steventon where the listed bridge for the High Street is closely followed by Stocks Lane and Causeway crossings. This is apparently their "worst nightmare" as they cannot demolish the bridge and need maximum clearance on the crossings. Apparently they are having to impose a solution which does not meet current (TSI) standards - which probably explains why there is a gap in the OLE works between the end of the loop by the A34 bridge and about 1/2 mile west of Causeway crossing while they work out what to do and secure the necessary derogations.

    Sorry I didn't recognise you, Bobm, if I'd known you were going I would have introduced myself.

    Acronym buster:

    APC - Automated Power Control - trackside magnets which activate the circuit breakers on the train so it doesn't draw current across a neutral section
    TSI - Technical Standards for Interoperability - EU regulations governing the interoperability capabilities of infrastructure and rail vehicles (I think - someone can word it better than me)


    I went to this, had a could catch up with my former line manager ................ the guy giving the presentation  :)

    No where near enough tech content for me ............. to much about bridges  ;D only jesting.

    The event was after all an IET event so tech stuff should be expected.  The main point Chris was putting across was the GW electrification is a major evolution from previous UK schemes even beyond that of the West Coast upgrade.  A new series of OLE equipment, new power supply system, indeed the application BSEN 61850 is being put to on the GW electrification is a world first, the aim is a very resilient electrification


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 18, 2016, 21:20:03
    I went to this, had a could catch up with my former line manager ................ the guy giving the presentation  :)

    Good grief - I looked out for you.  Either you've aged beyond recognition or my eyesight has failed even more.

    I think it is the latter!!  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 19, 2016, 20:56:38
    I went to this, had a could catch up with my former line manager ................ the guy giving the presentation  :)

    Good grief - I looked out for you.  Either you've aged beyond recognition or my eyesight has failed even more.

    I think it is the latter!!  ;D

    I was in my suit and not in my walking kit.  I was at the lectern before it started talking to Chris


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on October 20, 2016, 00:12:30
    A talking lectern?  ???


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 22, 2016, 11:54:02
    Great to see the Severn Tunnel blockade finished on time after the work to install the conductor beams.  I wasn't directly involved, but the near absence of any negative press indicates to me that road replacement services and the altered train service over the past few weeks was well organised and went down well.  A couple of people, including my parents, commented to me on enjoying a trip along the scenic diversionary route through Chepstow.

    One step further towards an electrified Great Western Main Line!  :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on October 22, 2016, 12:31:19
    I certainly enjoyed a couple of trips via Lydney - one with a Great Western Brunch!

    BBC report  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-37733372)on the re-opening.

    Quote
    (http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/A10A/production/_88862214_severn-tunnel2-grab.jpg)

    The Severn Tunnel has reopened after closing for six weeks for rail electrification works.
    It was shut on 12 September for a £10m upgrade to make the infrastructure ready for electric trains.
    This was part of the wider £2.8bn scheme to electrify the main line from London to south Wales.
    Three teams of 200 engineers have worked around the clock, 24 hours a day, to complete the work.
    This included installing a power rail in the tunnel roof.

    (http://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/DFD6/production/_91520375_tunnel2.jpg)
     
    During the tunnel closure, rail replacement buses operated between south Wales and Bristol via Gloucester, and flights took passengers from Cardiff to London City airport.
    GWR managing director Mark Hopwood said: "I appreciate how disruptive this work may have been for some and I would like to thank them for your patience during the last six weeks.
    "The vital work will modernise the railway between south Wales and London which, once complete, will enable us to deliver more frequent services, more seats, and to reduce journey times."
    Alun Cairns, Secretary of State for Wales, said: "I recognise the closure of the tunnel has been a challenge for many of us here, but it's clear the benefits will vastly outweigh this short period."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on October 23, 2016, 10:01:50
    And here's the official NR press release:

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/severn-tunnel-reopens-to-passengers-as-iconic-milestone-to-prepare-south-wales-mainline-for-electrification-is-completed


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on October 23, 2016, 18:59:43
    I certainly enjoyed a couple of trips via Lydney - one with a Great Western Brunch!

    I'm rather impressed that my colleague bobm apparently restrained himself so much as to enjoy just one Great Western Brunch.  :P ::)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 24, 2016, 09:13:12
    Great to see the Severn Tunnel blockade finished on time after the work to install the conductor beams.  I wasn't directly involved, but the near absence of any negative press indicates to me that road replacement services and the altered train service over the past few weeks was well organised and went down well.  A couple of people, including my parents, commented to me on enjoying a trip along the scenic diversionary route through Chepstow.

    One step further towards an electrified Great Western Main Line!  :D

    The road replacements I did were great.  Frequent direct coaches made the experience pretty good.  The only downside is that the fact that Newport to Parkway was go quick on the coach kind of highlighted that the normal trains are not exactly fast. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 24, 2016, 11:29:22
    There are portals exactly like that (same crossbar section anyway) further along towards Pangbourne supporting normal Series 1 off those vertical tubes.

    Paul

    And as of last week Series 1 insulator arms (short SICs*) are appearing just outside Reading station too. Only the mains are being done at the moment, apart from a few of those vertical drop tubes inside the station.

    The SICs always attach to the drop tubes by clamp bolts, unlike the long ones which attach to the masts at factory-made fixing points. I'm not sure if there are any non-Series 1 masts for single track arms at Reading - there are a few stanchions with no obvious purpose, so maybe we'll see later.

    * Furrer + Frey use the term Single Insulator Cantilever both for the arm that mounts on the vertical dropper tube and the similar thing bolted on the end of a steel section that attaches to a mast to equip a single track.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on October 24, 2016, 22:08:38
    Is there more work to do in overnight/weekend closures before the conductor rail in the tunnel can be energised or is it ready to be switched on for testing of electric trains already? Obviously the only electric trains able to reach the tunnel for testing would be bi-mode ones, because as far as I know there are no wires connecting to it on either side yet.

    In other (rather belated) electrification news, I noticed the other day that Cardiff council granted listed building consent for the OHLE at Cardiff Central a while ago, sadly without forcing Network Rail to design something subtle like they are doing with Sydney Gardens. Why Network Rail thought apparently the same huge reinforced OHLE needed for 140mph running further east would be suitable for running through Cardiff Central I don't know, but that appears to be what they are planning. Perhaps even more seriously, the listed building consent application suggests that platforms 7 and 8 aren't being wired (platform 6 might not be either). I know the ValleyLines project is meant to be happening at a later date, but it seems to me (as a layman) that it would be eaiser to do all the knitting over pointwork around the station at once. The only thing I can think of is that Network Rail are expecting either cancelation of the valleys wires with the loss of EU funding or freight off the Vale Of Glamorgan to remain diesel worked, thus allowing tram-trains on the valleys and <25kv electrification through platforms 6-8.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on October 24, 2016, 22:44:21
    Is there more work to do in overnight/weekend closures before the conductor rail in the tunnel can be energised or is it ready to be switched on for testing of electric trains already? Obviously the only electric trains able to reach the tunnel for testing would be bi-mode ones, because as far as I know there are no wires connecting to it on either side yet.

    Its conductor beam, conductor rail is a lot closer to the ground and is only rated to 750V dc.

    There will still need to be the wire runs to meet up with the Seven Tunnels conductor beam, and then there will be section proving

    In other (rather belated) electrification news, I noticed the other day that Cardiff council granted listed building consent for the OHLE at Cardiff Central a while ago, sadly without forcing Network Rail to design something subtle like they are doing with Sydney Gardens. Why Network Rail thought apparently the same huge reinforced OHLE needed for 140mph running further east would be suitable for running through Cardiff Central I don't know, but that appears to be what they are planning. Perhaps even more seriously, the listed building consent application suggests that platforms 7 and 8 aren't being wired (platform 6 might not be either). I know the ValleyLines project is meant to be happening at a later date, but it seems to me (as a layman) that it would be eaiser to do all the knitting over pointwork around the station at once. The only thing I can think of is that Network Rail are expecting either cancelation of the valleys wires with the loss of EU funding or freight off the Vale Of Glamorgan to remain diesel worked, thus allowing tram-trains on the valleys and <25kv electrification through platforms 6-8.

    The reason for using the same equipment everywhere and limiting different type of structures to only a few special locations is cost and also to keep the range of components to a minimum.

    Possibly the reason why the 6, 7 & 8 are not being altered by GWEP is they don't have the funding, the valley lines are still questionably if they will get funding especially as one of the funding sources will dry up in 2019 or so


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 25, 2016, 00:08:05
    Its conductor beam, conductor rail is a lot closer to the ground and is only rated to 750V dc.

    Now, be fair. Network Rail may have chosen "conductor beam" to avoid amibiguity, but Furrer+Frey use conductor-rail as their standard term for the product. OK, they are Swiss, but "rail" is also used elsewhere, e.g. in India. And other terms are common too, such as conductor bar, and in France even the rather illogical "rigid catenary" (directly from the French).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on October 25, 2016, 10:33:16
    In other (rather belated) electrification news, I noticed the other day that Cardiff council granted listed building consent for the OHLE at Cardiff Central a while ago, sadly without forcing Network Rail to design something subtle like they are doing with Sydney Gardens. Why Network Rail thought apparently the same huge reinforced OHLE needed for 140mph running further east would be suitable for running through Cardiff Central I don't know, but that appears to be what they are planning. Perhaps even more seriously, the listed building consent application suggests that platforms 7 and 8 aren't being wired (platform 6 might not be either). I know the ValleyLines project is meant to be happening at a later date, but it seems to me (as a layman) that it would be eaiser to do all the knitting over pointwork around the station at once. The only thing I can think of is that Network Rail are expecting either cancelation of the valleys wires with the loss of EU funding or freight off the Vale Of Glamorgan to remain diesel worked, thus allowing tram-trains on the valleys and <25kv electrification through platforms 6-8.
    The reason for using the same equipment everywhere and limiting different type of structures to only a few special locations is cost and also to keep the range of components to a minimum.
    Quite; my argument is that, as a listed building, Cardiff Central should be considered a special location and treated respectfully.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 25, 2016, 10:58:18
    Being part of a separate planning application does not necessarily mean that platforms 6 to 8 will be electrified at a different time.   

    With respect I'd also suggest that Cardiff Central is not quite as sensitive a location as Sydney gardens, or at least that the key heritage aspects are the building frontage and the tiling which will not be impacted by the wiring.  There is of course also talk of wholesale redevelopment of Cardiff Central in the future with a Reading-style "transfer deck" installed.

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on October 25, 2016, 11:20:46
    Central should be considered a special location and treated respectfully.

    From my experience of my last two visits to there, the gents' toilets should be entered on a special list of their own. I hope matters have improved?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on October 25, 2016, 11:22:40
    From my experience of my last two visits to there, the gents' toilets should be entered on a special list of their own. I hope matters have improved?
    Cardiff Central station as a whole is an absolute disgrace for a capital city station.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 25, 2016, 12:29:01
    From my experience of my last two visits to there, the gents' toilets should be entered on a special list of their own. I hope matters have improved?
    Cardiff Central station as a whole is an absolute disgrace for a capital city station.

    Agreed, the place is a dump (much like all of the stations along the SWML) and anything done to improve it would be a good thing. Even the listed concourse building looks pretty shabby and worn out externally.

    If you want toilets and you have a bit of spare time and can escape through the ticket barriers, it's well worth the 5 minute walk to John Lewis for a rather better experience...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 25, 2016, 13:20:38
    The only thing I can think of is that Network Rail are expecting either cancelation of the valleys wires with the loss of EU funding or freight off the Vale Of Glamorgan to remain diesel worked, thus allowing tram-trains on the valleys and <25kv electrification through platforms 6-8.
    Surely having multiple voltages just introduces needless complication? I'd have expected that all new electrification would be 25kV. Not that I'm claiming to know!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: anthony215 on October 25, 2016, 13:21:43
    Cardiff Central could certainly do with some improovements in addition to whats been spent on it already.

    Mind you there are a few stations west of Cardiff  that need a good clean some of the swanline stations look very tacky even Swansea station still looks like it needs work


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on October 25, 2016, 14:49:14
    The only thing I can think of is that Network Rail are expecting either cancelation of the valleys wires with the loss of EU funding or freight off the Vale Of Glamorgan to remain diesel worked, thus allowing tram-trains on the valleys and <25kv electrification through platforms 6-8.
    Surely having multiple voltages just introduces needless complication? I'd have expected that all new electrification would be 25kV. Not that I'm claiming to know!

    I would expect that all future main line or long distance electrification will be at 25KV AC. It seems likely that some form of local tram or tram train is being considered as an alternative to proper trains.
    Any such might use 750 V DC as does the Croydon tram system.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on October 25, 2016, 16:29:29
    I would expect that all future main line or long distance electrification will be at 25KV AC. It seems likely that some form of local tram or tram train is being considered as an alternative to proper trains.
    Any such might use 750 V DC as does the Croydon tram system.

    Tram-trains elsewhere do run on 25 kV when in "train" mode, and 750 V when on the road. If it doesn't do both modes it's not a tram-train, is it? The alternative is to take the railway track used by trams in its entirety and rework it as a tram line, including through the station. Then it would be 750 V.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on October 25, 2016, 16:42:09
    There have been suggestions on WNXX over the last week from well placed sources within GWR that the IET's will be running on diesel engines between Cardiff and Swansea indefinitely.

    Added together with the apparent decision that the Wales & West franchise will retain it's current footprint (i.e. no truncation of services at the Welsh border), I wonder what deal, if any has been reached regarding Welsh rail devolution? It is apparently the aspiration of the Welsh Assembly to have Cardiff to Swansea, the Valley lines and North Wales electrified, but perhaps Westminster has said words to the effect of 'if you want a devolved railway, you pay for electrification, we'll do a couple of platforms in Cardiff, but we aren't going to gift you the lot as you haven't committed to doing your share'? 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on October 25, 2016, 17:06:23
    I wouldn't believe everything you read on the WNXX forum ::) :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on October 25, 2016, 17:12:31
    There have been suggestions on WNXX over the last week from well placed sources within GWR that the IET's will be running on diesel engines between Cardiff and Swansea indefinitely.

    Added together with the apparent decision that the Wales & West franchise will retain it's current footprint (i.e. no truncation of services at the Welsh border), I wonder what deal, if any has been reached regarding Welsh rail devolution? It is apparently the aspiration of the Welsh Assembly to have Cardiff to Swansea, the Valley lines and North Wales electrified, but perhaps Westminster has said words to the effect of 'if you want a devolved railway, you pay for electrification, we'll do a couple of platforms in Cardiff, but we aren't going to gift you the lot as you haven't committed to doing your share'? 

    I'd suggest that we don't know the details of Cardiff-Swansea electrification simple because it hasn't been decided yet as part of a shady deal or not.  You have to remember that the decision to "pause" the electrification was taken when the project was a basket case and something needed to be done.  If it still is a basket case by 2018 then it is entirely sensible to stop the wires at Cardiff.  If the teams are up to standard and working well by then, then it makes sense to plough on.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on October 25, 2016, 17:28:27
    There have been suggestions on WNXX over the last week from well placed sources within GWR that the IET's will be running on diesel engines between Cardiff and Swansea indefinitely.

    Added together with the apparent decision that the Wales & West franchise will retain it's current footprint (i.e. no truncation of services at the Welsh border), I wonder what deal, if any has been reached regarding Welsh rail devolution? It is apparently the aspiration of the Welsh Assembly to have Cardiff to Swansea, the Valley lines and North Wales electrified, but perhaps Westminster has said words to the effect of 'if you want a devolved railway, you pay for electrification, we'll do a couple of platforms in Cardiff, but we aren't going to gift you the lot as you haven't committed to doing your share'? 

    The devolution decision was made as part of the Railways Act 2005.

    It is too long to quote here, but you may wish to have a read of this document from July 2016, which summarises the current state of play:

    http://www.assembly.wales/research%20documents/16-043%20rail%20franchising%20in%20wales/16-043-web-english.pdf (http://www.assembly.wales/research%20documents/16-043%20rail%20franchising%20in%20wales/16-043-web-english.pdf)

    One quote from which regarding the next franchise is:

    Quote
    • the DfT will fully fund Great Western electrification, including the section between Cardiff and Bridgend; and
    • the DfT will contribute £125m towards the cost of the Cardiff Valley Lines electrification

    No mention of happens between Bridgend and Swansea, though I would be very surprised if the wires stopped at Bridgend, but it seems it has been confirmed already that the DfT will be fully funding wires well beyond Cardiff.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on October 25, 2016, 20:34:51
    From my experience of my last two visits to there, the gents' toilets should be entered on a special list of their own. I hope matters have improved?
    Cardiff Central station as a whole is an absolute disgrace for a capital city station.
    I agree regarding the gents toilets, they were rather poor last time I used them* even though they had been recently refurbished at the time (the refurb, although poor, was an improvement, before that they were downright disgraceful). Aside from the awful toilets and one or two less important things, I don't see what you're complaining about; it is one of my favorite stations.

    *a fair few months back now I think

    With respect I'd also suggest that Cardiff Central is not quite as sensitive a location as Sydney gardens, or at least that the key heritage aspects are the building frontage and the tiling which will not be impacted by the wiring.  There is of course also talk of wholesale redevelopment of Cardiff Central in the future with a Reading-style "transfer deck" installed.
    I agree it isn't quite Sydney Gardens, but I disagre that the frontage and western (tiled) subway are the only 'key heritage aspects'. The listing text states something along the lines of 'most complete major city GWR station since grouping', and the platform buildings and canopies are also an important part of that (in my mind at least). God-forbid that transfer deck and the associated mass demolition (I'll say no more about that now, since there's a topic on that somewhere on this forum).

    The only thing I can think of is that Network Rail are expecting either cancelation of the valleys wires with the loss of EU funding or freight off the Vale Of Glamorgan to remain diesel worked, thus allowing tram-trains on the valleys and <25kv electrification through platforms 6-8.
    Surely having multiple voltages just introduces needless complication? I'd have expected that all new electrification would be 25kV. Not that I'm claiming to know!
    New heavy-rail electrification would indeed be 25kv, but the bidders for the new franchise are apparently being permitted to propose convertion of the ValleyLines to light-rail, which might not be 25kv.

    Tram-trains elsewhere do run on 25 kV when in "train" mode, and 750 V when on the road. If it doesn't do both modes it's not a tram-train, is it? The alternative is to take the railway track used by trams in its entirety and rework it as a tram line, including through the station. Then it would be 750 V.
    Good point, tram-trains could be dual-voltage, but I don't think they have to. Tram-train, as I understand it, means they meet the necessary crashworthyness standards to share tracks with heavy rail rolling stock, as they would if they shared the Vale Of Glamorgan line with freight services.

    Added together with the apparent decision that the Wales & West franchise will retain it's current footprint (i.e. no truncation of services at the Welsh border), I wonder what deal, if any has been reached regarding Welsh rail devolution? It is apparently the aspiration of the Welsh Assembly to have Cardiff to Swansea, the Valley lines and North Wales electrified, but perhaps Westminster has said words to the effect of 'if you want a devolved railway, you pay for electrification, we'll do a couple of platforms in Cardiff, but we aren't going to gift you the lot as you haven't committed to doing your share'?
    I thought that funding argument had been settled (apart from the EU contribution to the ValleyLines scheme); and sure enough:
    One quote from which regarding the next franchise is:

    Quote
    • the DfT will fully fund Great Western electrification, including the section between Cardiff and Bridgend; and
    • the DfT will contribute £125m towards the cost of the Cardiff Valley Lines electrification

    No mention of happens between Bridgend and Swansea, though I would be very surprised if the wires stopped at Bridgend, but it seems it has been confirmed already that the DfT will be fully funding wires well beyond Cardiff.
    that was my understanding. The way I read it, "fully fund Great Western electrification" included the run right through to Swansea, assuming Cardiff-Bridgend was in doubt as it could also be counted as part of the ValleyLines scheme (for the Maesteg services). I could be wrong though.

    There have been suggestions on WNXX over the last week from well placed sources within GWR that the IET's will be running on diesel engines between Cardiff and Swansea indefinitely.
    I've just noticed Roger Ford's e-preview for November's informed sources has arrived in my inbox, and one of his comments is rather alarming:
    Quote
    I would risk a modest bet on Swansea not getting electric trains in Control Period 6 (2019-2024.  And given slightly better odds make it a double with Trans-Pennine electrification.
    Cue uproar if he's right. (That quote was part of a peice on EU standards pushing up bridges and hence the price of electrification).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on October 26, 2016, 10:31:04
    So DfT will be funding the electrification as far as Bridgend but the Welsh Gov must find the money for Bridgend to Swansea? And presumably the two are contingent on each other. Sounds like quite a good way of ensuring it doesn't get further than Cardiff...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on October 27, 2016, 14:41:42
    Talking of jacking up rail bridges, have we all seen the trial of lifting masonry arches rather than demolishing them? http://freyssinet.co.uk/elevarch-masonry-arch-jacking-trial/ (http://freyssinet.co.uk/elevarch-masonry-arch-jacking-trial/) and pics at https://twitter.com/freyssinetrail (https://twitter.com/freyssinetrail). Would appear to have been successful. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 05, 2016, 12:57:49
    Does anyone know what is going on between Swindon and Didcot this weekend to require a long possession?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 05, 2016, 14:37:24
    So DfT will be funding the electrification as far as Bridgend but the Welsh Gov must find the money for Bridgend to Swansea?
    No, here, I think, is the relevant announcement (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-announces-rail-package-to-electrify-valley-lines-and-boost-welsh-economy). That says
    Quote
    the UK government will cover the full costs of electrifying the Great Western mainline to Swansea and devolve the Wales and Borders rail franchise

    My guess is that the 'including the section between Cardiff and Bridgend' bit was put in to make clear that was considered part of GWML (DfT funded), rather than part of the ValleyLines scheme (with the joint DfT/WAG funding arrangement).

    However, apparently, Sir Peter Hendy either isn't aware of that agreement for DfT to fund wires to Swansea, or he thinks the DfT are not going to keep their promise (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/electrification-swansea-not-done-deal-12088884).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on November 06, 2016, 20:46:47
    So DfT will be funding the electrification as far as Bridgend but the Welsh Gov must find the money for Bridgend to Swansea?
    No, here, I think, is the relevant announcement (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-announces-rail-package-to-electrify-valley-lines-and-boost-welsh-economy). That says
    Quote
    the UK government will cover the full costs of electrifying the Great Western mainline to Swansea and devolve the Wales and Borders rail franchise

    My guess is that the 'including the section between Cardiff and Bridgend' bit was put in to make clear that was considered part of GWML (DfT funded), rather than part of the ValleyLines scheme (with the joint DfT/WAG funding arrangement).

    However, apparently, Sir Peter Hendy either isn't aware of that agreement for DfT to fund wires to Swansea, or he thinks the DfT are not going to keep their promise (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-news/electrification-swansea-not-done-deal-12088884).

    IIRC, the structure of the deal was that Westminster would technically have fronted the Welsh Assembly's contribution, which would be repaid through a facilities charge on the infrastructure and would effectively mean that the Wales & West franchise (and effectively the Assembly, through subsidies) would have been paying significant sums back to Westminster each year.

    In the version I heard, the relevant Welsh AM's didn't get this nuance until after it was announced, and were not happy about it, as they thought they were going to be able to claim at least some credit, and didn't like the idea of being in hock to Westminster. One interpretation of the current impasse is that the Assembly are trying to find someone else who will pay for the upgrade, but let the Assembly take credit for it. But it seems unlikely they'll find a big enough mug soon enough, hence Hendy throwing up his hands, doing the bare minimum in Wales and getting on with the English bits.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 06, 2016, 22:54:52
    You mean Wales & Borders franchise surely?

    Wales & West is long gone.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 06, 2016, 23:44:24
    IIRC, the structure of the deal was that Westminster would technically have fronted the Welsh Assembly's contribution, which would be repaid through a facilities charge on the infrastructure and would effectively mean that the Wales & West franchise (and effectively the Assembly, through subsidies) would have been paying significant sums back to Westminster each year.

    That is pretty much what the CP5 enhancement delivery plans used to say:
    Quote
    Key assumptions
    • The business case is centred on efficiencies from an electric fleet as well as growth in demand from customers.
    • The Welsh Government is the funder and will specify the scope and outputs to recommence development of the scheme in 2015.
    • The scheme is funded through RAB borrowing, a capital contribution from the DfT and a facility charge will be paid by the Wales & Borders franchise.

    But that was for Project WL001 - Welsh Valley Lines Electrification, listed under England and Wales Projects: Wales. For W001b - South Wales Main Line Electrification - which is under England and Wales Projects: Western, it says:
    Quote
    Scope of works
    The scope required for this project includes the extension of electrification on the core route as noted below:
    • Cardiff (excl.) to Swansea (incl.) (ELR: SWM2 216m 49ch to 190m 68ch
    and there is no mention of the Welsh Government.

    After the Hendy review, the new delivery plan says this about WL001:
    Quote
    Network Rail’s obligation
    Network Rail has delivered its previous obligation to complete development of options for electrification to GRIP stage 2 – this was achieved in early 2014.
    The primary funder – the Welsh Government – is now reviewing the scope and future direction of the scheme and all Network Rail development work is on hold. Network Rail’s future obligations will be determined when the review is completed.
    ...
    Great Western Electrification will deliver electrification between Cardiff and Bridgend.
    and of W001b it says:
    Quote
    Network Rail’s obligation in CP5 is to complete GRIP Stage 3 and some enabling works. Full delivery of the scheme will not be completed until CP6.

    So on that basis the funding regime Noggin describes is for the valley Lines alone. The debate above was about the main line, which was previously treated as all DfT-funded. The delays with electrification mean it has been pushed into CP6, and as a result it is no longer committed funding. That presumably happens just because the DfT funds attached to the HLOS are time-limited to one CP and fixed as money, not as output.

    But the announcement of the agreement to the post-HLOS bickering match, in a speech by David Cameron on 21/11/2014, said (as pre-released by his office):
    Quote
    In his speech to the UK investment summit in Newport, the Prime Minister will announce that the UK government has agreed a funding package with the Welsh government to electrify the Valley Lines.

    He will also announce that the UK government will cover the full costs of electrifying the Great Western mainline to Swansea and devolve the Wales and Borders rail franchise, so that the Welsh government decides the new franchise in 2018.

    But later on it says:
    Quote
    In order to make this deal happen, the UK government will take over sponsorship and fund delivery of the Cardiff-Bridgend section of the Main Line electrification scheme to Swansea – worth £105 million, and contribute £125 million towards the costs of the wider Valley Lines electrification scheme.

    The Welsh government will take over sponsorship and delivery of the Valley Lines project.

    From that it does look as if the line from Cardif to Bridgend mysteriously got transferred from the main line to the Valleys part of the electrification, and had to be put back. The may be a result of earlier history, as "PR13 Initial Industry Plan Supporting Document - Definition of proposed CP5 enhancements" (September 2011) includes this under "Great Western electrification":
    Quote
    On 23rd July 2009 the Department for Transport (DfT) published Britain’s Transport Infrastructure: Rail Electrification, confirming government support for a programme of electrification. The projects supported, to be RAB funded, were the GWML (to Bristol, Oxford, Newbury and Swansea) and Liverpool – Manchester via the Chat Moss route.

    On 26th October 2009 Network Rail published the Network RUS: Electrification Strategy, with a core strategy consisting of electrification of MML, GWML and two strategic infill schemes (Liverpool – Manchester and Gospel Oak – Barking).

    On 1st March 2011 the Secretary of State for Transport confirmed the electrification of the Great Western Main Line between Cardiff, Bristol and Didcot (having previously announced electrification in November 2010 from London to Oxford, Didcot and Newbury).

    So Cardiff-Swansea, having been in earlier versions of this document, is no longer included in the proposed list of outputs. But it is still mentioned in two places, suggesting the editing to remove it was not 100% successful. The Valleys project is listed line by line, followed by:
    Quote
    • discussions are ongoing with the Welsh Government and DfT regarding extending the scope to include the Ebbw Vale branch, the Maesteg branch and Cardiff – Bridgend via the main line. These will now be considered as increments against the original remit;

    So maybe it's not surprising that no-one was ever quite sure which project Cardiff-Bridgend was part of. But while the (ex-)PM's statement is clear enough, you can see why (as Rhygdaled says) every subsequent statement about Cardiff-Swansea  has to have the rider "including Cardiff-Bridgend" tacked on, for avoidance of doubt.

    But if Hendy was right to say Cardiff-Swansea now depends on the Welsh Government, it looks as if DfT thinks its shifting into CP6 entirely cancels its (and HMG's) earlier commitment to fund it without a Welsh contribution. Unless he got mixed up...or was misreported.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 07, 2016, 14:42:28
    Blimey, stuving, it sounds like this is a really complicated suituation. As you say though, "the (ex-)PM's statement is clear". Crystal clear; the UK government WILL PAY for electrification of the entire GWML through to Swansea, including the Cardiff-Bridgend section.

    I can sort-of understand that they (UK gov./DfT) may now be trying to use the slippage into the next control period as an excuse to wriggle out of that promise, but in my view it is still a promise and trying to break it is grounds for (metaphorically) dragging the UK Government / DfT over hot coals.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 07, 2016, 22:45:54
    Blimey, stuving, it sounds like this is a really complicated suituation.

    I can only concur with that view - and also thank stuving for such a detailed and well-referenced post on this subject.  :o ::) :-X


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on November 08, 2016, 09:35:26
    Blimey, stuving, it sounds like this is a really complicated suituation.

    I can only concur with that view - and also thank stuving for such a detailed and well-referenced post on this subject.  :o ::) :-X

    Yes, thank you for the clarification, much appreciated.


    Title: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 09:57:07
    Hot off the presses:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/rail-update-rail-investment-in-the-great-western-route

    From Paul Maynard:

    Quote
    As a result of this scrutiny from the Hendy review I have decided to defer 4 electrification projects that are part of the programme of work along the Great Western route. The 4 projects being deferred are:

    electrification between Oxford and Didcot Parkway
    electrification of Filton Bank (Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads)
    electrification west of Thingley Junction (Bath Spa to Bristol Temple Meads)
    electrification of Thames Valley Branches (Henley & Windsor)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on November 08, 2016, 10:07:35
    Is this a further deferment beyond what we already knew? For example, Didcot – Oxford has already been put back until 2019 – is there now a further deferment?

    Pity Paul Maynard didn't put some dates in his statement.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Timmer on November 08, 2016, 10:10:11
    This is an absolute disgrace! Has a project ever been so terribly managed as this one has? BR had no such issues electrifying lines, why can't Network Rail do the same?

    They can get away with this because all the new trains will be bi-modes. Looking like Dft made a good call on this one.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: bobm on November 08, 2016, 10:10:45
    Reaction from GWR

    Quote
    The changes are of course disappointing. However, we have done a considerable amount of work with the Department for Transport over the past year to find different ways to provide the benefits we promised customers despite the challenges faced by Network Rail.

    Although there is some more work to do, we expect to be able to deliver the benefits broadly in line with the timescales we originally expected. In some areas of the network we may even be able to exceed the original expectations, as we have done for example the Thames Valley where all our local electric trains will now be brand new Class 387s, rather than the older trains previously planned.

    Of course, we will need to understand today’s news a little more to be completely sure, but we will do all we can to deliver our commitments to customers as close as possible to the dates we promised when the franchise started.  


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 08, 2016, 10:12:03
    So, no 387s to Oxford then....


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Timmer on November 08, 2016, 10:16:10
    Pity Paul Maynard didn't put some dates in his statement.
    Can't think why  ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2016, 10:17:40
    I concur. Having such multiple layers of "decision making" and funding does make for complexity. Some may say unnecessarily so!


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: bobm on November 08, 2016, 10:20:55
    For the record in the future, here is the complete statement from the minister

    Quote
    I wish to update the House on the programme of rail investment in the Great Western route and the steps we are taking to ensure this improves services to passengers while getting the best deal for taxpayers.

    We are continuing to invest £2.8 billion in this electrification programme to provide faster journeys, more services, and better stations while providing new or upgraded trains for passengers, with thousands more seats, and increasing capacity for freight. It will improve the experience on over 100 million rail journeys each year, stimulating economic growth from London through the Thames Valley, to the Cotswolds, West Country and to South Wales.

    It is a project unprecedented in scale that is building on and around ageing assets in constant use. This is an ambitious and challenging undertaking, but real progress is being made in delivering it.

    Projects completed successfully this year include the digital upgrade of large sections of signalling to improve reliability, the modification of over 100 bridges and structures, flood alleviation work, significant improvements to the resilience of the Oxford route and the introduction of the first Great Western electric services between Hayes & Harlington to Paddington which run between some of the busiest peak services in the country.

    Works on the Severn Tunnel this autumn made vital preparation for electrification between London and South Wales. Other enabling works include the progression of electrification towards the west, further re-signalling in Bristol, Cardiff and Cornwall, improvements at Bristol Temple Meads Station, enabling works at stations throughout the route, provision of better access for disabled passengers at selected stations, and enhancements to depots from West Ealing in the east to Penzance in the west.

    We have been clear that there have been difficulties with this programme. These were set out last year in the review of Network Rail’s delivery plan by Sir Peter Hendy. Following the re-planning of work that followed this review, the programme has been placed on a more efficient footing. A key part of this is the ongoing assessment of investment decisions so that passengers and taxpayers get maximum value.

    As a result of this scrutiny from the Hendy review I have decided to defer 4 electrification projects that are part of the programme of work along the Great Western route. The 4 projects being deferred are:
    electrification between Oxford and Didcot Parkway
    electrification of Filton Bank (Bristol Parkway to Bristol Temple Meads)
    electrification west of Thingley Junction (Bath Spa to Bristol Temple Meads)
    electrification of Thames Valley Branches (Henley & Windsor)

    This is because we can bring in the benefits expected by passengers - newer trains with more capacity – without requiring costly and disruptive electrification works. This will provide between £146 million to £165 million in this spending period, to be focused on improvements that will deliver additional benefits to passengers. We remain committed to modernising the Great Western mainline and ensuring that passenger benefits are achieved.

    This decision underscores the government’s approach to wider rail investment; that passenger outcomes must be delivered in conjunction with achieving the best value from every pound spent.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on November 08, 2016, 10:36:59
    I hope all that work in Box Tunnel last year doesn't turn out to be waste of time and money .....


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 08, 2016, 10:43:30
    presumably this could push back the delay in getting the wires to Swansea even more?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 08, 2016, 10:45:47
    Or speed them up? As these bits are no longer in the work programme ahead of Cardiff-Swansea


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 08, 2016, 10:46:35
    This really is quite rubbish.  Presumably it means that we will get hardly any "electric all the way" journeys on the network at all this decade.  This latest delay rules out Oxford-Paddington, Bristol-Filton bank-Paddington and Bristol-Bath-Paddington.  What are we left with?  Looks like it will only be Cardiff-Paddington.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Red Squirrel on November 08, 2016, 10:46:57
    When you 'defer' something without specifying a date, isn't that the same thing as 'cancelling' it?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 08, 2016, 10:49:57
    Or speed them up? As these bits are no longer in the work programme ahead of Cardiff-Swansea

    possible, but I suspect unlikely.  They haven't announced a Swansea timescale yet so pushing it back is perhaps politically easier.  Mind you if Cardiff-Paddington is the first main route to be done, then extending to Swansea does have a certain logic and might make more sense operationaly if all of the Welsh trains (and therefore the welsh depot) become electric.    


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 08, 2016, 10:52:04
    When you 'defer' something without specifying a date, isn't that the same thing as 'cancelling' it?

    Perhaps.  I suspect that they haven't decided yet.  But if the Bi mode trains are well received and further electrification looks poor value then cancelling it would be tempting and maybe even logical.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: stuving on November 08, 2016, 10:56:47
    If you look at the Hendy update to the delivery plan, three of those route sections were listed with the "EIS Infrastructure Authorised" milestone in CP6. The other wasn't split at the same point, but Wootton Basset Junction to Bristol temple Meads shows dates February 21092019 - April 2020 (CP6 starts April 2019). So it's partly manipulation of promised dates - everything due in CP5 is still there.

    But hasn't work started on some of this already? You can't defer that. And if it's been contracted for, you can't defer it except at cost. Maybe internal spend controls at NR mean that these ones with end dates in CP6 were already being restrained - only done if essential for the timescale, and no outside contracts if at al possible?

    And of course it's basically financial. NR have a CP5 budget, and overspends elsewhere (whether added work or under-delivery) will be funded by cutting these items out of CP5.

    So it'll all be down to the CP6 budget. No doubt the long-term planning process is well underway for that.



    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: paul7575 on November 08, 2016, 11:13:07
    If you look at the Hendy update to the delivery plan, three of those route sections were listed with the "EIS Infrastructure Authorised" milestone in CP6. The other wasn't split at the same point, but Wootton Basset Junction to Bristol temple Meads shows dates February 2109 - April 2020 (CP6 starts April 2019). So it's partly manipulation of promised dates - everything due in CP5 is still there.

    The Hendy update is only really a snapshot in time; there have been two further updates to the enhancements milestones plan, there was one in June and another in September (issued early October IIRC).   Not a huge difference each time but without doing a line by line comparison it might be the Hendy dates are getting slightly stale.

    As suggested earlier, until anything with hard date info is published then this may just be DfT admitting to the realistic dates already in the enhancements milestones.    Perhaps it will be clearer in the January version...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: brompton rail on November 08, 2016, 11:21:46
    Announcement made on the day when to whole of the media in the U.K. is devoting all their resources to covering elections across the pond. Good day for burying bad news anyone!


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: PhilWakely on November 08, 2016, 11:27:43
    If you look at the Hendy update to the delivery plan................  Wootton Basset Junction to Bristol temple Meads shows dates February 2109 - .....................

    Many a true word........   ;) :P


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: didcotdean on November 08, 2016, 11:28:28
    Bi-mode has gone from being a stop-gap to a 'get out of jail free card' to be able to postpone electrification indefinitely. Look out for more of these wheezes as government finances get squeezed.

    Completion of the main line is probably the shocker in here rather than the branches or even DID-OXF.



    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ray951 on November 08, 2016, 11:38:27
    Agreed, if you can change from Diesel to Electric on the move then what is the point of completing electrification, it can be postponed indefinitely.

    Although not quite sure what they will do with the electrification 'substation' at Radley which was only installed a couple of months ago.




    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 08, 2016, 11:42:33
    Agreed, if you can change from Diesel to Electric on the move then what is the point of completing electrification, it can be postponed indefinitely.

    Although not quite sure what they will do with the electrification 'substation' at Radley which was only installed a couple of months ago.




    I don't think the 387s can swop on the move.  I think that is just an IEP capability. 


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: didcotdean on November 08, 2016, 11:45:56
    387s would run to DID only with a diesel shuttle to OXF, sometimes extended to BAN.

    There are some side effects here - in local planning there are 1000 homes to be built around Culham station - not so attractive a location maybe if it only has an hourly service to DID / OXF for an unknown time.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 08, 2016, 11:49:55
    Agreed, if you can change from Diesel to Electric on the move then what is the point of completing electrification, it can be postponed indefinitely.

    Although not quite sure what they will do with the electrification 'substation' at Radley which was only installed a couple of months ago.

    I don't think the 387s can swop on the move.  I think that is just an IEP capability. 

    I don't either - they have no diesel capability at all.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ray951 on November 08, 2016, 12:18:19
    Agreed, if you can change from Diesel to Electric on the move then what is the point of completing electrification, it can be postponed indefinitely.

    Although not quite sure what they will do with the electrification 'substation' at Radley which was only installed a couple of months ago.




    I don't think the 387s can swop on the move.  I think that is just an IEP capability. 

    The 387's don't need to be, the OXF to PAD stoppers can be a diesel shuttle to Didcot and 387 from DID to Paddington and the fasts can be IEP changing from diesel to electric at Didcot East Junc.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 08, 2016, 12:21:30
    But there's a speed loss on diesel, right? 110mph rather than 125mph, so there'll be degaradation of timetables?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ellendune on November 08, 2016, 12:31:44
    But there's a speed loss on diesel, right? 110mph rather than 125mph, so there'll be degaradation of timetables?

    IIRC there is not much 125 between Thingley and Bristol, between Filton and Bristol, or between Didcot and Oxford, Not sure about Reading to Newbury. 

    The timetable problem would be on the South Wales Route.



    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: 1st fan on November 08, 2016, 12:32:23
    Oh quelle surprise - so the supposed benefits for customers on the Hereford line are what exactly? The new Hitachi trains are unlikely to run any faster beyond Oxford especially if it won't be electric all the way there anymore. The seating isn't supposed to be as comfortable as the HST in 1st - I dread to think about standard. There is a lack of a buffet. Can we keep the HST to Hereford please.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ellendune on November 08, 2016, 12:33:41
    When you 'defer' something without specifying a date, isn't that the same thing as 'cancelling' it?

    No I suspect it is all about not making CP6 commitments until CP6 is agreed.

    Postponing Oxford until it can be aligned with Oxford Station improvements might save some money too


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Visoflex on November 08, 2016, 12:48:47
    Peculiar decisions regarding Temple Meads and Oxford, but diesel IEP's will no doubt lessen the blow until station refurb funding becomes available..


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: paul7575 on November 08, 2016, 12:57:25
    Can we keep the HST to Hereford please.
    No you can't, such is progress.

    I don't think you should be able to like your own post either, to be fair...   ???

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2016, 13:01:19
    How can Filton Bank not be electrified after all the work already done? And the IEP depot there,too?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 13:04:50
    Can we keep the HST to Hereford please.
    No you can't, such is progress.

    There are those of us who are really fond of our current trains - be they class 125 or class 153.  However, if we campaigned to keep them and won would rapidly find our love for them drowned by people complaining about old trains on their line ... to say nothing of increasing maintenance costs and failures over the years ahead, and a real problem is we'd refused an upgrade on the back of a bigger order and wanted a special build later.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: 1st fan on November 08, 2016, 13:24:22
    Can we keep the HST to Hereford please.
    No you can't, such is progress.

    I don't think you should be able to like your own post either, to be fair...   ???

    Paul
    Can we at least keep the comfortable seats? I've heard (and yes it may be hearsay) that the new seats are awful.

    I wasn't aware I'd liked my own post  ??? I think that might be too many things on my desk causing spurious mouse clicks when I unintentionally move the mouse. I've unliked it now.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: bobm on November 08, 2016, 13:27:13
    I think that might be too many things on my desk causing spurious mouse clicks when I unintentionally move the mouse.

    Yes I often do that - knowing that a bigger desk would just allow me to spread my clutter to fill it, a bit more discipline is needed!


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: DidcotPunter on November 08, 2016, 13:30:54
    When you 'defer' something without specifying a date, isn't that the same thing as 'cancelling' it?

    No I suspect it is all about not making CP6 commitments until CP6 is agreed.

    Postponing Oxford until it can be aligned with Oxford Station improvements might save some money too

    Quite. If Oxford station is to get major redevelopment in future, there's not much point in putting up the wires right now. There's some work ongoing for the new Chiltern service to Marylebone (which is supposed to be starting next month) but the major redevelopment which has been proposed has not even got funding yet.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on November 08, 2016, 13:50:04
    There are some side effects here - in local planning there are 1000 homes to be built around Culham station - not so attractive a location maybe if it only has an hourly service to DID / OXF for an unknown time.

    Indeed. I doubt the Oxfordshire local authorities are very impressed with this announcement.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ray951 on November 08, 2016, 14:00:00
    When you 'defer' something without specifying a date, isn't that the same thing as 'cancelling' it?

    No I suspect it is all about not making CP6 commitments until CP6 is agreed.

    Postponing Oxford until it can be aligned with Oxford Station improvements might save some money too

    But if we wait for Oxford station to be redeveloped it will never get delivered as there is currently no funding for the station.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 08, 2016, 14:07:05
    Agreed, if you can change from Diesel to Electric on the move then what is the point of completing electrification, it can be postponed indefinitely.

    Although not quite sure what they will do with the electrification 'substation' at Radley which was only installed a couple of months ago.

    I don't think the 387s can swop on the move.  I think that is just an IEP capability. 

    I don't either - they have no diesel capability at all.

    Good point. Well made


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: chrisr_75 on November 08, 2016, 14:21:49
    Bi-mode has gone from being a stop-gap to a 'get out of jail free card' to be able to postpone electrification indefinitely. Look out for more of these wheezes as government finances get squeezed.

    Completion of the main line is probably the shocker in here rather than the branches or even DID-OXF.



    The previous change of the train order to include more bi-mode sets looks rather premeditated to me following todays announcement of the 'deferment' of full electrification...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: 1st fan on November 08, 2016, 14:48:42
    How can Filton Bank not be electrified after all the work already done? And the IEP depot there,too?
    That's politics!


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: 1st fan on November 08, 2016, 14:52:04
    Oh quelle surprise - so the supposed benefits for customers on the Hereford line are what exactly? The new Hitachi trains are unlikely to run any faster beyond Oxford especially if it won't be electric all the way there anymore. The seating isn't supposed to be as comfortable as the HST in 1st - I dread to think about standard. There is a lack of a buffet.

    I like the quote from James Davis of GWR in the Oxford Mail

    Quote from: James Davis in the Oxford Mail
    "We aim to deliver 9,000 extra seats on trains across the network including on trains running between Oxford and London Paddington.

    "There could also be journey-time improvements on long-distance journeys - journey time improvements from Oxford to London is not something we have ever promised."

    http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14874438.Rail_electrification_between_Oxford_and_Didcot__delayed_until_further_notice_/

    Given the news today and the lack of electrification that is planned beyond Oxford it looks like there won't be any speed improvements at all for Cotswold line users. I think there was only 6 minutes decrease in journey time to Hereford to begin with so not a really massive improvement with the Class 8xx.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: didcotdean on November 08, 2016, 15:17:33
    If there was any thought that slipping out the announcement today would get it buried to any real extent that has proved to be another miscalculation.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: chrisr_75 on November 08, 2016, 15:21:15
    If there was any thought that slipping out the announcement today would get it buried to any real extent that has proved to be another miscalculation.

    Indeed. Not sure if mentioned earlier in the thread, but picked up by the BBC now on main news homepage:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-37908735 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-37908735)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: didcotdean on November 08, 2016, 15:24:25
    It also led the BBC South regional news at 13:30.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 15:27:49
    I think that might be too many things on my desk causing spurious mouse clicks when I unintentionally move the mouse.

    Yes I often do that - knowing that a bigger desk would just allow me to spread my clutter to fill it, a bit more discipline is needed!

    If you accidentally like something, you can click again to remove the like and no-one is any the wiser.  You may need to refresh the page between the like and unlike due to my crap Javascript knowledge.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 15:47:12
    From The BBC (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-politics-37907841)

    Quote
    Electric trains are still due to start running between Cardiff and London in 2019, a minister has said, despite the deferring of work on other lines.
    Work on four routes serving Bristol, Oxford and Berkshire is now on hold.
    Rail minister Paul Maynard said it would free up money to "deliver additional benefits to passengers" and added Wales would not suffer delays.
    "My focus is to ensure that we deliver electrification to Cardiff on time," he said of the £2.8bn modernisation plan.
    Responding to a question from Cardiff West MP Kevin Brennan during a Commons rail debate, Mr Maynard said he wanted to make sure "that passengers in south Wales benefit from that electrification to the fullest degree possible".

    Article continues ...


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 08, 2016, 15:59:16
    Quite. If Oxford station is to get major redevelopment in future, there's not much point in putting up the wires right now. There's some work ongoing for the new Chiltern service to Marylebone (which is supposed to be starting next month) but the major redevelopment which has been proposed has not even got funding yet.

    There are three phases to the Oxford corridor enhancement programme. 

    Phase 0 is for Chiltern and just about complete (save for an almighty rush to get the two new bay platforms ready for 6-car trains in December). 

    Phase 1 delivers significant extra capacity in the form of increased speeds, new crossovers, rebuilt carriage sidings at Oxford (on both sides of the track) and new mostly 4-aspect signalling together with bi-directional running between Didcot and Tackley - which will mean the closure of Oxford PSB.  Work on that has already started, with the down sidings being remodelled during this month, new 40mph crossovers installed at Tackley and locations for the new signalling marked on the sleepers between Didcot and Oxford.  Completion date is as far as I know scheduled for 2018, though the Oxford PSB closure has been postponed many times now.

    Phase 2 then builds on that with a couple of extra crossovers and signalling routes, together with an additional bi-directional Platform 5 behind what is now Platform 4.

    Assuming Phase 1 is unaffected by this announcement, then I reckon it delivers approximately 80% of the benefits of the completed Phase 2 and electrification, so I would be very disappointed if today's announcement were to curtail or delay it in any way.  Phase 1 will deliver the infrastructure for IEP's (on diesel) and not having electrification would only then mean the 387s can't go beyond Didcot which we were expecting to be the case until 2019 anyway.

    Any reliance on funding and delivery of the new station before electrification would be a huge risk in my opinion and I could easily see it being 10+ years before the station is rebuilt, however I think there would be little affect on the infrastructure as the new station would in all likelihood be build as a transfer deck above the predicted Phase 1 and 2 track layouts.  Indeed I would have thought electrification could proceed and need little modification for a completed Phase 1 scheme with Phase 2 and the new station following on at a later date. 

    I guess we just have to wait and see exactly what 'deferred' means in terms of timescales, but as long as Phase 1 isn't delayed as well, the impact on services and journey times will be fairly minimal.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: JayMac on November 08, 2016, 16:13:21
    Following this deferment, as far as I can make out, there are no sections on which the Class 80x will operate on diesel that have line speed above 110mph, except Wootton Bassett Junction to Box.

    Modest journey time improvements are supposed to come from improved acceleration and braking. And reduced dwell times thanks to the automatic doors. Where the 80x sets operate off grid, for example, on the Cotswold Line, there should still be scope to shave something off journey time.

    I don't think it necessary to conflate interior comfort with this announcement though. There's enough of that elsewhere on the forum. All of which is supposition or rose-tinted nostalgia for what has gone before.

    This announcement is disappointing, although not unexpected nor disastrous. It could have been worse. Box Tunnel portals and Sydney Gardens keeps their pleasant unobstructed views of the line for a few more years.  :P


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on November 08, 2016, 16:15:18
    Quote
    IIRC there is not much 125 between Thingley and Bristol, between Filton and Bristol, or between Didcot and Oxford, Not sure about Reading to Newbury. 

    The timetable problem would be on the South Wales Route.

    No, nothing over 100 between Reading and Newbury, also nothing over 100 westwards from Bristol Parkway


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 16:15:45
    Looking to do some maths on 165 / 166 cascades here ... wondering how many won't be released for the foreseeable future?   Are there more 387s on order than are needed now?  Perhaps the Swansea trains remain as IEPs but the Cardiffs become spare 387s, releasing IEPs for the Oxford runs?   Noting that electrification to Thingley Junction is to proceed, does that open the way for extra London to Chippenham services?  Are the proposed works at Bath next Easter to proceed anyway, or will they be postponed? Looking to understand the numbers and ramifications here.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 16:18:44
    Following this deferment, as far as I can make out, there are no sections on which the Class 80x will operate on diesel that have line speed above 110mph, except Wootton Bassett Junction to Box.

    Thought Wootton Bassett to Thingley remained in the program - ruddy great feeder station there were much of the juice comes from ...


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on November 08, 2016, 16:26:34
    No impact to the plans for the B&H to Newbury as far as I can see.

    Interesting that Newbury gets "prioritised" for electric trains over Oxford....but I guess due to complexity/re-development at the latter.

    Perhaps all the bits of infrastructure that won't be needed between Didcot and Oxford could now be used to wire to Bedwyn! (retreats with tongue firmly in-cheek ;D)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on November 08, 2016, 16:30:50
    How can Filton Bank not be electrified after all the work already done? And the IEP depot there,too?
    That's politics!

    I am pretty sure it will be electrified - after all the re-signalling is still going ahead, the four tracking is in progress still (the contract has been let).  This is just about the electrification isn't it.

    After all that it should look a simple scheme. 

    I just do not know when it will happen!


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: paul7575 on November 08, 2016, 16:55:50
    I'd again re-iterate that all they've effectively don is announce what was already stated in the Sept 16 update to the enhancement plans.   Nothing DfT have said should be a surprise, in comparison.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on November 08, 2016, 16:56:06
    I guess Bristol East Jn, together with the approach to Temple Meads and the platforms itself will be fairly complex.

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on November 08, 2016, 17:20:48
    I just do not know when it will happen!
    Neither do the government by the looks of things.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: broadgage on November 08, 2016, 17:37:35
    I suspect that a lot of the proposed electrification wont happen in the foreseeable future now.

    This "deferment" will be seen as a substantial victory by the NIMBYs, and will get them more time to raise funds and become better organised.
    And meantime, the newts are no doubt breeding.
    Actual electrification will be replaced by yet more studies and consultations, each such study and consultation will recommend further studies, with the eventual result being a more expensive and less reliable scheme that probably wont be built, and certainly wont work in windy weather if it is built.

    The fact that the new trains can switch between diesel and electric power on the move will increase calls to not electrify bits of the route that anyone can see !



    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: JayMac on November 08, 2016, 18:12:52
    Following this deferment, as far as I can make out, there are no sections on which the Class 80x will operate on diesel that have line speed above 110mph, except Wootton Bassett Junction to Box.

    Thought Wootton Bassett to Thingley remained in the program - ruddy great feeder station there were much of the juice comes from ...

    Apologies. It does appear that the wires should reach Thingy Junction. One more 125 mph stretch covered by leccy.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2016, 19:22:27

    Apologies. It does appear that the wires should reach Thingy Junction. One more 125 mph stretch covered by leccy.

     ;D

    If not Whosname Bassett.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: TonyK on November 08, 2016, 19:27:57
    Reaction from GWR

    Quote
    The changes are of course disappointing. However, we have done a considerable amount of work with the Department for Transport over the past year to find different ways to provide the benefits we promised customers despite the challenges faced by Network Rail.

    Although there is some more work to do, we expect to be able to deliver the benefits broadly in line with the timescales we originally expected. In some areas of the network we may even be able to exceed the original expectations, as we have done for example the Thames Valley where all our local electric trains will now be brand new Class 387s, rather than the older trains previously planned.

    Of course, we will need to understand today’s news a little more to be completely sure, but we will do all we can to deliver our commitments to customers as close as possible to the dates we promised when the franchise started.  

    In English:
    Quote
    We will do something better in spite of Network Rail, not because of Network Rail.

    This is a ridiculous step backwards. Millions of passengers annually will make the trip from London to Bristol, almost but not quite all of it under electric power. That means all of the trains will need to be bi-mode for both routes, and this is despite the large amount of work already done in preparation. Such as lowering the line at Keynsham and rebuilding Easton Road bridge to name but two. Never has there been a more obvious case of spoiling the ship for a ha'porth of tar. (Albeit a pretty penny of a ha'porth).

    I think that might be too many things on my desk causing spurious mouse clicks when I unintentionally move the mouse.

    Yes I often do that - knowing that a bigger desk would just allow me to spread my clutter to fill it, a bit more discipline is needed!

    As a now retired civil servant, I know that a tidy desk is a sign of a sick mind.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 08, 2016, 19:36:44
    As I have said before elsewhere on this forum I think the government now has a good case for taking renewals and enhancements away from NR and creating a National Infrastructure Company that can, and will be held account to deliver.  That will leave NR to focus on maintaining and operating the railway (and hopefully making a better job of it than today).


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ellendune on November 08, 2016, 19:50:39
    As I have said before elsewhere on this forum I think the government now has a good case for taking renewals and enhancements away from NR and creating a National Infrastructure Company that can, and will be held account to deliver.  That will leave NR to focus on maintaining and operating the railway (and hopefully making a better job of it than today).

    I am a bit unsure of this.  When the contracts for maintenance were separate to renewal under railtrack, the maintenance contractors were perversely incentivised to minimise the maintenance, run the track into the ground and leave someone else to pick up the tab. 


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Oberon on November 08, 2016, 19:56:28
    I think the main line can cope with (hopefully temporary) pausing of electrification, Thingley-Bristol-Parkway is not a 125mph stretch of line. The real problem as I see it is by deferring the Oxford electrification the transfer of all those nice 166 Turbos to Bristol for strengthening will be much delayed. This must mean Cardiff-Portsmouth soldiers on for years to come with inadequate 3 car 158s, which might be ok in the middle of the day but not in the crowded peaks. Then of course there is the knock on effect further west with no 158s going to the Barstaple line and presumably no 150s for Devon & Cornwall. I wonder if GWR has thought about this?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 08, 2016, 19:59:00
    As I have said before elsewhere on this forum I think the government now has a good case for taking renewals and enhancements away from NR and creating a National Infrastructure Company that can, and will be held account to deliver.  That will leave NR to focus on maintaining and operating the railway (and hopefully making a better job of it than today).

    I am a bit unsure of this.  When the contracts for maintenance were separate to renewal under railtrack, the maintenance contractors were perversely incentivised to minimise the maintenance, run the track into the ground and leave someone else to pick up the tab. 

    mmm.....so you don't think that NR is running its assets into the ground then?  I can tell you that the maintenance budgets now are a fraction of what they were at the start of NR in 2004 and there is no money even for extended maintenance tasks such as minor renewals to keep indvidual assets safe and reliable.... ::) :P


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: simonw on November 08, 2016, 20:01:03
    What impact will this decision have on transfer of stock to local and regional services in the Bristol area?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: John R on November 08, 2016, 20:08:10
    I wonder if GWR has thought about this?
    I am sure this has been very much at the top of their agenda for some time now. It would be remarkable if it is not, given how critical this cascade is to the continued running let alone expansion of the regional services.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 08, 2016, 20:14:00
    What impact will this decision have on transfer of stock to local and regional services in the Bristol area?

    Probably not a particularly huge one.  Oxford to Didcot local shuttles could run at their present 30-minute frequency using three units - in fact you could probably get away with two.  Add in one for the Windsor and one for the Henley branches and you might be looking at four or five more units staying that had been envisaged.  Of course, things like the Vivarail D-Train could conceivably be used on both branches to reduce that number even less.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 20:15:46
    I wonder if GWR has thought about this?
    I am sure this has been very much at the top of their agenda for some time now. It would be remarkable if it is not, given how critical this cascade is to the continued running let alone expansion of the regional services.

    The issue has, I believe, been very much on their radar.  Being on the radar is different to being able to wave a magic wand ...



    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 08, 2016, 20:23:11
    What impact will this decision have on transfer of stock to local and regional services in the Bristol area?

    Probably not a particularly huge one.  Oxford to Didcot local shuttles could run at their present 30-minute frequency using three units - in fact you could probably get away with two.  Add in one for the Windsor and one for the Henley branches and you might be looking at four or five more units staying that had been envisaged.  Of course, things like the Vivarail D-Train could conceivably be used on both branches to reduce that number even less.

    Relieved to read that ... agrees with my guess in an email to someone.

    So what would happen to the four or five class 387s that will no longer be able to take those services over?

    D Trains to Windsor would be sort of poetic justice:

    http://www.thamesweb.co.uk/windsor/windsorhistory/underground.html

    Quote
    The District line in London started operation on 24th December 1868 running from South Kensington to Westminster. The line was progressively extended from Westminster eastwards towards the City of London and westwards, reaching Hammersmith by 1874, Richmond in 1877 and Ealing Broadway in 1879.
      In 1883 a service was introduced to Windsor from Ealing Broadway using the tracks of the Great Western Railway, but this was withdrawn in 1885.
      So Windsor was once an 'underground' station!


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 08, 2016, 21:00:19
    So what would happen to the four or five class 387s that will no longer be able to take those services over?

    Hopefully they'll be used to provide lots of 12-car Swindon to Paddington peak hour services... ;)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Timmer on November 08, 2016, 22:10:45
    I think the main line can cope with (hopefully temporary) pausing of electrification, Thingley-Bristol-Parkway is not a 125mph stretch of line. The real problem as I see it is by deferring the Oxford electrification the transfer of all those nice 166 Turbos to Bristol for strengthening will be much delayed. This must mean Cardiff-Portsmouth soldiers on for years to come with inadequate 3 car 158s, which might be ok in the middle of the day but not in the crowded peaks. Then of course there is the knock on effect further west with no 158s going to the Barstaple line and presumably no 150s for Devon & Cornwall. I wonder if GWR has thought about this?
    4/5 coach short formed HSTs is what we'll see. Has been mentioned earlier this year though not yet officially announced, just talk in the rail related press. I suspect GWR have known for sometime Network Rail were struggling with this project more so than what we already knew with deadlines slipping backwards.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on November 08, 2016, 22:23:43
    Quote
    nothing over 100 between Reading and Newbury

    I believe there is a 110 section between just east of Newbury Racecourse and Kintbury, although this is of no use to electric trains that can only run to Newbury.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: onthecushions on November 08, 2016, 23:13:45

    There does seem to be some logic in these delays in that electric traction will be available for the high speed part of the Bristol route although it may be entertaining to see how the diesels cope with the Eastward climb through Box tunnel (1/100). Perhaps the wires should stretch the extra 11 miles beyond Thingley to Bath.
    The rest of the line from Bath Westwards is either level or at 1/1320, so should be easy work for a diesel.

    Doubtless there is every reason to keep diesels out of the similarly graded Seven tunnel and also the politics of serving the Welsh capital will have a bearing.

    The Didcot to Oxford delay seems a pity at first, until one sees the thin entries and exits for Appleford, Culham and Radley but the change needed for those bound for Oxford from Thames valley local stations will be grim, as will be the effects of the smaller "cascade" of Turbos further West.

    GWR will no doubt feel that their bi-modes will fend off Chiltern's competition.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: stuving on November 08, 2016, 23:50:40
    I don't think the flat-out speed of an 800 matters much in itself, so much as the lousy acceleration up to (say) 160 km/hr. The acceleration at low speeds is limited by adhesion (and sometimes by the drive as well), up to a threshold above which it is power-limited. That threshold is lower when less power is available.

    Peering at the back of my (Microsoft-supplied) envelope, it looks roughly like this:                 

    Threshold, km/hr    seconds to 160 km/hr
    800, electric   61113
    802, diesel29226
    800, diesel37312
    HST60262

    Some of the parameters that were used in that are only estimatesguesses, bit the general trend should be right. And that says ... worse than an HST. And that down-rating really hurts.

    Gradients make less difference than you'd expect, at least on this flat track. Once up to speed at below 180km/hr, there is enough power in hand for 1 in 100. (Re)accelerating up any gradient will always be slower, though.

    Heating/cooling load also matters, and could be a bigger issue. I don't know how that's done on 80xs, but as Hitachi make HVAC units for trains you'd expect to see that fitted. I don't think they do CO2 and air-cycle ones, which (as I understand it) are more easily reversed for efficient heating.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ray951 on November 09, 2016, 09:26:06
    This is the National Audit Office (NAO) view on the impact of the electrification delays on the rolling stock cascade:


    Does ordering extra AT300's for the Oxford route suggest that the electrification is not just delayed but effectively cancelled?


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: JayMac on November 09, 2016, 09:38:41
    I bet FirstGroup are beginning to regret riding on the coat tails of Network Rail with their advertising that promised various improvements by certain dates. Some of those promises may never now be kept and others won't happen for another 2 or more years.

    Serves them right for running such a disingenuous ad campaign.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: John R on November 09, 2016, 09:46:04
    This is the National Audit Office (NAO) view on the impact of the electrification delays on the rolling stock cascade:


    Does ordering extra AT300's for the Oxford route suggest that the electrification is not just delayed but effectively cancelled?

    Interesting the statement about the retention of 11 HST's.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 09, 2016, 11:27:52
    From yesterday's Oxford Area newsletter from NR -

    Quote
    Work continues at Oxford Station to construct new platforms and accommodation building at Oxford Station.  We have  written to our neighbours around  the station to let them know that we will be working 24/7 from Wednesday 9 November to Sunday 11 December.  This work is necessary to allow us to open the new platforms on time on 12 December. We apologise for any inconvenience caused by this work, but can assure our neighbours that we will do everything possible to minimise disruption during this time.

    .....
    Work on the Down Sidings north of the station


    We are currently upgrading and remodeling the ‘Down Sidings’ directly opposite the Oxford University accommodation.
     
     Monday 7th - Friday 11th November
     07:00 to 15:00
     Removal of existing siding 1 and 160 meter renewal of ballast which will include the use of diggers and on track machines.
     
     Saturday 12 November - Monday 14 November
     23:00 – 04:45
     Loading of waste material from siding 1 onto an engineering train for removal from site. Reballast and install sleepers and ballast for new siding 1.
     
     Monday to Friday 14th - 18th November
     07:00 - 15:00
     Excavate 150 meters of spoil for new siding and remove by train, install 150 meters of bottom ballast and reinstate existing sleepers and install new rails.
     
     Monday 21 November - Friday 25 November
     07:00 - 15:00
     Remove 40 meters of spoil and transfer to the yard, install 40 meters of bottom ballast and connect new siding to existing siding. Delivery and installation of new top ballast by engineering train.
     
     Saturday 26th November - Sunday 27th November
     08:00 to 16:00
     Tamping of new siding 1
     A tamping machine or ballast tamper is a machine used to pack (or tamp) the track ballast under railway tracks to make the tracks more durable.
     Install a temporary rail road access point at new siding, to enable us to access the track with the required machinery to undertake work.
     

    Monday 28th November - Friday 2nd December
     07:00 - 15:00
     Monday to Wednesday
     Excavate spoil and unload onto engineering train.
     
     Thursday to Friday
     Unload and install 190 meters of ballast and install new sleepers to down siding 2.
     
     Saturday 3rd December - Monday 5th December
     23:00 - 09:00
     Deliver track switching and crossing into down siding 3. Move rail into down siding.
     
     Monday 5th December - Friday 9th December
     07:00 - 15:00
     Install new rails, switches and crossings for the down carriage siding 2, then unload and install new top ballast.
     
     Saturday 10th December - Monday 12th December
     23:00 - 04:45
     Excavate, reballast and install 60 meters of track to connect to new siding 2.
     Remove existing down siding 2 and transfer to engineering train. Lay 60 meters of top stone at south end of new siding 2.
     
     Monday 12th December - Tuesday 13th December
     07:00 - 15:00
     Tamping at new siding.
     Open new siding 2.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: paul7575 on November 09, 2016, 13:05:24

    So what would happen to the four or five class 387s that will no longer be able to take those services over?


    The full number of 387s is still quite a few less than the originally intended total number of 387s and 365s.    My guess is that the reduced route mileage available to 387s, and the slight reduction in EMU numbers, will have been broadly allowed for by the recent increase in the number of GW spec 802s?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 09, 2016, 13:23:10
    and also the politics of serving the Welsh capital will have a bearing.
    And I was just thinking to myself "It would surely be too cynical to suspect that this is partly down to post-Brexit Union-preserving politics."


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 09, 2016, 14:20:23
    This is the National Audit Office (NAO) view on the impact of the electrification delays on the rolling stock cascade:

    {Diagram]
    Does ordering extra AT300's for the Oxford route suggest that the electrification is not just delayed but effectively cancelled?

    For this Government? Yes, I'd say so.

    Other facts to be noted from that diagram -

     - 11 HSTs retained till 2018 (and 180s(?) -I thought these *had* to go at end of 2017?)
     - 165s & 166s staying in TV until electrification complete in CP6
     - Bi-modes now replacing 180s & HSTs for Dec18 TT change
     - 2 additional AT300s also ordered to keep hourly through services to Bedwyn
     - 153/150s retained in West until 2018 - impact on North services
     - 143s in Exeter decommissioned a year later in Dec18


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: eightf48544 on November 09, 2016, 14:44:12
    What has happened to our planning, logistics and engineering expertise?

    98 years ago my grandfather helped push a numerically superior German Army out of France in just 100 days.

    The planning and logistics for that were enormous 1 million men in France. They make GWML electrification look trivial especially as nobody's shooting at the engineers.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: didcotdean on November 09, 2016, 15:36:00
    The initial cost always smelt completely wrong to me. Sadly this has shown up that Network Rail had a poor understanding of its physical assets and capabilities and that the DfT seemed to put its trust into it which was misplaced - although its shifting specification (if you can call it that) was significantly to blame too.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: 1st fan on November 09, 2016, 15:54:40
    This is the National Audit Office (NAO) view on the impact of the electrification delays on the rolling stock cascade:

    {Diagram]
    Does ordering extra AT300's for the Oxford route suggest that the electrification is not just delayed but effectively cancelled?

    For this Government? Yes, I'd say so.

    Other facts to be noted from that diagram -

     - 11 HSTs retained till 2018 (and 180s(?) -I thought these *had* to go at end of 2017?)
     - 165s & 166s staying in TV until electrification complete in CP6
     - Bi-modes now replacing 180s & HSTs for Dec18 TT change
     - 2 additional AT300s also ordered to keep hourly through services to Bedwyn
     - 153/150s retained in West until 2018 - impact on North services
     - 143s in Exeter decommissioned a year later in Dec18


    Will they have to make the HST doors automatic and all the other stuff to make them compliant with the PRM-TSI regulations? I would guess the trains would meet most of the regs already but the doors would be a biggie.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 09, 2016, 16:28:51
    The new regs only come in in 2020, so we could operate them as they are for a few years more.  There is also the possibility of a temporary derogation from the regulations.  This kind of temporary, unexpected delay that one might assume the derogations were designed for.   


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 09, 2016, 16:32:54
    .... I think that the trains would also need scrolling LED thingies to meet the regs.   There is also the matter of fitting retention toilets.  Although not related to the disability regs, NR has said that it wants track discharge to end by 2020.  It is of course NR who have screwed up here so it would be kind of poetic justice if one outcome was that their infrastructure was to continue to be c**ped on (although hardly fair to the wo/man in the track gang)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on November 09, 2016, 17:21:21
    Other facts to be noted from that diagram -

     - 11 HSTs retained till 2018 (and 180s(?) -I thought these *had* to go at end of 2017?)

    It's a particularly confusing diagram. I don't think it's saying that the 180s are being retained. That said, AIUI Hull Trains' fleet of 180s isn't yet spoken for, now that they too have ordered AT300s, so there's some room for manoeuvre there...


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 09, 2016, 17:28:08
    The NAO report (mirror (http://atrebatia.info/nao_201611.pdf)) has a wealth of information ... so many things strike me ...

    Quote
    Electrifying the line from Maidenhead to Cardiff by December 2018 relies on the assumption that Network Rail can significantly increase mast installation and piling rates, compared with the rates it has achieved so far. Network Rail’s current target is to increase the number of piles installed each week from 62 in August 2016 to 195 piles by November 2016. The rate of mast installation is expected to increase from 55 per week to 191 per week over the same period. However, Network Rail is currently developing a new plan which it expects will mean it will install around 150 piles per week between November 2016 and March 2017, without delaying the completion of electrification any further. In early September 2016 Network Rail had completed 6,804 foundations, 44% of the total required. It had installed 3,438 masts (23% of the total) and 1,352 booms (15%).


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: bobm on November 09, 2016, 17:45:33
    They make GWML electrification look trivial especially as nobody's shooting at the engineers.

    Without wishing to be disrespectful (my grandfather survived the First World War) perhaps it was the very fact that people were shooting at the engineers that sharpened the mind to the job in hand.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 09, 2016, 18:37:08
    The NAO report (mirror (http://atrebatia.info/nao_201611.pdf)) has a wealth of information ... so many things strike me ...

    And an interesting diagram ...

    Quote
    (http://www.wellho.net/pix/gwrelmap.jpg)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on November 09, 2016, 18:50:06
    Quote
    perhaps it was the very fact that people were shooting at the engineers that sharpened the mind to the job in hand.

    What are you suggesting bobm?  ;)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: simonw on November 09, 2016, 19:48:15
    The NAO report (mirror (http://atrebatia.info/nao_201611.pdf)) has a wealth of information ... so many things strike me ...

    And an interesting diagram ...

    Quote
    (http://www.wellho.net/pix/gwrelmap.jpg)

    Looking at the map, it would be interesting to know which parts carry the most traffic, passengers and trains.

    I am not convinced that taking electrification of the line to Cardiff is more economically sensible than Bristol.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 09, 2016, 19:49:42
    The NAO report (mirror (http://atrebatia.info/nao_201611.pdf)) has a wealth of information ... so many things strike me ...

    Quote
    Electrifying the line from Maidenhead to Cardiff by December 2018 relies on the assumption that Network Rail can significantly increase mast installation and piling rates, compared with the rates it has achieved so far. Network Rail’s current target is to increase the number of piles installed each week from 62 in August 2016 to 195 piles by November 2016. The rate of mast installation is expected to increase from 55 per week to 191 per week over the same period. However, Network Rail is currently developing a new plan which it expects will mean it will install around 150 piles per week between November 2016 and March 2017, without delaying the completion of electrification any further. In early September 2016 Network Rail had completed 6,804 foundations, 44% of the total required. It had installed 3,438 masts (23% of the total) and 1,352 booms (15%).
    For a second I thought "electrification from Kent to Wales!" I do sometimes get Maidenhead and Maidstone mixed up...  ::)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: stuving on November 09, 2016, 19:57:01
    Looking at the map, it would be interesting to know which parts carry the most traffic, passengers and trains.

    I am not convinced that taking electrification of the line to Cardiff is more economically sensible than Bristol.

    I think you're missing the point. The map just shows where the work that the NAO report was about was, as originally proposed, to be done.

    Cardiff is proceeding because its end date is in CP5. Bristol isn't, as is has already been delayed by the resignalling work and can't be done in CP5. That's confirmed in the report to be the reason:
    Quote
    The Department has instructed Network Rail to defer electrification on some stretches
    of the route for longer, reflecting between £146 million and £165 million of spending,
    because it cannot meet the costs within the current funding package. It still intends to
    electrify these sections, during the next rail investment period, which runs from April 2019
    to March 2024. As a result, passengers in affected areas may have to wait longer to
    see the full benefits of modernisation. These deferrals are intended to fund projects that
    are considered critical, but were not allocated funding in the 2015 replan. Such critical
    projects account for £72 million of the funding shortfall. The largest of these are:
    • A new depot in Exeter (£36 million). The Department agreed to make funding
      available for this in March 2015, as part of the second franchise extension, known
      as a ‘direct award’.
    • Work at Bristol East Junction (£15 million). Network Rail now expect that it will
      need to spend more on this project in the current rail investment period in order
      to complete it before this section of line is electrified.
    • Platform extensions on the Cotswold Line, which are needed to allow the new
      Intercity Express Programme trains to stop at smaller stations (£13 million).
      The Department instructed Network Rail to carry out this work in August 2014.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: bradshaw on November 09, 2016, 19:59:39
    The impression I get, from the NAO report and the Minister's statement, is that the lines are deferred only just to CP6. Tables in the report give this impression.
    It would seem, therefore, that the plan is to focus all resources on getting to Cardiff. After that one might expect the deferred lines will be re-instated, probably sequentially, in order of greatest return: ?Parkway to Temple Meads, thence to Swindon. Oxford may be done after the NR upgrades have all taken place in the Station.
    Electrification to Swansea is probably not looking to good though, unless funded by the Welsh Goverment.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: onthecushions on November 09, 2016, 21:11:48
    What has happened to our planning, logistics and engineering expertise?

    98 years ago my grandfather helped push a numerically superior German Army out of France in just 100 days.

    The planning and logistics for that were enormous 1 million men in France. They make GWML electrification look trivial especially as nobody's shooting at the engineers.

    ....but the British Army's learning curve was four years long and cost c750 000 lives before it twigged how to integrate an infantry attack supported by tanks under a creeping artillery barage with mass tactical air support overhead. That's what beat the German Army economically in August 1918. This, combined with the terror felt by the German Navy at the prospect of being sent to sea against a painfully re-educated but now supremely competent Royal Navy, drove Germany to revolutionary collapse.

    We promptly forgot the lessons of 1918 only to have the Germans play them back to us 20 odd years later.

    From which I deduce that had we a proper railway with an established chief electrical engineer's department able to manage investment, renewals and maintenance, then we could be zipping around an electrified Western very soon.

    Remembrance

    OTC


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: onthecushions on November 09, 2016, 21:37:09
    I don't think the flat-out speed of an 800 matters much in itself, so much as the lousy acceleration up to (say) 160 km/hr. The acceleration at low speeds is limited by adhesion (and sometimes by the drive as well), up to a threshold above which it is power-limited. That threshold is lower when less power is available.

    Peering at the back of my (Microsoft-supplied) envelope, it looks roughly like this:                 

    Threshold, km/hr    seconds to 160 km/hr
    800, electric   61113
    802, diesel29226
    800, diesel37312
    HST60262

    Some of the parameters that were used in that are only estimatesguesses, bit the general trend should be right. And that says ... worse than an HST. And that down-rating really hurts.

    Gradients make less difference than you'd expect, at least on this flat track. Once up to speed at below 180km/hr, there is enough power in hand for 1 in 100. (Re)accelerating up any gradient will always be slower, though.



     Just found a loco performance log for King Edward 5 + 8, departing Bath, reached 54mph in 5 miles but down to 35mph at the top of the grade, Box Tunnel Eastern portal.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: stuving on November 10, 2016, 00:59:45
    Looking at this, from the NAO report:
    Quote
    The Department has instructed Network Rail to defer electrification on some stretches
    of the route for longer, reflecting between £146 million and £165 million of spending,
    because it cannot meet the costs within the current funding package. It still intends to
    electrify these sections, during the next rail investment period, which runs from April 2019
    to March 2024.

    There's no need to know whether that's a sincere intention to complete the plan, since such an intention could change before then anyway. Then there is this:
    Quote
    2 .11 The Department’s May 2016 decision to procure all the new Intercity Express trains
    for Great Western as bi-modes, rather than a combination of bi-modes and electric trains,
    affects the assumptions underpinning the March 2015 business case. This recent change
    calls into question whether the full extent of electrification under the programme is still
    justified, as the new trains will now all be able to run on non-electrified route sections.

    In other words, there is now an alternative and the costs and benefits can be compared, not just within DfT but by anyone else.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Kenny on November 10, 2016, 05:53:10
    National Audit Office 09/11/16

    https://www.nao.org.uk/report/modernising-the-great-western-railway/

    Modernising the Great Western railway

    Quote
    The cost of modernising the Great Western railway is estimated to be £5.58 billion, an increase of £2.1 billion since 2013, and there are delays to the electrification of the route of at least 18 to 36 months. The Department for Transport and Network Rail have begun to improve the management of the programme but they have more to do to protect value for money in the future.

    The cost of modernising the Great Western railway is currently estimated to be £5.58 billion, an increase of £2.1 billion since 2013, and there are delays to the electrification of the route of at least 18 to 36 months. Delays to the electrification programme will cost the Department up to £330 million. These cost increases and recent changes to the new trains order mean that the value for money of the programme needs to be reassessed, and the extent of electrification reconsidered, according to a report today by the National Audit Office.

    The Great Western route has some of the most overcrowded services in England and Wales and has forecast passenger growth of 81% between 2013-14 and 2018-19. The modernisation programme involves complex infrastructure works, new trains and service changes. These aim to improve services along the rail route, which connects London with west and south-west England and south Wales and passes through heritage areas and areas of outstanding natural beauty.

    Before 2015, the Department did not plan and manage all the projects which now make up the Great Western Route Modernisation industry programme in a sufficiently joined up way. The Department did not produce a business case bringing together all elements of the programme until March 2015, more than two years after ordering the trains and over a year after Network Rail began work to electrify the route. When the Department entered into a contract to buy the Intercity Express Trains, creating fixed deadlines for electrification, the infrastructure planning work was still at a very early stage of development. This is illustrated by the fact that Network Rail had only just identified that it would need to develop a new type of electrification equipment. The electrification timetable was not based on a bottom-up understanding of what the works would involve.

    In 2015 Network Rail re-planned the infrastructure programme after it became clear that costs were increasing and the schedule could not be met. Electrification between Maidenhead and Cardiff is now expected to cost £2.8 billion, an increase of £1.2 billion (70%) against the estimated cost of the programme in 2014.

    Network Rail’s 2014 cost estimate was unrealistic. It was too optimistic about the productivity of new technology. It underestimated how many bridges it would need to rebuild or modify and also the time and therefore costs needed to obtain planning permission and other consents for some works. Failings in Network Rail’s approach to planning and delivering the infrastructure programme further increased costs. It did not work out a ‘critical path’ – the minimum feasible schedule for the work, including dependencies between key stages – before starting to deliver electrification. It also did not conduct sufficiently detailed surveys of the locations for the structures, which meant that some design work had to be repeated.

    Delays to the electrification programme will cost the Department up to £330 million. The Department intends to vary its order of Intercity Express trains so that they can operate under both diesel and electric power. The Department will also receive less income from the Great Western franchise between September 2015 and March 2019. This is because the train operator will bear the costs of providing extra trains and leasing depots, as well as higher running costs from operating diesel trains for longer, while also receiving less revenue from passengers than expected.

    Some passengers in the north and west of England may have to wait longer, some nine months and up to two years respectively, to see improvements such as increased capacity in services because of the delays to the programme. Any additional delays would be difficult to address and put pressure on the Department’s rail franchising programme.

    Network Rail has a challenging task to deliver the main benefits from the infrastructure programme, within the current schedule and budget. The schedule for electrification contains some ambitious assumptions while the budget for the electrification programme between London and Cardiff currently has less funding available to manage risk than Network Rail believes it needs.

    Some passengers will have to wait longer to see the full benefits of modernisation because of budget constraints. The Department has delayed electrification on some stretches of the route as the costs cannot be met within the funding package. The Department currently intends to electrify these sections but not until the next rail investment period, which runs from April 2019 to March 2024.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2016, 06:51:07
    National Audit Office 09/11/16

    https://www.nao.org.uk/report/modernising-the-great-western-railway/

    Modernising the Great Western railway

    Quote
    The cost of modernising the Great Western railway is estimated to be £5.58 billion, an increase of £2.1 billion since 2013, and there are delays to the electrification of the route of at least 18 to 36 months. The Department for Transport and Network Rail have begun to improve the management of the programme but they have more to do to protect value for money in the future.

    [snip]


    Welcome to the forum, Kenny - your first post  ;D.    What do you make of all this?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oberon on November 10, 2016, 07:55:38
    Looks like everything left to do has been scoped into CP6.

    In a way this is unbelievable, a nightmare scenario, I remember when the ECML was electrified in the 1980s everything seemed to happen quickly and the total cost was under budget. I suspect, although I do not know, that the GW scheme has been massively over-engineered. My suspicion is that our old friend Health & Safety is probably at the root of it all.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2016, 08:05:11
    Looks like everything left to do has been scoped into CP6.

    Are the new costs / dates realistic? Or might we see some things not completed within CP6 even if currently scoped there?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on November 10, 2016, 08:37:40
    .............manana, manana, manana............. ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 10, 2016, 08:39:54
    That all depends on how much £££ the Government put into CP6.....I'm not sure that figure has been decided.

    However, an awful lot of identified works have been deferred to CP6, and is already scoped for CP6 by NR - can anyone find any sort of list of these projects, ideally with a cost estimate? I'd be interested in knowing how much that is, so at least able to compare with other CP periods as to whether it is likely to all happen.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: ChrisB on November 10, 2016, 08:45:27
    I wonder whether that decision was deliberate to achieve this change? Surely the bods at the DfT would have realised that the business case for electrification would change with all bi-modes?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: simonw on November 10, 2016, 08:54:20
    I am probably not alone in feeling sorry for Network Rail.

    The continued lack of proper investment in rail assets for 80+ years has left many parts of the network dilapidated, and when NR come along with the simple task of deploying electrification to a line and its primary branch line, it uncovers a lot of neglect, costs rise and rise.

    It is a bit rich for the NAO/Parliament to panic at these costs. NR admitted at the start of the this that the GW had seen little or no investment over many years, and lots of work was needed.

    I am probably not in alone in thinking that Network Rail should have a 25yr goal of electrifying the whole network, with 5 year goal of ensuring that all major conurbations should have fully electrified local trains


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on November 10, 2016, 09:17:55
    All this talk of making much greater use of the bi-mode capability leaves me with thinking that their ability to switch between modes is going to need to be extremely robust. Examples from my local area would be:

    1. Class 8xx on it's way down the B&H from Reading to points west without a Newbury stop. Presumably somewhere between Thatcham and Newbury (whilst running at 100mph linespeed), the diesels will be fired-up and engaged to power the train, the pantographs will come down and the train will proceed seemlessly away from the wires west of Newbury.

    2. Class 8xx operating down semi-fast, with stop at Newbury. Train pulls into down platform under electric traction. During the stop (or maybe before it stops) diesels are fired-up, pantographs are lowered while in the station, then off it goes under diesel traction.

    All sounds great in theory, if it doesn't work well GWR will get all the flack for technology they have been "forced" to make more use of due to wires that may not be where they were supposed to be for a while (or ever!)


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: simonw on November 10, 2016, 09:30:41
    Its about time that Network Rail split into a Infrastructure Inspectorate and its current function to be devolved to each primary franchisee.

    All the government would gave to do is to give 25year franchises (for train, track and stations) that require full electrification. Once a commercial company has to do the work, then proper planning will be implemented and jobs would be done in the right sequence.

    The chaotic linkage between Government, DfT, NR and GWR has created this mess.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: didcotdean on November 10, 2016, 09:33:00
    Yes I think that the performance of the bi-modes in practical service is going to be the key factor as to whether the  interim (if it is an interim) setup actually works. If there is an extended teething period it is going to try the patience further of everyone who have been promised so much for so long. By contrast the switch of 165/166 to 387 ought to be smoother. Well we can hope.

    The background flavour of the NAO report reading between the lines is that they don't really favour from a pure monetary view of doing any more electrification seeing the bi-modes as a longer term solution, but think the government of the day will do it anyway. The Great Western has always been awkward to electrify as a system overall because of its fan nature and the bi-modes do at least allow something workable between all or nothing.

    There is also the impression that if the assessment had been done ab initio with the benefit of the hindsight knowledge of time and costs it might have been very more restricted or carefully staged - conceivably only to Reading, possibly then on to DID/OXF/NBY before elsewhere.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 10, 2016, 09:37:04
    That all depends on how much £££ the Government put into CP6.....I'm not sure that figure has been decided.

    However, an awful lot of identified works have been deferred to CP6, and is already scoped for CP6 by NR - can anyone find any sort of list of these projects, ideally with a cost estimate? I'd be interested in knowing how much that is, so at least able to compare with other CP periods as to whether it is likely to all happen.

    That's a bit like Arthur Scargill accusing the NCB of having a hit-list of collieries. They probably had several hundred lists of collieries, many of which could be seen as relating to closures - making lists of colliery figures was one the the NCB's main activities.

    Similarly, NR will have enough lists of projects and costs that only computerisation saves them from being knee-deep in them. Not that they would show them to you, of course.

    In officialese, long-term planning for CP6 started before 2010, and the main inputs are the Route Studies - appearing after 2010, when HMG sent their CP5 shopping list (aka HLOS). Given the long lead times, and the arbitrary nature of the planning periods, there have to be interim lists of things to do being updated in between times. So the content and cost of CP6 is "known", but not in a single version - it's subject to a lot of unknowns such as the performance of ongoing projects and the DfT's budget.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 10, 2016, 09:46:50
    Ok then, has anyone compiled a "transferred to CP6" list from the many announcements we've had? I guess there could be one somewhere compiled by an enthusiast somewhere. I'm trying to get a handle on how much more CP6 projects have gone up from the initial list staving talks about


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on November 10, 2016, 09:58:10
    For CP5, the suggestions presented to DfT (PR13 Initial Industry Plan Supporting Document; Definition of proposed CP5 enhancements) was dated September 2011, so if the timing hasn't changed that should have been done. That has forecast expenditure numbers, though not detailed item by item ones. For example, GW electrification was to cost £548M in CP5.

    I don't known when it was published, or by whom (probably ORR?). But HLOS for CP6 should be next year...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 10, 2016, 10:13:40
    Anybody like to draw any comparisons with this?  Especially Sir John Bourn's statement:

    https://www.nao.org.uk/report/the-modernisation-of-the-west-coast-main-line/

    Of course, that was an even bigger balls-up.  £2 billion initial cost, could have risen to a staggering £14.5bn but a greatly de-scoped programme finally came in at £8.6bn and over three years late.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Tim on November 10, 2016, 10:39:02
    All this talk of making much greater use of the bi-mode capability leaves me with thinking that their ability to switch between modes is going to need to be extremely robust.

    I may be being unduly cynical, but my prediction is that in 10 years time, following a run of terrible reliability, the TOC will decide that at least some of the diesel engines will run throughout the journey in order to prevent unreliability starting them.  No doubt this will cost them (meaning the tax payer) in extra payments to Hitachi.

    A more positive view of the future, has the TOC removing the engines from many of the trains as the electrification is now very extensive.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on November 10, 2016, 11:25:49
    Yes I think that the performance of the bi-modes in practical service is going to be the key factor as to whether the  interim (if it is an interim) setup actually works.
    Interim in railway terms seems to mean up to 25 years.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on November 10, 2016, 11:39:16
    Looks like everything left to do has been scoped into CP6.

    In a way this is unbelievable, a nightmare scenario, I remember when the ECML was electrified in the 1980s everything seemed to happen quickly and the total cost was under budget. I suspect, although I do not know, that the GW scheme has been massively over-engineered. My suspicion is that our old friend Health & Safety is probably at the root of it all.

    I think the nightmare scenario would be that the new trains were straight electric and going to be sitting in a compound somewhere for a couple of years until all the wiring was complete. 

    What we are talking about is not just straight electrification, but the rebuilding, resignalling and electrification of one of the oldest and most heavily used railway lines in the world, much of which is listed and runs through environmentally sensitive area. Few original plans exist, maintenance records are patchy to say the least, Brunel used some rather unorthodox techniques to build the line quickly, the railway hadn't done any major electrification work for a generation before this, it's being done at a time when there is huge investment in the railways, and human resources are stretched to say the least etc etc.

    Yes, it's all a mess, but most of us have know that for years, and this is just pigeons coming home to roost now that deadlines are approaching. IEP was known at the time of procurement to be an expensive dog's breakfast, NR's new electrification design and plant were expected to take far more time and money than NR would publicly admit to, NR's time and cost estimates for electrification were finger in air exercises so the project got past the Treasury and politicians, Oxford Council mucked around over the design of the new station etc. 

    OK, so NR have had some major issues with the project planning on the GWML upgrade, but, the new F+F OHLE seems very good and has worked pretty much "out of the box" (many people thought that Severn Tunnel would be impossible to electrify), NR's electrification plant seems to now be reasonably productive, the Hitachi trains seem really quite good and worked on the new OHLE pretty much from day 1, engineering blockades start and end on time and do the work that was planned, the Reading upgrade was on time and under budget etc.

    I'm sure that H&S plays an element in costs (part of the rationale for the F+F catenery is that as few parts should be live as possible), but there's also a rationale that jobs should be done properly, so trackwork isn't just bodged, so it lasts for 20 years instead of 10. With the ECML, I don't recall it being done that quickly, but it was certainly done on the cheap, which has resulted in heavy maintenance costs and continual dewirement.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Noggin on November 10, 2016, 12:11:35
    I've said it before, but what you have to remember is that the IET is a showcase project for Hitachi in Europe, and they are not just building them, but maintaining them too, with a contract that sets high standards for availability.

    Any public failure will be a loss of face that the Japanese just don't do. So it will have lots of people, resources and management attention thrown at it. Don't think the changeover will work? There's probably been some poor sod driving a test train in Japan for the past 2 years trying to break it. Likewise, there's probably a warehouse in Kasado with someone else spraying high-pressure salt water, crabs and seaweed at a unit to simulate the Dawlish sea wall, trying to break it.

    Do the bi-modes change the business case for electrification? Yes and no. They are still more expensive to build and run and heavier than a straight electric, and don't have the same performance or top speed when on diesel, 110mph is about the best you are going to get out of them, plus you get noise and pollution. So, for high-speed, heavily graded routes, or in high-traffic areas where you really need the performance of electrification, then it's an EMU, or at least a EDMU with the pantograph up.

    So no-one's going to truncate the GWML electrification at Didcot or switch it off, and Bristol will surely be electrified once the trackwork, resignalling and rebuilding is done. But the business case for long lengths of new OHLE (e.g. MML, WoEML) where you simply replace diesels for electrics like-for-like doesn't look great. The thinking seems to be that it would be better to focus on urban infill electrification where you can greatly increase capacity and thus benefit the most people.

    So, that said, can we please have the Severn Beach line rebuilt with provision for electrification with some of that £165m that is being saved ;-)   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on November 10, 2016, 12:44:38
    For CP5, the suggestions presented to DfT (PR13 Initial Industry Plan Supporting Document; Definition of proposed CP5 enhancements) was dated September 2011, so if the timing hasn't changed that should have been done. That has forecast expenditure numbers, though not detailed item by item ones. For example, GW electrification was to cost £548M in CP5.

    I don't known when it was published, or by whom (probably ORR?). But HLOS for CP6 should be next year...

    The September 2011 Initial Industry Plan appeared first on NR's website as an NR publication, it was linked from the ORR website at the time; and is still live, albeit only of historic interest:  http://www.networkrail.co.uk/iip.aspx   

    Paul


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: 1st fan on November 10, 2016, 13:04:58
    All this talk of making much greater use of the bi-mode capability leaves me with thinking that their ability to switch between modes is going to need to be extremely robust. Examples from my local area would be:

    1. Class 8xx on it's way down the B&H from Reading to points west without a Newbury stop. Presumably somewhere between Thatcham and Newbury (whilst running at 100mph linespeed), the diesels will be fired-up and engaged to power the train, the pantographs will come down and the train will proceed seemlessly away from the wires west of Newbury.

    2. Class 8xx operating down semi-fast, with stop at Newbury. Train pulls into down platform under electric traction. During the stop (or maybe before it stops) diesels are fired-up, pantographs are lowered while in the station, then off it goes under diesel traction.

    All sounds great in theory, if it doesn't work well GWR will get all the flack for technology they have been "forced" to make more use of due to wires that may not be where they were supposed to be for a while (or ever!)
    This is hearsay but......A mate of mine who works in the South East for a railway company told me that the Javelins are requiring more intensive maintenance than planned. This is because they were designed as high speed trains and for fast runs between stations. Sadly whilst they are being used on HS1 they're also being used to provide a stopping services round the Kent coast as well. This has meant that they're not being used as designed and it has meant brakes, motor etc. are requiring more intensive maintenance. This may be just him telling 'stories' or it maybe the gospel truth I don't know.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: chrisr_75 on November 10, 2016, 14:22:06

    Any public failure will be a loss of face that the Japanese just don't do.

    Hmmmm, Toyota/Lexus and their well documented safety recalls of millions of vehicles.

    Building nuclear power stations on top of seismically active areas.

    Mitsubishi cars now enveloped in the emissions cheat problems similar to VW.

    I could probably find more if I tried...


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: trainer on November 10, 2016, 15:07:10
    ...the Javelins are requiring more intensive maintenance than planned. This is because they were designed as high speed trains and for fast runs between stations.

    This sounds like a similar story to the HSTs that didn't perform so well at one time because their engines (basically a marine engine) were designed to run at speed for long distances, not stop every 10-20 minutes and have to restart the train. The lead times for ordering new stock and its design and delivery often mean that the realities of the final requirements have changed. Add to that the complication that the commercial operators are not always the ones who have the final say in what is procured, it's a wonder that we ever have any railway equipment that, to use the cliche, is fit for purpose.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: broadgage on November 10, 2016, 16:06:14
    All this talk of making much greater use of the bi-mode capability leaves me with thinking that their ability to switch between modes is going to need to be extremely robust.

    I may be being unduly cynical, but my prediction is that in 10 years time, following a run of terrible reliability, the TOC will decide that at least some of the diesel engines will run throughout the journey in order to prevent unreliability starting them.  No doubt this will cost them (meaning the tax payer) in extra payments to Hitachi.

    A more positive view of the future, has the TOC removing the engines from many of the trains as the electrification is now very extensive.

    I share your cynicism, with one alteration. I expect the actual starting of the engines to be reasonably reliable, pre-heating the engines and keeping the starter batteries fully charged should be a simple matter under electric power.
    I suspect that the problems will be software and IT related, changing from one power source to another could be fruitful source of software faults.
    The new trains are hugely complicated with a lot of computers, all of which have to work in conjunction, first time, every time. And unlike diesel engines, software is NEVER a mature technology ! "if it works then it is obsolete and requires an upgrade"


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2016, 17:23:32
    I'm probably about to ask a very dumb question (or several) - but I don't really understand this "power limited" business.

    It reads to me as if there's software control on the diesel engines on the 800 and 801 class units which will limit the power that can be applied - and thus their acceleration - once they get above a certain speed. But the class 802 will be essentially the same units but with a bigger diesel fuel tank and without that limiter.

    1. Do I have this right

    2a. If so, why is the limiter there in the first place?
    2b. If so, couldn't the limiter be removed now that the units will be running longer distances on diesel?

    and

    3. If I don't have it right, can someone please put me right?




    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2016, 17:34:26
    Quote
    08.11.2016   PRESS STATEMENT from TravelWatch SouthWest CIC
    In response to today’s announcement that Network Rail will not complete the Great Western Electrification Project as planned:

    TravelWatch SouthWest, the region's passenger watchdog warns that the electrification delays will have far reaching effects for passengers.
     
     "The government's announced deferment of four rail electrification schemes is bad news for all those who rely on Great Western services. The Government is renaging on the promise for newer trains thereby frustrating the delivery of better  capacity, reliability and sustainability to passengers, qualities which are long over due and can only be delivered by electrification.   The Government's plans mean that there is now no certainty that the country's fastest growing city outside London will be connected to the electric network so benefits of greener services, faster dispatch times and scope for higher frequency will be lost.

     Deferring completion of Thames Valley electrification to Oxford undermines the promised cascade of the Turbo trains that are needed for the planned Bristol Metro and the modernisation of services through Wiltshire to the south coast. This means that passengers could lose many of the improvements promised by the Government for local services in Somerset, Devon and Cornwall which were going to come as the inadequate four-wheeled 'Pacer' trains were replaced by more comfortable, higher capacity trains released from the Bristol area. Passengers have been crying out for better trains with more seats. Network Rail's failure to deliver to time or budget is a savage blow that is forcing the Government and Great Western to renege on their franchise commitments to passengers and communities through the South West. The Government must hold Network Rail to account; attain certainty for passengers by agreeing a timetable for electrification; and compensate passengers for the railway's broken promises by providing additional trains to meet the over-crowding passengers suffer.  In resetting the clock, Government must take responsibility for minimising the disruption to passengers and work in closely with all parties affected for the benefit of passengers."

    Downloadable, with links to press contacts at TravelWatch SouthWest, via http://travelwatchsouthwest.org/media/

    "TravelWatch SouthWest (TWSW) is a social enterprise company which acts as an advocate for passengers to lobby for the improvement of public transport in the region and works closely with local authorities, business organisations, partnerships and other stakeholder groups. With the dissolution of the former Rail Passengers Committee for Western England in July 2005, TWSW is the representative body for public transport users throughout the South West of England."

    Next TWSW General Meeting
    Date:  Sat 4th March 2017
    Venue: Taunton


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: paul7575 on November 10, 2016, 17:53:47
    I'm probably about to ask a very dumb question (or several) - but I don't really understand this "power limited" business.

    It reads to me as if there's software control on the diesel engines on the 800 and 801 class units which will limit the power that can be applied - and thus their acceleration - once they get above a certain speed. But the class 802 will be essentially the same units but with a bigger diesel fuel tank and without that limiter.

    1. Do I have this right

    2a. If so, why is the limiter there in the first place?
    2b. If so, couldn't the limiter be removed now that the units will be running longer distances on diesel?

    and

    3. If I don't have it right, can someone please put me right?


    An article in (IIRC) Modern Railways has suggested that it is technically possible to uprate the SET performance by altering the relevant software, but the financial consortium that own the trains see it as an avoidable reliability risk, and will not permit it.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on November 10, 2016, 19:08:27
    I would be more than willing to explain but I fear this would end up with me rumbleing on a bit like James May late of Top Gear  up to you let me know if you think it would be usefull.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 10, 2016, 19:21:34
    I would be more than willing to explain but I fear this would end up with me rumbleing on a bit like James May late of Top Gear  up to you let me know if you think it would be usefull.

    You have me intrigued ... Ill take the risk please!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: dviner on November 10, 2016, 22:29:59
    Looks like everything left to do has been scoped into CP6.

    In a way this is unbelievable, a nightmare scenario, I remember when the ECML was electrified in the 1980s everything seemed to happen quickly and the total cost was under budget. I suspect, although I do not know, that the GW scheme has been massively over-engineered. My suspicion is that our old friend Health & Safety is probably at the root of it all.

    Let's put this thought forward:

    The GW scheme hasn't been massively over-engineered.

    The GW scheme has been engineered on a basis of building something that will work, work well, and that can be rolled out across the rest of the electrified railway network.

    What would have been interesting was whether productivity had been increasing. I doubt it would now, as it's been knifed.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on November 10, 2016, 22:31:51
    Meanwhile, in the interests of clarity and continuity, I have merged a couple of topics here - as they both relate to the electrification of the Greater Western route, and the delays now apparent.

    May I also offer my thanks here to everyone who has contributed here already to such a lively discussion, on such a live subject.  :P ;) ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: GBM on November 11, 2016, 08:13:10
    .............manana, manana, manana............. ::)
    As it's also impacting on the far West, we would say 'drekly'


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on November 11, 2016, 08:31:24
    .............manana, manana, manana............. ::)
    As it's also impacting on the far West, we would say 'drekly'

    ..........and speaking as a Janner, it certainly isn't a "Proper Job"  >:(


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on November 11, 2016, 08:32:54
    I would be more than willing to explain but I fear this would end up with me rumbleing on a bit like James May late of Top Gear  up to you let me know if you think it would be usefull.

    You have me intrigued ... Ill take the risk please!

    Ok then   As Paul mentioned above it is possible to play around with the engine management software  but in doing so you run the risk that the overall performance and length of service that could be expected from the power unit will be greatly reduced ,this of course will lead to more down time and increased servicing costs as well as a reduction in fuel economy and an increase in exhaust emissions

    As to the Question of the Limiter issue
    Most if not all diesel engines in a rail application are governed as to the maximum amount of speed that they can run at
    This is for reasons of efficiency as unlike the engine in your car or van the amount of speed that the engine is developing is not directly related to the speed at which you are traveling at
    Yes I know that the trains would appear to accelerate with a corresponding rise in engine speed but it's only from a state where the power unit is at idle for reasons of economy and also to save the passengers from the noise of the engine reving when not needing generate full power for traction purposes

    So simply put a loco or a power car that is diesel electric is really a portable self propelled generating unit
    Hope this is of some use and answers one or two of your points  Grahame :)

    Was hoping to get this posted last night
    But you know what they say about a friend in need  and when they turn up unannounced !.....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2016, 09:04:32
    In that diagram upthread, the pacers are still to be decommissioned, just a year later than was planned


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: stuving on November 11, 2016, 09:26:05
    Ok then   As Paul mentioned above it is possible to play around with the engine management software  but in doing so you run the risk that the overall performance and length of service that could be expected from the power unit will be greatly reduced ,this of course will lead to more down time and increased servicing costs as well as a reduction in fuel economy and an increase in exhaust emissions

    I'm not convinced by that - at least not by the "greatly". Almost identical trains will be operated by GWR with the same engine/alternator package but at full power. On the (admittedly rather sketchy) information available, the MTU type 12V 1600 R80L engine and the TSA (Traktioneysteme Austria) TG 59-43-4 induction alternators are both rated at 700 kW, and are identical in both cases. While in the 802s they will run up to full power, in 800s they will be limited to 560 kW. In both cases that limit is purely a matter of the operating regime defined in software - 800s will have 700 kW available if a generator package fails, and I guess that 802s may be set up to minimise full power running in some way.

    Presumably Hitachi don't think the engines in 802s will disintegrate after a couple of years, and their financial backers Eversholt Rail presumably don't think the risk is such an issue. So I imagine Paul is right, it's the cumbersome nature of the funding for IEP that makes it difficult to negotiate the reuprating - which may even be a single line in the software!

    The one thing about higher-power running that isn't "only software" is the reduction in range between refuelling, given the smaller fuel tanks in 800s. That might be a big issue, or it could be nothing, you'd need some rather specific inside information to know.


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 11, 2016, 09:40:28
    I would be more than willing to explain but I fear this would end up with me rumbleing on a bit like James May late of Top Gear  up to you let me know if you think it would be usefull.

    You have me intrigued ... Ill take the risk please!

    Ok then   ...

    Hugely appreciate the answer - thanks.     And the others too on this discussion.  I have often wondered what was "really" involved and I think we now have a range of considerations / ramifications (shorter engine life, more fuel used so need for more frequent re-tanking which may effect diagrams, contractual issues to sort out) ... good to know.  Oh - and it seems that it's unlikely that the change would create an unreliable train.   Whether it's work it for acceleration out of Bath / Bristol is another matter ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2016, 09:45:04
    Unreliable as in out of service more often/for longer, I think....


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: grahame on November 11, 2016, 09:50:50
    Presumably Hitachi don't think the engines in 802s will disintegrate after a couple of years, and their financial backers Eversholt Rail presumably don't think the risk is such an issue. So I imagine Paul is right, it's the cumbersome nature of the funding for IEP that makes it difficult to negotiate the reuprating - which may even be a single line in the software!

    Probably just a configuration file then - not even a single software line to change.  Hopefully Hitachi programmers don't hard code too many constants ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2016, 10:01:19
    Hitachi will charge a lot of money to lift these restrictors


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on November 11, 2016, 11:48:12
    So to summarise, the new trains will be slower than the old ones when on diesel power which is a large part of the mileage. To increase the performance may be very challenging from a contractual point of view and will increase costs and probably decrease reliability.
    Presumably fares will increase* to cover these extra costs, and more half length trains will appear to cover for any extra breakdowns, and of course for extra trips to fuelling points.

    The noise and vibration from the underfloor engines will presumably increase if run at a higher output, and will certainly be present for a greater part of the journey than was anticipated.

    I seem to recall Mark Hopwood stating that passengers did not want underfloor engines on intercity trains. When I cynicly pointed out that underfloor engines was exactly what were getting, advocates of the new trains implied that this did not much matter because the trains would be mainly run on electric power.

    *It has been stated that fares wont rise to pay for the new trains. I expect some substantial hidden fare rises to pay the extra and still rising costs.

    The whole project is rapidly turning into a huge fiasco.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: simonw on November 11, 2016, 11:55:45
    With the delays in cascading trains to the West Country and Southwest, will GWR be allowed to lease extra stock to add capacity?

    A potential 5/6 years delay is possible and with rail growth experienced, something will have to be done!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2016, 12:01:14
    There's nothing diesel extra to lease - that is why GWR are getting new trains....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on November 11, 2016, 12:06:52
    So to summarise, the new trains will be slower than the old ones when on diesel power which is a large part of the mileage.

    I'm not so sure that's the case in reality, at least not to materially affect journey times.  Their initial acceleration is likely to be better, even if not so good after the 40mph mark, the ruling linespeeds on the remaining diesel sections are largely 100mph or less and we know their dwell times will be reduced greatly thanks to no slam doors and the brakes are likely to be better as well reducing the time of an average station stop even further.

    The noise and vibration from the underfloor engines will presumably increase if run at a higher output, and will certainly be present for a greater part of the journey than was anticipated.

    From what I've heard, the engines are exceptionally quiet and that is a good omen when it comes to potential vibrations as well.  Also of course only just over half of the vehicles have engines anyway, so the remaining vehicles will be very quiet.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on November 11, 2016, 14:14:52
    A letter (http://74f85f59f39b887b696f-ab656259048fb93837ecc0ecbcf0c557.r23.cf3.rackcdn.com/assets/library/document/r/original/resident_letter-_cu02_cu17_final_v2.pdf) from NR concerning electrification between Stockley Road (UB7) and Norden Road (SL6)

    Quote
    Thank you for your patience while we have been electrifying the Great Western route to make journeys more reliable, greener and quieter for thousands of passengers. The electrification of one of Britain’s busiest and oldest railways will improve connections between major towns and cities across southern England and South Wales. Journeys will be smoother and more comfortable for passengers and quieter for people living near the railway.

    Over the next few months we will be continuing to assemble the steel and wiring structures needed for
    electrification. Much of this work will need to be undertaken at night when there are not trains running on the
    nearby tracks.

    In order to complete this work we need to use specialist railway machinery on track which can cause some
    level of noise. It is a requirement to sound vehicle horns when manoeuvring to alert other co-workers on track. This is due to strict safety measures we have in place for our staff. While some noise is inevitable, we will make every effort to keep any disruption to a minimum in accordance with the Crossrail Construction Code.

    Once this work is completed, the overhead power lines suspended above the railway tracks between close to the Stockley Road Bridge, (A408 near West Drayton, Ordnance Survey Ref: TQ 08043 79722) and Norden
    Road, in West Maidenhead (OS Ref: SU 88727 80752) will be energised.

    From 4 February 2017 the overhead lines and associated infrastructure along the Great Western
    Railway should be treated as “live” at all times.


    It is extremely dangerous for any person to come closer than 2.75 metres to the equipment or any
    associated part of it, including supporting masts, cables and other elements. You do not need to
    touch the wires to receive a shock. Please consider how this will affect you or the activity of your
    organisation and take appropriate action.

    The overhead lines will be energised at 25,000 Volts and because of this it is extremely dangerous for any
    person to come close to the overhead line equipment or any associated part of it. Electrification does not
    pose a risk to people using the railway safely; please stay away from the railway boundary and ensure you are always more than 2.75 meters from the overhead lines.

    Should you have further enquiries regarding our programme to electrify the Great Western Main Lines, please
    contact the Network Rail 24 hour National Helpline on 03457 11 41 41 or email us on
    electrification@networkrail.co.uk. You will find more information on our website,
    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/


    Title: Re: Electrification delays
    Post by: Rhydgaled on November 15, 2016, 22:20:23
    Wow, what a lot of posts on this topic recently! I've just been trying to catch up, too many points raised to quote everything I'd like to reply to, so I won't directly quote in most cases:

    1. why can't Network Rail manage the electrification? many and varied reasons, probably, but this month's "Modern Railways" claims that over 50% of the cost overruns on the ScotRail electrification projects are down to compliance issues. Apparently, in 2014 the minimum electrical clearance considered safe was raised from 125-150mm to 200mm, and then raised again to 370mm when EU regulations were adopted in 2015. It does say though that other factors have had a larger impact on costs on the Great Western. So yes, whoever it was, Health & Saftey is part of it.

    2. Bi-mode leading to canceled electrification? politically, I think (hope?) it will be very difficult to cancel the wires that have been promised previously. It does raise serious concerns for future electrification however; is there anyone left who still thinks the existance of bi-mode trains would improve the case for extending electrification? Diesel isn't the cleanest of power sources, I hope expansion of electrification will continue, but it isn't looking that promising at the moment.

    3. Loss of Turbo cascade and retention of 11x IC125sI think these two are connected. There's been a long-running topic on the WNXX forum reporting FirstGWR's various attempts to plan the cascade in the face of electrification delays. The plan seems to change every week, but one suggestion is that a number of 2+4/2+5 IC125s may be made TSI-PRM complaint for operation into 2020 and beyond. Where exactly these would be used seems to change as well, but it always seems to be somewhere between Cardiff and Penzance.

    4. All bi-mode IEP fleet As I like to keep reminding pepole, the class 801 IEP 'electric' (although it is, from a operational perspective, an EMU) is, from an engineering viewpoint, itself a bi-mode design. It still has a diesel engine on-board, it justs lacks the horsepower to be useful for regular service in diesel mode. Thus, when the GWML is eventually wired through to Swansea, Bristol, Oxford and Newbury, the only difference is that the trains will be a little bit heavier and actually have enough power in diesel-mode for S.Wales services to be diverted via Gloucester and Bristol services via Westbury if required due to engineering works. Even better, a that point somebody might find a partially electrified route elsewhere that some the bi-modes could be cascaded onto (although the 26m vehicles might make that a bit more difficult, and the complex IEP contract might hinder cascades also) and get a new fleet of truely pure-electric trains for the GWML, leaving enough bi-modes with GWR to handle diversions.

    Now for the direct quotes:
    and also the politics of serving the Welsh capital will have a bearing.
    And I was just thinking to myself "It would surely be too cynical to suspect that this is partly down to post-Brexit Union-preserving politics."
    Wrong country, it is Scotland that needs pampering to save the union, as far as I know (which probably isn't much) we're not threatening rebellion here in Wales; though I'll probably be angry if the full extent of promised GWML electrification, including Paddington-Swansea (which, we have previously established on this topic, the UK government promised to pay for), is not wired by the end of CP6.

    Can we keep the HST to Hereford please.
    No you can't, such is progress.
    There are those of us who are really fond of our current trains - be they class 125 or class 153.  However, if we campaigned to keep them and won would rapidly find our love for them drowned by people complaining about old trains on their line ... to say nothing of increasing maintenance costs and failures over the years ahead, and a real problem is we'd refused an upgrade on the back of a bigger order and wanted a special build later.
    Really, the new trains should be designed to be something we could look forward to, then there would be no reason to campaign for retaining stock that is really too old to keep in service (other than a few for preservation, I'd be quite upset if an IC125 (at least 1) and an IC225 aren't preserved). However, when we are looking at Intercity trains running underfloor diesel engines for many hours, the removal of hot food for standard class passengers (although the competion, motorway service stations, seems to be going the same way) and potentially rocks-for-seats (the latter still to be determined) action should be taken.

    So to summarise, the new trains will be slower than the old ones when on diesel power which is a large part of the mileage.
    I'm not so sure that's the case in reality, at least not to materially affect journey times.  Their initial acceleration is likely to be better, even if not so good after the 40mph mark
    Going back to the possibility of reduced-formation IC125s on Cardiff-Taunton (or Plymouth-Penzance or whatever it is this week), I still think the superiour low-end acceleration of a multiple unit makes more sense for stoppers like Cardiff-Taunton; if the IC125s can be kept going medium-term as ScotRail and now FirstGWR seem to think a better solution would be to keep the IC125s (full-length) on Paddington-Plymouth/Penzance services and use the 5-car 800s/802s on the local stoppers instead.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on November 20, 2016, 19:58:08
    A very interesting and informative document on electrification systems (including the GW F&F Series 1 system) has been published here:  http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/OLE/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on November 22, 2016, 20:56:26
    Watched our 3 Bristol women Labour MPs take a really strong and united stand in Westminster Hall in the electrification debate secured by Charlotte Leslie. (Available on parliament.tv) Thought the male MPs in contrast were more or less spineless. The Rail Minister Paul Maynard was hapless and hopeless in turn. Clare Perry must have seen the tea leaves on the line, and got out before she had to defend the indefensible.
    There are 51 out of 54 Tory MPs in the southwest and only one ( Liam Fox) has a voice at the top table. Is it any wonder we are are ignored as a region by Central Government ?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on November 22, 2016, 21:24:20
    Yes, my MP Charlotte Leslie really did stand out in the debate. Going as far as she dared in criticising her Conservative colleagues in the government.

    However, both sides were using Network Rail as the whipping boy. I think the DfT are equally to blame for their woeful oversight of the project.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 03, 2016, 17:02:01
    An update on wiring progress for those that don't regularly get to see it:

    Airport Junction, Hayes to Maidenhead:
    Real progress over that last couple of months.  All structures, booms and small parts fitted and probably around 90-95% of the main contact wires have been strung through to MP25 east of Maidenhead station, though there's very little of the ATF (Auto Transformer Feeder) installed as yet.

    Maidenhead to Ruscombe (Twyford):
    Virtually all structures and booms/small parts fitted and wiring has just started at the Maidenhead end.

    Ruscombe (Twyford) to Scours Lane (west of Reading):
    Significant number of structures fitted and more and more booms and small parts now getting installed.

    Scours Lane to Foxhall Junction (Didcot):
    Infrastructure commissioned, including now a route from Tilehurst into the depot via Connection E.  Though there's still the odd area where the ATF wire is slung on castors rather than the permanent fittings.

    At the recent rate of progress I think the 'deadlines' for electric trains to Maidenhead next summer, and then Didcot at the end of the year should be met.  The section on to Cardiff might be much more challenging!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 03, 2016, 17:20:20
    At the recent rate of progress I think the 'deadlines' for electric trains to Maidenhead next summer, and then Didcot at the end of the year should be met.  The section on to Cardiff might be much more challenging!

    Fantastic update - thanks; gives some useful feedback with regards to cascades too.   Where do we stand on Reading to Newbury, which is also due to release turbos and hasn't been pushed back hard.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 03, 2016, 17:39:24
    Thought that got pushed at the same time Didcot/Oxford did?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 03, 2016, 18:12:00
    Thought that got pushed at the same time Didcot/Oxford did?

    Hmmm ... thought it was Henley and Windsor that got "pushed" as well?? - but you may be right. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 03, 2016, 19:07:57
    Thought that got pushed at the same time Didcot/Oxford did?

    No, its delivery date was December 2018, so like all the sections due to complete within CP5 it was kept. It's that arbitrary criterion that makes the 'keep' and 'defer' lists look so odd.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 03, 2016, 19:27:47
    Ruscombe (Twyford) to Scours Lane (west of Reading):
    Significant number of structures fitted and more and more booms and small parts now getting installed.

    Yes, just outside Reading station (mainly to the east) the density of dangly bits has been going up week by week. And very odd some of them look, too, because so much of the track will have two (or more?) pairs of wires at once. There are loads of tensioners too, most of them on uprights rather than those twin crossbars.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on December 03, 2016, 20:51:44
    Does anyone know if there has been any progress on deciding what will happen at Steventon.  It must be on the critical path now for electrification West of Didcot?



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on December 04, 2016, 09:58:58
    Quote
    Where do we stand on Reading to Newbury, which is also due to release turbos and hasn't been pushed back hard.

    From my occasional observations, quite a lot of progress over the last few months, although it seems to have slowed since the beginning of November.

    A lot of uprights in place from just east of Newbury Racecourse (still nothing in the area of the Newbury stations themselves) all the way to Theale, with some gaps (mainly through the stations, and between Aldermaston and Theale, where there is a down loop). Nothing east of Theale to Reading West last time I looked (a few weeks ago).

    The new bridge at Ufton Nervet looks to be almost finished also.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 04, 2016, 10:10:10
    Is this where the nimbys want different structures owing to not liking their view? NR were of the opinion they'll get a repaint after electric trains start running. They weren't prepared to scupper their timetable for them! I've not heard of a change of mind


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on December 04, 2016, 10:18:54
    Is this where the nimbys want different structures owing to not liking their view? NR were of the opinion they'll get a repaint after electric trains start running. They weren't prepared to scupper their timetable for them! I've not heard of a change of mind

    ..........the key phrase there is "when electric trains start running".......at the current rate it could be the next generations problem.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on December 04, 2016, 10:33:20
    Does anyone know if there has been any progress on deciding what will happen at Steventon.  It must be on the critical path now for electrification West of Didcot?



    I thought that they were going to lower the track under High Street bridge but not much has happened so far. The section west of Didcot, from Milton Junction to Uffington is nearly ready for wiring now with pretty much all the main steelwork and most of the small part steelwork in place. The exception is through Steventon where there is a gap from the A34 bridge to about 1/2 mile west of the Causeway crossing.

    At the IET lecture I attended in Swindon in October, the NR project manager described Steventon as the OLE engineer's "worst nightmare" in terms of designing OLE which would fit both the bridge and the two level crossings because of the difference in heights required and the proximity of Stocks Lane crossing to the High Street bridge. Since NR are unable to demolish the bridge, any solution will apparently be non-compliant in terms of contact wire height transition and subject to a greater wear rate which will need to be monitored.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on December 06, 2016, 15:34:03
    Quote
    Nothing east of Theale to Reading West last time I looked (a few weeks ago).

    A (very) few uprights now in evidence to the east of Theale, near to the M4 underbridge, and near to the down loop between Ufton Nervet and Aldermaston.

    Night-time possessions this week, so maybe more work underway.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Kenny on December 10, 2016, 17:58:06
    http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/articles/first-electric-wires-for-crossrail-programme-switched-on-in-thames-valley

    First electric wires for Crossrail programme switched on in Thames Valley

    Quote
    Thames Valley rail passengers can look forward to better journeys and the introduction of new GWR trains in 2017 following the achievement of the latest milestone in the electrification of the railway between Heathrow junction and Maidenhead by Network Rail as part of the Crossrail programme.

    After more than a year of work, the electricity has now been turned on along the first section. The remaining section will be turned on next year allowing new electric GWR trains to run between Maidenhead and London Paddington from summer 2017.

    The work is part of the Crossrail programme and Network Rail’s Railway Upgrade Plan to provide a bigger, better, more reliable railway for passengers and businesses.

    To bring passengers quieter, greener and more efficient journeys, Network Rail has carried out this major infrastructure investment programme, allowing the introduction of the Elizabeth line trains and GWR’s electric trains to the Thames Valley.

    Electrification to power the new trains requires the installation of overhead line equipment alongside and above the existing track. It consists of overhead wires running between supporting steel posts to distribute electricity. The steel posts are mounted on heavy duty foundations.

    An 800-strong workforce has successfully installed over 1,400 piled foundations and 834 overhead line structures. More than three quarters of the wiring programme, which sees 150km of wires strung between the new equipment, has now been completed.

    From summer 2017, GWR will be able to extend its electric train services to Maidenhead, which currently stop at Hayes & Harlington. When the Elizabeth line opens fully in December 2019, passengers in the Thames Valley will be able to travel on new trains right through central London without having to change at Paddington.

    Matthew Steele, Network Rail Project Director, said: “This is a key milestone towards the introduction of brand new, cleaner, quieter electric trains on this very busy route into London. This electrification not only enables the introduction of the Elizabeth line but also supports the introduction of new GWR trains in 2017.

    “I would like to thank the local residents and businesses for their patience as we undertake this sometimes noisy construction works”.

    Matthew White, Crossrail Surface Director said: “This vital work is paving the way for quicker, greener, quieter and more reliable trains for people in the Thames Valley. Once the Elizabeth line opens fully, passengers will be able to travel right through the capital without having to change at Paddington, making it quicker and easier to get to a range of destinations across London and the South East.”




    Edit note: Hyperlink fixed, for clarity. CfN.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 10, 2016, 21:28:37
    It does not say which section; my guess its not even as far as West Drayton, however over Christmas more will be charged up.  The IATS at Slough does not have all its connections to the OLE yet and the other subsection switches are not complete.

    What I suspect they have done is move the "OLE Buffer Section" and "Permanently Earthed Sections" West away from the complexity of Airport Junction.   The "OLE Buffer Section" and "Permanently Earthed Sections" is the transition from "Live" operational system under the control of an ECR (Electrical Control Room) and "construction site"  Also extending the existing OLE at Airport Jcn means that Romford (Didcot) ECR ............. Yes Didcot ECR is based in Romford SCADA computer put in for HEX in the 1990's can still bee used, it does not have the capacity to include Kensal Green, West Ealing, Slough and Maidenhead.  Kensal Green is the feed inform the 400kV Grid



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on December 11, 2016, 23:03:59
    It does not say which section; my guess its not even as far as West Drayton, however over Christmas more will be charged up.  The IATS at Slough does not have all its connections to the OLE yet and the other subsection switches are not complete.

    What I suspect they have done is move the "OLE Buffer Section" and "Permanently Earthed Sections" West away from the complexity of Airport Junction.   The "OLE Buffer Section" and "Permanently Earthed Sections" is the transition from "Live" operational system under the control of an ECR (Electrical Control Room) and "construction site"  Also extending the existing OLE at Airport Jcn means that Romford (Didcot) ECR ............. Yes Didcot ECR is based in Romford SCADA computer put in for HEX in the 1990's can still bee used, it does not have the capacity to include Kensal Green, West Ealing, Slough and Maidenhead.  Kensal Green is the feed inform the 400kV Grid

    Somebody on WNXX reckoned that it was 1.1km, which by my reckoning is just east of West Drayton station. As you say, probably just a short run between old and new OHLE which permits mechanical integration and electrical control to be extended. Probably a very big deal for the project team as it will doubtless be the cumulation of much work and allows them to start testing towards Maidenhead, but I can see why it might have been a bit underwhelming for others.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 12, 2016, 07:23:43
    Mighty oaks from little acorns grow...  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on December 12, 2016, 07:26:29
    Any idea when Didcot ECR will be at err... Didcot


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 12, 2016, 20:37:41
    It does not say which section; my guess its not even as far as West Drayton, however over Christmas more will be charged up.  The IATS at Slough does not have all its connections to the OLE yet and the other subsection switches are not complete.

    What I suspect they have done is move the "OLE Buffer Section" and "Permanently Earthed Sections" West away from the complexity of Airport Junction.   The "OLE Buffer Section" and "Permanently Earthed Sections" is the transition from "Live" operational system under the control of an ECR (Electrical Control Room) and "construction site"  Also extending the existing OLE at Airport Jcn means that Romford (Didcot) ECR ............. Yes Didcot ECR is based in Romford SCADA computer put in for HEX in the 1990's can still bee used, it does not have the capacity to include Kensal Green, West Ealing, Slough and Maidenhead.  Kensal Green is the feed inform the 400kV Grid

    Somebody on WNXX reckoned that it was 1.1km, which by my reckoning is just east of West Drayton station. As you say, probably just a short run between old and new OHLE which permits mechanical integration and electrical control to be extended. Probably a very big deal for the project team as it will doubtless be the cumulation of much work and allows them to start testing towards Maidenhead, but I can see why it might have been a bit underwhelming for others.

    Also there would not have been a need to publish an energisation notice as the area was technically electrified before the current project started.

    Any idea when Didcot ECR will be at err... Didcot

    Not sure, but it will need to be there and on the new SCADA system to allow Kensal Green, West Ealing, the new Hayes, Slough and Maidenhead to be commissioned.  Feeding from Hayes to Maidenhead is technically feasible as 4 stub end feeds but not very practical for normal operation use

    The "Test Track" Didcot to Tilehurst is being done by "manning the buildings"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on December 12, 2016, 22:57:23
    Also there would not have been a need to publish an energisation notice as the area was technically electrified before the current project started.

    No pun intended, I'm sure!
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 14, 2016, 21:30:24
    Also there would not have been a need to publish an energisation notice as the area was technically electrified before the current project started.

    No pun intended, I'm sure!
     

     ;D  Ah but the bit past Airport Jcn especially on the Relief Lines would not have had any current just volts ................ electric traction never operated under that bit of wire  :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on December 14, 2016, 21:44:57
    Also there would not have been a need to publish an energisation notice as the area was technically electrified before the current project started.

    No pun intended, I'm sure!
     

     ;D  Ah but the bit past Airport Jcn especially on the Relief Lines would not have had any current just volts ................ electric traction never operated under that bit of wire  :P

    Thats why it needed a Current Project to give it some AMPS!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on December 16, 2016, 08:57:00
    Back to some sensible updates ;).....my last from a few weeks ago.....

    Quote
    A lot of uprights in place from just east of Newbury Racecourse (still nothing in the area of the Newbury stations themselves) all the way to Theale, with some gaps (mainly through the stations, and between Aldermaston and Theale, where there is a down loop). Nothing east of Theale to Reading West last time I looked (a few weeks ago).

    As of yesterday, a few uprights starting to appear between Theale and Southcote Junction. Maidenhead to Airport Junction looks nearly fully wired now (a few gaps around Slough), and some wiring up just west of Maidenhead also.

    Not really electrification related, but the new overbridge at Ufton Nervet is due to open today.





    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 17, 2016, 08:20:56
    Shocking positively Shocking .
    Don't be so negative.

    As the GWML electrification is alternating current derived from the UK National Grid which is generated so the current cycle passes through zero ............ both the above quotes are most useful  ;D

    Back to some serious comments, the latest internal news was quoting that 85% of the OLE wiring is complete and the remainder is well on target.

    As I went past Kensal Green grid site yesterday I notice that the final connections look like they are being prepped, not sure when Kensal come on line though.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on December 18, 2016, 10:00:50


    Back to some serious comments, the latest internal news was quoting that 85% of the OLE wiring is complete and the remainder is well on target.

    As I went past Kensal Green grid site yesterday I notice that the final connections look like they are being prepped, not sure when Kensal come on line though.

    Presume you're referring to the Crossrail section to Maidenhead. From my observations last week I'd say that it's more like 95% complete - at least in terms of the running lines. I couldn't see the down main but the other lines are pretty much fully wired from Airport Junction to west of Maidenhead. There are some gaps between Langley and Slough around Dolphin Junction and maybe the odd wire length missing which I didn't spot. The AT wire is also to be fitted on both sides of the track and the AT stations at Slough and Maidenhead have yet to be connected up.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on December 18, 2016, 10:11:24
    It's probably about 85% if you include all the missing AT wire, though in terms of the contact wire that is indeed about 95% done to just west of Maidenhead.

    A fair bit of wire has been strung onwards to Ruscome the last couple of weeks as well, though the wiring team appears to be ahead of the 'small parts' team as quite a bit of it is held up with temporary castors.  Hopefully they'll be no more instances of temporary fixings and equipment causing delays.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 18, 2016, 19:43:01
    The AT Feed has not been run yet, the extra wire you can see is the earth wire, i believe the plan is to run initially in classic mode.

    The 20% ish that has to be done are junction wire runs, there are some odd bit deliberately left not done waiting for the Xmas work to be done.  There are also all the switching drapes and OLE switches and the Track Sectioning Locations to connect up.  Also possibly Bonding to be done.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on December 21, 2016, 07:59:09
    Not sure if we've seen these figures before?

    Quote
    Network Rail Chief Executive Mark Carne told the Public Accounts Committee that "around £47 million" has been spent on works on the Great Western Main Line where electrification has been deferred. He added that the total incremental cost of the deferred works is "around £160m".

    Full report in next issue of Rail Magazine (http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/47-million-spent-on-deferred-sections-of-great-western-modernisation)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on December 21, 2016, 09:12:30
    Not sure if we've seen these figures before?

    Quote
    Network Rail Chief Executive Mark Carne told the Public Accounts Committee that "around £47 million" has been spent on works on the Great Western Main Line where electrification has been deferred. He added that the total incremental cost of the deferred works is "around £160m".

    Full report in next issue of Rail Magazine (http://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/47-million-spent-on-deferred-sections-of-great-western-modernisation)

    Interesting.  £160m seems a relatively small amount of money compared with the overall cost. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 21, 2016, 11:14:57
    Total *incremental* cost - I read that as the extra cost involved in delaying the work...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on December 21, 2016, 11:26:07
    Total *incremental* cost - I read that as the extra cost involved in delaying the work...

    I read it as "for the work that was been deferred £47m has already been spent and it would cost £160m to finish it".

    That would give £207m for the extra mileage deferred.   Of course some of the £47m already spent might be on accommodating the longer IEP coaches rather than on putting up the wires and installing the associated infrastructure. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 21, 2016, 11:48:01
    Surely that would be termed just "total cost"....incremental must mean something additional to that?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 21, 2016, 11:59:50
    Surely that would be termed just "total cost"....incremental must mean something additional to that?

    No - it's the cost of the deferred work as an increment to the rest of the programme. He was answering this question:
    Quote
    Q34 Chair:   The  issue  really,   Mr  Carne,   is  the  incremental  cost  of  keeping going. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on December 21, 2016, 13:03:35
    Words mean what we want them to mean, as Humpty Dumpty said. Presumably that £47 million includes the work done between Bristol Parkway and Temple Meads to lift bridges and lower tracks, but where wires will not appear?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on December 21, 2016, 13:46:44
    Words mean what we want them to mean, as Humpty Dumpty said. Presumably that £47 million includes the work done between Bristol Parkway and Temple Meads to lift bridges and lower tracks, but where wires will not appear?

    Yes.  What about work, such as rebuilding the platforms at Bath Spa, that has not happened yet but will need to happen for the IEPs to run even on diesel?  Is that in the £47m or the £160m?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 21, 2016, 13:58:05
    Quote
    Q30 Karin  Smyth: Can  you  tell  me  how  much  has  been  spent  already  on  the  sections that  have  been deferred,  in preparation  for  electrification?
    Philip  Rutnam: On  those  two  sections,  I’m  afraid  I  can’t  say  myself;  Mr  Carne can. 
    Mark  Carne: So far,  we’ve  spent  about  £47  million  on the  three  pieces  of  track. 
    Q31 Karin  Smyth: If  electrification  doesn’t  go  ahead,  how  much  of  that  money  is wasted?
    Mark  Carne: Well,  I  can’t  give  you  an  answer  to  that  now,   because  it  includes  a number  of    different  aspects  of    the  work,  including  improving  the  track  and   the  system,   as  well   as  preparation  works  for  electrification.  So  I’d  be  happy   to  come  back   to  the   Committee  with  a  response  on  that  breakdown; I  don’t have it to  hand.
    Later, that was clarified a bit to say that it refers to electrification works alone. Other things not required just by electrification are not deferred. There is probably a grey area - for example axle counters, depending on what other resignalling is being done in the same area.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 21, 2016, 14:12:58
    Do you want to quote that section where he admits to really poor planning of the project (again)?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 21, 2016, 16:29:27
    I think there's now too much "managerialism" involved in both DfT and NR. That's my name for the belief that every project can have a single cost and timescale known in advance, and can be managed to meet that unless those involved are incompetent. It underlies the style of management that responds to a project deviating from its plan by threatening to waterboard the project manager and expecting the threats and arm-twisting to be communicated down the hierarchy, expecting the result of getting it back on target.

    This always collides with the real world, which isn't like that. Hence the difficulty of explaining who was at fault for the supposedly "inadequate" planning. I'm pretty sure those involved knew how much they didn't know, and that the initial "known costs only" estimates could only go up. But the quickest and most reliable way to better scope those unknown costs is to get started and find out. Sitting at a desk won't tell you. Expensive consultants very likely can't tell you either. And all this detailed planning-for-every-possibility costs money; a lot of money.

    The traditional way to manage the inevitable cost overruns is to allocate a big contingency, not to the project but higher up so it averages several projects at different stages. With NR's old "fake private company" funding approach most of their money was borrowed anyway, so a couple of big overruns just added a bit on top of that. Not crazy at all, just incompatible with the several extra layers of project "management" now peering over the shoulders of the guys actually running the work.

    Oddly, Philip Rutnam struggled to explain to the PAC how DfT was doing exactly the same thing with its own £330M extra costs on this project (more bimodes etc.).
    Quote
    Philip  Rutnam:  Which costs?
    Kevin  Foster:   The  £330  million   cost  of  delays  we   have  seen  on  this project,  which   is    the  figure  cited  at  the   start  of  the   Report.  Does  that mean  we  will  potentially  see  cuts    in  spending  elsewhere    in   your Department’s budget?
    Philip  Rutnam: No,  it   does  not.   We  are  talking   about  different  pots  of  money  here  and  different  budgets.   Mr  Carne  has  been  talking  about  the  £15.7  billion  envelope   within   which  Network  Rail   needs  to  manage   its  enhancement  portfolio  in this  control  period.  The  costs  that  exist  in    the  up  to  £330  million  estimate  included  in    the  Report  for  consequential  impacts  on  the  Department  associated  with  these   delays  sit  elsewhere.  There  are  two  principal  elements  within  that  figure  of  up  to  £330   million.   One  is  associated  with  the  decision  we  have  taken  to  make  all the  trains  we  are  buying  for this  part  of the  country  bi-mode.  The  other  is   the  effect  on  the  revenues  of    Great  Western  Railway,  the  franchisee  associated  with  running  the  trains,   because  electrification  is    happening   a   bit  later  and  the   service  change is happening  a    bit later. 
    Q76 Kevin  Foster: Will  they  bear  that  cost  themselves,  or  will   that  cost  be  with  the Department?
    Philip  Rutnam: Both  those   costs  sit  with  the  Department,  rather   than  with  Network  Rail.  As  you  would   expect   in  a   large   complex  organisation  like  the  Department,  we  have  budgets  that  include  certain   amounts   of  contingency.  These  costs  are  also  spread  over  a   number  of    years,  so  I  am  not  anticipating  that  we  will  need  to    make  any  reductions  in    other  areas  of  the Department’s  spend associated  with  these  costs crystallising.

    Ultimately risk can't be reduced, just moved around from one place - or budget - to another. Of course adding a big number to the initial cost estimate always makes it easier not to overspend...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on December 21, 2016, 17:18:07
    As I was once one of those allegedly 'greedy consultants' you have mentioned above I can assure you that when the client doesn't really have a clue what it actually wants from its projects (now I wonder which client I am speaking about there) that the 'specification', as much as it is, usually means that the consultant has to build all sorts of unknowns into the estimates because, as sure as tomorrow will come, so will the flack if the estimates are too low when the project hits the buffers... :-\ >:(

    I have seen some woeful client requirements documents in my (perhaps too long) career and I do recall one project that had nearly 300 technical queries on the client and in which some cases they clearly stated they weren't going to 'bother' to respond to, just get on with it.

    End of whinge :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on December 21, 2016, 20:46:27
    As I was once one of those allegedly 'greedy consultants' you have mentioned above I can assure you that when the client doesn't really have a clue what it actually wants from its projects (now I wonder which client I am speaking about there) that the 'specification', as much as it is, usually means that the consultant has to build all sorts of unknowns into the estimates because, as sure as tomorrow will come, so will the flack if the estimates are too low when the project hits the buffers... :-\ >:(

    I have seen some woeful client requirements documents in my (perhaps too long) career and I do recall one project that had nearly 300 technical queries on the client and in which some cases they clearly stated they weren't going to 'bother' to respond to, just get on with it.

    End of whinge.

    There are a number of major problems in todays railway, the number of stakeholders non of which can have a clear vision or strategy until one of them comes up with one but 2 of the key stakeholders have short term tenure ................ the TOC typically 7 years and the Government typically 5 years.  The TOC is at the behest of its contract with the DfT which in tern has to bow down to the elected Government, who can even change its direction of travel when the Sectary of State is changed in a reshuffle.  Even NR works to its Control Periods of 5 years which do not line up with general elections of with TOC franchises.
     

    The UK railways lacks a cohesive leadership, for all its failing BR had far better vision of what it need to do and where it wanted to be that the industry has today.

    Nothing wrong with consultants being brought to do work but they are only cost effective when the client is an informed client NR lacks a solid engineering base (that is not only engineers but project managers), but  it is driven by the Government to out source as much as it can because contracting out is cost efficient so therefore so much of it is done by short term people.

    The solution is not simple but removing the politicians out of the equation would help

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on December 28, 2016, 23:34:31
    I see that not only were the fairies out in force over Christmas at Reading, garnishing the grey gantries with dangly bits, but they even strung up some shiny new pink wires. Despite the earlier work being all on the Main Lines, it's the Reliefs and platforms 13 and 14 that have now shot into the lead. I couldn't see how far the wires went, nor whether any of the fancy bits are done yet.

    I guess that someone twigged that the first trains they need to provide for will be 387s providing stopping services, and giving the Turbos leave to cascade. At this rate people round here might even start to think that electrification will actually happen after all.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on December 29, 2016, 05:42:44
    And getting the 387s into Reading depot must be te priority?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: CyclingSid on January 03, 2017, 11:27:21
    I see on roadworks.org that they have started work on Burghfield road bridge, lowering the line and raising parapets. Also forward planning to lengthen platforms at Reading West and Theale.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 03, 2017, 12:45:45
    .......platforms to be lengthened at Thatcham also as far as I know.

    Was on foot yesterday between Thatcham and Midgham (canal towpath) and noticed some crossbeams starting to appear. Also some verticals that don't appear to be exactly vertical! (should've taken a pic).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 03, 2017, 23:07:06
    Not sure if it goes here or Crossrail but looks like the work at Maidenhead to remodel the layout and to allow trains to turn back from most of the platforms  (Down Main 1 excepted) as well as in the sidings has been done.

    Hopefully ready for the 387s in the Spring. DFT are making a rod for their own back 2 years of a train with relatively decent seats and toilets to be followed by the Cattle Class 345s. Don't think TV commuters are going to be too impressed.


    Also wires up over Maidenhead bridge no comment yet in Maidenhead Advertiser.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on January 04, 2017, 10:34:56
    Short NR video of the xmas/new year 2016/2017 works at Acton, Hayes and Stockley viaduct https://youtu.be/cOOySiJdW_Y

    Also noted that the altered Platform No.12 at Paddington was brought into use on Tuesday evening 03/01/2017.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 04, 2017, 11:05:22
    Platform 12 will continue to be open as a short length platform for a while whilst the country end is rebuilt.  The platform face is all there following the Xmas works, but the platform surface behind it needs quite a lot of work still.  I think the Maidenhead Reversal Siding wasn't completed, although the signalling for it was, so that will be a pretty quick job to tidy up one weekend.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on January 04, 2017, 11:36:09
    I hope that the works will include extending the platform canopy from the old edge of P13 to the new edge of P12.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: LiskeardRich on January 04, 2017, 12:26:01
    A 16* ran from reading to Bristol this morning, as part of the electrification cascades


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 04, 2017, 12:36:04
    166215 was the unit in question.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on January 04, 2017, 12:36:47
    A 16* ran from reading to Bristol this morning, as part of the electrification cascades

    166215 was the unit in question.

    http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C49039/2017/01/04/advanced

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dwbphotos/17600966530


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: simonw on January 04, 2017, 12:57:42
    That is good news, at last.

    I feared we would not see any cascade stock till the year end, and the any chance of a seat, or reasonable personal space, on my way home (BTM->BPW). would not happen this year (2017).



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: LiskeardRich on January 04, 2017, 19:09:40
    It's for staff training. A turbo will be at Bristol for the foreseeable future for that purpose.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on January 04, 2017, 20:03:12
    I detect a greater confidence in NR that the electrification will be extended to Maidenhead by May. 

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/new-electric-trains-provide-extra-6-550-seats-a-day

    "Maidenhead will be the next area to benefit from the new electric trains with the 387s expected to start running between their and London Paddington from May."

    Though as noted before, how many of the units released will result in a net gain to the West's fleet remains to be seen.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on January 04, 2017, 20:13:53
    Whether the grammar in 'their' press release will be corrected also remains to be seen.  :o ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on January 04, 2017, 21:16:14

    Why, in the context of Maidenhead to Paddington services, does the press release show Hitachi IEP's at Reading?

    Sloppy journalism,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on January 04, 2017, 21:49:47

    Sloppy journalism,


    Oh, don't even go there!  :o ::) ;D



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on January 04, 2017, 21:51:45
    Yes, and watching the Open Train Times map for Paddington earlier today I got the feeling the service was gradually falling apart trying to cram to many services into a pint pot.  Delays got worse and worse over a period of an hour.  It appeared that trains were being manually signalled as routes were not being set in advance enough to give trains clear signals with very poor regulating of conflicts.  I accept that of course we can only guess what was actually going on at TVSC but it gave a pretty poor impression to this onlooker.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 04, 2017, 21:57:24

    Why, in the context of Maidenhead to Paddington services, does the press release show Hitachi IEP's at Reading?

    Sloppy journalism,

    OTC

    Eh? It looks nothing like an IEP ... flush double doors, for a start. I was a bit puzzled by the door steps, but they seem to be a recent addition to the 387s.

    Oh, and Reading hasn't got a glass roof like that either, has it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on January 04, 2017, 22:04:05
    Correct Stuving, its a 387 at Paddington


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 04, 2017, 23:23:14
    I detect a greater confidence in NR that the electrification will be extended to Maidenhead by May...
    They published a go live date (in February sometime) quite awhile ago.  Installation looks fairly complete as observed from passing trains, I don't think Maidenhead in May is at all unlikely.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 05, 2017, 09:53:23
    I detect a greater confidence in NR that the electrification will be extended to Maidenhead by May...
    They published a go live date (in February sometime) quite awhile ago.  Installation looks fairly complete as observed from passing trains, I don't think Maidenhead in May is at all unlikely.

    Paul

    Still awaitng connections at Taplow to the hangers above the gantry arms,

    The main feed from the transformers?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on January 05, 2017, 11:40:56
    I detect a greater confidence in NR that the electrification will be extended to Maidenhead by May...
    They published a go live date (in February sometime) quite awhile ago.  Installation looks fairly complete as observed from passing trains, I don't think Maidenhead in May is at all unlikely.

    Paul

    A manager posting on WNXX forum is training up drivers on the 387s in anticipation of running an electric service to Maidenhead in May. Apparently the service will be limited by turnback facilities initially but will subsequently be ramped up by December.

    Given the current rate of progress west of Maidenhead, I would expect to see electric services through to Didcot by the end of the year if not earlier and wouldn't rule out the wires to Swindon being live by then, provided NR sort out the issues at Steventon.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 05, 2017, 12:23:40
    It would certainly be nice if Paddington to Didcot was fully live for the planned introduction of the IEP trains in summer.  It would seem a shame to run them on diesel all the way, and rather cumbersome to run them electric to Maidenhead, diesel to Tilehurst, electric to Didcot and diesel onwards!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on January 05, 2017, 14:42:09

    Eh? It looks nothing like an IEP ... flush double doors, for a start. I was a bit puzzled by the door steps, but they seem to be a recent addition to the 387s.

    Oh, and Reading hasn't got a glass roof like that either, has it?

    I agree that the top image is of a contemporary unit at Paddington.

    If you look at the 3 images at the bottom of the article you will see that the central one is from platform 9 at Reading. Also the two right hand images have units in multiple bearing the words "Hitachi" and "Agility Trains".

    Festina lente,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 05, 2017, 14:55:34
    If you look at the 3 images at the bottom of the article you will see that the central one is from platform 9 at Reading. Also the two right hand images have units in multiple bearing the words "Hitachi" and "Agility Trains".

    Festina lente,

    OTC

    But is that part of the press release? It's underneath the heading "About the Railway Upgrade Plan", where some more general pictures might properly belong.

    Now, you might well ask "why have quotes from this press release been put under pictures they don't relate to?" That is sloppy - though perhaps PR rather than journalism.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on January 06, 2017, 00:15:41
    Yes, we seem to have gone full circle on that one.  ::)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 06, 2017, 21:13:00
    I detect a greater confidence in NR that the electrification will be extended to Maidenhead by May...
    They published a go live date (in February sometime) quite awhile ago.  Installation looks fairly complete as observed from passing trains, I don't think Maidenhead in May is at all unlikely.

    Paul

    Still awaitng connections at Taplow to the hangers above the gantry arms,

    The main feed from the transformers?

    mmmmm not technically correct the "hangers above the gantry arms" are there to support what is called the Auto Transformer Feeder, the way the auto transformer systems works you need all 3 electrical conductors - the contact wire, the ATF and the running rails / earth wire.   Although the system will work in "classic" mode that is contact wire live ATF isolated but that is a restrictive mode to operate in.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on January 07, 2017, 15:59:40
    Just had a leaflet from Network Rail through my letterbox advertising local Public Exhibitions in various Village Halls in the Pangbourne and Goring area in late January and early February to show and seek views on the “range of potential measures, or options, which would help to reduce the visual impact of the OLE in the area”.  Members of the NR project team will be on hand.

    The information will also be available online from 21st January at networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/oxfordshire (http://networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/oxfordshire)

    Well done NR on this initiative.

    Edit - the leaflet scanned better than I thought it would, so here it is:


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on January 09, 2017, 10:26:10
    I noticed today that some masts for electrification have appeared between Didcot North Junc and Appleford, these must have gone up over the weekend.
    This follows on from piling carried out between Didcot East junc and Didcot North Junc on Christmas Day and between Didcot North Junc and Appleford just before Christmas.

    Given that Didcot to Oxford electrification has been paused/deferred/cancelled I am surprised that they are putting up masts north of Didcot North Junc.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 09, 2017, 10:49:33
    I noticed today that some masts for electrification have appeared between Didcot North Junc and Appleford, these must have gone up over the weekend.
    This follows on from piling carried out between Didcot East junc and Didcot North Junc on Christmas Day and between Didcot North Junc and Appleford just before Christmas.

    Given that Didcot to Oxford electrification has been paused/deferred/cancelled I am surprised that they are putting up masts north of Didcot North Junc.

    It's not the only area where the prophets of doom describe it as cancelled, but there's evidence on the ground that it is still in progress but to a delayed (but unpublished) deadline.    I await the next enhancement milestones with interest, they were last updated in October...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 09, 2017, 10:52:06
    Given that Didcot to Oxford electrification has been paused/deferred/cancelled I am surprised that they are putting up masts north of Didcot North Junc.

    What does deferral mean in commercial terms? I assume it means no more contracts will be signed, but work already committed by contract will continue. So anything underway will complete. After all, the stated (and quite plausible) objective was to avoid any change at the moment to the end product of the programme, while giving NR a bit of financial wiggle room in CP5.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 09, 2017, 11:09:13
    Are they definitely electrification masts, or might they be signalling gantry masts?  I only say that because the resignalling between Didcot and Oxford is continuing regardless of any electrification delay, though I also heard that a short section north of Didcot was still to be electrified anyway in relation to stabling of the new trains.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 09, 2017, 11:20:05
    I noticed today that some masts for electrification have appeared between Didcot North Junc and Appleford, these must have gone up over the weekend.
    This follows on from piling carried out between Didcot East junc and Didcot North Junc on Christmas Day and between Didcot North Junc and Appleford just before Christmas.

    Given that Didcot to Oxford electrification has been paused/deferred/cancelled I am surprised that they are putting up masts north of Didcot North Junc.


    The Didcot area, which is one of the complex in GWEP its possible cost effective to do it now before the area is fully electrically operational that way it just needs a "buffer zone" going North.  There may be other reasons such as operational train moves around the Didcot triangle and traction power feeding around Didcot station from Didcot ATFS toward Reading in the even Didcot station area has to be isolated


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on January 09, 2017, 11:48:48
    I noticed today that some masts for electrification have appeared between Didcot North Junc and Appleford, these must have gone up over the weekend.
    This follows on from piling carried out between Didcot East junc and Didcot North Junc on Christmas Day and between Didcot North Junc and Appleford just before Christmas.

    Given that Didcot to Oxford electrification has been paused/deferred/cancelled I am surprised that they are putting up masts north of Didcot North Junc.

    As other posters point out, it's quite normal to have at least one wire run beyond a junction onto a non-electrified line to allow for manoeuvres, in case a train gets wrong-routed etc. The Marlow branch is a case in point. It may well also be the case that somewhere between Didcot North and Appleford was a planned section break in electrification, so it makes more sense to complete the planned works to that point, even though there are a few miles of wiring that are technically redundant for a few years.

    AIUI, the deferral means that NR don't have to meet their statutory obligation to complete the work in CP5, which means that NR, Oxford City Council and the DfT can take their time to sort out Oxford station (which should be a lot cheaper and less disruptive to rebuild whilst unwired), and likewise, NR can do Filton Bank quadrupling, Bristol resignalling and wiring/rebuilding Temple Meads without it having to be an expensive rush-job full of compromises and requiring expensive alterations later. As luck would have it, that probably saves NR a lot of money in CP5.

    I'm not sure what that means in terms of the programme of work, there have been reports that piling has continued between Bristol and Bath, but perhaps that has just been due to work being programmed, resources booked, residents already leafleted etc?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 09, 2017, 11:58:57
    AIUI, the deferral means that NR don't have to meet their statutory obligation to complete the work in CP5, which means that NR, Oxford City Council and the DfT can take their time to sort out Oxford station (which should be a lot cheaper and less disruptive to rebuild whilst unwired), and likewise, NR can do Filton Bank quadrupling, Bristol resignalling and wiring/rebuilding Temple Meads without it having to be an expensive rush-job full of compromises and requiring expensive alterations later. As luck would have it, that probably saves NR a lot of money in CP5.

    But all the sections deferred  (and only those) were already not due to complete in CP5, following the Hendy review.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on January 09, 2017, 12:05:03
    Are they definitely electrification masts, or might they be signalling gantry masts?  I only say that because the resignalling between Didcot and Oxford is continuing regardless of any electrification delay, though I also heard that a short section north of Didcot was still to be electrified anyway in relation to stabling of the new trains.
    Definitely electrification masts, the signalling gantries are much larger.

    Does anyone know where this stabling point is going to be? Based on information from Didcot Railway centre I assume it is going to be next to them in the sidings currently used by DB Cargo. But I have seen no plans and there is no evidence of any work in that area (or any other area in Didcot).

    Any stabling point would need wiring and masts and currently the only wiring in Didcot, excluding the main-line, is between the station and Didcot West Curve and that is only partially complete.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on January 09, 2017, 12:11:52
    AIUI, the deferral means that NR don't have to meet their statutory obligation to complete the work in CP5, which means that NR, Oxford City Council and the DfT can take their time to sort out Oxford station (which should be a lot cheaper and less disruptive to rebuild whilst unwired), and likewise, NR can do Filton Bank quadrupling, Bristol resignalling and wiring/rebuilding Temple Meads without it having to be an expensive rush-job full of compromises and requiring expensive alterations later. As luck would have it, that probably saves NR a lot of money in CP5.

    But all the sections deferred  (and only those) were already not due to complete in CP5, following the Hendy review.
    Just because they weren't due to complete in CP5 doesn't mean that no money would be spent in CP5, if deferred means stopped until CP6 then no money will be spent until CP5.

    Whatever the reality of the situation I hope they don't use the Oxford station rebuild as an excuse not to complete electrification to Oxford. As as far as I can tell there is no approved/finalised plan for the rebuild and their certainly doesn't appear to be any money so we could be waiting a long time/forever.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 09, 2017, 12:19:41
    But all the sections deferred  (and only those) were already not due to complete in CP5, following the Hendy review.
    The June 2016 milestones, which in some areas slightly revise the 'post Hendy' timescales, have a regulated output of "Didcot to Oxford complete" June 2019, so only 3 months into CP6.   

    But then there is also a line in the table for "entry into service for part of route section for train testing" due in Sept 2018.   That is only 18 months away, so I would have thought that at least some section of the route will carry on at a slightly slower pace, but I'd be surprised if there was an obvious withdrawal of the entire workforce for a significant period.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 09, 2017, 12:20:41
    Whatever the reality of the situation I hope they don't use the Oxford station rebuild as an excuse not to complete electrification to Oxford. As as far as I can tell there is no approved/finalised plan for the rebuild and their certainly doesn't appear to be any money so we could be waiting a long time/forever.

    That is my main concern.  It could be at least ten years before any new station is built.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on January 09, 2017, 13:44:42
    But all the sections deferred  (and only those) were already not due to complete in CP5, following the Hendy review.
    The June 2016 milestones, which in some areas slightly revise the 'post Hendy' timescales, have a regulated output of "Didcot to Oxford complete" June 2019, so only 2 months into CP6.   

    But then there is also an entry for "entry into service for part of route section for train testing" due in Sept 2018.   That is only 18 months away, so I would have thought that at least some section of the route will carry on at a slightly slower pace, but I'd be surprised if there was an obvious withdrawal of the entire workforce for a significant period.

    Paul
    But didn't the Grayling deferral come after that? And Grayling gave no dates or even any guarantees that electrification would ever be completed.

    I would say that Sept 2018 was very unlikely given the lack of work undertaken between Kennington Junction and Oxford. No piling or even preparation for piling has ever taken place between those two places.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 09, 2017, 21:02:33
    The reasons I suspect the electrification is going slightly North of Didcot are -

    • Didcot area is one of the more complex areas in the GWEP, it makes sense to complete it all at one time.
      There may also be some train operational reasons for completing the lines North of the Didcot
      With the ATFS site to the West of Didcot Station there may be some alternative feeding arrangements via the route North.
    One of the principle reasons for not going to Oxford is the rebuild of Oxford Station once that has been sorted out wiring to Oxford is quite simple


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 09, 2017, 21:09:28
    Whatever the reality of the situation I hope they don't use the Oxford station rebuild as an excuse not to complete electrification to Oxford. As as far as I can tell there is no approved/finalised plan for the rebuild and their certainly doesn't appear to be any money so we could be waiting a long time/forever.

    That is my main concern.  It could be at least ten years before any new station is built.

    And any guesses on the revamp of Temple Meads?

    A lot of the "preppy-uppy" work for electrification of Filton Bank has been done, if not all. I was beginning to think that was all for naught until I saw Paul's earlier post - you have been right on timings before, Paul, and I trust your judgement. It would make sense to get Four Track, Now! out of the way with electrification in mind rather than do it with it in place, then throw up the knitting after it's finished.

    Between Thingley and Temple Meads is another matter. Much has already been done, notably Box Tunnel and Keynsham, but some big jobs remain, mainly the two tunnels closest to Temple Meads. This could be a reason for the truncation, but can't be the whole reason - why stop at Thingley when the coast is clear to Bath and slightly beyond? Another factor may be that the HOPS train, whilst doing what it was designed for, hasn't been the wonder we expected, because of the stuff buried trackside.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 10, 2017, 10:19:16
    The June 2016 milestones, which in some areas slightly revise the 'post Hendy' timescales, have a regulated output of "Didcot to Oxford complete" June 2019, so only 2 months into CP6.   

    But then there is also an entry for "entry into service for part of route section for train testing" due in Sept 2018.   That is only 18 months away, so I would have thought that at least some section of the route will carry on at a slightly slower pace, but I'd be surprised if there was an obvious withdrawal of the entire workforce for a significant period.

    Paul
    But didn't the Grayling deferral come after that? And Grayling gave no dates or even any guarantees that electrification would ever be completed.

    I would say that Sept 2018 was very unlikely given the lack of work undertaken between Kennington Junction and Oxford. No piling or even preparation for piling has ever taken place between those two places.

    There's a December 2016 milestones published now, with the GW electrification section amended at that time, so post-Grayling.  As you forecast, most affected route sections now show CP6.   Paddington to Didcot in Dec 2017 is still there though, as we'd expect.

    http://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Enhancements-Delivery-Plan-September-2016.pdf (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Enhancements-Delivery-Plan-September-2016.pdf)

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on January 10, 2017, 10:25:32
    Whatever the reality of the situation I hope they don't use the Oxford station rebuild as an excuse not to complete electrification to Oxford. As as far as I can tell there is no approved/finalised plan for the rebuild and their certainly doesn't appear to be any money so we could be waiting a long time/forever.

    That is my main concern.  It could be at least ten years before any new station is built.

    10 years is likely timescale IMHO.  I am optimistic that "pause" means "pause" and that electrification will continue into the foreseeable future although at a more measured and steady pace to allow time for proper planning and integration.  If that is the case it might take 10 years anyway to get thorough the work already announced (on GWML, and MML) and so waiting until the new station in Oxford is up might be entirely sensible. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on January 10, 2017, 10:38:04
    Whatever the reality of the situation I hope they don't use the Oxford station rebuild as an excuse not to complete electrification to Oxford. As as far as I can tell there is no approved/finalised plan for the rebuild and their certainly doesn't appear to be any money so we could be waiting a long time/forever.

    That is my main concern.  It could be at least ten years before any new station is built.

    And any guesses on the revamp of Temple Meads?

    A lot of the "preppy-uppy" work for electrification of Filton Bank has been done, if not all. I was beginning to think that was all for naught until I saw Paul's earlier post - you have been right on timings before, Paul, and I trust your judgement. It would make sense to get Four Track, Now! out of the way with electrification in mind rather than do it with it in place, then throw up the knitting after it's finished.

    Between Thingley and Temple Meads is another matter. Much has already been done, notably Box Tunnel and Keynsham, but some big jobs remain, mainly the two tunnels closest to Temple Meads. This could be a reason for the truncation, but can't be the whole reason - why stop at Thingley when the coast is clear to Bath and slightly beyond? Another factor may be that the HOPS train, whilst doing what it was designed for, hasn't been the wonder we expected, because of the stuff buried trackside.
    AIUI the very first stage of "preppy-uppy" work was clearing the embankments of undergrowth and rubbish thrown over the fences; I suspect also mending some of those fences. That looks like being an ongoing job for as long as the railway is in use.  :-\


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: autotank on January 10, 2017, 18:06:50
    From the document linked to above it says the first timetabled public use of the infrastructure between Maidenhead and Didcot will be in CP6? Surely this isn't the case - I would have thought the IEPs will use the juice for as far as possible once they start running. Also I thought the plan was to start using 387's to Didcot sooner than CP6?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on January 10, 2017, 18:12:08
    A mistake I think.  To be honest the whole document is a bit of a shambles with CP6 cut-and-pasted all over the place.  At this rate they'll be no 'new' CP6 enhancements at all, just a load of stuff carried over from CP5 - some of which will probably be shelved completely.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 10, 2017, 19:25:33
    A mistake I think.  To be honest the whole document is a bit of a shambles with CP6 cut-and-pasted all over the place.  At this rate they'll be no 'new' CP6 enhancements at all, just a load of stuff carried over from CP5 - some of which will probably be shelved completely.

    Actually, that first timetabled use has been given as CP6 ever since the Hendy review a year ago. It is slightly out of line with the dates for availability of IEPs (last one July 2018, unless becoming a bi-mode takes longer) and wires (some much earlier). Introduction of the full timetable might well be a bit later, if it relies on the whole system for its timings to work. However, the Hendy report did set that at December 2018, and was written before the "all bi-modes" decision .

    Of course if it's only a "must do by this date" kind of milestone, it doesn't preclude using juice earlier.

    Also, I did say a little while ago that no completion dates had been Graylinged from CP5 to CP6. However I'd forgotten about the branch lines, which did have December 2018 as their EIS milestone. They are just too easy to defer, I guess. My apologies to the poor old branch lines for writing them off once again.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Kenny on January 10, 2017, 21:59:45
    The reasons I suspect the electrification is going slightly North of Didcot are -

    • Didcot area is one of the more complex areas in the GWEP, it makes sense to complete it all at one time.
      There may also be some train operational reasons for completing the lines North of the Didcot
      With the ATFS site to the West of Didcot Station there may be some alternative feeding arrangements via the route North.
    One of the principle reasons for not going to Oxford is the rebuild of Oxford Station once that has been sorted out wiring to Oxford is quite simple

    Oxford Station masterplan - Work is underway to attract public sector funding to deliver the Masterplan

    https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20182/regeneration_and_development/949/oxford_station_masterplan

    Timeline of progress

        April 2013 to September 2013 - Stakeholder consultation
        24 July 2014 - Launch of Station Masterplan
        1 & 2 August 2014 - Station Masterplan exhibition in the Westgate Centre
        Autumn 2015 - Launch of an architectural competition inviting international firms to develop concept designs of a new station, bridge and transport interchange
        December 2015 - Station competition public exhibition
        Ongoing - Work is underway to attract public sector funding to deliver the Masterplan



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on January 13, 2017, 18:01:05

    Indeed, the wind is unreliable, and sometimes so absent that wind turbines become net consumers of electricity.


    True, but then all generating plant consumes some energy, and wind turbines don't consume much compared to what you get out. How much energy does a coal pulveriser consume?


    Developing batteries to store excess power for its own sake... ...is at present a nonsensical idea.



    Quite so. But I don't think anyone was suggesting storing it for fun.


    Now, if trains can be run on solar power, and you need somewhere to put the panels, why not on the train roof?


    I has crossed my mind that putting solar panels above the track might (along with the OHLE) not be completely insane - perhaps they could start at Goring?


    FTR, FT, N! awaits the outcome of the proposal to build a tidal lagoon somewhere near Swansea with interest. So long as this doesn't solve one problem but cause two more, it could be a goer on a national scale. We know with remarkable accuracy what the tide will be doing there at any given time within the next 100 years, and the energy density of water is higher than that of wind.


    Yes, this looks interesting, with your provisos.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: froome on January 13, 2017, 19:33:47


    Now, if trains can be run on solar power, and you need somewhere to put the panels, why not on the train roof?


    I has crossed my mind that putting solar panels above the track might (along with the OHLE) not be completely insane - perhaps they could start at Goring?




    Those are two ideas that have been in the back of my head for some time. To me above railway lines and on carriages offer potential solutions to where do you put up enough panels to really make a difference to renewable energy production. It is a topic worth having a separate thread about.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 13, 2017, 22:28:27


    Now, if trains can be run on solar power, and you need somewhere to put the panels, why not on the train roof?


    I has crossed my mind that putting solar panels above the track might (along with the OHLE) not be completely insane - perhaps they could start at Goring?


    Lets put a bit of context to solar electricity generation -

    Blackfriars station roof has 4,400 solar panels which are South facing with next to no shadows cast over them and generate 1.1 MW peak a 12 car class 700 is 5 MW

    Therefore to power one 12 car class 700 you need an area 5 times the roof of Blackfriars station  and that's on a bright sunny day.

    Renewable have there place, and are important in the energy mix; but they are not the total solution we will always need some hydrocarbon and some nuclear generation.

    The problem with solar and wind generation is they do not provide any inertia on the National Grid, the National Grid relies of the spinning mass of large generators to maintain sync, to manage power factor and to stabilise the voltage on the system especially after a fault. Because solar is DC, like wise the inter connectors across to Europe are DC these produces ac via an inverter which as no spinning mass and wind turbines just don't have the mass and many of these are dc machines feeding via an inverter


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on January 14, 2017, 09:25:09

    I has crossed my mind that putting solar panels above the track might (along with the OHLE) not be completely insane - perhaps they could start at Goring?

    Maybe they could put wind turbines on each stanchion as well, again with the trial at Goring. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: JayMac on January 14, 2017, 10:04:35
    Nice brownfield site just up the road from Goring at Didcot for a nuclear power station. Water supply could be provided by diverting, or digging a tributary from, the Thames.

    Residents of Goring will surely approve. ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on January 14, 2017, 11:16:06
    Nice brownfield site just up the road from Goring at Didcot for a nuclear power station. Water supply could be provided by diverting, or digging a tributary from, the Thames.

    It would get my tick - and its current chimney is visible from my house (well just and then from on top the roof!). Safe from tsunamis I reckon and pretty much carbon free. Great existing infrastructure made for a power station.  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on January 14, 2017, 11:58:49
    The current Didcot Power Station isn't in Didcot anyway, it is in Sutton Courteney (http://maps.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/website/showmap/main.asp?lyr=V_PAR&ref=SUT&title=Sutton%20Courtenay%20Parish%20Council).

    Make more sense to build close to the Thames - Goring or Pangbourne perhaps ... :)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on January 14, 2017, 21:05:20
    Nice brownfield site just up the road from Goring at Didcot for a nuclear power station. Water supply could be provided by diverting, or digging a tributary from, the Thames.

    Residents of Goring will surely approve. ;)

    The residents (well, a couple) of Goring are far too busy fighting against the Goring Hydro Electric plans, Tesco and Network Rail. Not sure they would have time for that one too ;-)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on January 15, 2017, 15:10:12

    Maybe they could put wind turbines on each stanchion as well, again with the trial at Goring. 

    One more thing to go wrong, although with the right accountant and business model, plus maybe a relative on the Commons select committee for climate change etc, it could provide a healthy supply of subsidies. And possibly even a small amount of occasional electricity.

    Nice brownfield site just up the road from Goring at Didcot for a nuclear power station. Water supply could be provided by diverting, or digging a tributary from, the Thames.

    Residents of Goring will surely approve. ;)

    Probably not enough water. Trawsfynydd was the only nuclear plant not built on the coast, and that had a serious dam to hold water.

    Even so, the residents of Goring might not all turn it down, like the residents of quite a long way around Hinkley are keen to get building. Although as BNM points out, their back yards are precious to them.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 15, 2017, 15:54:54
    Been out in the rain earlier to take some pics of the OHLE progress in my locality on the B&H, although the first pic is not of OHLE:

    1. Ufton Nervet, site of former level crossing
    2. Looking W from atop the new bridge
    3. Looking E from the same location


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 15, 2017, 15:58:07
    ...then a few more at Aldermaston and Midgham:

    1. Looking W at Aldermaston. There is a housing estate with back fences right up to trackside on the south side of the track beyond the road bridge, so it looks like all the infrastructure has been piled from the north side and spans across
    2. Looking E at Midgham
    3. Looking W at Midgham


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on January 20, 2017, 09:26:52
    Just had a leaflet from Network Rail through my letterbox advertising local Public Exhibitions in various Village Halls in the Pangbourne and Goring area in late January and early February to show and seek views on the “range of potential measures, or options, which would help to reduce the visual impact of the OLE in the area”.  Members of the NR project team will be on hand.

    The information will also be available online from 21st January at networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/oxfordshire (http://networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/oxfordshire)

    Well done NR on this initiative.

    Edit - the leaflet scanned better than I thought it would, so here it is:

    Network Rail has now postponed these consultation sessions, and has announced: 

    "Network Rail has been working with an Advisory Group of Natural England and AONB Conservation Boards to agree how we can manage the visual impact of the new electrification overhead lines in the Chilterns and North Wessex Downs Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. We have jointly agreed to postpone the planned public drop in sessions until later in the year to enable us to jointly undertake further work. We will be re-advertising dates of public engagement events in due course. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused by the postponement of the events."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on January 20, 2017, 10:35:44
    Network Rail has now postponed these consultation sessions, and has announced: 

    "Network Rail has been working with an Advisory Group of Natural England and AONB Conservation Boards to agree how we can manage the visual impact of the new electrification overhead lines in the Chilterns and North Wessex Downs Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. We have jointly agreed to postpone the planned public drop in sessions until later in the year to enable us to jointly undertake further work. We will be re-advertising dates of public engagement events in due course. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused by the postponement of the events."

    That could just be a polite way of saying that they are still poles* apart, having briefed the above groups that a total rebuild of the entire infrastructure is not at all realistic...

    * or masts or stanchions, I suppose...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on January 20, 2017, 10:45:44
    Network Rail has now postponed these consultation sessions, and has announced: 

    "Network Rail has been working with an Advisory Group of Natural England and AONB Conservation Boards to agree how we can manage the visual impact of the new electrification overhead lines in the Chilterns and North Wessex Downs Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. We have jointly agreed to postpone the planned public drop in sessions until later in the year to enable us to jointly undertake further work. We will be re-advertising dates of public engagement events in due course. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused by the postponement of the events."

    That could just be a polite way of saying that they are still poles* apart, having briefed the above groups that a total rebuild of the entire infrastructure is not at all realistic...

    * or masts or stanchions, I suppose...

    Paul

    Could also be a delaying tactic. Once you have an operational electrified railway, it becomes much more expensive and disruptive to reinstall masts, plus by that point the good commuters of Goring will be enjoying their new 387's, momentum will have been lost and something else can be found to moan about.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Jason on January 20, 2017, 12:02:27
    “range of potential measures, or options, which would help to reduce the visual impact of the OLE in the area”

    The OLE looks spectacularly ugly in any area. Looking west from Reading station transfer deck the view is hideous.

    All in my humble opinion of course.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on January 20, 2017, 12:18:40
    Quote
    Quote
    Looking west from Reading station transfer deck the view is hideous.

    It could be argued that a railway is an industrial site, so if it's good on the eye aswell (thinks Glenfinnan, Ribblehead etc) then that's a bonus.

    It may well be a bit unsightly, but if that means it's strong, doesn't break and lasts for years that has to be a good thing.

    IMHO


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on January 20, 2017, 13:19:11
    “range of potential measures, or options, which would help to reduce the visual impact of the OLE in the area”

    The OLE looks spectacularly ugly in any area. Looking west from Reading station transfer deck the view is hideous.

    All in my humble opinion of course.

    Electricity pylons  poles and wires, telephone wires, roads, satellite dishes, water treatment plants, hospitals, houses even, all detract from the natural appearance of things, but no one objects to those and the clear benefits they bring, so why should a few stanchions and wires on a railway be an issue if it ensures and fast, clean, reliable and robust service? Or should we just keep the 40 year old trains and continue the Thames valley infrastructure failure thread ad infinitum?!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 20, 2017, 15:12:39
    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on January 20, 2017, 18:21:46

    The OLE looks spectacularly ugly in any area. Looking west from Reading station transfer deck the view is hideous.

    All in my humble opinion of course.

    Electricity pylons  poles and wires, telephone wires, roads, satellite dishes, water treatment plants, hospitals, houses even, all detract from the natural appearance of things, but no one objects to those and the clear benefits they bring, so why should a few stanchions and wires on a railway be an issue if it ensures and fast, clean, reliable and robust service? Or should we just keep the 40 year old trains and continue the Thames valley infrastructure failure thread ad infinitum?!

    Human intervention in the landscape need not detract excessively from the natural or historic environment. UK designers have for centuries integrated these successfully, so much that their creations are often now seen as essential to the landscape and themselves protected from disfigurement. Careful design is functional, economic in materials and intrusion, uses craft skills, observes scholarly geometric proportion and may use vernacular (i.e locally accepted) materials, methods and art as appropriate.

    The objection to the AoNB OLE is that it is not well designed, with irregular lengths  (and overlaps) of masts and portals, it is uneconomic in materials, such as portal slots rather than bracing and heavy clamps, it is randomly irregular (i,e sloppily laid out) in that masts are sometimes tall enough to hang the 50kV feeder, sometimes not, involving random extra spindly supports. The design is not consistent in that there are portals inter-spaced with cantilevers. The foundations do not show but are said to be excessive. There is no reasonable environmental objection to a bulkier OLE design capable of supporting the heavier, higher tension contact wire, just to one that is clearly sub-optimal and not the fruit of the best brains the UK possesses. Sir G G Scott's K6 red telephone boxes spring to mind.

    While I don't agree with spending serious money on altering what's done - any money available needs to go on extending the wires - the bodies and individuals responsible do need to be held to account. This probably means the civil servants and politicians who thinned out BR/RT/NR's excellent technical staff, staged a 20 year electrification strike followed by driving half a dozen simultaneous major wirings, rather than anyone in the Railway Industry itself.

    PS: Trump, in his acceptance speech today mentioned building "railways" not "railroads".

    Rule Britannia

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on January 21, 2017, 00:05:07

    The OLE looks spectacularly ugly in any area. Looking west from Reading station transfer deck the view is hideous.

    All in my humble opinion of course.

    Electricity pylons  poles and wires, telephone wires, roads, satellite dishes, water treatment plants, hospitals, houses even, all detract from the natural appearance of things, but no one objects to those and the clear benefits they bring, so why should a few stanchions and wires on a railway be an issue if it ensures and fast, clean, reliable and robust service? Or should we just keep the 40 year old trains and continue the Thames valley infrastructure failure thread ad infinitum?!

    Human intervention in the landscape need not detract excessively from the natural or historic environment. UK designers have for centuries integrated these successfully, so much that their creations are often now seen as essential to the landscape and themselves protected from disfigurement. Careful design is functional, economic in materials and intrusion, uses craft skills, observes scholarly geometric proportion and may use vernacular (i.e locally accepted) materials, methods and art as appropriate.

    The objection to the AoNB OLE is that it is not well designed, with irregular lengths  (and overlaps) of masts and portals, it is uneconomic in materials, such as portal slots rather than bracing and heavy clamps, it is randomly irregular (i,e sloppily laid out) in that masts are sometimes tall enough to hang the 50kV feeder, sometimes not, involving random extra spindly supports. The design is not consistent in that there are portals inter-spaced with cantilevers. The foundations do not show but are said to be excessive. There is no reasonable environmental objection to a bulkier OLE design capable of supporting the heavier, higher tension contact wire, just to one that is clearly sub-optimal and not the fruit of the best brains the UK possesses. Sir G G Scott's K6 red telephone boxes spring to mind.

    While I don't agree with spending serious money on altering what's done - any money available needs to go on extending the wires - the bodies and individuals responsible do need to be held to account. This probably means the civil servants and politicians who thinned out BR/RT/NR's excellent technical staff, staged a 20 year electrification strike followed by driving half a dozen simultaneous major wirings, rather than anyone in the Railway Industry itself.

    PS: Trump, in his acceptance speech today mentioned building "railways" not "railroads".

    Rule Britannia

    OTC

    My highlighting in bold - there was no reference to the AONB specifically in the post I replied to, Jason mentioned that his opinion OLE was spectacularly ugly in any area, a point to which I generally disagree.

    With regards your PS, Trump is always at pains (along with many of his fellow country folk) to disclose his Scottish ancestry, so his use of 'railways' perhaps shouldn't be too surprising  ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 21, 2017, 13:12:26
    “range of potential measures, or options, which would help to reduce the visual impact of the OLE in the area”

    The OLE looks spectacularly ugly in any area. Looking west from Reading station transfer deck the view is hideous.

    All in my humble opinion of course.

    As an electrification engineer I think OLE structures have great elegance ....................

    Although I will admit the GWEP structures are rather robust  ;D

    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!

    I feel the designers have done a good job is reducing the profile


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on January 21, 2017, 15:13:57

    As an electrification engineer I think OLE structures have great elegance ....................

    Although I will admit the GWEP structures are rather robust.


    Agree generally. Coal smoke and exhaust steam are real blots on the landscape!

    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!
    I feel the designers have done a good job is reducing the profile

    The Royal Border Bridge at Berwick was also wired in the ECML Scheme in 1989. I think that it won an award. Interestingly it used portals. It showed that our designers are well up to the job.

    OTC




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on January 21, 2017, 18:48:06
    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!

    It may not surprise readers to know that there is a negative comment about it on the Goring Gap Facebook page.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 21, 2017, 21:26:18
    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!

    It may not surprise readers to know that there is a negative comment about it on the Goring Gap Facebook page.   

    Interesting but not yet in the Maidenhead Advertiser


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on January 22, 2017, 09:40:29
    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!

    It may not surprise readers to know that there is a negative comment about it on the Goring Gap Facebook page.   

    That does not surprise me as the folk in Goring are looking every where and anywhere to back up their case, if they have to resort to the Sounding Arch as evidence they are on a weak footing the design was approved by English Heritage and the Local Authorities because of the Sounding Arch Grade 1 listing.

    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!

    It may not surprise readers to know that there is a negative comment about it on the Goring Gap Facebook page.   

    Interesting but not yet in the Maidenhead Advertiser

    It might get comments in the spring / summer when the good folks of S/Bucks and Maidenhead come out of hibernation  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on January 22, 2017, 10:49:50
    Electricity pylons  poles and wires, telephone wires, roads, satellite dishes, water treatment plants, hospitals, houses even, all detract from the natural appearance of things, but no one objects to those and the clear benefits they bring, so why should a few stanchions and wires on a railway be an issue if it ensures and fast, clean, reliable and robust service? Or should we just keep the 40 year old trains and continue the Thames valley infrastructure failure thread ad infinitum?!
    Oh, I object to electricity pylons (the enormous metal lattice things), and I'm not the only one. Some of the objections to wind turbines in mid Wales actually stem from the associated pylons. In my opinion, those wires should be burried; yes it costs more but it is a better way of providing 'the benefit they bring'. Obviously you cannot do that with rail electrification wires, but the structures carrying them do not have to be as bulky, blocky and ugly as the GWML OHLE. It appears from some other electrified railways that it is perfectly possible to string up OHLE on relatively elegant supports, but sadly the GWML OHLE is anything but.

    A little visual clutter is necessary to get a modern, relatively clean, railway, but I'm not convinced that it needs to be as ugly as the GWML kit is.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on January 23, 2017, 12:05:07
    the structures carrying them do not have to be as bulky, blocky and ugly as the GWML OHLE. It appears from some other electrified railways that it is perfectly possible to string up OHLE on relatively elegant supports, but sadly the GWML OHLE is anything but.
    IMHO the problem we have is that the design does not square the circle between a lightweight and therefore unreliable design and a bulky, heavyweight and therefore reliable design.

    I would argue that we could have a design that is both elegant and robust, but probably not easily done in the context of an off the shelf modular system which is what they have chosen.  It was probably the right choice too as a bespoke design would be expensive and perhaps not reliable.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on January 23, 2017, 14:00:28
    The wires are up over Maidenhead Bridge. not heard any comments yet!

    It may not surprise readers to know that there is a negative comment about it on the Goring Gap Facebook page.   


      
    [/quote]

    [/quote]

    It might get comments in the spring / summer when the good folks of S/Bucks and Maidenhead come out of hibernation  ;D
    [/quote]


    Could you keep the noise down please? Some of us are trying to sleep.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on January 27, 2017, 11:36:23
    Thought this document was interesting (but posted on 23 January 2017???) ::) :P

    http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/resources/great-western-and-crossrail-xmas-work-map#


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on January 31, 2017, 12:22:10
    Here's something of an "I wonder what that really means" piece from the Bristol Post (http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/bristol-may-not-get-faster-electric-trains-because-of-bath/story-30098130-detail/story.html):
    Quote
    Bristol may not get faster electric trains because of Bath

    By The Bristol Post    Posted: January 31, 2017
    By Patrick Daly, Parliamentary Correspondent @thepatrickdaly

    Bristol might not get faster trains to London after all – because the overhead electric cables could spoil the landscape in "historic" Bath, according to the Transport Secretary.

    Ministers left the city stunned in November when they announced that the expected electrification of the line to Bristol Temple Meads would be delayed for as long as six years.

    The cleaner and faster rail service to the capital had been due to be unveiled in 2018, but the Department for Transport pushed the upgrade work between Temple Meads and Bath Spa back into Network Rail's 2019-24 construction period.

    The delay was blamed on spiralling costs, with the current £5.6 billion bill to electrify the Great Western line treble what was first estimated. Despite the setback for Bristol, Cardiff's electrification programme, which passes through Bristol Parkway station, would continue unabated, rail ministers confirmed.

    Electrification work has been delayed by the Government until 2024

    The DfT promised MPs that the decision was "not a cancellation" but Transport Secretary Chris Grayling has poured doubt over whether the track investment will ever be seen.

    In an interview with the Bristol Post, Mr Grayling indicated that he felt overhead cables going through Bath could blight the city's landscape, while leading to only limited improvements in journey times.

    The new trains being rolled out this year by route operator Great Western Railway will be dual-fuelled, meaning they can run on both electricity and diesel. The hybrid Hitachi trains, even without electrification between Bristol and Bath, will still shave 15 minutes off the journey to London, according to DfT.

    Mr Grayling said: "The arrival of hybrid technology means we don't have to put up unsightly overhead lines in places where either you wouldn't want them, like historic Bath, or through attractive country areas where you are not getting the speed gains.

    "And the truth is that [on] those routes into Bristol, new trains are arriving and will deliver the journey improvements anyway. So the question then becomes, do you have to put up electric cables through all of the route to deliver improvements?"

    The Epsom and Erwell MP said the city should not get "hung-up" on whether it gets electrified trains, despite being the largest city along the Paddington to Cardiff Great Western route.

    He said the "hundreds of millions" of pounds needed to electrify the line between Bristol and Bath could be reinvested into other transport projects, including MetroBus.

    Great Western Railway's new Hitachi trains will be able to run on both diesel and electric track.

    "The question is, if the train going through Bath is going to travel to Birmingham at exactly the same time, regardless of whether we have overhead cables or not, do we really want to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayers' money putting unsightly overhead cables through Bath? The new trains allow us to think differently about these projects," said the Cabinet minister.

    "Bristol would feel rightly short-changed if it wasn't getting new trains and the benefits of journey time improvements. But it is.

    "And actually, right now in Bristol, I want to look at ways of helping Bristol Metro[Bus] develop, I want to see smart ticketing around Bristol. Let's not get hung-up about the overhead lines right now, let's get hung-up about how we deliver a better service for passengers."

    Now, is that just the Grayling doing a bit of a Donald - giving a running commentary on his education, and so betraying how much it is needed? In this case, has  someone just told him about the earlier studies on ways to cope with gaps in electrification, and he's got all over-excited? And what's that about trains via Bath to Birmingham?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on January 31, 2017, 12:27:16
    Quote
    "The question is, if the train going through Bath is going to travel to Birmingham at exactly the same time"

    I knew that IEP had an innovative traction package, but I hadn't realised Hitachi had successfully implemented Douglas Adams' Infinite Improbability Drive.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on January 31, 2017, 13:13:48
    Quote
    "The question is, if the train going through Bath is going to travel to Birmingham at exactly the same time"

    I knew that IEP had an innovative traction package, but I hadn't realised Hitachi had successfully implemented Douglas Adams' Infinite Improbability Drive.

    As fitted to the new Heart Of Gold Class Fourty Two perhaps !....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on January 31, 2017, 14:41:34
    Won't repeat Stuving's quote to keep things neat, but someone is of course confusing Birmingham for Bristol.

    I wonder if Grayling is trying to justify inaction by appealing to naysayers? i.e. he thinks the good folk of Bath are all against the nasty electric wires, and Bristolians would rather have the money spent on MetroBus? If that's his strategy, then he's even more politically tone deaf than I thought he was, or his staff are mis-advising him to try and get him reshuffled.

    I rather suspect that Ben Howlett (Conservative MP for Bath), Charlotte Leslie (C. Bristol NW), and Michelle Donelan (C. Chippenham) will have words to say as well. He may be technically correct that the 80x's can match the HST times on the section, but of course electric trains accelerate even faster, are cheaper to build and run, are quieter and don't pollute (well, at least not along the route anyway). Not to mention that electrification would support a much better local service, plus potentially freight out of Portbury and Avonmouth.

    If Mr Grayling really wants to buy Bristolians off in lieu of electrification then I would suggest that he needs to be talking about at least the redoubling of the Severn Beach line in addition to Portishead and the full Henbury loop.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: welshman on January 31, 2017, 18:59:33
    Failing Grayling again.  He caused complete chaos at the MoJ, which was partly undone by Michael Gove (surprisingly).  Now he's making a pig's breakfast, to coin a phrase, of the DoT and especially railways.

    Apart from the practicalities, the postponement of public expenditure like this is economically illiterate.  The job gets partly done and then the contracting team is disbanded and made redundant or goes elsewehere.  When work resumes the cost increases again and there's more delay while the same arguments are rehearsed.  2030 here we come.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on January 31, 2017, 23:04:51

    At the risk of my personal safety, I will speak up for Grayling.

    Faced with a GWEP cost 3.6 times budget, repeated to lesser extents on other wirings (like Rugeley, x2) it was necessary to cobble together something of a working system within the money to hand. It is probably true that the DfT is itself partly responsible, buying IEP and allowing the revision of clearances but the high output (!) train and the GW signal cables were likely down to NR. The choice  is reasonable, except for the steeply graded 3km Box tunnel, (track lowered in 2015?), involving largely level routes below 125mph. The IEP has saved the day and will now allow electric traction for trains terminating beyond the wires. Walmsley's Modern Railways article this month on bi-modding(?) the XC voyagers is relevant.

    What Grayling has forgotten is that electric traction (in bulk) will still have capacity, capital, energy, maintenance, reliability and amenity advantages. I imagine that both GWR and NR will eventually tire of even Hitachi's diesels and find ways of extending the wires, even if partially. IEP also suggests other wiring opportunities such as the 30 mile hump from Newton Abbot to Laira on which, like Box, even IEP would struggle. A re-reading of the 1931 Weir report wouldn't hurt; the ECML had a return of 7.2% against the WCML of 2.5%, simply because the EC used its wires three times as much (Sec. 39).

    I understand that the Shotts (Scotland) wiring contract is to be let; 75 track miles for £49M, so perhaps the industry can get it together after all.

    Fingers crossed,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on January 31, 2017, 23:12:30
    Update towards 5th Feb when the big switch on occurs at Taplow.

    The feeder wires which are above the gantries have been slung over the Relief line by Lent Rise bridge.

    I've been volunteered to stand next to the old footbridge at Taplow Station to see how big a shock I get touching the metal!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on February 02, 2017, 17:34:50
    I wonder if Grayling is trying to justify inaction by appealing to naysayers? i.e. he thinks the good folk of Bath are all against the nasty electric wires, and Bristolians would rather have the money spent on MetroBus? If that's his strategy, then he's even more politically tone deaf than I thought he was, or his staff are mis-advising him to try and get him reshuffled.

    I rather suspect that Ben Howlett (Conservative MP for Bath), Charlotte Leslie (C. Bristol NW), and Michelle Donelan (C. Chippenham) will have words to say as well. ....

    Of course, while there are people in Bath who don't want the wires, there are also people in Bath who want a reduction of pollutants which would come from the majority of train traffic being electric.   Not sure of numbers in Bath, but take a look at this Bath Chronicle Article (http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/bad-air-pollution-bath-40-000-people-die-uk-year/story-28837177-detail/story.html) which refers to extra UK deaths caused by bad air, and highlights where it's bad in Bath.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on February 03, 2017, 13:48:12
    What we also have to remember is that the GWML electrification programme isn't just overhead wires - it's also extensive resignalling, trackwork and civil structures on a route that for much of it's length is amongst the oldest and most intensively worked in the world, including lots of listed structures, the Severn Tunnel and many of Brunel's practices were highly questionable by today's standards. And no-one in the UK has electrified a mainline in a generation. So little wonder that it has come out a tad expensive.

    On the other hand, with the benefit of experience, wiring a route in better physical condition that has been recently resignalled, that was built later, by a more conventional builder, less intensively worked and with fewer fiddly bits could well prove to be considerably less expensive. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on February 04, 2017, 12:09:27
    Switch on from Stockley Bridge to Maidenhead postponed to 5 March.

    So won't be able to report until then if I am electrocuted hugging the upright on the old footbridge at Taplow or if my wi-fi is affected by induction from the energised wires.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on February 05, 2017, 16:02:53
    IEPs maybe causing interference on the communication network. Something is, and the 387 tests to Didcot this morning was also looking to see if the same problems occurred. If not, then the IEPs will need Hitachi to do some work on the IEPs to fix.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on February 05, 2017, 20:20:05
    I've been volunteered to stand next to the old footbridge at Taplow Station to see how big a shock I get touching the metal!

    I think that the technique is to take a rubber mat to stand on, put your left hand in your pocket and touch the metal guard with the back of your right hand.

    Then you might come back and tell us all about it.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on February 05, 2017, 22:57:33
    IEPs maybe causing interference on the communication network. Something is, and the 387 tests to Didcot this morning was also looking to see if the same problems occurred. If not, then the IEPs will need Hitachi to do some work on the IEPs to fix.

    A usually reliable source on WNXX reckons that both 387s and 800s were tested on Saturday night and there were no repeats of the previous issues, so subject to data analyis and official clearance, it should be all systems go with driver training between Didcot and Reading TCD.

    Hayes to Taplow was supposed to have been switched on yesterday I believe, but apparently now delayed to 5th March, though it may be that we're now supposed to consider it live to be on the safe side.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lbraine on February 07, 2017, 08:12:26
    Seem whilst coming through western approaches to Reading this AM on the relief lines - outside the Traincare depot : one nice shiny green EMU (class 387 8 believe)

    I wonder if it was hauled (no evidence of this) or it actually made it under the wires ?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rower40 on February 07, 2017, 08:45:08
    A usually reliable source on WNXX reckons that both 387s and 800s were tested on Saturday night and there were no repeats of the previous issues, so subject to data analyis and official clearance, it should be all systems go with driver training between Didcot and Reading TCD.

    Hayes to Taplow was supposed to have been switched on yesterday I believe, but apparently now delayed to 5th March, though it may be that we're now supposed to consider it live to be on the safe side.
    I've never known of electric trains causing interfErEnC rr5%a|ef !ds3@<  +++ NO CARRIER +++


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on February 07, 2017, 10:37:05
    Seem whilst coming through western approaches to Reading this AM on the relief lines - outside the Traincare depot : one nice shiny green EMU (class 387 8 believe)

    I wonder if it was hauled (no evidence of this) or it actually made it under the wires ?

    Arrived yesterday lunchtime, impossible to make it here under the wires, unless manufactured somewhere between the depot and Didcot. A loco from Crewe picked the 387 up from Bletchley, dropped it off at Reading depot and headed back up to Crewe. In the past it has been a class 37, although I haven't bothered checking what did yesterdays run.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lbraine on February 07, 2017, 15:45:45
    Ahh - I didn't think it would be that route. For some reason I thought Bletchley to Reading would be via WCML and GWML.

    I read some where that they would be arriving at the rate of 1 set every two weeks. Reading is going to look full(er) soon.

    Also - I saw the new sidings by the Plasser works outside West Ealing had 2 8 car units stabled in them already.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on February 07, 2017, 18:36:02
    Ahh - I didn't think it would be that route. For some reason I thought Bletchley to Reading would be via WCML and GWML.


    Correct, they do run that route, however the electrification work between Maidenhead and Reading depot hasn't been finished yet, also the section between Hayes and Maidenhead hasn't been switched on yet albeit due to happen in the coming weeks.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on February 07, 2017, 23:06:45
    Steventon Parish News for January 2017 (http://www.steventon.info/paramonthly.html) is reporting that in the end the bridge will be rebuilt and the level crossings will stay open!

    So that years of delay to end up back where they started at huge public expense. 

    A decision due by May and then they still have to get permission from the District Council because it is listed. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on February 08, 2017, 18:34:53
    Update towards 5th Feb when the big switch on occurs at Taplow.

    The feeder wires which are above the gantries have been slung over the Relief line by Lent Rise bridge.

    I've been volunteered to stand next to the old footbridge at Taplow Station to see how big a shock I get touching the metal!
    Switch on from Stockley Bridge to Maidenhead postponed to 5 March.

    So won't be able to report until then if I am electrocuted hugging the upright on the old footbridge at Taplow or if my wi-fi is affected by induction from the energised wires.


    You wont feel a thing ..........................


    However if you do you wont be around to tell any one about it  :o


    Now let me think  ??? how many occasions I leant against OLE and other structures during testing of OLE  ................... not enough fingers and toes so lost count


    and still here to tell the tail .................... even operated OLE switches when the OLE fell off of said switch and struck the structure of the switch I was operating ................... need clean under pants after wards though  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on March 01, 2017, 14:36:09
    Looks like 5th March may be on for energising around Taplow. Feeder wire now strung above Mainline gantries by house.

    Have to go hug the footbridge  pillar next week.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on March 02, 2017, 10:42:05
    Should I look out for sparks when they switch on on Sunday!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 02, 2017, 22:09:07
    That knitting machine's been out to Reading again. Now there's a third platform with wires running through it (P8), as well as a start on some of the fiddly bits at the ends.

    Platform 1 has also been done, as you can see. But I can't help feeling there's something missing here ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on March 03, 2017, 05:50:29
    I don't know. It looks like a robust - and hopefully plastic - stanchion  :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 03, 2017, 08:37:31
    I don't know. It looks like a robust - and hopefully plastic - stanchion  :o

    Well, structural steel certainly will undergo significant plastic deformation, once the limit of its elastic strain has been reached. If that's what you meant.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on March 03, 2017, 09:51:47
    Quote
    How not to do it! MPs blast 'unacceptable' handling of bungled Great Western Railway upgrade:

    Report published weeks before construction of High Speed 2 line gets under way
    Public Accounts Committee slams Department of Transport and Network Rail
    Estimated cost of electrifying line between London and Swansea soared £1.2bn
    Committee’s chair called it a ‘stark example of how not to run a major project’

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4277098/MPs-blast-unacceptable-handling-Rail-upgrade.html

    Interesting day of the week to try and 'bury' a bad news story  ::)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 03, 2017, 10:44:57
    The PAC report (https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/776/77602.htm), for which the guilty were grilled in December, is published today.

    This, from GWR's written submission (http://data.parliament.uk/WrittenEvidence/CommitteeEvidence.svc/EvidenceDocument/Public%20Accounts/The%20Great%20Western%20Railway/written/44440.html), is probably the most interesting in this forum:

    Quote
    The DfT also accepted our recommendation for GWR to procure an additional seven Intercity Express Trains, giving us enough trains to operate bi-mode trains on fast trains from London Paddington to Oxford, despite the deferral of the Didcot to Oxford section of electrification. We are retaining some of the current Turbo diesel trains to operate direct local peak services between Reading and Oxford, but most local journeys through Didcot to Oxford will require a change of train at off peak times.

    In addition, subject to an infrastructure change, the additional bi-mode trains we have procured will enable GWR to run bi-mode trains through to Bedwyn, meaning customers between Newbury and Bedwyn will retain their direct London services, overcoming the need to switch from diesel to electric trains at Newbury.

    Changes in the shape and speed of Thames Valley electrification does mean we will need to retain more diesel trains in the London area, and the rate of cascade will be slower than originally envisaged. This will affect our planned cascade of vehicles to Bristol, and from there to the South West. To help mitigate this, we have put forward a suggestion to the DfT that we retain a number of upgraded HST trains, running in shorter formations, to provide some of the promised regional services across the South West. This should allow us to meet our promises on capacity and frequency improvements by early 2019. We are in the final stages of discussion with the DfT in this regard, and hope to be able to discuss in more detail shortly.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 03, 2017, 10:51:41
    Platform 1 has also been done, as you can see. But I can't help feeling there's something missing here

    End of run insulators perhaps?  I think they are normally fitted later by cutting and splicing.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oxonhutch on March 03, 2017, 11:07:13
    I don't know. It looks like a robust - and hopefully plastic - stanchion  :o

    Well, structural steel certainly will undergo significant plastic deformation, once the limit of its elastic strain has been reached. If that's what you meant.

    As above with Paul7755 - I was expecting some insulation between the OHL and the - grounded - stanchion.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 03, 2017, 13:19:05
    From The BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-39143416)

    Quote
    The electrification of the Great Western rail line has been described by MPs as a "stark example of how not to run a major project".
    The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said "mismanagement" of the project had left customers "angry and frustrated".
    It warns "similar flaws" could impact on planned electrification schemes on Midlands and TransPennine routes.
    Network Rail claimed it had "learnt lessons" and major projects no longer start before being "properly scoped".
    However, doubts have been expressed that the plan to electrify the London to Cardiff line can be delivered by December 2018 and to a budget of £2.8bn, while the PAC described a £1.2bn increase in costs "in the space of a year" as "staggering and unacceptable".
    'Appalling waste'
    Among its recommendations it said the DfT and Network Rail should reassess the case for electrification section-by-section and fund schemes "only where worthwhile benefits for passengers could not be achieved otherwise at lower cost".
    The committee added Network Rail needed to produce "realistic cost estimates" and have "robust and detailed" plans.
    Meg Hillier MP, chair of the PAC, said mismanagement of the Great Western programme has hit taxpayers hard and left many people angry and frustrated.
    "This is a stark example of how not to run a major project, from flawed planning at the earliest stage to weak accountability and what remain serious questions about the reasons for embarking on the work in the first place.
    "The sums of public money wasted are appalling - not least the £330m additional costs the Department for Transport will have to pay to keep the trains running because of delays to electrification."
    Network Rail said the modernisation was agreed in 2009, "long before the scale of the work was properly understood".
    "Network Rail and Department for Transport (DfT) have learnt the lessons from the poor early planning of this project," a spokesman said.
    "Today we do not take forward major projects until they are properly scoped, properly planned and we have a robust estimate of what the cost will be."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 03, 2017, 14:42:56
    Quote
    Network Rail said the modernisation was agreed in 2009, "long before the scale of the work was properly understood".
    "Network Rail and Department for Transport (DfT) have learnt the lessons from the poor early planning of this project," a spokesman said.
    "Today we do not take forward major projects until they are properly scoped, properly planned and we have a robust estimate of what the cost will be."

    Hang on a minute, thats what the much vaunted NR GRIP process is supposed to provide.  That process has been in place for nearly 15 years now.  Time for heads to roll in NR. :(


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 03, 2017, 14:57:18
    Hmmm - project too big for GRIP maybe?

    Also, if Government ask NR to perform a project "we want to electrify the GWR", do you then say 'hang on a few months while we do a GRIP set of reports. It might take a year or two as its a mammoth project"

    Can between a x and a y, I feel.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 03, 2017, 15:31:12
    Hmmm - project too big for GRIP maybe?

    Also, if Government ask NR to perform a project "we want to electrify the GWR", do you then say 'hang on a few months while we do a GRIP set of reports. It might take a year or two as its a mammoth project"

    Can between a x and a y, I feel.
    Having implemented many large projects over the past 50 years I can assure you that it would have been a very brave person who tried to shortcut the NR GRIP process, which after all was introduced by a certain Chief Executive by the name of Coucher. He didn't hesitate in finding a way of getting rid of anybody if they didn't follow 'his' rules.  My personal view, following recent involvement in some significant resignalling projects, is that NR have lost all the personell with the necessary experience and skill set to be able to stand up with confidence and say NO. :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 03, 2017, 16:54:09
    Paul Maynard has been on the telly today. Saying, and I paraphrase and interpret, that there is no longer any need to do the electrification to Bristol ever, because we have all these bi-mode trains. Oh, and there won't be any cascade of stock to Bristol for the Metro.

    Oh dear.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on March 03, 2017, 22:39:04
    I can assure you that it would have been a very brave person who tried to shortcut the NR GRIP process

    I can believe that that is true of those at NR.  But part of the fiasco was caused by some idiot ordering the trains when the infrastructure enhancement was still at a very early stage of the GRIP process.  That was a stupid and expensive mistake.  NR were not guilty of that.  FGW probably wasn't either.  It was the DfT who ordered the trains from Hitachi.  I am sure it was mere coincidence that the trains were ordered shortly after the PM and Chancellor went to Japan on a trade mission and that they returned with a large order for Airbuses with UK-built wings and engines.  In fact it must be a coincidence because I think that what a cynic might think I was implying couldn't possible happen not least because it would be illegal under WTO rules.

    It does seem though that whatever fault lies with NR, someone pushed the start button before the designs, and therefore the costs and timescales had been finalised.  And the only person who can push the start button on a project of that size is HMG   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 04, 2017, 07:28:11
    It does seem though that whatever fault lies with NR, someone pushed the start button before the designs, and therefore the costs and timescales had been finalised.  And the only person who can push the start button on a project of that size is HMG   

    Hmm.  Yes politicians, like small children, do like instant gratification.  They've made a decision they want people to get on with that - even when that is ill advised. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on March 04, 2017, 10:06:33
    The more interesting aspect to me concerned needing to get hundreds of separate local permissions for works rather than getting one for the whole scheme via the DfT SoS. They couldn't explain why that had been done except that they would have needed to have more detailed designs available to go this way. Maybe the thought was they needed people to get metaphorical shovels into the ground to show they had started. Whatever, they certainly found the condition, even the existing designs of infrastructure weren't as they had thought.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on March 04, 2017, 10:25:39
    Apologies if this has already been highlighted.....

    http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2017-03-03/rail-electrification-sums-of-public-money-wasted-are-appalling/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 04, 2017, 14:27:06
    Airport Junction to Maidenhead switch-on has been delayed again so not happening this weekend.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on March 04, 2017, 22:41:17
    For an in-house view, perhaps - from Civil Service World (https://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/how-not-run-major-project-%E2%80%93-dft-firing-line-over-great-western-rail-upgrade):

    Quote
    "How not to run a major project" – DfT in the firing line over Great Western rail upgrade

    Public Accounts Committee says accountability system for major electrification programme was too complex, and casts doubt on cost estimates even after £1.2bn increase

    The Department for Transport has been urged to learn the lessons of "serious failings" in one of its key rail modernisation programmes, with MPs warning that major problems with the DfT and Network Rail's Great Western upgrade risk being repeated in future schemes.

    The Public Accounts Committee last reported on the department's plan to electrify the Great Western Main Line, which runs between Maidenhead and Cardiff, in 2015, after it emerged that estimated costs for the programme had risen by £1.2bn in a single year, with the completion date slipping by up to three years.

    The latest report from the cross-party group of MPs attempts to dig into the detail, and finds that there were "significant failings" in the design, planning and costing of the programme.

    The PAC says that the "tripartite" system of accountability for the GWR project, which saw the DfT setting high-level requirements, and the Office of Rail and Road then scrutinising Network Rail’s plans, was "too complex", with the DfT failing to scrutinise Network Rail's cost estimates effectively "despite the very significant sums of public money at risk".

    "Depite being liable to pay £400,000 per day to lease new trains that could not be used until the overhead electrification was complete, the department did not adequately challenge Network Rail’s plans to carry out the infrastructure work," the report finds.

    According to the PAC's report, the department also did not do enough to integrate the different elements of the rail modernisation programme "in a joined-up way", instead managing electrification and the roll-out of new trains as separate projects until March 2015.

    The committee notes that the DfT has since overhauled its approach to infrastructure planning, and says it is now "trying to align decisions about infrastructure improvements with franchise timetables".

    But the MPs remain unconvinced over whether the electrification of the GWR "can be delivered to the revised target of December 2018 and budget of £2.8 billion".

    Speaking during PAC's inquiry, DfT permanent secretary Philip Rutnam – who will soon be moving on from the transport ministry to head up the Home Office – said the DfT had made efforts to get at the "root causes" of weaknesses in the rail system since a high-profile blunder with the West Coast rail franchise in 2012.

    "Within the department we have greatly strengthened and clarified accountability," he said.

    "We have a very clear structure of accountability for our role as client and sponsor of major projects and programmes. We have done an enormous amount to develop our project and programme expertise and profession, and our commercial expertise. We have enormously expanded our approach to assurance.

    But he added: "Unfortunately, those changes were too late to catch this one. They have, however, been really important in the way in which we have approached the reset of this project from 2015 onwards. Although it is not perfect, the improved performance since 2015 owes a lot to Network Rail but also certainly owes something to a greater maturity and depth of challenge within the department."

    The group of MPs, however, remains "concerned that serious failings in planning and delivering this programme will affect the case for future investment in rail programmes".

    Launching the report, PAC chair Meg Hillier said the Great Western Programme had "hit taxpayers hard and left many people angry and frustrated".

    And she added: "This is a stark example of how not to run a major project, from flawed planning at the earliest stage to weak accountability and what remain serious questions about the reasons for embarking on the work in the first place.

    "The sums of public money wasted are appalling — not least the £330 million additional costs the Department for Transport will have to pay to keep the trains running because of delays to electrification.

    "The department failed to adequately challenge Network Rail's plans to carry out the infrastructure work and, even now, casts doubt on whether electrification work on this and other lines is even necessary.

    "Government accepts it got this project badly wrong and must now demonstrate it has learned the lessons."

    Responding to the PAC's findings, rail minister Paul Maynard said the GWR modernisation project represented "the most substantial programme of work undertaken on the railway since the Victoria era", and insisted it would "deliver better services for passengers, with new trains and thousands more seats".

    He added: “We continually assess our investment decisions to ensure they deliver maximum value for the taxpayer. As the report acknowledges, since autumn 2015 we have overhauled the way the department commissions and oversees work from NR – including a clear structure of accountability, with new governance processes that include independent assurance on cost and deliverability.”




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 05, 2017, 09:03:25
    What a fiasco !
    It might have been cheaper to forget the whole idea and build some new HSTs *

    We have had years of disruption and damage to existing infrastructure, with several more years of the same to come. The end result is a downgraded service with inter urban (at best) DMUs replacing proper inter city trains. Sufficient wires have been installed to close down the service in windy weather, but not enough to give any significant improvements in journey times.
    The downgrade of signalling from track circuits to axle counters appears to have permanently reduced reliability.

    It remains to be seen how reliable the new DMU service will be in practice, but a cynic like me would observe that a lot remains to go wrong.

    And of course the ballooning cost has got to come from somewhere, probably a lot of hidden fare increases.

    The drain on the public finances will lead to calls to scrap or least to pause other railway projects.

    *not of course an exact copy of a now decades old train, but broadly similar in overall design with a power car at each end and no underfloor engines. 12 coaches in length, first class one end and standard class the other end with a buffet in between. Internal fit out and style to be "proper inter city" and not "modern DMU style"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 05, 2017, 09:44:11
    Quote
    Responding to the PAC's findings, rail minister Paul Maynard said the GWR modernisation project represented "the most substantial programme of work undertaken on the railway since the Victoria era"

    .....short memories there then.  I seem to recall a substantial project in the 1960s that resignalled and electrified the West Coast Main Line (and yes, I do acknowledge that it ran out of money and was delayed (there is a very interesting document concerning this here: http://www.bath.ac.uk/e-journals/jtep/pdf/Volume_111_No_1_69-95.pdf).  But who am I to take away the glory (sorry, mistyped that; meant to say excuses) from the DfT...... ::) :P


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 05, 2017, 13:17:25

    I blame privatisation (or rather fragmentation) entirely.

    A system for spending money (even tarmacing my drive) that has three independent areas of decision making (DFT at the top, ORR stirring the pot in the middle and NR trying to cook up the result at the bottom via some ever sharp but not always competent contractors is a recipe (to continue the metaphor) for burnt toast.

    A British Railways Board whether a state agency or a plc, with a CCM&EE, would not have lost the plot (at least so badly). It would have tackled the job incrementally, extending the Crossrail wiring to cover the outer suburban services first, so that problems and lessons (such as buried cables, ugly supports etc) could be overcome and learned in a smaller, less costly project. The suburban EMU's would then be running and earning while the work progressed Westwards. Instead, we started at Didcot Jn and worked East.... 

    Point enablement and point accountability. - TQM!

    OTC




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 05, 2017, 15:44:38
    *not of course an exact copy of a now decades old train, but broadly similar in overall design with a power car at each end and no underfloor engines. 12 coaches in length, first class one end and standard class the other end with a buffet in between. Internal fit out and style to be "proper inter city" and not "modern DMU style"

    Nice in theory, but imagine the cost of modifying signalling and platforms (particularly at the terminal stations), for a train of 14 vehicles.  Also, those two power cars would have to be mighty beefy to shift a train of that length and weight at 125mph.  That amount of seating would also be a massive over provision for much of the day on most services.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on March 05, 2017, 18:01:31
    The web like nature of the Western network makes it difficult to extract value from pure electrification (no bimodes!) until you have done more or less the lot excluding minor branches. This was not so much the case with the West/East coast - and wouldn't be with the Midland Mainline, which I think had a better financial case. Why the MML wasn't done first was a mixture of the political and the practical. Everything seems to be coming to the end of its life at the roughly same time on the Western; arguably the HSTs are already 5 years overdue for replacement, and the other diesels can't meet the demand at peak times especially. Longer distance trains have required a higher and higher density of seating to cope; whilst I know that hasn't been to everyone's satisfaction it has probably been done as best it could have been.

    Possibly a trick was missed not electrifying the network as far as Oxford and Newbury well before now - maybe as far back as the introduction of the turbos. Commuter traffic historically took rather a backseat on the western compared with some other main lines, but it seems incredulous that 2-car turbos are still operating some peak suburban services. However, I couldn't have seen the HSTs soldiering on whilst all that was done first, notwithstanding issues over their future non-compliance.

    The point about the demand being more peaky is also a valid one; some of the HSTs still go around in the middle of the day much more than half empty.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 05, 2017, 19:15:00
    *not of course an exact copy of a now decades old train, but broadly similar in overall design with a power car at each end and no underfloor engines. 12 coaches in length, first class one end and standard class the other end with a buffet in between. Internal fit out and style to be "proper inter city" and not "modern DMU style"

    Nice in theory, but imagine the cost of modifying signalling and platforms (particularly at the terminal stations), for a train of 14 vehicles.  Also, those two power cars would have to be mighty beefy to shift a train of that length and weight at 125mph.  That amount of seating would also be a massive over provision for much of the day on most services.

    I was not proposing that ALL services would be formed of new 12 car trains,, refurbished old HSTs would have a part to play for the less busy services.

    Anyway it is too late now for such speculation, it looks as though we are going to be stuck for a generation with a partly electrified railway that is mainly worked by short inter-urban DMUs, with limited mileage under electric power.

    The various problems and overruns so far do not fill me with confidence that the planned GWR electrification will EVER be completed in full.
    The actual electrification structures certainly seem much more substantial than those used on the failed East coast scheme, so hopefully SOME lessons have been learnt.
    Despite this I still expect a lot of weather induced failures and an increase in large scale disruption with intending passengers being advised not to travel.
    Falling trees will be an ever increasing problem in the absence of any effective programme to cut them down.
    The increasingly untidy trackside gives more debris to be windblown into the OHLE.
    The centralised and computerised electrical systems give more scope for IT issues stopping everything.

    And of course the cost overruns may lead to value engineering some later bits of the works.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 05, 2017, 20:58:18
    I was not proposing that ALL services would be formed of new 12 car trains,, refurbished old HSTs would have a part to play for the less busy services.

    So you'd have all the cost of infrastructure modification to run only some trains with 14 vehicles, with the balance made up with refurbished (again) HST's trying to soldier on after more than 40 years of hard front line duties?  One sounds unworkably expensive and the other a temporary stay of execution at best.

    As you say though, new trains are on their way and fortunately they were able to be modified fairly easily to cope with the electrification issues, and whilst I see problems ahead I don't think it's the disaster you portray - provided their diesel engines are powerful enough not to hinder journey times too much and enough route miles are electrified. 

    On the route mileage issue, let's not forget that the majority of both London to Swansea and Bristol trunk routes are committed to be electrified (I would guess it must be about 80%).  You make it sound like only a small percentage will be.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 05, 2017, 21:12:57
    Airport Junction to Maidenhead switch-on has been delayed again so not happening this weekend.

    I would say I am shocked :o ........... but as there's no juice getting a shock is not possible  ;D

    The energisation process of section proving is a quick process, but does need the knitting to be in place, what may take time if its need is the immunisation tests

    Hmmm - project too big for GRIP maybe?

    Also, if Government ask NR to perform a project "we want to electrify the GWR", do you then say 'hang on a few months while we do a GRIP set of reports. It might take a year or two as its a mammoth project"

    Can between a x and a y, I feel.
    Having implemented many large projects over the past 50 years I can assure you that it would have been a very brave person who tried to shortcut the NR GRIP process, which after all was introduced by a certain Chief Executive by the name of Coucher. He didn't hesitate in finding a way of getting rid of anybody if they didn't follow 'his' rules.  My personal view, following recent involvement in some significant resignalling projects, is that NR have lost all the personell with the necessary experience and skill set to be able to stand up with confidence and say NO. :P

    I agree with SandTEngineer there has been a massive skill fade within NR, some by natural wastage but a large part of it was restructuring of the Projects part of NR lots of very experienced engineers, project managers, commercial mangers made redundant with a heavy reliance being placed on suppliers "knowing what they are doing" and yes they do bt NR has lost a lot of its "informed buyer" knowledge.

    There was also blank cheque writing by the political parties in the lead up to the 2010 general election all the parties wanting the UK railways electrified at a pace and cost that had never been done on a high speed, high intensity railway network anywhere in the world and without investing in the real key part ....................

    A skilled work force


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 06, 2017, 13:20:08
    Quote
    provided their diesel engines are powerful enough not to hinder journey times too much. 

    Not sure if it was mentioned at the time but the test run they did a few weeks ago between PAD and BPW included short stops at Reading and Swindon, and I believe from start to stop between the two it arrived Swindon marginally quicker doing 110 on diesel than an HST can. (Due to increased acceleration etc) Therefore I would hope no journey times will be hindered compared to today despite electrification issues


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Thatcham Crossing on March 06, 2017, 17:59:57
    Evidence of further recent metalwork erection at various locations between Southcote Junction and Aldermaston during a run to London and back today. Still a lot to do in this area though.

    Near to Slough, I noticed some gaps in the wiring, notably the cable at the top of the OHLE, the one usually suspended from a single insulator....don't know what it's for but imagine it needs to be in place before the juice can be switched on? At one point it was lying on the ground between a couple of the OHLE uprights.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 06, 2017, 19:28:51
    AIUI that's the ATF wire, which doesn't need to be in place until intensive running under electric power is introduced.  So it would be OK for the limited number of trains planned from May to operate without it I think. ElectricTrain will correct me if I'm wrong!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 06, 2017, 22:21:45
    For an in-house view, perhaps - from Civil Service World (https://www.civilserviceworld.com/articles/news/how-not-run-major-project-%E2%80%93-dft-firing-line-over-great-western-rail-upgrade):

    Quote
    "How not to run a major project" – DfT in the firing line over Great Western rail upgrade

    The PAC says that the "tripartite" system of accountability for the GWR project, which saw the DfT setting high-level requirements, and the Office of Rail and Road then scrutinising Network Rail’s plans, was "too complex"

    So a three-ring circus where infrastructure, procurement of rolling stock, and operation are kept in separate bubbles. directed by a government department that tries to pretend it isn't meddling to give the impression this is an entirely private operation, with the whole shoot-bang works overseen by a quasi-independent body that isn't entirely sure whether it should be keeping it safe or counting the beans is "too complex"?

    I would say "Couldn't run a bath", but I'm not sure to whom I would direct the insult. For sure, Margaret Hodge is overly fond of her own voice, but there is a problem that obviously needs solving before things can move on properly.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on March 09, 2017, 14:36:32
    What a fiasco !
    It might have been cheaper to forget the whole idea and build some new HSTs *

    [snip]


    *not of course an exact copy of a now decades old train, but broadly similar in overall design with a power car at each end and no underfloor engines. 12 coaches in length, first class one end and standard class the other end with a buffet in between. Internal fit out and style to be "proper inter city" and not "modern DMU style"
    While I agree with you that an intercity train should have a buffet and not have underfloor engines, I think that word 'cheaper' needs to be considered very carefully. Had a new intercity diesel been built instead of electrification, the costs in terms of capital expenditure would undoubtedly have been less than IEP + electrification. However, the financial running costs of a diesel train in would be higher than an electric (not sure how they would compare to the expensive IEP deal) and the environmental costs of running intercity diesel trains flat out for at least the next 30 years would be very high compared to electrification. It even have been far longer than 30 years, given what little electrification skills remain from the ECML would have well and truely died out by then, meaning we might never have got an electrified railway. We cannot afford another hitatus in electrification; keep knitting away slowly to build up and retain a skills base I say.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 09, 2017, 14:46:27
    ... keep knitting away slowly to build up and retain a skills base I say.

    There is a huge logic in a rolling electrification program over the next 30 years, with the bimode trains coming to lines once there's a bit of wire up, and extending along until power reaches the far end. They can then move to another line  that's being electrified with fresh electric stock replacing them on the completed line.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Fourbee on March 09, 2017, 14:47:37
    That sounds like a sensible incremental approach massively reducing the scope for things to go wrong.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 09, 2017, 15:27:52
    Is the objection to underfloor engines only to actual engines, presumably due to noise and vibration, or is it a preference for separate locomotives? I understood the point of having all wheels driven (electrically) was to increase traction and both reduce and better distribute weight, thus improving acceleration and reducing wear and tear on the track?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 09, 2017, 19:32:54
    That sounds like a sensible incremental approach massively reducing the scope for things to go wrong.

    Yes far too sensible the politicians will never allow it!  Its too long term. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on March 10, 2017, 12:03:45
    Is the objection to underfloor engines only to actual engines, presumably due to noise and vibration, or is it a preference for separate locomotives? I understood the point of having all wheels driven (electrically) was to increase traction and both reduce and better distribute weight, thus improving acceleration and reducing wear and tear on the track?
    Both, in my case, but the noise and vibration is the showstopper.

    With most intercity trains, the benifits of units are less since most intercity trains need a top speed in excess of 110mph (which rules out UEGs and possibly needs a longer 'nose' which makes running units in multiple rather wasteful in terms of space, maybe not as much as a loco + DVT but with seated DVTs the gap will narrow significantly). Also, most intercity trains are on busy routes and need a decent number of coaches, which means the cost of a locomotive is balanced out by the cheaper unpowered coaches in a way it isn't on a shorter train. A good-looking locomotive (eg. class 91, class 43 (IC125 powercar)) can also add to the prestige value of an intercity train, particularly if fitted with cast nameplates with a sensible name.

    Taken together, the attributes discussed in the above paragraph are not sufficient to rule out the use of EMUs, they just make locomotive working a more attractive prospect than for other types of service. A decent intercity EMU (sadly I'm not sure we have one of those at present) is thus acceptable; an intercity DMU is not (bi-modes are a grey area, if the diesel engines will only be running for a short time (Bristol to Weston-Super-Mare perhaps?) it probably is not too big a problem).

    UEGs = Unit End Gangways


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 10, 2017, 16:03:11
    Is the objection to underfloor engines only to actual engines, presumably due to noise and vibration, or is it a preference for separate locomotives? I understood the point of having all wheels driven (electrically) was to increase traction and both reduce and better distribute weight, thus improving acceleration and reducing wear and tear on the track?

    In my case, the objection to underfloor engines is partly due to noise and vibration, but is also the fact that a short DMU, or even a pair of short DMUs coupled together simply do not feel like a proper intercity train.
    A proper intercity train should be at least 10 coaches, and preferably 12 coaches, and be gangwayed throughout.
    First class should be at one end, and preferably at the same end each day, with standard class at the other end and a buffet between the classes.
    Seating should be mainly facing across full sized tables, with luggage space between the seat backs.

    A pair of 5 car DMUs are a very poor substitute for a proper train, first class will be in two different and presumably random locations. And the first class host will be in other unit.

    Haulage may be by diesel or electric locomotive as required. A locomotive or power car each end has a lot to be said for it. If the power cars are gangwayed to the rest of the train, then any spare space therein could be used for storage of luggage, cycles, and catering supplies.

    EMUs are not as bad as DMUs, but for long distance or prestigious services I would still prefer an electric locomotive hauling an ample number of coaches, over an EMU. Several short EMUs coupled together and lacking gangways simply are not a proper intercity train.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on March 11, 2017, 08:58:02
    The other advantage of locos and hauled coaches is that you can vary the set lengths for different journeys.

    I believe that's how the Norwich service works (can't remember who works it now it's changed so often!) work long train sets from Norwich in the morning and back at night and shorter sets out of London in the morning.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 11, 2017, 19:38:39
    The other advantage of locos and hauled coaches is that you can vary the set lengths for different journeys.

    I believe that's how the Norwich service works (can't remember who works it now it's changed so often!) work long train sets from Norwich in the morning and back at night and shorter sets out of London in the morning.

    With 5 and 9 car multiple units, that's the sort of thing that should be worked on the GWR lines too.  Peak trains into London - 2 x 5 cars.  Shoulder trains 9 cars, off peak 5 (the off peak trains being at the "far end" of the line during the peaks.  Slight problem that in GWR land there are peak flows at some of the far ends too - like into Bristol.

    You see similar on the regional commuter trains - there's a couple of "contra flow" trains in the morning peak out of Bristol that are just a single car to ensure the big trains are around the big flows.   Doesn't always work though - I know of one line where the pre-peak service in the morning and the post-peak service in the evening (and a lunchtime train) are 2 or 3 carriages, and the peak services are 1 carriage.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 11, 2017, 19:59:25
    With 5 and 9 car multiple units, that's the sort of thing that should be worked on the GWR lines too.  Peak trains into London - 2 x 5 cars.  Shoulder trains 9 cars, off peak 5 (the off peak trains being at the "far end" of the line during the peaks.  Slight problem that in GWR land there are peak flows at some of the far ends too - like into Bristol.

    But once you allow for the non-passenger space in the end cars, a 9-car (627) is almost exactly twice the "length" of a 5-car (315). That is, I think, "by design" - it is (or was during IEP spec-writing) seen as OK to run long trains off-peak at low loadings, but not "sustainable" to do that with diesel (or semi-diesel) ones. Hence any bi-mode had to be a train of two halves.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 11, 2017, 21:03:03
    Quote
    I know of one line where the pre-peak service in the morning and the post-peak service in the evening (and a lunchtime train) are 2 or 3 carriages, and the peak services are 1 carriage.

    Hmmmm, i really can't think of what line Graham is talking about ???

     ::)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on March 11, 2017, 23:07:49
    The other advantage of locos and hauled coaches is that you can vary the set lengths for different journeys.

    I believe that's how the Norwich service works (can't remember who works it now it's changed so often!) work long train sets from Norwich in the morning and back at night and shorter sets out of London in the morning.
    With 5 and 9 car multiple units, that's the sort of thing that should be worked on the GWR lines too.  Peak trains into London - 2 x 5 cars.  Shoulder trains 9 cars, off peak 5 (the off peak trains being at the "far end" of the line during the peaks.  Slight problem that in GWR land there are peak flows at some of the far ends too - like into Bristol.
    The bit I've bolded is why* I think the fleet should haven been either all 9-car trains or a mix of 9-car and either 8-car or 7-car sets; the logic being that the peak flows at the "far end" are smaller than into London, so might manage with a 7-car set but not with a 5-car (I don't know the loadings, hence the 'might').

    * not the sole reason, I also think that if all off-peak trains into London were only 5 coaches there might not be enough seats to go round, just because London is so big

    But once you allow for the non-passenger space in the end cars, a 9-car (627) is almost exactly twice the "length" of a 5-car (315). That is, I think, "by design" - it is (or was during IEP spec-writing) seen as OK to run long trains off-peak at low loadings, but not "sustainable" to do that with diesel (or semi-diesel) ones. Hence any bi-mode had to be a train of two halves.
    There was nothing saying all bi-modes had to be in two halves; although all the 9-car GW IEPs were ordered as 'electric' sets the ECML Aberdeen and Inverness routes were always intended to be a full-length bi-mode as far as I know; when the order was signed it definately already included 9-car bi-modes for the ECML.

    Not sure where 'sustainable' comes in, I doubt sustainability factored very highly in the DfT's planning; otherwise they wouldn't have replaced the IC225 fleet early and would have tried to plan for further electrification. If the half-capacity was indeed "by design" I think it more likely that the 'half-length' trains were designed as such so that a pair of half-sets could substitute for a full-length set if need be with no reduction in capacity.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 12, 2017, 00:31:25
    There was nothing saying all bi-modes had to be in two halves; although all the 9-car GW IEPs were ordered as 'electric' sets the ECML Aberdeen and Inverness routes were always intended to be a full-length bi-mode as far as I know; when the order was signed it definately already included 9-car bi-modes for the ECML.

    The order make-up never had to be made public before it was placed, though the requirement to offer 5-car and 9-car trains was in the requirement. I know less about the plans for the ECML, but I think the 9-car bimodes are meant for the Aberdeen and Inverness routes, which don't have much of a peak/off-peak difference. The equivalent routes on GWR were left out of the IEP order, and there are 9-cars among the AT300s. The 5-car electric IEPs are, I think, for different routes rather than to be run as pairs - but no doubt that may have changed by the time they are in service. As you say there is that flexibility.

    Not sure where 'sustainable' comes in, I doubt sustainability factored very highly in the DfT's planning; otherwise they wouldn't have replaced the IC225 fleet early and would have tried to plan for further electrification. If the half-capacity was indeed "by design" I think it more likely that the 'half-length' trains were designed as such so that a pair of half-sets could substitute for a full-length set if need be with no reduction in capacity.

    It was always intended for Mk IVs (not sure how many of them) to continue operating the faster trains (fewer stops) while the IEPs were seen as "semi-fast". And whatever you think about other parts of DfT policy, the choice of trains with the IEP order was just a straight choice - "how many trains of each kind to we want?". Buying new diesel (even if part-time) trains was seen as a potential source of criticism, so a few offsetting green brownie points were needed. Embodied carbon (or energy) doesn't feature much in the public's appreciation of greenness (nor DfT's I suspect), so minimising diesel burn was what they picked on. Subsequent history (i.e. air pollution issues) suggest that as PR this may have been right.

    Oh, and using bi-modes was indeed seen as favouring further electrification. For sections that would never be done before IEP, doing it later would now have some value, whereas with diesel-only trains it wouldn't. That's based on limited and unrealistic assumptions, obviously, but does have some internal logic.

    A lot of this is in a DfT presentation dated 2011 (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/3736/intercity-rail-travel-presentation.pdf):

    Quote
    Great Western – by December 2017
    • Electrification of all the busier and high speed sections – challenging, especially with planning issues
    • Bimode for the low and medium speed route sections with lower frequencies
    • Uses the capacity gains from the Reading scheme
    • Takes Paddington to Reading up to ‘safe’ capacity limits
    • Mix of 5 car, 8 car and 2 x 5 car workings with options to extend 8 car sets to 9 or 10 cars
    • Greatly increased peak capacity with fast EMUs as extra ‘peak busters’ – in total 11,000 more peak period seats
    • Reduced off peak waste by use of 5 car trains

    East Coast – for December 2018
    • Power Upgrade – London to Doncaster Auto Transformer
    • Various capacity works:
    • Joint Line
    • Flyovers Hitchin and Shaftholme
    • Peterborough capacity and possible grade separation
    • Line speeds
    • IEP trains primarily on semi fast services which enable MkIVs to operate faster fast trains to Leeds and Edinburgh
    • Mix 5 car, 9 car and 2 x 5 car trains
    • Use of IEP to Cambridge/ King’s Lynn and to N of Edinburgh
    • 16 Min faster to Edinburgh and 3 trains per hour to Leeds and Newcastle


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Worcester_Passenger on March 12, 2017, 07:33:08
    A lot of this is in a DfT presentation dated 2011 (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/3736/intercity-rail-travel-presentation.pdf).

    Thanks for that link. I particularly like

    Quote
    Putting the ‘Inter City’ back in Great Western
    • More trains serving more segregated markets
    • Efficient resource utilisation
    • Likely standard hourly pattern:
        • Swansea fast (non stop Reading to Newport)
        • Cardiff semi fast
        • 2 x Bristol fast (non stop to Parkway)
        • 2 x Bristol via Bath
        • Cheltenham
        • Worcester
    • Bristol (Parkway and T.M.), Swansea, Cardiff, Worcester and Cheltenham all 15 – 22 min faster than today.

    I look forward to the Worcester service being "15-22 min faster than today" [presumably 2011]. This will take us back to what we used to have back when the HSTs were first introduced.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 12, 2017, 09:26:55
    Note Worcester not Hereford.

    There's local comment that these new trains won't clear Ledbury tunnel


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 12, 2017, 13:03:54
    It does have a quite severe kink at the Malvern end of it, and is just about as narrow as a tunnel can be for a standard gauge railway.  I wonder what would happen to Hereford-London services if the IET's aren't cleared for it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 12, 2017, 14:42:47
    I thought I read somewhere else that the IET had chamfered ends so that the coach profile is the same as a MK3?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 12, 2017, 14:48:01
    I thought I read somewhere else that the IET had chamfered ends so that the coach profile is the same as a MK3?

    Yes, I think I saw that ... but then why do they need to reprofile the platforms at Bath for them to get through, and I think there's a problem with Narbeth Tunnel too which will stop through services from London on that line ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 12, 2017, 15:35:26
    The coaches are also longer, thus isn't there a different profile to the way the ends move when cornering?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 12, 2017, 16:26:22
    The coaches are also longer, thus isn't there a different profile to the way the ends move when cornering?
    Aren't the bogie centres the same as a MK3 as well, hence the chamfered coach ends designed to keep the overall profile the same despite the additional 3m length of the IET?  I'll have to see if I can find out where I read all this.

    ....and by the way, there is no such thing as 'cornering' on a railway, its 'curving and canting'.... ::)

    Yes, I think I saw that ... but then why do they need to reprofile the platforms at Bath for them to get through, and I think there's a problem with Narbeth Tunnel too which will stop through services from London on that line ...

    Not sure about Narbeth tunnel, but isn't Bath mainly to do with stepping distances?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 12, 2017, 16:33:12
    I thought I read somewhere else that the IET had chamfered ends so that the coach profile is the same as a MK3?

    Yes, I think I saw that ... but then why do they need to reprofile the platforms at Bath for them to get through, and I think there's a problem with Narbeth Tunnel too which will stop through services from London on that line ...

    But every new design needs some work with angle grinders somewhere...

    On paper, a 26 m carriage ought to be 3 m longer than a Mk 3. But Hitachi draw theirs with a dimensioned length of 25.000 m and a gap of 1.000 m. Obviously those are implausibly precise figures, and that 1 m gap looks way too big, but they are the best we have (I've not been able to sneak up to one with a measuring tape).

    A Mk 3 is 22.57 m over its body proper, with bogie pivots spaced at 16 m. My best estimate off drawings is that for IEP that spacing is about 17 m, or a bit less. The important lengths for overthrows are half the bogie spacing and the bogie-end distance. So that 3 m has been reduced, then spread about equally over those lengths. 

    Applying what GE/GN8573 says to those data, for a 300 m radius curve I get 14 mm greater inner overthrow. But that's offset if (as it appears) the body is a little narrower - at 2.7 m vs 2.79 m it has 45 mm more clearance. Of course width varies with height, so for platforms and other things the answer may vary.

    For outer overthrow the formula gives 34 mm more, but that can be offset by the taper at the end of the bodyshells - it wouldn't take a lot.

    So the answer ought to be some minor adjustments ... unless someone has done their sums wrong.
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 12, 2017, 19:44:32
    Is the objection to underfloor engines only to actual engines, presumably due to noise and vibration, or is it a preference for separate locomotives? I understood the point of having all wheels driven (electrically) was to increase traction and both reduce and better distribute weight, thus improving acceleration and reducing wear and tear on the track?

    In my case, the objection to underfloor engines is partly due to noise and vibration, but is also the fact that a short DMU, or even a pair of short DMUs coupled together simply do not feel like a proper intercity train.
    A proper intercity train should be at least 10 coaches, and preferably 12 coaches, and be gangwayed throughout.
    First class should be at one end, and preferably at the same end each day, with standard class at the other end and a buffet between the classes.
    Seating should be mainly facing across full sized tables, with luggage space between the seat backs.

    A pair of 5 car DMUs are a very poor substitute for a proper train, first class will be in two different and presumably random locations. And the first class host will be in other unit.

    Haulage may be by diesel or electric locomotive as required. A locomotive or power car each end has a lot to be said for it. If the power cars are gangwayed to the rest of the train, then any spare space therein could be used for storage of luggage, cycles, and catering supplies.

    EMUs are not as bad as DMUs, but for long distance or prestigious services I would still prefer an electric locomotive hauling an ample number of coaches, over an EMU. Several short EMUs coupled together and lacking gangways simply are not a proper intercity train.
    Gangways are good. But we're not talking about DMUs or even EMUs; at least, I didn't think we were. I didn't think I was! The IEPs are to have underfloor traction to each wheel (so no underfloor engines) and gangways. I think?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 12, 2017, 20:26:41
    The IEPs DO have engines under the floors.
    They are gangwayed WITHIN each unit, but do NOT have gangways between two units run in multiple.
    Sure sounds like a DMU, even if it can also use electric power. Diesel operation will be substantial due to the ongoing electrification fiasco.

    Since the majority of the fleet consists of half length units, I have a cynical suspicion that many services will be run by single units, as with voyagers. Those with more positive views assure me that double unit operation is expected regularly. So no access from front unit to rear unit.

    Refreshment trolley will be in the other unit (no buffet remember)
    First class host will be in the other unit.
    Ditto the train manager, when needed to referee reservation disputes, of which I foresee great numbers.
    What happens to those who have a reserved seat in coach "C" but have joined the portion containing coaches F,G, H, J and K ? Many passengers used to proper inter city trains would assume that after boarding that they can walk through to the coach containing their booked seat.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on March 12, 2017, 21:01:58
    I thought I read somewhere else that the IET had chamfered ends so that the coach profile is the same as a MK3?

    Yes, I think I saw that ... but then why do they need to reprofile the platforms at Bath for them to get through, and I think there's a problem with Narbeth Tunnel too which will stop through services from London on that line ...

    I believe that Bath is due to the electrification clearances for the canopies which are listed and cannot be altered, plus the platforms need to be extended and the trackbed needs to be dropped to reduce the step.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 12, 2017, 21:30:27
    The IEPs DO have engines under the floors.

    Just for the sake of clarity, the 5-car trains have 3 engines and the 9-car variant has 5 engines, so just over half the vehicles will have underfloor engines.  Reports from those who've travelled in them say they are very quiet when compared with a Voyager.

    I don't personally mind an underfloor engine myself if reasonably quiet.  It means I'm less likely to be annoyed by my fellow passengers.  My preference is for airline seats for the same reason - unless traveling in a group of three or more.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 12, 2017, 22:32:09
    Also other TOCs run voyagers in myltiple & don't suffer the problems that Broadgage (repeatedly, sounding like a stuck needle now) forecasts. So why do you think GWR pax are less intelligent that other TOCs, as they all serm to manage ok


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 13, 2017, 09:28:49
    Also other TOCs run voyagers in myltiple & don't suffer the problems that Broadgage (repeatedly, sounding like a stuck needle now) forecasts. So why do you think GWR pax are less intelligent that other TOCs, as they all serm to manage ok

    Voyagers are indeed run in multiple, though not that often IME, and when they are in multiple people searching for and failing to find reserved seats seems a significant problem.
    Also Cross country are not exactly a prestigious operator, and seem to get away with a prevailing view of "stop moaning, you got there did you not"

    FGW, now GWR, passengers are hopefully no more stupid than those of other TOCs, but they have become used to "proper trains" and may find the down grade to DMUs a bit of a shock. As someone remarked "you lot in the south west have had it far too good for far too long, welcome to what we have to put up with elsewhere"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 13, 2017, 09:45:02
    It's certainly not ideal having two trains without corridor connections running in multiple, but then again it's certainly not ideal to have long trains running around for much of the day carrying mostly fresh air as happens now.

    The 08:21 Paddington to Hereford is an example of how not to do it.  As a 6-car Turbo it leaves Paddington and stations en-route with information screens saying that the rear three are detached at Worcester Shrub Hill, so passengers for beyond there need to travel in the front portion.  That's perfectly correct, but what it doesn't say is that the rear three coaches are locked out of use at Oxford, so in effect anybody travelling beyond Oxford needs to be in the front three coaches.  The on-train APIS system makes no distinction announcing the whole train is going to Hereford, so it's left to the driver to make announcements if he/she chooses to.  The end result is a dozen or more people turfed out at Oxford each and every day and creates a very poor impression.

    The key to making the least number of people make a mistake when boarding is to provide clear and easy to understand information on the stations and on the train.  Let's remember that the current HST fleet doesn't have any internal information screens and relies on window labels that often fall off, and paper reservation labels that are easily removed and sometimes not placed on the train at all.

    Let's hope GWR are on the ball in making sure proper information is supplied to minimise the number of people confused.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 13, 2017, 09:53:58
    [Voyagers are indeed run in multiple, though not that often IME, and when they are in multiple people searching for and failing to find reserved seats seems a significant problem.

    Every weekend on XC, and I believe there's a regular Glasgow via the West Midlands that uses double voyagers.  I'm not sure you are up to speed with other TOCs?

    Seems to whom? I use both XC at weekends and the Glasgow services from Birmingham at least fortnightly. Never ever seen anyone not find their coach from the platform or get stuck in the 'wrong' half either. And staffing is such that on Virgin there is a TM & catering in both halves and on XC at least one member od on-board staff in each half. I think you need to travel more on these services before expressing such an opinion?

    The key to making the least number of people make a mistake when boarding is to provide clear and easy to understand information on the stations and on the train. 

    Which Virgin do well & XC not badly.

    Remember that these are doubled for their entire journey & do not split en-route. Oxford to Cotswolds will need attention, but with on-train comms being far better on IEPs, it is easily surmountable


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on March 13, 2017, 11:40:40
    I thought I read somewhere else that the IET had chamfered ends so that the coach profile is the same as a MK3?

    Yes, I think I saw that ... but then why do they need to reprofile the platforms at Bath for them to get through, and I think there's a problem with Narbeth Tunnel too which will stop through services from London on that line ...

    I believe that Bath is due to the electrification clearances for the canopies which are listed and cannot be altered, plus the platforms need to be extended and the trackbed needs to be dropped to reduce the step.

    correct.  The work at Bath is probably worth doing even if we were not getting a new design of coach because the widening gives more space on increasingly crowded platforms, it reduces the "gap" which is a long standing problem at Bath especially at the front end of the up platform, and it allows at least one of the platforms to be slightly lengthened.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chrisr_75 on March 13, 2017, 11:56:09
    Voyagers are indeed run in multiple, though not that often IME, and when they are in multiple people searching for and failing to find reserved seats seems a significant problem.
    Also Cross country are not exactly a prestigious operator, and seem to get away with a prevailing view of "stop moaning, you got there did you not"

    Virgin West Coast use double Voyagers on the north Wales services which (mostly) split at Chester. I've used these a fair bit and never noticed any issues as the carriage numbering is effective and presumably the seat reservation system is set up correctly to take this into account.

    1tph in each direction so it's hardly a rarely used timetable oddity.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 13, 2017, 12:55:04
    All four daily services between London and Shrewsbury, as well as some of the hourly trains between London and Glasgow (via Birmingham) and even the odd London to Birmingham service are also in the hands of 2x5 car Voyagers.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 14, 2017, 00:00:11
    All four daily services between London and Shrewsbury, as well as some of the hourly trains between London and Glasgow (via Birmingham) and even the odd London to Birmingham service are also in the hands of 2x5 car Voyagers.

    There was, and maybe still is, a Newquay to Dundee service that was formed of two 5 car sets. One failed in Cornwall on the day my mum was due to catch it from Temple Meads to Birmingham New Street, leaving her reserved seat 100 miles away. It ended well for her, because of a kindly GWR dispatcher and an equally kindly XC TM, letting her into first class FOC. But I felt for all the many people on P5 trying to cram into half the train they were expecting.

    That said, had it been a single 10-car unit, it might all have been left in Cornwall.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 14, 2017, 00:32:33
    XC don't run many in multiple.  There's one Friday diagram on the Manchester to Bournemouth axis but I'm not aware of any others on the route through Reading which is the one that I know best, with a healthy majority being operated by 4-car sets. 

    Are there many more on the Bristol axis?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on March 14, 2017, 09:10:00
    XC don't run many in multiple.  There's one Friday diagram on the Manchester to Bournemouth axis but I'm not aware of any others on the route through Reading which is the one that I know best, with a healthy majority being operated by 4-car sets. 

    Are there many more on the Bristol axis?

    currently only a few run in multiple.  They are however planning a recast with another HST diagram and a bit of reforming of 5-car sets into 4-car sets (using spare driving cars) and some trimming of non-core routes which will allow them to run many (most?) of the core route in multiple. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 14, 2017, 10:01:41
    Flicking through the document mentioned above as discussed here
     (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=17650.0)
    The only current weekday double headed operations are as follows:

    07:03 Birmingham to Edinburgh
    11:25 Plymouth to Dundee (between Bristol and Newcastle)
    13:07 Edinburgh to Plymouth (until Gloucester)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 14, 2017, 10:28:46
    Many more at weekends, especially if affected by engineering work means 1tph rather than 2. Often doubled-up to use both units. And others permanently scheduled - well, I've travelled on double units in the past.

    And XC arguably carry more at weekends, without very few if any having problems finding their reservation as the on-board reservations can cope with coach re-lettering so prevent duplicates - which fixed coach lettering of course can't....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on March 14, 2017, 10:58:33
    I note this thread has now reached page 166... wonder if the electrification will be complete by the time we get to page 387.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on March 14, 2017, 11:00:21
    Or 800...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 14, 2017, 11:28:55
    I note this thread has now reached page 166... wonder if the electrification will be complete by the time we get to page 387.

    We're looking forward to getting 153 passengers on a 153 ...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 14, 2017, 11:58:16
    I note this thread has now reached page 166... wonder if the electrification will be complete by the time we get to page 387.
    Or ever...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 20, 2017, 12:24:48
    I see 387140 is spending much of the day doing test runs between Reading Depot and Didcot.  Authority for 110mph running has been given for this section, subject to the ruling linespeed not being lower and an additional special limit of 30mph through the Down Relief platform at Tilehurst.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on March 20, 2017, 16:06:03
    I noticed lots of uprights in place around Uffington and Wotton Basset, but it seems somewhat random which uprights have their horizontal arms fitted. No wires up, obviously.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 20, 2017, 19:08:14
    I see 387140 is spending much of the day doing test runs between Reading Depot and Didcot.  Authority for 110mph running has been given for this section, subject to the ruling linespeed not being lower and an additional special limit of 30mph through the Down Relief platform at Tilehurst.

    And not causing as much grief the electrification as the Hitachi units cause ............... according to my informed sources   :-X


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 20, 2017, 19:53:37
    I've heard the same, ET.  Not entirely unexpected given one is an established train type and the other brand new in many respects?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 20, 2017, 21:52:17
    More demanding of power or is it the physical contact between wire and pantograph? Or are tweaks of the kit or improved driver technique needed?

    But that's one reason we have testing, surely?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: eightf48544 on March 21, 2017, 08:29:21
    Rumour has it switch on Stockley Jn to Maidenhead this Sunday 26/3.

    I'll be off down to Taplow to hug the footbridge.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on March 24, 2017, 11:35:06
    We all thought it, now it may be a reality:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-bristol-39366719

    Quote
    Great Western electrification: 'Line may never be electrified beyond Chippenham'

    The chairman of Network Rail has delivered a further blow to commuters on part of the Great Western rail line as he says electrification may now not happen past Chippenham.

    In November the government deferred electrification work from Thingley Junction - linking Bath Spa to Bristol Temple Meads - and three other routes because of the escalating cost .

    New trains will be converted to run on both diesel and electricity and ministers must now decide whether to fund the deferred work in the 2020s.

    Sir Peter Hendy, who heads up Network Rail and lives in Bath, says he wouldn't worry if electrification doesn't happen.
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 24, 2017, 12:50:08
    I think it should be done, but if the money isn't there I would prioritise Oxford over it as the benefits are much reduced beyond Chippenham given the linespeeds from there to Bristol, and the awkward and costly nature of installing and maintaining the equipment and not upsetting people at Box Tunnel and through the Bath area.

    I have a feeling it will be done eventually, though it might be CP7 or 8.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on March 24, 2017, 13:56:03
    I got the impression his point was that if the only stock that would be using the wires were 80x's, which would be quite happy running on diesel, then why bother and prioritise lines where there was an urgent need, and wiring would enable 100% conversion to electric traction.

    Of course there's also the counter argument that if Bristol TM and Bath are wired then that's the "big ticket" items out of the way, and the BCR for future projects, such as a Bristol suburban electrification, Bristol to Birmingham etc will be much better.

    But we know that realistically, electrification's likely to be deferred until resignalling is complete and East Junction has been rebuilt (not to mention that Temple Meads is probably due some fairly hefty building work itself). So I wonder if it's more likely that there will be a big Bristol suburban programme late in CP6 to coincide with the retirement of the Turbos?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 24, 2017, 14:10:23
    Turbo retirement in 7 years time? Unlikely, surely?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 24, 2017, 15:05:20
    So long as we have a continuing electrification programme to keep (and build) expertise here in the West and Wales then I am more relaxed about which lines to do first.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on March 24, 2017, 15:14:38
    So long as we have a continuing electrification programme to keep (and build) expertise here in the West and Wales then I am more relaxed about which lines to do first.

    absolutely.  And the decision of which lines to do is most sensibly driven by rolling stock (ie when diesel trains are due to be replaced or where another route is crying out to pinch them).

    What we need is a rolling programme which is busy enough to keep skills, but not so busy that it is overloaded and screws things up.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 24, 2017, 15:29:46
    So, where is next that will keep them occupied?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on March 24, 2017, 18:33:51
    So, where is next that will keep them occupied?

    Well that is what we will see when we know more about CP6, 7 and 8.  There are plenty of candidates if you include Oxford, Swansea and the Valley Lines not to mention Filton to Temple Meads and Chippenham to Temple Meads.  In the longer term there is Bristol to Bromsgrove, Bristol Suburban lines


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 24, 2017, 18:59:34
    So, where is next that will keep them occupied?

    I imagine that NR has plenty of wiring to complete even with the economies announced.

    If it wants to do more it must prove itself by lower costs and timely progress. It must learn real engineering - solving problems within a budget and vigorously contesting other impediments that bystanders such as ORR and DfT throw up.

    Wires only need to follow the traffic, i.e. where EMU's are needed or where the bi-modes will struggle. I suggest that in our area that means to Oxford (without an unaffordable new station) and up the hills (Box tunnel and Newton Abbot - Plymouth approaches) but probably not now West of Cardiff. Nationally, wires are most needed in the large regional population centres such as in Lancashire and Yorkshire, where the economy is hindered by poor public transport.

    The quickest way to increase electric mileage is to make the Voyagers bi-mode.

    Perhaps,

    OTC



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 24, 2017, 20:45:29

    Has anyone suggested converting half of the class 43 fleet primary electric power (essentially their diesel engines are used to make electricity anyway, right?) and running trains with one electric and one diesel power car?  There' an awful lot of diesel mileage that doesn't need to be on both east and west coasts, some of it coming up cross country.

    I asked a driver friend recently about the ratings of the new MTU diesel engines, as they have been set to match the previous Paxman Valentas' 1680kW (1380kW at rail). He commented that they do have the facility, if one power car is out (not very often with the German engines) of using their true capacity of up to 2000kW.

    At the other end, the electric power would be limited by the existing mass of 68t and the capacity of the motor bogies but would be well in excess of the diesel car.

    Their 40 year age would raise questions. There are LBSCR Terriers from 1874 still running!

    Fascinating idea.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 25, 2017, 07:09:02
    That might be possible if engineers were to play around with the software, but it's not something a driver has the ability/authority to do on GWR when running on one engine only.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on March 25, 2017, 07:39:09
    With only an electric engine on one end, or a diesel on the other, acceleration would be limited by adhesion, unless power was transmitted up and down the train. In effect a 2 + 8 would become 1 + 9 and there would be a few places with restart issues to be considered - in GWR territory (but the suggestion is not for the GWR franchise) at Bodmin Road, Totnes, and Crediton on the way to Okehampton. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on March 25, 2017, 12:01:25
    IMHO, converting an HST to electric power at one end whilst keeping the existing diesel power car at the other end would only be viable if batteries were also fitted.

    In diesel mode, acceleration would indeed be very limited and starting on inclines doubtful. If however a battery was fitted to the electric end and this battery was able to supply perhaps 2,500 HP for say 15 minutes then acceleration would be much improved and starting on inclines no worse than at present.

    If the battery was able to supply 500 HP for say 100 minutes, that would preserve the "get you home" redundancy of an HST  in the event of the single diesel failing. Performance on only 500HP would be very limited, but far preferable to blocking a main line.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on March 27, 2017, 18:36:57

    Noel Dolphin of Furrer and Frey has tweeted that OLE is now live to Maidenhead (March 26)

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 27, 2017, 19:17:24

    Noel Dolphin of Furrer and Frey has tweeted that OLE is now live to Maidenhead (March 26)

    OTC

    Only a few more decades before it gets to Bristol, then.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on March 28, 2017, 11:23:06
    Man in the know on WNXX reports that there will be 12 car testing with 387s between Reading TCD and Didcot on the night of 7th/8th April and between Stockley and Maidenhead on the night of 8th/9th April. If this goes well they are apparently just about on schedule to introduce EMU working between Padd and Maidenhead in tome for the May timetable change.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 28, 2017, 12:54:39
    Lurking on the second page of the recent letter from Paul Maynard to Alok Sharma (http://thealevillage.com/theale-station/), about Theale's lifts (q.v.), is this:

    "I believe the Office of Rail and Roads [sic] will shortly be issuing new guidance about electrical clearances which assist Network Rail in finalising the measures necessary to complete electrical design."

    And no, I don't entirely follow that rather odd wording either.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 28, 2017, 13:06:36
    .....no more TSI compliant electrification then.... ;) :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on March 28, 2017, 16:37:59
    25mm it is, then.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bradshaw on March 28, 2017, 16:53:15
    This was the ORR position last year, which led to the increased clearances and cost involved. Roger Ford in Modern Railways discussed the implications and is well worth reading.


    http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/23004/electrical-clearances-policy-statement.pdf

    The date of the letter mentioned, March 2017, may indicate a change in these clearances to a lower tolerance.

    British Rail did research it in the 1950/60s and allowed much lower clearances.

    If a lower tolerance is allowed there could be significant cost reductions in the offing


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on March 28, 2017, 20:33:39
    The answer to my question in another thread concerning the changes carried out at Maidenhead over xmas/new year 2016/2017 can be found if you play the video here: http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/articles/new-trains-on-the-way-as-thames-valley-electrification-reaches-major-milestone


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on March 28, 2017, 23:38:40
    Man in the know on WNXX reports that there will be 12 car testing with 387s between Reading TCD and Didcot on the night of 7th/8th April and between Stockley and Maidenhead on the night of 8th/9th April. If this goes well they are apparently just about on schedule to introduce EMU working between Padd and Maidenhead in tome for the May timetable change.

    Network rail have now put their collective neck on the block for that May date, as well a announcing the enlivening of those 12 miles of magic string (https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds/new-trains-on-the-way-as-thames-valley-electrification-reaches-major-milestone/):
    Quote
    New trains on the way as Thames Valley electrification reaches major milestone

    Network Rail successfully electrifies 12 miles of railway from Maidenhead to Stockley Junction as part of the Crossrail project
    New electric infrastructure in the Thames Valley allows for the introduction of new Great Western Railway (GWR) trains in May and the Elizabeth line from 2019


    Last weekend, Network Rail successfully electrified 12 miles of railway to the west of London between Stockley Junction and Maidenhead as part of the Crossrail project.

    Electrification will allow GWR to extend new electric trains from London Paddington to Maidenhead from this May, and to Didcot in January 2018, delivering more seats for passengers. In January this year GWR began to run half-hourly new Electrostar trains from London Paddington to Hayes & Harlington, providing much needed extra capacity for passengers.

    The work will also allow for the delivery of new Elizabeth line trains on this section of the railway from December 2019. Passengers in the Thames Valley will be able to catch new Elizabeth line trains all the way through central London without having to change onto the Underground at Paddington, making it quicker and easier to get to a range of destinations across London and the South East.

    Over three years, Network Rail has led an 800-strong workforce to successfully install more than 1,400 overhead structures and 140 miles of overhead wires that will power the new trains. The vast majority of this huge engineering project had to be undertaken in the early hours of the morning, at weekends and bank holidays to enable GWR and other operators to run normal services as much as possible.

    Mark Langman, Route Managing Director, Network Rail, said: “This is a major milestone for Network Rail’s Railway Upgrade Plan of which the delivery of an electrified Great Western Mainline and the Elizabeth line is a huge part. From May this year more passengers will see immediate benefits with brand new, cleaner, quieter electric trains operating between Maidenhead and Paddington. “On behalf of Network Rail I would like to thank passengers, local residents, businesses and local authorities for their patience and permission to deliver this huge programme of railway upgrade work at anti-social hours, weekends and every bank holiday for the last three years. Without their support it simply would not have been possible to electrify the Great Western Mainline to deliver new improved passenger services and pave the way for the Elizabeth line.”

    Mark Hopwood, GWR Managing Director, said: “The Thames Valley is one of the most popular rail corridors in the UK.  We have promised the current fleet would be upgraded to provide much needed additional capacity and more comfortable, quieter journeys. We started to run half hourly new electric trains in January, delivering over 10,000 more seats a day between London Paddington and Hayes & Harlington. We look forward to being able to extend these services beyond Hayes to Maidenhead this coming May as Network Rail continues its work to upgrade the railway.”

    Matthew White, Crossrail Surface Director, said: “The completion of this major piece of work paves the way for new, quicker, quieter trains right along this stretch of the railway. Once the Elizabeth line opens fully in 2019, passengers from the Thames Valley will be able to catch one train all the way through central London, providing a direct link to a range of destinations, including the West End, the City and Canary Wharf.”

    ENDS


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on March 29, 2017, 11:43:13
    “Electrification to …. Didcot in January 2018?” .  This is the first I’ve heard that they’re going to miss the December 2017 date which has been quoted for a long time and which I’d thought was pretty definite.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on March 29, 2017, 11:50:39
    Aren't the electric trains in the Dec17 timetable actually starting in very early January for some reason? I think that's the meaning of this reference


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on March 29, 2017, 13:30:39
    I think it's always been that the infrastructure will be ready for use by December, but training, testing and fine tuning (such as making sure SDO works ok and that stopping points when turning back aren't over AWS magnets/TPWS grids and there's no problems with signal sighting/potential read across) means the public services are set to commence in January.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on March 29, 2017, 13:49:05
    There've also been a couple of occasions over on the "Southern", mainly to do with London Bridge works, when the public timetable alterations were deferred slightly from mid December until after the Christmas & New Year break, especially when it coincided with major infrastructure changes. 

    Indeed didn't the Hayes & Harlington all day EMU changes (and Greenford curtailment to West Ealing) only start on Jan 3rd this year to avoid various holiday period closures?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on March 29, 2017, 17:35:33
    I think it's always been that the infrastructure will be ready for use by December, but training, testing and fine tuning (such as making sure SDO works ok and that stopping points when turning back aren't over AWS magnets/TPWS grids and there's no problems with signal sighting/potential read across) means the public services are set to commence in January.

    Indeed, the Hendy dates are availability for public service, which is not the same as public services actually starting. That would allow plenty of time for a blockade of Reading to test everything, driver training etc. It presumably implies an energisation of September/October, which hardly seems challenging given how much of the ironmongery seems to be in place.

    Is it still the case that Cardiff & Newbury are planned for Dec 2018?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on March 30, 2017, 07:08:55
    Man in the know on WNXX reports that there will be 12 car testing with 387s between Reading TCD and Didcot on the night of 7th/8th April and between Stockley and Maidenhead on the night of 8th/9th April. If this goes well they are apparently just about on schedule to introduce EMU working between Padd and Maidenhead in tome for the May timetable change.

    Network rail have now put their collective neck on the block for that May date, as well a announcing the enlivening of those 12 miles of magic string (https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds/new-trains-on-the-way-as-thames-valley-electrification-reaches-major-milestone/):
    Quote
    New trains on the way as Thames Valley electrification reaches major milestone

    Network Rail successfully electrifies 12 miles of railway from Maidenhead to Stockley Junction as part of the Crossrail project
    New electric infrastructure in the Thames Valley allows for the introduction of new Great Western Railway (GWR) trains in May and the Elizabeth line from 2019


    Last weekend, Network Rail successfully electrified 12 miles of railway to the west of London between Stockley Junction and Maidenhead as part of the Crossrail project.

    Electrification will allow GWR to extend new electric trains from London Paddington to Maidenhead from this May, and to Didcot in January 2018, delivering more seats for passengers. In January this year GWR began to run half-hourly new Electrostar trains from London Paddington to Hayes & Harlington, providing much needed extra capacity for passengers.

    The work will also allow for the delivery of new Elizabeth line trains on this section of the railway from December 2019. Passengers in the Thames Valley will be able to catch new Elizabeth line trains all the way through central London without having to change onto the Underground at Paddington, making it quicker and easier to get to a range of destinations across London and the South East.

    Over three years, Network Rail has led an 800-strong workforce to successfully install more than 1,400 overhead structures and 140 miles of overhead wires that will power the new trains. The vast majority of this huge engineering project had to be undertaken in the early hours of the morning, at weekends and bank holidays to enable GWR and other operators to run normal services as much as possible.

    Mark Langman, Route Managing Director, Network Rail, said: “This is a major milestone for Network Rail’s Railway Upgrade Plan of which the delivery of an electrified Great Western Mainline and the Elizabeth line is a huge part. From May this year more passengers will see immediate benefits with brand new, cleaner, quieter electric trains operating between Maidenhead and Paddington. “On behalf of Network Rail I would like to thank passengers, local residents, businesses and local authorities for their patience and permission to deliver this huge programme of railway upgrade work at anti-social hours, weekends and every bank holiday for the last three years. Without their support it simply would not have been possible to electrify the Great Western Mainline to deliver new improved passenger services and pave the way for the Elizabeth line.”

    Mark Hopwood, GWR Managing Director, said: “The Thames Valley is one of the most popular rail corridors in the UK.  We have promised the current fleet would be upgraded to provide much needed additional capacity and more comfortable, quieter journeys. We started to run half hourly new electric trains in January, delivering over 10,000 more seats a day between London Paddington and Hayes & Harlington. We look forward to being able to extend these services beyond Hayes to Maidenhead this coming May as Network Rail continues its work to upgrade the railway.”

    Matthew White, Crossrail Surface Director, said: “The completion of this major piece of work paves the way for new, quicker, quieter trains right along this stretch of the railway. Once the Elizabeth line opens fully in 2019, passengers from the Thames Valley will be able to catch one train all the way through central London, providing a direct link to a range of destinations, including the West End, the City and Canary Wharf.”

    ENDS

    Looking over the OLE install albeit from the limited view of a train yesterday afternoon, there are areas where for instance the ATF wire is yet to be completed, I do not believe Kensal Green ATFS is fully ready yet and the IATS at West Ealing, Slough do not seem to be connected; there are issues with SCADA.

    Except for a few places like Maidenhead platform 5 (I think could well be tied in with the Maidenhead Silco Drive sidings work, leaving the wire that is in platform 5 / branch separated to allow the work to be done without permits) the OLE contact wire is complete to allow an electric train service to operate to Maidenhead, the system will be operated in the "classic" mode ie 25kV with running rail / earth wire return.  There is no need for the full electrical sectioning for the limited initial electric train service and the existing Old Oak Common classic FS will be capable of feeding it.

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on March 31, 2017, 18:34:26
    Mods...can we split off the more technical questions and answers of this thread, please ? The last posting was just words to me, with absolutely no level of comprehension whatsoever ! It might have helped if there had been a full stop in there somewhere.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on April 01, 2017, 18:47:18
    Mods...can we split off the more technical questions and answers of this thread, please ? The last posting was just words to me, with absolutely no level of comprehension whatsoever ! It might have helped if there had been a full stop in there somewhere.


    Sorry about that, I typed it in a bit of a rush.   I try to explain some of the techie terms used in electrification as simply as I can, so that people can appreciate some of what is behind the system.  :)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on April 01, 2017, 21:09:19
    I am delighted to read "techie" posts provided they don't drown the general content. I can choose to skip them if I want, whereas my choice of whether to read or not would be taken away from me if the post wasn't made.

    Although I started with rail "stuff" in 2005 as a clueless amateur, I have learned a bit over the years and I'm fully aware that some of my posts may be regarded as long, dry, techie by some / many.  ok; but I'll try to explain them, and I'll keep them coming both as a record, to help those who are interested, and to receive feedback so that I'm slightly less clueless next time around.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on April 01, 2017, 22:39:30
    Following on from grahame's previous post, I also welcome many of the more 'technical' posts from our expert members on topics such as this one, as they try to explain 'why' something is done, relative to 'what' is happening.

    However, in view of the sheer size of this topic (and the fact that I'm on holiday for a week from now and therefore allegedly have time on my hands ::)),  I'll have a look at how I could possibly split this particular topic into two versions - one for a more general discussion, and the other for our very technically qualified members to give full flight to their fascinating discussions.  ;)

    Both versions of this particular subject will obviously be readable by all, but everyone will hopefully then be able to decide to what level of detail they want to read.

    CfN.  :)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on April 02, 2017, 07:36:34
    That is a most helpful response Chris. Thank you in advance as I can see it will be time consuming. I would suggest that anything with figures and impenetrable acronyms and formulae goes into the techie section !  :o


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on April 02, 2017, 08:11:38
    The 3187 description has been stuck in there since the signalling 'commissioning' at xmas/new year 2016/2017 ;)  I think II told us in another thread that the physical construction hasn't been completed yet.  Anybody got a photograph as it would be nice to see whats been done at Maidenhead (no good looking out of a train window at 125mph)?  ::) :P

    No photos sadly, but I can confirm the current state of play:

    1) Station area:  Wires up throughout station area (and now assumed live) except for the London end of Platform 5 through to Maidenhead East Junction.
    2) Turnback siding:  Wires are up on the turnback siding and signalling is installed, but there's no track beyond the S&C as yet - I heard it was to be installed during April, so presumably Easter weekend.
    3) Stabling sidings:  No wires on any of them yet, though all other OHLE fixtures and fitting seem to be installed.  First two sidings are 'open' and signalled, the others all have rails and are ballasted but signalling work remains to be installed.

    A few photos - as best as can be obtained from a moving turbo - but at least it had clean windows!

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/maid1.jpg)

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/maid2.jpg)

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/maid3.jpg)

    (http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/maid4.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on April 02, 2017, 09:35:15
    Bobm, thanks for posting those photographs. You must have been crawing past on a (possibly) delayed HST  ::) :P ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on April 02, 2017, 09:49:56
    No it was a turbo pulling out of Maidenhead for Reading - it *was* two minutes late.  In this particular case that was just as well or I would have missed it!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on April 08, 2017, 22:43:02
    That is a most helpful response Chris. Thank you in advance as I can see it will be time consuming. I would suggest that anything with figures and impenetrable acronyms and formulae goes into the techie section !  :o

    I'm still working on this project, where I've adopted a fairly pragmatic approach that, if any post (or series of posts) isn't specific to the Great Western Main Line, it will probably go into the separate technical discussion.

    So far, it seems to have worked rather well.  :)



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on April 09, 2017, 15:21:35
    Mind you, a quick look at bobm's photographs, above, gives an insight into the very complex nature of the modern railway. There are so many different scientific disciplines involved just in the structures shown, in both the theoretical and the practical sectors. Metallurgy, electrical engineering, geology, the chemists who decide the formulation of the paint, the makers of the insulators, stress engineering, the guys who decide the optimum shape of the gantrys are just a few whose work is shown.

    As a country, we need to make sure these skills are available and improving. Post-Brexit, we may find a gap.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on April 11, 2017, 11:46:47
    I drove along the M4 yesterday, to somewhere I can't get to by train. There were posts up for the electric stuff on both sides of the track where the motorway crosses the railway up near Royal Wootton Bassett.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: NickF on April 11, 2017, 16:27:13
    I drove along the M4 yesterday, to somewhere I can't get to by train. There were posts up for the electric stuff on both sides of the track where the motorway crosses the railway up near Royal Wootton Bassett.

    Additionally there are a number of posts up where the railway crosses the A429 road, near Hullavington, some both sides, some just one side, and there seems to be the odd gap here and there where it looks like one is missing.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on May 07, 2017, 15:37:26
    I noticed a surprising (to me!) number of posts up between Cardiff Central and STJ yesterday morning. Probably more between STJ and the Tunnel too, but I got off there.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 08, 2017, 09:51:46
    I drove along the M4 yesterday, to somewhere I can't get to by train. There were posts up for the electric stuff on both sides of the track where the motorway crosses the railway up near Royal Wootton Bassett.

    Additionally there are a number of posts up where the railway crosses the A429 road, near Hullavington, some both sides, some just one side, and there seems to be the odd gap here and there where it looks like one is missing.

    I believe that where you see them just on one side they are quite likely to be two-track cantilever structures.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on May 13, 2017, 16:12:08
    Wiring now appears to be complete at the east end of Sonning Cutting where I took a couple of photos today:



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 14, 2017, 08:28:45
    Wiring now appears to be complete at the east end of Sonning Cutting where I took a couple of photos today:

    Energisation of the Maidenhead - Reading OLE is due in August 17, with I believe through Paddington - Reading electrics locals in the September timetable.

    I must emphasise the OLE in its present state is dangerous to approach or touch


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: bobm on May 14, 2017, 08:39:18
    I must emphasise the OLE in its present state is dangerous to approach or touch

    The old maxim, treat every wire as though it is live.  (or in the politician's case treat every microphone as though it is live)  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on May 14, 2017, 10:11:48
    Wiring now appears to be complete at the east end of Sonning Cutting where I took a couple of photos today:

    Energisation of the Maidenhead - Reading OLE is due in August 17, with I believe through Paddington - Reading electrics locals in the September timetable.

    I must emphasise the OLE in its present state is dangerous to approach or touch

    Before energisation can take place I'm guessing that the parapets of Butts Hill Bridge (the one in my lower photo, apologies for the slight sun glare) will need to be raised. They're currently the same as in this Google Street View from last year:

    https://goo.gl/maps/nHtSKeRFMM72 (https://goo.gl/maps/nHtSKeRFMM72)

    However I can't find any mention anywhere of the intention to carry out such work. Closing the road would be a major headache as apart from it being on a bus route there's no suitable diversion route for traffic. (Duffield Road bridge from where I took the photos is single lane with traffic lights). Presumably though somebody's going to have to do something very soon.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 14, 2017, 14:41:14
    Quote
    with I believe through Paddington - Reading electrics locals in the September timetable.

    So soon? I was led to believe (through unofficial sources mind) that services would start on Jan 2nd, which would include running through to Didcot.

    Of course September, or any sooner than January would be a nice bonus  :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 14, 2017, 21:24:59
    Wiring now appears to be complete at the east end of Sonning Cutting where I took a couple of photos today:

    Energisation of the Maidenhead - Reading OLE is due in August 17, with I believe through Paddington - Reading electrics locals in the September timetable.

    I must emphasise the OLE in its present state is dangerous to approach or touch

    Before energisation can take place I'm guessing that the parapets of Butts Hill Bridge (the one in my lower photo, apologies for the slight sun glare) will need to be raised. They're currently the same as in this Google Street View from last year:

    https://goo.gl/maps/nHtSKeRFMM72 (https://goo.gl/maps/nHtSKeRFMM72)

    However I can't find any mention anywhere of the intention to carry out such work. Closing the road would be a major headache as apart from it being on a bus route there's no suitable diversion route for traffic. (Duffield Road bridge from where I took the photos is single lane with traffic lights). Presumably though somebody's going to have to do something very soon.

    To raise the parapets on that style of bridge is not to difficult, the use of wire mesh screen which could be done at night with a single carriageway closure using traffic lights.   


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 16, 2017, 11:31:04
    Quote
    with I believe through Paddington - Reading electrics locals in the September timetable.

    So soon? I was led to believe (through unofficial sources mind) that services would start on Jan 2nd, which would include running through to Didcot.

    That's what I understand too....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 16, 2017, 13:58:20
    Quote
    with I believe through Paddington - Reading electrics locals in the September timetable.

    So soon? I was led to believe (through unofficial sources mind) that services would start on Jan 2nd, which would include running through to Didcot.

    That's what I understand too....

    Given the complexity of the Reading station layout and the need to prove it all, not to mention training drivers and staff, I'd be very surprised if there were only a month between energisation and planned introduction into public service. Six months sounds more like it, perhaps the plan is to allow ECS runs from September (with the fallback position being that loco haulage will continue if there are any issues with the OLE).

    The Hendy dates for infrastructure authorisation were:

        Maidenhead to Didcot: December 2017
        Didcot to Wootton Bassett Junction: December 2018
        Wootton Bassett Junction to Bristol Parkway: December 2018
        Reading to Newbury: December 2018
        Bristol Parkway to Cardiff: December 2018
        Didcot to Oxford: June 2019
        Wootton Bassett Junction to Bristol Temple Meads: February 2019-April 2020
        Filton Bank: Early CP6

    Obviously Oxford and Bristol have been postponed since then, but the rest would seem achievable given the current rates of progress. 
     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 16, 2017, 14:24:28
    Obviously Oxford and Bristol have been postponed since then, but the rest would seem achievable given the current rates of progress. 

    I think all of those December 2018 dates will be very difficult but just about possible to achieve as long as recent rapid progress continues.  The December 2017 date out to Didcot Parkway looks like being achieved with time to spare.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 16, 2017, 14:30:46
    Of course, GWR couldn't start electric services to Didcot several days/weeks after wires-live (Jan 2nd announced, I believe?) - training etc will be necessary. So definitely need to be finished well before.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 16, 2017, 14:40:39
    The timetable book E1 (May 21 onward version) shows a number of stopping services that change from DMU to EMU operation from July, the majority are split at Maidenhead, with a DMU leg added for Maidenhead to Reading.

    ISTM that those particular services fit in with an early extension as far as Reading if infrastructure becomes available between say September and January. If it doesn't happen there'd be no need to alter the timetable again.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 18, 2017, 16:31:16
    With apologies if this is already in this thread somewhere but I couldn't easily find it if so but if all goes according to plan it looks (from realtime trains) as if the following new services will be running from Monday as EMUs:

    Maidenhead to Paddington (morning rush hour)

    6.25 non-stop arriving at 06.56
    6.56  stopping service arriving at 07.46
    7.33  non-stop arriving at 08.06
    7.41  non-stop arriving at 8.21
    8.42  stopping at Taplow, Slough and Southall arriving at 9.22
    9.07 stopping service arriving at 9.49


    Paddington to Maidenhead (Evening services)

    16.09  stopping at just Slough arriving at 16.42
    16.42  non-stop arriving at 17.13
    17.14  stopping service arriving at 18.05
    17.42  stopping at Slough and Burnham arriving at 18.14
    18.42  stopping at Slough arriving at 19.14
    19.12  stopping service arriving at 19.53
    19.36  non-stop arriving at 20.00

    Some are replacing existing services and some appear to be new. The increase in capacity will make a big difference to the overcrowding (I hope)










    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 18, 2017, 16:37:49
    Spottable in the printed timetable with electric flashes above each column


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Boppy on May 18, 2017, 17:58:02
    I was hoping to try one of these new services running as an EMU.

    Today I managed to make the 16.09 from Paddington. Unfortunately it was a DMU!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 18, 2017, 18:06:06
    I was hoping to try one of these new services running as an EMU.

    Today I managed to make the 16.09 from Paddington. Unfortunately it was a DMU!
    The timetable changes this weekend coming up though...   ???


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Boppy on May 18, 2017, 20:43:45
    Doh.

    I had it in my head it changed start of this week (sorry I'm clearly not keeping up!)

    Next week it is! Thanks.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on May 20, 2017, 15:38:28
     ;D

    May I commend my colleague's excellent post at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5066.msg213946#msg213946 for details. ;)

    CfN.  :-X


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 20, 2017, 16:17:12
    Quote
    6.25 non-stop arriving at 06.56

    I see throughout next week this departs at 06:28, with the following, 2P11 06:29 off Maidenhead departing at 06:32 instead

    As things stand it is booked for 06:25 from the 30th onwards...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 21, 2017, 08:48:25
    Quote
    7.33  non-stop arriving at 08.06
    It appears for just Monday this week this will be a turbo (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O98085/2017/05/22/advanced) and not a 387.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 21, 2017, 09:16:53
    Quote
    7.33  non-stop arriving at 08.06
    It appears for just Monday this week this ill be a turbo (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O98085/2017/05/22/advanced) and not a 387.

    That link takes you to a empty train running from Reading to Maidenhead which is a little suspicious.. Here is the 7.33 Maidenhead to Paddington EMU still hopefully (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29357/2017/05/22/advanced)  ;D :D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 21, 2017, 09:25:22
    Quote
    7.33  non-stop arriving at 08.06
    It appears for just Monday this week this ill be a turbo (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O98085/2017/05/22/advanced) and not a 387.

    That link takes you to a empty train running from Reading to Maidenhead which is a little suspicious.. Here is the 7.33 Maidenhead to Paddington EMU still hopefully (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29357/2017/05/22/advanced)  ;D :D
    However the service from West Ealing EMU sidings which forms this service cancelled (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29667/2017/05/22/advanced)  says "cancelled" on it.. Could this be the start of a recurring  theme I wonder :'( :-\


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 21, 2017, 09:30:49
    Yes, that empty train will form the 07:33

    The electric coaching stock for the 07:33 has also been cancelled (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29667/2017/05/22/advanced)


    Likewise the 18:42 from Paddington looks as if it will also be a turbo

    Here (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C29729/2017/05/22/advanced) is the empty electric coaching stock going back to West Ealing which has been cancelled for tomorrow

    Whilst here (http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O98089/2017/05/22/advanced) is the turbo running back to Reading empty.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 21, 2017, 09:40:58
    I wonder how many carriages they'll manage to put on for these two trains then.. Not sure it's worth the risk of finding out it's a whole two carriages  :-\


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 21, 2017, 19:01:46
    From GWR Twitter
    Quote
    Hi, some electric trains will be Turbos tomorrow because of an electricity supply issue. Network Rail are working to fix


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 21, 2017, 19:08:48
    This should also lead to the same turbo unit doing the 08:42 from Maidenhead and the 16:42 from Paddington tomorrow instead of a 387.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 21, 2017, 19:16:27
    Why would this issue cause just two changes to turbos & not all of the 387 services?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on May 21, 2017, 19:39:53
    Why would this issue cause just two changes to turbos & not all of the 387 services?

    Because enough power can be supplied for the existing Heathrow services plus so many 387s, but not the full timetabled number. No doubt that judgement was based on examining the power drawn with the trains running to far, and extrapolating to the new timetable, with allowance for varying relative timing of trains accelerating etc. The peak power draw predicted is over what's available, hence the change.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on May 21, 2017, 19:53:10
    Although I'm not an engineer, that sounds like a fairly basic thing to have established prior to announcing the new services (and certainly not to have discovered less than 48 hours before the services were due to commence).  It doesn't inspire confidence in the whole project.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 21, 2017, 20:00:37
    Perhaps they're just playing it safe tomorrow, and, all being well, will have the full service commencing on Tuesday when they can monitor tomorrow's power draw?

    Better that than something going bang and nothing being able to operate.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on May 21, 2017, 20:09:09
    Although I'm not an engineer, that sounds like a fairly basic thing to have established prior to announcing the new services (and certainly not to have discovered less than 48 hours before the services were due to commence).  It doesn't inspire confidence in the whole project.

    Sorry - I'd forgotten that this subject is (not unreasonably) split over two threads. If you refer to Electric train's post (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14927.msg214015#msg214015) there you'll see that power is still coming from the old feeder station, designed just for the Heathrow services. I'm not sure how long (or short) the wait will be until the new, more powerful, one's on line.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on May 21, 2017, 20:36:58
    Although I'm not an engineer, that sounds like a fairly basic thing to have established prior to announcing the new services (and certainly not to have discovered less than 48 hours before the services were due to commence).  It doesn't inspire confidence in the whole project.

    Sorry - I'd forgotten that this subject is (not unreasonably) split over two threads. If you refer to Electric train's post (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14927.msg214015#msg214015) there you'll see that power is still coming from the old feeder station, designed just for the Heathrow services. I'm not sure how long (or short) the wait will be until the new, more powerful, one's on line.

    Thanks for the signpost to that. I did recall that post, but still thought that it's incredibly late in the day to pull some of the new services. Hopefully II is right, and it is just a case of being cautious on day 1.  That I would be completely in favour of, as the bad publicity that would result if it went "bang" stopping everything is something to be avoided at all cost. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on May 22, 2017, 05:32:49
    From ITV (http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/update/2017-05-22/new-electric-trains-introduced-by-first-great-western/)

    Quote
    The first of the new electric trains to ease congestion for passengers on the First Great Western Railway enter into service today.

    The Electrostars will increase capacity by forty per cent and have cost £200 million.

    They will start running from Maidenhead.

    Looks like ITV doesn't consider Hayes and Harlington to Paddington to have been much of a service  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 22, 2017, 08:36:44
    Realtime trains suggests the 6.56 departure only made it as far as Taplow before there was an issue with the doors..aLso they were handing out leaflets at Maidenhead this morning about the increased capacity.. Let's hope they get the service sorted for tomorrow..


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on May 22, 2017, 09:09:11
    When I arrived at Maidenhead this morning at 08:11, platform 4 seemed far busier than it has been in recent weeks!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 22, 2017, 14:55:18
    I wonder how many carriages they'll manage to put on for these two trains then.. Not sure it's worth the risk of finding out it's a whole two carriages  :-\

    A 5-car Turbo was used this morning, and should be used again this evening, so not too bad.

    Realtime trains suggests the 6.56 departure only made it as far as Taplow before there was an issue with the doors..aLso they were handing out leaflets at Maidenhead this morning about the increased capacity.. Let's hope they get the service sorted for tomorrow..

    Yes, not too sure of the details but it looked like it went to West Ealing empty and was swapped for another two 387s in time for the next passenger working, so not to he perfect start GWR was hoping four, but not an all out disaster either.

    We'll see how tonight and tomorrow morning shape up...


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 22, 2017, 19:00:19
    It looks like the 7.33am is a turbo again tomorrow.. So much for Electric trains :)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 22, 2017, 19:24:03
    I just asked on Twitter how long this problem is likely to go on for and got the reply "Network Rail are working on the issue but I can't provide a date for when it will be sorted I'm afraid".. Doesn't sound terribly hopeful.. After all the years we've needed this extra capacity someone didn't check out that the electrics were going to work for the...erm..electric trains  ::) ??? ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 22, 2017, 20:58:28
    I was on the 06:28 this morning, left on time arrived at Padd on time.   Oh and plenty of seats to chose from   :)  Better that my usual 07:02 where its difficult find even standing space  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on May 23, 2017, 00:12:16
    Decided to try out the 19:12 this evening, still many seats available, with various off and ons at Ealing and Hayes, along with a mass exodus at West Drayton leaving it fairly empty with less than 10 people in my carriage for the remainder of the journey.

    Here is the 19:12 having come in to Maidenhead on Platform 5, with the 19:36 having just arrived on Platform 3.

    (http://i1347.photobucket.com/albums/p710/Adelante_CCT/IMG_20170522_200054_zpsrr0eypfx.jpg)

    Hadn't got round to trying a 387 out before, very happy with my journey, plenty of leg room and pleasant AC on what had been a muggy afternoon. Looking forward to a larger rollout, power supply pending  ::)

    I know the odd late running freight was in the area but one slight problem I saw was by the time the units on Platform 5 had returned towards London, the service from Bourne End was being held on the branch, I hope this doesn't happen to often in the future.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BBM on May 23, 2017, 08:33:03
    I had to work in Ealing today so I took the 0635 Turbo from TWY to MAI and then I hung around there for the 0656 Cl.387 service which today had no door problems at Taplow or indeed anywhere else! Very nice smooth comfortable journey with plenty of seats for everyone and so good not to have to push my way out at EAL. Not looking forward to a noisy hot plodding return journey on a Turbo later.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on May 23, 2017, 08:50:13
    I wonder when the overhead line damage occurred then as the 0733 & others from Maidenhead were 3 car turbos, very cosy! (According to GWR this was due to OHL damage)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: johoare on May 23, 2017, 08:57:30
    I was on the 7.33 today and it was actually not too overcrowded at all.. Probably helped by it starting at Maidenhead empty rather than the train which it replaces (the 7.29) which used to arrive fairly full anyway.. It will be even better once it's 8 carriages  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: lordgoata on May 23, 2017, 09:20:38
    The 0811 on the other hand, was also a 3-car (down from 5) and was rammed solid!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on May 23, 2017, 09:24:36
    I was on the 7.33 today and it was actually not too overcrowded at all.. Probably helped by it starting at Maidenhead empty rather than the train which it replaces (the 7.29) which used to arrive fairly full anyway.. It will be even better once it's 8 carriages  ;D

    I have been asked if this improvement in services from Maidenhead three weeks before a general election is a co-incidence of timing, or if it's been hurried into life (e.g. electric supply issues) early to help the local MP, who I understand is a key person to the Conservatives.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on May 23, 2017, 09:33:00
    Neither.....planned well before that certain lady called the election.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on May 23, 2017, 09:34:35
    I was on the 7.33 today and it was actually not too overcrowded at all.. Probably helped by it starting at Maidenhead empty rather than the train which it replaces (the 7.29) which used to arrive fairly full anyway.. It will be even better once it's 8 carriages 

    I have been asked if this improvement in services from Maidenhead three weeks before a general election is a co-incidence of timing, or if it's been hurried into life (e.g. electric supply issues) early to help the local MP, who I understand is a key person to the Conservatives.

    Ahhhhh, so the whole, massive delay and cost increase to the  electrification programme was all a cunning Conservative plan to get the timing just right.....got it!  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 23, 2017, 11:04:43
    Neither.....planned well before that certain lady called the election.

    For a source, Paddington/Maidenhead peak services in May 2017 is clearly supported by the details shown in the September 2016 track access application - the same TAA that dealt with the Greenford and Hayes changes.   

    Of course it is later (perhaps about 9 months?) than expected compared to when first announced in the new franchise brief,  IIRC (without looking it up) May 2017 was supposed to have had EMUs running to Oxford.   

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on May 23, 2017, 11:45:31
    It's not a good start to the new Maidenhead-Paddington electric services is it?

    Doubt anyone who uses peak time services along the Thames Valley was that surprised after all the problems and delays of the past few years though.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 23, 2017, 12:16:15
    I'd be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    The fact is that at the appointed day, electric trains started running, and they are new and shiny ones to boot, not like the 319's the northerners got. Within the next six months the power supply will be upgraded, Maidenhead to Reading will be energised and it should be all systems go. Considering the mess the project was in at the start, with piling hitting signalling cables and all sorts, it is a remarkable achievement.

    2 years from today, Crossrail should be fully functional, there will be OHLE all the way to Cardiff, Newbury and Chippenham, and shiny new 80x's galore, and of course there will have been an awful lot of infrastructure and signalling renewal. That's not bad progress for 10 years.





    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 23, 2017, 13:04:33
    That's not bad progress for 10 years.

    I intend to produce a cab video comparison next year charting all of the numerous changes on the route between Paddington and Didcot Parkway in a similar vein to my Cotswold line redoubling one.  The original footage I have was recorded in July 2010.  That was before any visible work had started at Reading or on the Great Western Electrification Programme and the only Crossrail works visible were the lifting of the old Marcon sidings between Westbourne Park and Royal Oak.

    I think the number of changes will surprise many people.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on May 23, 2017, 13:16:07
    I'd be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    The fact is that at the appointed day, electric trains started running, and they are new and shiny ones to boot, not like the 319's the northerners got. Within the next six months the power supply will be upgraded, Maidenhead to Reading will be energised and it should be all systems go. Considering the mess the project was in at the start, with piling hitting signalling cables and all sorts, it is a remarkable achievement.

    2 years from today, Crossrail should be fully functional, there will be OHLE all the way to Cardiff, Newbury and Chippenham, and shiny new 80x's galore, and of course there will have been an awful lot of infrastructure and signalling renewal. That's not bad progress for 10 years.

    I think that's a very glass half full view.  Remember that the whole east coast was electrified from Hitchin to Leeds and Edinburgh in 7 years from authorisation. So a remarkable achievement?  Hardly.  What we'll get is half a job - so much so that the AC only units are being respecified as bi-modes, the wires will run out in the middle of the Wiltshire countryside, and one of the major Thames valley destinations will remain devoid of knitting.  And finally, they discover a couple of days before launch that they can't even run all of the additional three emu peak hour only diagrams.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on May 23, 2017, 13:31:49

    I intend to produce a cab video comparison next year charting all of the numerous changes on the route between Paddington and Didcot Parkway in a similar vein to my Cotswold line redoubling one.  The original footage I have was recorded in July 2010.  That was before any visible work had started at Reading or on the Great Western Electrification Programme and the only Crossrail works visible were the lifting of the old Marcon sidings between Westbourne Park and Royal Oak.


    I think that RailScene Cab Ride 32 might show even more changes - it was made 27 years ago to the day!

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on May 24, 2017, 10:34:21
    What we'll get is half a job - so much so that the AC only units are being respecified as bi-modes
    They were never really going to true 'AC Only' units anyway, just like the new Hitachi trains to replace the IC225 electrics out of Kings Cross they were to be class 801 units which, operationally speaking, are EMUs but technically speaking are bi-modes. The class 801s will have a single diesel engine on-board (or possibly two) to allow low-speed movement if the overhead wires are disabled. They would not have enough power in diesel mode to be useful for running services beyond the wires, but they will have a diesel mode.

    Given that electrification of the diversionary route to south Wales via Gloucester was never authorised, I actually think having some fully-capable 9-car bi-mode units (rather than a choice of 5-car bi-modes and 9-car class 801s) could be a good thing; it is just a shame that the electrification we were promissed is being delayed (I hope not cut back, but worryingly it is looking that way).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Noggin on May 24, 2017, 11:49:05
    WNXX's man inside GWR suggests that there will be full electric diagram in the peaks from Friday as previously planned. Guess that someone was just being cautious.

    Yes, the ECML was done relatively quickly, and the track mileage is longer, but as I understand it, the scope of works was relatively limited and the DfT screwed the costs down as tightly as possible, leaving problems with the overheads that are still experienced today. Hull, Lincoln, Middlesborough, Aberdeen, Inverness etc were left untouched, with no electro-diesels, so they were left with HST's running under the wires for long stretches.

    I'd argue that the GWML project is far greater in scope - complete resignalling, much heavier duty OLE that meets European TSI's, major infrastructure rebuilding right into Paddington, conductor bar through the Severn Tunnel, reinstatement of 4 miles of double track along the Filton Bank including some major civil engineering, on a railway that is far more heavily used than the ECML in the 1980's, of which much is a world heritage site and was built by Brunel very early on using what would now be considered extremely unorthodox techniques.

    I'd say that that's a pretty amazing feat.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on May 24, 2017, 14:24:30
    It's not a good start to the new Maidenhead-Paddington electric services is it?

    Not perfect, no.  But it's worth pointing out that of the 15 daily electric passenger services that are supposed to be running from/to Maidenhead and Slough, only 4 of them are not running as a result of this 'Turbotution' of one of the diagrams.

    OK, one failed at Taplow on Monday and today there were delays caused by the failed engineering train, but all-in-all I wouldn't say it was a 'bad' start either.  Especially if the full 15 trains are 387s from Friday as Noggin has reported from the WNXX forum.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on May 25, 2017, 16:50:13
    Steventon Parish News for January 2017 (http://www.steventon.info/paramonthly.html) is reporting that in the end the bridge will be rebuilt and the level crossings will stay open!

    So that years of delay to end up back where they started at huge public expense. 

    A decision due by May and then they still have to get permission from the District Council because it is listed. 

    The planning application is currently pending, and has become a leading topic in the local weekly papers, eg:

    http://www.oxfordshireguardian.co.uk/end-line-railway-bridge/
    http://www.heraldseries.co.uk/news/hsdidcotnews/15308796.Network_Rail_faces_residents__wrath_over_plans_to_demolish_historic_bridge/

    Much (but not all) of the ire seems to be around the length of time (10 months) Steventon will be cut off for traffic towards the south from business.

    The actual number of objections on the planning site is only a handful, at least at the moment. Still some time to run.




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 25, 2017, 18:43:54
    I'd be inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    The fact is that at the appointed day, electric trains started running, and they are new and shiny ones to boot, not like the 319's the northerners got. Within the next six months the power supply will be upgraded, Maidenhead to Reading will be energised and it should be all systems go. Considering the mess the project was in at the start, with piling hitting signalling cables and all sorts, it is a remarkable achievement.

    2 years from today, Crossrail should be fully functional, there will be OHLE all the way to Cardiff, Newbury and Chippenham, and shiny new 80x's galore, and of course there will have been an awful lot of infrastructure and signalling renewal. That's not bad progress for 10 years.

    I think that's a very glass half full view.  Remember that the whole east coast was electrified from Hitchin to Leeds and Edinburgh in 7 years from authorisation. So a remarkable achievement?  Hardly.  What we'll get is half a job - so much so that the AC only units are being respecified as bi-modes, the wires will run out in the middle of the Wiltshire countryside, and one of the major Thames valley destinations will remain devoid of knitting.  And finally, they discover a couple of days before launch that they can't even run all of the additional three emu peak hour only diagrams.

    There was a bit of a fudge with the ECML electrification, BR installed a lot of OLE foundations and switchgear building bases during pauses in other electrification projects.  It was easy for them to do this as they used direct labour, had their own plant, controlled the whole system so possessions were simple to arrange.

    Also its a little unfair to compare todays railway to the one BR "owned" and operated , NR may "own" the infrastructure but they have to jump through hoops to get the access they need also the way contracts are let today and the H&S law that surrounds the way work is done is vastly different. 

    Also BR were well practiced at electrification, they had constantly been at it for 30 plus years so the engineers and managers were highly experienced.  We have had a 22 or so year gap at best the experience is spread across many employers but in a lot of cases has retired.  The guys in GWEP have been relearning a lot of the lessons plus a whole lot of new ones.   Add the complexity of the politicians in the 2010 general election out bidding each other on who was going to do the most electrification and the quickest but then did not have the money to fund it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on May 25, 2017, 21:09:01
    There was a bit of a fudge with the ECML electrification, BR installed a lot of OLE foundations and switchgear building bases during pauses in other electrification projects.  It was easy for them to do this as they used direct labour, had their own plant, controlled the whole system so possessions were simple to arrange.

    They were also sorting out low bridges to provide for electrification many years in advance.   In Peter Semmens' book on the project, he mentions that they were raising bridges in the north east from the 1950s onwards.  The work was theoretically to provide increased clearances for decent depth of ballasted track for the higher speeds the Deltics would run at, but they were able to rebuild bridges for OHLE clearances as part of the same work.  There are a number of examples of this on the closed section of the line from Selby to York, which were completed prior to the Selby coalfield diversion.

    The other main point about the ECML is that design work must have been continuing on and off for many years prior to the Department of Transport's decision to start in 1984, after all the project was always about to start ever since the time of the modernisation plan, if not well before.  I very much doubt they started with a completely clean slate in 1984...

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on May 25, 2017, 22:38:26
    There was a bit of a fudge with the ECML electrification, BR installed a lot of OLE foundations and switchgear building bases during pauses in other electrification projects.  It was easy for them to do this as they used direct labour, had their own plant, controlled the whole system so possessions were simple to arrange.

    They were also sorting out low bridges to provide for electrification many years in advance.   In Peter Semmens' book on the project, he mentions that they were raising bridges in the north east from the 1950s onwards.  The work was theoretically to provide increased clearances for decent depth of ballasted track for the higher speeds the Deltics would run at, but they were able to rebuild bridges for OHLE clearances as part of the same work.  There are a number of examples of this on the closed section of the line from Selby to York, which were completed prior to the Selby coalfield diversion.

    The other main point about the ECML is that design work must have been continuing on and off for many years prior to the Department of Transport's decision to start in 1984, after all the project was always about to start ever since the time of the modernisation plan, if not well before.  I very much doubt they started with a completely clean slate in 1984...

    Paul

    Also the ECM had a major re-signalling in the 1970's on most of the route, very little was done to the signalling as part of the electrification process.  With GW Route it is a whole sale route modernisation, even in the 1970s for the introduction of the 125's it was predominately track work; so we find our selves with an electrification scheme, re-signalling and playing catch up with bridge replacements


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on May 25, 2017, 23:12:36
    I see Network Rail have now applied for planning permission to demolish the bridge at Steventon.  Details can be found on the Vale of the White Horse Council's website here (http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/java/support/Main.jsp?MODULE=ApplicationDetails&REF=P17/V1154/LB#exactline)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on May 25, 2017, 23:20:03
    I see Network Rail have now applied for planning permission to demolish the bridge at Steventon.  Details can be found on the Vale of the White Horse Council's website here (http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/java/support/Main.jsp?MODULE=ApplicationDetails&REF=P17/V1154/LB#exactline)
    Also this one: Provision of New Overbridge, under Part 18 Class A to Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, requiring the Local Planning Authority's Prior Approval (http://www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk/java/support/Main.jsp?MODULE=ApplicationDetails&REF=P17/V1161/P18)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on June 15, 2017, 12:41:51
    I was slightly surprised to see that piling has recently been carried out immediately west of Thingley Jn for around 1.2Km. Maybe that's considered to be a better place for drivers to transition from electric to diesel than at the junction itself?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on June 15, 2017, 13:25:47
    I was slightly surprised to see that piling has recently been carried out immediately west of Thingley Jn for around 1.2Km. Maybe that's considered to be a better place for drivers to transition from electric to diesel than at the junction itself?

    Perhaps it is better to have the end of the initial stage of the wiring at a normal plain line location, well away from the grid feeder station, which will be a relatively more complex location with additional electrical switching.  Eventually Thingley will be feeding in both directions.   1.2 km is possibly a fairly standard wiring length.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rower40 on June 15, 2017, 15:11:02
    Or is it enough distance for an electric-only train to stop on passing the "Electric trains stop here" board, before running out of wires and needing a Thunderbird to haul it back?

    When I was 14 or so, I had a Lego railway; hacksawing through the conductor rails (BEFORE installing!), and bridging the gap with a diode, meant that trains running onto a dead-end siding would stop, but could be reversed off.  The equivalent could be done here by isolating the last section, and getting the ECR to supply power to it when an electric train has become stranded, and is ready to drive back onto the properly-wired-up railway.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on June 15, 2017, 15:34:35
    Given there won't be any electric-only units for the foreseeable future, and that decision was taken broadly at the same time as to curtail the wires at Thingley then I don't believe that is the reason.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 15, 2017, 18:17:11
    It is possible the piling had already been contracted, often more cost efficient to allow work to go ahead than cancel a contract; or there was a possession available a piling team available so the decision was taken to carryout the piling.

    There can be a multitude of reasons, remember the electrification via Bath has been deferred, not cancelled.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Chris from Nailsea on June 17, 2017, 00:31:25
    The following item is an article, on page 5 in The Week In of 7 June 2017 (a free newspaper distributed in East Bristol & North East Somerset).

    To those who know him, David Redgewell particularly wanted me to post this item on the Coffee Shop forum - so here it is:

    Quote
    No assurance from Chancellor on electrification

    On a visit to Bristol last week, Chancellor Philip Hammond would not give any assurances that electrification of the GWR line into Temple Meads will go ahead.

    Mr Hammond, who met the newly elected West of England Mayor Tim Bowles, said "Investing in infrastructure is the number one priority for us ... but we've got to do it in a way that is cost effective, and it means engineering projects to deliver the maximum passenger benefits that we can with the money that's available.

    "What matters to people is the output: reliable journey times, shorter journey times, greater frequency of service, better availability of wifi on the trains. How we do that, whether it's by electrifying or not part of the lines using hybrid trains, is of less interest to them. What they want is the services delivered and that is what Network Rail is determined to deliver too."

    The first of a new breed of Hitachi bi-mode diesel/electric trains are due to join the GWR fleet this year. While services to Bristol Parkway will be fully electrified, trains bound for Temple Meads will switch to diesel power for the last part of the journey at Thingley Junction, near Corsham. The "deferral" of work west of Chippenham because of spiralling costs was announced last autumn.

    When the Transport Secretary Chris Grayling came to Bristol to support Mr Bowles during the run-up to the mayoral election, The Week In asked him whether we would ever see electric trains travelling all the way to Temple Meads. He told us: "Our expectation is yes, but I don't want people to be hung up over journey times or when overhead wires will appear. The important thing is that from this autumn, travellers will begin to see a new service with new trains, more departures and extra seats. Electrification continues ever westwards and it is our intention that it will continue, albeit on a different timescale."

    Tim Bowles made it clear during his campaign that electrification needs to happen and that if elected, he would be pressing for it.

    We have asked him for his response to Mr Hammond's comments.




    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 20, 2017, 14:19:01
    Network Rail are saying "suspended", but the Government are intimating otherwise, stating that the bimodes can already go anywhere, wiring or no wiring. I suspect Hammond is saying 'not in this Parliament'. But that may now not be a full 5 years.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 20, 2017, 18:05:08
    Network Rail are saying "suspended", but the Government are intimating otherwise, stating that the bimodes can already go anywhere, wiring or no wiring. I suspect Hammond is saying 'not in this Parliament'. But that may now not be a full 5 years.

    Also he and his boss might have to "buy off" some West Country MP during this parliament   ;)  ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on June 21, 2017, 10:58:07

    Also he and his boss might have to "buy off" some West Country MP during this parliament   ;)  ;D


    Hmm... with four Labour MPs in Bristol and a LibDem in Bath, I suspect the current government's pork barrel money will go elsewhere. Antrim - Lisburn, anyone? With maybe a link to Belfast International?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on June 21, 2017, 19:47:56
    For at least the third time since I moved to Bristol, electrification has been promised, then unpromised. This time, it looks to be even more of a false economy than before. How much did it cost to fit all the diesel engines as compared to finishing the electrification? Particularly as so much of the prep-up work has been done on stretches of track that will not see wires above them for the foreseeable?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on June 21, 2017, 19:55:21
    I'm a little bit puzzled here as the recently published NR 2017/2018 Upgrade Plan (Page 50) clearly states the electrification to Bristol, Cardiff and Newbury will be complete by 2019: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-railway-upgrade-plan/railway-upgrade-plan-2017-2018/


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on June 21, 2017, 20:05:24
    For at least the third time since I moved to Bristol, electrification has been promised, then unpromised. This time, it looks to be even more of a false economy than before. How much did it cost to fit all the diesel engines as compared to finishing the electrification? Particularly as so much of the prep-up work has been done on stretches of track that will not see wires above them for the foreseeable?

    If it is a delay that allows money to be saved by a better sequence of work (e.g. Bristol East Junction and Temple Meads refurbishment) then it is probably best in he long run. If it is kicked into the long grass then it is stupid.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on June 21, 2017, 20:39:30
    As I said earlier, NR want to do the work, but the Goverent (their paymasters) aren't interested, as stated by various Ministers. It'll happen, not just under this (likely) shorter-term Parliament. The Government is due to submit their plans for Rail to the ORR by the end of the year, if not sooner. We'll find out for sure then


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on June 22, 2017, 09:37:06
    The delay for Bristol East in particular is very logical, but my worry is that with the new stock all now bi-mode, the business case won't stack up. And the nimbys of Bath not wanting the overhead wiring will be used as the excuse not to proceed.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on June 22, 2017, 13:09:47
    Quote
    I'm a little bit puzzled here as the recently published NR 2017/2018 Upgrade Plan (Page 50) clearly states the electrification to Bristol, Cardiff and Newbury will be complete by 2019: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-railway-upgrade-plan/railway-upgrade-plan-2017-2018/

    It states 'To Cardiff via Bristol and To Newbury', not 'To' Bristol, so I'm assuming the via Bristol part means Parkway, also the map doesn't show a green line between Parkway and Temple Meads.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on June 22, 2017, 14:19:58
    I think government's reasons for not wanting to finance it are important. If they are purely political (such as, in order to favour the Northern Powerhouse, to punish Bristol for voting Labour, or whatever) then they are likely to be reversed fairly quickly even without a change of government. If they are due to poor economic outlook (budgets tightening as post-Brexit economy shrinks, tax rates fall, etc) then they are less likely to change even with a change of government.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on June 26, 2017, 12:14:48

    Also he and his boss might have to "buy off" some West Country MP during this parliament   ;)  ;D


    Hmm... with four Labour MPs in Bristol and a LibDem in Bath, I suspect the current government's pork barrel money will go elsewhere. Antrim - Lisburn, anyone? With maybe a link to Belfast International?

    Ah - silly of me to think it might be spent of a rail project. Apparently a decent chunk will go towards this:

    https://www.infrastructure-ni.gov.uk/articles/york-street-interchange-overview


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 29, 2017, 09:27:46
    The feeder thingy at Kensal Green has now been switched on, so more electric trains can now run from July as planned and the existing ones can now run at full beans.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: DidcotPunter on June 29, 2017, 11:04:57
    The feeder thingy at Kensal Green has now been switched on, so more electric trains can now run from July as planned and the existing ones can now run at full beans.

    That's good news II. They still need to convert the Padd to Stockley Junction OLE to autotransformer (AT) supply before a full electric service can be run but that's several months away yet. As you rightly say it means that the planned service to Maidenhead can be run from next month.

    It now appears that the wiring between Maidenhead through the Reading station area to Scours Lane is nearing completion.  That leaves commissioning the AT stations at Twyford and Reading together with testing to complete, so the planned switch-on day in September should be quite achievable. Electrification from Padd to Milton Junction west of Didcot will then be complete theoretically enabling the IETs to run on AC from October, when they're supposed to be introduced and the 387s from Didcot at the beginning of next year.

    Are there any other works which need to be completed before this happens? I know there's platform lengthening planned at Didcot and some of the Thames Valley stations but I thought this was for 12 car 387s which won't be needed straight away


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Gordon the Blue Engine on June 29, 2017, 11:32:36
    Yes, good news indeed.  I think platform lengthening works have started at Pangbourne, there have been work area protection fences up at the country end of both platforms. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on June 29, 2017, 14:19:51
    The last update to the enhancement plan (March 17) shows an intended completion date of Dec 2017 for the platform extensions from Paddington to Didcot, and December 2018 for the Newbury route:

    8 car

    Tilehurst – Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4
    Pangbourne – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Goring and Streatley – Platforms 1, 2, 3, 4
    Cholsey – Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4.
    Culham – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Radley – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Reading West – Platform 2.
    Theale – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Thatcham – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Iver – Platforms 4 (resurfacing)

    12 car

    Slough – Platforms 2, 3, 4 and 5.
    Maidenhead – Platforms 1, 2 ,3, 4 and 5.
    Twyford – Platforms 1, 2 and 3.
    Didcot - Platform 3 – funded by IEP but still delivers 12 car EMU capability

    If that plan holds it allows for 12 car semi-fast EMUs from Didcot from January?

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: chuffed on June 29, 2017, 20:06:38
    The metro mayor has had a hunt down the back of the DUP sofa and found enough money for the Bromley Heath viaduct work to be reduced to 33 weeks instead of 52.....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on June 29, 2017, 22:13:40
    The feeder thingy at Kensal Green has now been switched on, so more electric trains can now run from July as planned and the existing ones can now run at full beans.

    I believe its been in services for at least a week, OOC FS seems to be left in an "available for use" condition which is normal practice for a few weeks.

    The last update to the enhancement plan (March 17) shows an intended completion date of Dec 2017 for the platform extensions from Paddington to Didcot, and December 2018 for the Newbury route:

    8 car

    Tilehurst – Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4
    Pangbourne – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Goring and Streatley – Platforms 1, 2, 3, 4
    Cholsey – Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4.
    Culham – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Radley – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Reading West – Platform 2.
    Theale – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Thatcham – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Iver – Platforms 4 (resurfacing)

    12 car

    Slough – Platforms 2, 3, 4 and 5.
    Maidenhead – Platforms 1, 2 ,3, 4 and 5.
    Twyford – Platforms 1, 2 and 3.
    Didcot - Platform 3 – funded by IEP but still delivers 12 car EMU capability

    If that plan holds it allows for 12 car semi-fast EMUs from Didcot from January?

    Paul

    Not much evidence of lengthening works at Maidenhead ............... yet

    12 car 387 are quite cool .............................. although its a bit of a hike if you get on the wrong end   ;D


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on June 29, 2017, 22:59:01
    Preliminary work has started at the Thames Valley stations but I guess if they're not finished by 387 service commencement then SDO can be used in the interim for 8-car services.  I wonder whether they'll bother with Culham and Radley now?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on July 06, 2017, 22:44:10
    The metro mayor has had a hunt down the back of the DUP sofa and found enough money for the Bromley Heath viaduct work to be reduced to 33 weeks instead of 52.....

    I think he arranged that before the May-DUP money had to be found. My guess is that, like MetroBust, there will be "unforeseen circumstances", meaning his money will reduce the works from 78 to 52 weeks.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 20, 2017, 10:15:12
    Cancelled between Cardiff & Swansea.

    From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-40665659)

    Quote
    Plans to electrify the Great Western Railway line between Cardiff and Swansea have been scrapped, the UK's transport secretary has said.

    Chris Grayling told the Western Mail a faster journey between the cities would be achieved without the "needless disruption of engineering works".

    He said a new fleet of trains would be on the line from the autumn, with 130 extra seats per train.

    The first minister said the news was "disturbing".

    Carwyn Jones tweeted: "Disturbing reports on rail electrification in the media this morning - waiting for the UK government to clarify."




    Plaid Cymru leader Leanne Wood tweeted: "Wales gets 1% of rail investment despite making up 6% of the UK network. And now this."

    In another, she wrote: "Wales is in a club of just three countries in Europe with not one inch of electrified rail to date. The other two are Albania & Moldova."

    Swansea council leader Rob Stewart said he was "angry" at the decision and felt "betrayed" by the UK government.

    Network Rail is working to deliver electrification between London and Cardiff by December 2018.

    Mr Grayling committed to 40% more seats on rush-hour journeys between Swansea and Cardiff.

    He said the new trains would be bi-mode, meaning they could run on electrified sections of track and then transfer to non-electrified sections.

    "The speed limit on the Swansea-Cardiff route is such that the new fleet of trains will be doing the route in exactly the same amount of time as they would be on a fully-electrified route," he told the newspaper."

    'Broken promises'

    But Wales' Economy Secretary Ken Skates disputed that claim, telling Radio Wales' Good Morning Wales programme: "I don't buy it."

    He accused the UK government of "years of broken promises" to the people of Wales and said Mr Grayling had not responded to his requests for a meeting on the issue.

    "I'm urging the UK government to clarify the situation immediately," he added.

    Professor of Transport for the University of South Wales Stuart Cole said the announcement could prevent companies investing in Swansea.

    "It affects its [Swansea's] image… what people like Siemens, Mitsubishi or any of the international big investors will say is 'if the UK government aren't prepared to invest in high tech for Swansea, why should we?'

    "It means that Swansea won't get the kind of modern railway technology which cities of its size elsewhere in western Europe have had for several years."

    Prof Cole said he believed the change of heart was down to mounting costs.

    He said. "In the initial stages the evaluation of costs and benefits were a desk exercise…

    "As that got more realistic and as the engineers started to walk the tracks to identify what bridges needed to be either removed, changed, heightened… those costs started to mount up [and] it increased from something like £300m to what is now £700m to 800m and I think that's probably been the primary determinant in this decision by the Department for Transport."

    The Welsh Government said it had long called on the UK government to electrify the line to Swansea, or instead give it the powers and the funding to do so.

    A spokesman said: "The UK government has so far refused to devolve funding for rail infrastructure, as was recommended by the Commission on Devolution in Wales, so it is its duty to invest in Wales. Today's reports in the media are therefore disturbing."


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: BerkshireBugsy on July 20, 2017, 10:24:01
    The last update to the enhancement plan (March 17) shows an intended completion date of Dec 2017 for the platform extensions from Paddington to Didcot, and December 2018 for the Newbury route:

    8 car

    Tilehurst – Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4
    Pangbourne – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Goring and Streatley – Platforms 1, 2, 3, 4
    Cholsey – Platforms 1, 2, 3 and 4.
    Culham – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Radley – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Reading West – Platform 2.
    Theale – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Thatcham – Platforms 1 and 2.
    Iver – Platforms 4 (resurfacing)

    12 car

    Slough – Platforms 2, 3, 4 and 5.
    Maidenhead – Platforms 1, 2 ,3, 4 and 5.
    Twyford – Platforms 1, 2 and 3.
    Didcot - Platform 3 – funded by IEP but still delivers 12 car EMU capability

    If that plan holds it allows for 12 car semi-fast EMUs from Didcot from January?

    Paul

    Thank you Paul. Although I don't travel between Thatcham and Reading any more (I found the service to unreliable for my needs) I wasn't aware on lengthening work starting yet - does anyone know if it has (Thatcham Crossing?) or if not when it is due to start?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on July 20, 2017, 10:38:26
    Cancelled between Cardiff & Swansea.

    From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-40665659)

    Quote
    Plans to electrify the Great Western Railway line between Cardiff and Swansea have been scrapped, the UK's transport secretary has said.

    Chris Grayling told the Western Mail a faster journey between the cities would be achieved without the "needless disruption of engineering works".

    He said a new fleet of trains would be on the line from the autumn, with 130 extra seats per train.

    The first minister said the news was "disturbing".

    Carwyn Jones tweeted: "Disturbing reports on rail electrification in the media this morning - waiting for the UK government to clarify."




    Plaid Cymru leader Leanne Wood tweeted: "Wales gets 1% of rail investment despite making up 6% of the UK network. And now this."

    In another, she wrote: "Wales is in a club of just three countries in Europe with not one inch of electrified rail to date. The other two are Albania & Moldova."

    Swansea council leader Rob Stewart said he was "angry" at the decision and felt "betrayed" by the UK government.

    Network Rail is working to deliver electrification between London and Cardiff by December 2018.

    Mr Grayling committed to 40% more seats on rush-hour journeys between Swansea and Cardiff.

    He said the new trains would be bi-mode, meaning they could run on electrified sections of track and then transfer to non-electrified sections.

    "The speed limit on the Swansea-Cardiff route is such that the new fleet of trains will be doing the route in exactly the same amount of time as they would be on a fully-electrified route," he told the newspaper."

    'Broken promises'

    But Wales' Economy Secretary Ken Skates disputed that claim, telling Radio Wales' Good Morning Wales programme: "I don't buy it."

    He accused the UK government of "years of broken promises" to the people of Wales and said Mr Grayling had not responded to his requests for a meeting on the issue.

    "I'm urging the UK government to clarify the situation immediately," he added.

    Professor of Transport for the University of South Wales Stuart Cole said the announcement could prevent companies investing in Swansea.

    "It affects its [Swansea's] image… what people like Siemens, Mitsubishi or any of the international big investors will say is 'if the UK government aren't prepared to invest in high tech for Swansea, why should we?'

    "It means that Swansea won't get the kind of modern railway technology which cities of its size elsewhere in western Europe have had for several years."

    Prof Cole said he believed the change of heart was down to mounting costs.

    He said. "In the initial stages the evaluation of costs and benefits were a desk exercise…

    "As that got more realistic and as the engineers started to walk the tracks to identify what bridges needed to be either removed, changed, heightened… those costs started to mount up [and] it increased from something like £300m to what is now £700m to 800m and I think that's probably been the primary determinant in this decision by the Department for Transport."

    The Welsh Government said it had long called on the UK government to electrify the line to Swansea, or instead give it the powers and the funding to do so.

    A spokesman said: "The UK government has so far refused to devolve funding for rail infrastructure, as was recommended by the Commission on Devolution in Wales, so it is its duty to invest in Wales. Today's reports in the media are therefore disturbing."

    Not surprising.  The govt view seems to be "we've got bi-mode trains, hence we don't need any more electrification".  That of course misses the point that you only need bi-modes to take advantage of those parts of the route which are electrified. That is an admission that electrified routes are more desirable.  So for an example, no nippy emu's which can accelerate quickly on the stopping services, reducing journey times and also keeping out of the way of the long distance services. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on July 20, 2017, 10:45:04
    It also concentrates solely on speed, ignoring the other benefits of electrification.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on July 20, 2017, 11:23:41
    [sigh] Can't say i'm surprised. Bi-modes have given license to never electrify parts of the network making the cost benefits of electrification null and void in many cases. Sad.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: IndustryInsider on July 20, 2017, 12:09:32
    Any news on Didcot to Oxford and Chippenham/Stoke Gifford to Bristol in today's announcements?  Couldn't see any myself.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rogerw on July 20, 2017, 12:24:42
    The only 3 mentioned were Cardiff - Swansea, MML north of Kettering and the Windermere branch


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on July 20, 2017, 12:51:50
    Quote
    Mr Grayling also announced:
    ◾plans to improve journeys times and connections between Swansea and Cardiff, south Wales, Bristol and London
    ◾plans to improve journeys times and connections across north Wales
    direct services from Pembroke Dock to London via Carmarthen on new Intercity Express trains
    ◾station improvements at Cardiff and Swansea

    At least one forum member will be pleased with point 3.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 20, 2017, 13:18:40
    all cancelled.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 20, 2017, 14:04:45
    HMG Statement here (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-improvements-for-rail-passengers-in-wales-the-midlands-and-the-north) (with spin, of course!)

    Quote
    New improvements for rail passengers in Wales, the midlands and the north

    The Department for Transport announces plans for new bi-mode trains for passengers with more seats and better on-board facilities.

    Passengers in Wales, the midlands and the north will get faster and more comfortable journeys quicker under new plans announced by the government today (20 July 2017).

    The Department for Transport is setting out plans for new trains on the Midland Main Line, Great Western Main Line and in the Lake District with increased seats and better on-board facilities.

    Modern bi-mode trains will be used on Great Western and Midland Main Line, with passengers in Wales benefiting from new Intercity Express trains which will each deliver over 130 more seats and faster services.

    Long distance journey times from Nottingham and Sheffield will also be reduced by up to 20 minutes in the peak, with the train operator in the Lake District beginning work to trial an alternative-fuelled train in this World Heritage Site.

    Thanks to this new technology disruptive electrification works between Cardiff and Swansea, Kettering, Nottingham and Sheffield, and between Windermere and Oxenholme, will no longer be needed.

    Passengers will benefit sooner and experience less disruption compared with putting up intrusive wires and masts along routes where they are no longer required.

    The government today also published the consultation for the next East Midlands franchise, which will deliver reduced journey times for intercity services and more seats for long distance passengers at peak hours, as well as dedicated services and more capacity for commuters coming into London. The franchise will maximise the benefits of the upgrade of the Midland Main Line — the biggest investment in the route since it was completed in 1870.

    Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said:


    “We are making the biggest investment in the railways since the Victorian era and upgrading services across the country, including in Wales, the midlands and the north.

    “Passengers expect and deserve high quality rail services and we are committed to using the best available technology for each part of the network, delivering significant benefits for those who use our railways.”

    Benefits along the specific routes include:

    Cardiff to Swansea

    From Autumn 2017, passengers in Wales will benefit from new Intercity Express trains which will each deliver over 130 extra seats, faster journey times and improved connectivity for South Wales to London with 40% more seats in the morning peak once the full fleet is in service.

    Network Rail will also develop additional options to improve journeys for passengers in Wales. These will include:
    •improving journeys times and connections between Swansea and Cardiff, and South Wales, Bristol and London
    •improving journeys times and connections across North Wales
    •direct services from Pembroke Dock to London via Carmarthen on new, state of the art Intercity Express trains
    •station improvements at Cardiff Station
    •station improvements in and around Swansea including looking at the case for additional provision

    The Secretary of State also welcomed a proposal for Wales’ first privately funded railway station at St Mellons. The department will work with the promoters of the scheme as they develop their plans to the next stage.

    The first new Intercity Express trains will enter service from this Autumn and once the whole fleet is introduced and electrification to Cardiff is complete journey times between Swansea, London and other stations along the route will be approximately 15 minutes shorter.

    Midland Main Line

    The next operator will be required to deliver modern, fast and efficient intercity and commuter trains, including a brand new set of bi-mode intercity trains from 2022, maximising the benefits of the largest upgrade of the Midland Main Line since it opened in 1870. This will improve journeys sooner, without the need for wires and masts on the whole route, with further investment to come to ensure Sheffield is ready for HS2.

    Benefits include reducing journey times on long distance services from Nottingham and Sheffield by up to 20 minutes in the peak and delivering over 1000 additional seats an hour in the peak into London, an increase of more than 50%.

    Oxenholme to Windermere

    Passengers in the Lake District will benefit from 4 direct services a day in each direction between Windermere and Manchester Airport from May 2018.

    The government has announced plans to ensure passengers enjoy brand new trains from December 2019. Journeys between Windermere and Manchester Airport will be improved sooner and with less disruption to services and local communities. It also means there is no need to construct intrusive wires and masts in this National Park.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on July 20, 2017, 14:07:24
    Most regrettable IMO, but hardly surprising under the circumstances.
    The electrification works already done have been one almighty c0ck up, badly over budget, hugely delayed, and have resulted in very considerable disruption to existing services.

    Railway electrification is much hated by those along the route, who will regard this as an historic victory. How long until they demand that the electrification already done is removed ?

    I fear that any significant new railway electrification is now dead for a generation. Minor additions and infill schemes might continue.

    I also wonder if HMG know something that we don't regarding electricity supplies in years to come. Considerable doubts exist as to the sufficiency of UK generating capacity. Rota power cuts have only been averted by the narrowest of margins and a certain amount of luck in recent winters.
    Diesel fuel can be stored against shortages, unlike electricity.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: brompton rail on July 20, 2017, 14:48:17
    Recent projected increases in electric car use (e.g. Volvo will be all electric soon) have brought forward comments about the need to increase generation to meet demand, so one way to curb that demand is to not expand railway electrification. Or am I too cynical.

    Shares in Hitachi seem to be a good bet. New Midland Mainline stock - why does it need to be bi-mode? - though only to replace the HSTs really, as the 222s can carry on.

    Ah well, so good to live in a country where the government plans ahead for decades to come.😢


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on July 20, 2017, 14:49:35
    Don't knock that - the 222s can be used elsewhere, like on XC.....let's have 'em.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Timmer on July 20, 2017, 15:12:49
    Don't knock that - the 222s can be used elsewhere, like on XC.....let's have 'em.
    And most probably will be along with cascaded HSTs...the train that never dies  ;)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on July 20, 2017, 15:15:12
    Refining of petrol and especially diesel uses huge amounts of electricity. I doubt if this is to do with reducing electricity demand, more to do with immediate budget constraints and the problems, engineering and political, encountered so far.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Richard Fairhurst on July 20, 2017, 15:41:41
    "Disruptive electrification works". "Intrusive wires". I suspect those comments will come back to bite DfT in the posterior next time there's a Goring Gap situation.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on July 20, 2017, 15:41:50
    Recent projected increases in electric car use (e.g. Volvo will be all electric soon) have brought forward comments about the need to increase generation to meet demand, so one way to curb that demand is to not expand railway electrification. Or am I too cynical.

    Increasing use of battery electric vehicles brings dangers and opportunities. Quite a small reduction in demand for oil can cause major downward pressure on prices, and once people see the massive benefits of owning or leasing electric vehicles, the demand for petrol and diesel may well crash. Thankfully there is a lot of spare power generation capacity overnight, and most battery electric vehicles already have software which allows them to be charged using a timer. Also technology is ripening which will allow charging to be suspended at times of high demand,  and even for capacity to be borrowed from batteries.

    I think I read somewhere that current generating capacity will allow for about half the vehicle fleet to be electrified. That process is likely to take at least 15 years, and in the meantime developments in grid storage and renewables are likely to continue.

    So to answer your question: I don't know about you being too cynical. Isn't it just another manifestation of austerity?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on July 20, 2017, 15:42:48
    well done Network Rail.  You had your chance and you blew it! 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on July 20, 2017, 16:05:47
    Do we know if the Box-Bat-Temple Meads - Parkway route will be wired still?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on July 20, 2017, 16:50:46
    "Disruptive electrification works". "Intrusive wires". I suspect those comments will come back to bite DfT in the posterior next time there's a Goring Gap situation.

    Intrusive wires was used in respect of the Windemere electrification.  I hardly think a single track branch is going to have intrusive catenary. Were there any objections or was it just an excuse to a problem that didn't exist. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Western Pathfinder on July 20, 2017, 17:13:37
    Do we know if the Box-Bat-Temple Meads - Parkway route will be wired still?

    Not at any time soon by the looks of things
    Might just try to forget about it.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Electric train on July 20, 2017, 17:47:07
    HMG Statement here (https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-improvements-for-rail-passengers-in-wales-the-midlands-and-the-north) (with spin, of course!)

    Quote
    New improvements for rail passengers in Wales, the midlands and the north

    The Department for Transport announces plans for new bi-mode trains for passengers with more seats and better on-board facilities.

    Passengers in Wales, the midlands and the north will get faster and more comfortable journeys quicker under new plans announced by the government today (20 July 2017).

    The Department for Transport is setting out plans for new trains on the Midland Main Line, Great Western Main Line and in the Lake District with increased seats and better on-board facilities.

    Modern bi-mode trains will be used on Great Western and Midland Main Line, with passengers in Wales benefiting from new Intercity Express trains which will each deliver over 130 more seats and faster services.

    Long distance journey times from Nottingham and Sheffield will also be reduced by up to 20 minutes in the peak, with the train operator in the Lake District beginning work to trial an alternative-fuelled train in this World Heritage Site.

    Thanks to this new technology disruptive electrification works between Cardiff and Swansea, Kettering, Nottingham and Sheffield, and between Windermere and Oxenholme, will no longer be needed.

    Passengers will benefit sooner and experience less disruption compared with putting up intrusive wires and masts along routes where they are no longer required.

    The government today also published the consultation for the next East Midlands franchise, which will deliver reduced journey times for intercity services and more seats for long distance passengers at peak hours, as well as dedicated services and more capacity for commuters coming into London. The franchise will maximise the benefits of the upgrade of the Midland Main Line — the biggest investment in the route since it was completed in 1870.

    Transport Secretary Chris Grayling said:


    “We are making the biggest investment in the railways since the Victorian era and upgrading services across the country, including in Wales, the midlands and the north.

    “Passengers expect and deserve high quality rail services and we are committed to using the best available technology for each part of the network, delivering significant benefits for those who use our railways.”

    Benefits along the specific routes include:

    Cardiff to Swansea

    From Autumn 2017, passengers in Wales will benefit from new Intercity Express trains which will each deliver over 130 extra seats, faster journey times and improved connectivity for South Wales to London with 40% more seats in the morning peak once the full fleet is in service.

    Network Rail will also develop additional options to improve journeys for passengers in Wales. These will include:
    •improving journeys times and connections between Swansea and Cardiff, and South Wales, Bristol and London
    •improving journeys times and connections across North Wales
    •direct services from Pembroke Dock to London via Carmarthen on new, state of the art Intercity Express trains
    •station improvements at Cardiff Station
    •station improvements in and around Swansea including looking at the case for additional provision

    The Secretary of State also welcomed a proposal for Wales’ first privately funded railway station at St Mellons. The department will work with the promoters of the scheme as they develop their plans to the next stage.

    The first new Intercity Express trains will enter service from this Autumn and once the whole fleet is introduced and electrification to Cardiff is complete journey times between Swansea, London and other stations along the route will be approximately 15 minutes shorter.

    Midland Main Line

    The next operator will be required to deliver modern, fast and efficient intercity and commuter trains, including a brand new set of bi-mode intercity trains from 2022, maximising the benefits of the largest upgrade of the Midland Main Line since it opened in 1870. This will improve journeys sooner, without the need for wires and masts on the whole route, with further investment to come to ensure Sheffield is ready for HS2.

    Benefits include reducing journey times on long distance services from Nottingham and Sheffield by up to 20 minutes in the peak and delivering over 1000 additional seats an hour in the peak into London, an increase of more than 50%.

    Oxenholme to Windermere

    Passengers in the Lake District will benefit from 4 direct services a day in each direction between Windermere and Manchester Airport from May 2018.

    The government has announced plans to ensure passengers enjoy brand new trains from December 2019. Journeys between Windermere and Manchester Airport will be improved sooner and with less disruption to services and local communities. It also means there is no need to construct intrusive wires and masts in this National Park.

    Its called putting spin on austerity for the unknown cost of Bexit

    Plus the diverting money into HS2, despite what HMG said a few years ago that HS2 would not be at the expense of the National network.



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TaplowGreen on July 20, 2017, 19:17:52
    Maybe they've just decided that it's overrunning & overspent so severely that it's time to pull the plug and admit they're not up to meeting the challenge of a project like this.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: simonw on July 20, 2017, 21:11:43
    The sad aspect of this decision, and the much more serious decision about Bristol is that if Network Rail had a 25 year commitment to electrify the whole network, then the costs would be manageable and affordable.

    Employing teams of people/specialists on short term contracts to plan, design and build the enhanced rail systems for electrification is expensive.

     


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on July 20, 2017, 21:15:51
    I fear that any significant new railway electrification is now dead for a generation. Minor additions and infill schemes might continue.
    A generation? No, if there isn't significant action sharpish to restore order I fear that electrification in England and Wales is dead, full-stop. One of the main reasons it has all gone south appears to be the skilled workforce necessary to carry out the glut of projects just wasn't there due to having not done any significant electrification for 20 odd years. That cannot be fixed unless the contracts have some certainty that some level of ongoing electrification will continue in the medium-long term, so that the contracts can invest in training up a skilled workforce with confidence.

    A positive move might be to re-instate the Midland Main Line project and ensure the ValleyLines electrification goes ahead, then when they are done move on to Bath-Bristol-Wales electrification and Didcot-Oxford, then finally get arround to doing Cardiff-Swansea (around 2030 at the rate things are going, but hopefully as a skills base is built up things would improve).

    Quote
    Mr Grayling also announced:
    ◾plans to improve journeys times and connections between Swansea and Cardiff, south Wales, Bristol and London
    ◾plans to improve journeys times and connections across north Wales
    direct services from Pembroke Dock to London via Carmarthen on new Intercity Express trains
    ◾station improvements at Cardiff and Swansea

    At least one forum member will be pleased with point 3.
    If you mean me, then I am not at all pleased with today's announcement, because I see electrification as a vitial step in de-carbonising transport.

    As for Pembroke Dock, I've picked up on comments previously that they are 'looking into it' so
    a.) I that isn't news to me and
    b.) I think I'd rather the Wales & Borders franchise put on a new 'Pembroke Coast Express' to/from Cardiff with mark 4 coaches or similar calling at Llanelli, Carmarthen, Whitland, Kilgetty/Saundersfoot, Tenby, Pembroke and Pembroke Dock than keeping the London services basically as-is but using portion working with the class 800/0 abominations. Intercity trains cannot have unit end gangways, therefore dividing on route with such stock should not be allowed in my opinion.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Tim on July 21, 2017, 09:15:11
    The sad aspect of this decision, and the much more serious decision about Bristol is that if Network Rail had a 25 year commitment to electrify the whole network, then the costs would be manageable and affordable.
     

    You may be right, but I think that your statement puts more faith in NR's ability than recent evidence supports. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on July 21, 2017, 09:42:43
    The sad aspect of this decision, and the much more serious decision about Bristol is that if Network Rail had a 25 year commitment to electrify the whole network, then the costs would be manageable and affordable.
     

    You may be right, but I think that your statement puts more faith in NR's ability than recent evidence supports. 

    I think it is the politician's timescales that are a large part of the problem with electrification costs.  If the bridgeworks had been planned well in advance and consultations undertaken without the clock ticking.  If projects could be done in a more logical order then costs will come down.

    I have heard it said that the cost work on the roof of Temple meads will triple if it is done after electrification.  I suspect the same fro Bristol East Junction.  So lets do less electrification each year, but keep the programme going at a steady pace, planned well in advance. 

    More speed less haste!

    Maybe over time the rate of electrification can then be slowly increased!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on July 21, 2017, 10:51:46
    My guess is that we'll have to wait for CP13 (2054-2059) before we (I say 'we' - hah - I'll be long gone) Bath and Bristol electrified; assuming the bi-modes last as well as the HSTs.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on July 21, 2017, 11:31:01
    My guess is that we'll have to wait for CP13 (2054-2059) before we (I say 'we' - hah - I'll be long gone) Bath and Bristol electrified; assuming the bi-modes last as well as the HSTs.

    I was at a campaign training class last week, and during interactions where we all looked at each other's spheres of work (fare trade and microfibres though to spending more council money in West Somerset). And one of the other campaigners suggested that things/systems that have been around for 100 years need to be replaced with something newer. His suggestion's to scrap all buses and trains, and replace them with things like guided systems - automated or semiautomated, such as you'll see at Heathrow (https://londonist.com/2014/09/a-ride-on-heathrows-self-driving-pods) and in parts of Cambridgeshire (http://www.thebusway.info).  "Nothing that's been around over 100 years should still be in use" was his view; I disagree - a review of what technology we're using is valid, but we should not reject any technologies based on their age.   When I asked about flow capacity and journey speeds, the gentleman indicated that was something he was sure could be sorted, pointing me to other modes too such as the pneumatic capsule proposals which - err - have a history that dates back to the systems used to send cash to the registers in Edwardian shops, and prior to that to Brunel's initial traction system from Exeter to Newton Abbott.

    There are lots of ideas for the future - real answer has to be "goodness only knows".



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on July 21, 2017, 15:42:44

    When considering future technologies we should listen more to those with a background in Physics and (real) Engineering than to vocal, plausible opinions with little basis in fact.

    The old lady who is reputed to have said that if the Almighty had wanted us to fly he wouldn't have given us the railways, had a point. The rolling resistance of a steel wheel on a steel rail is about 15% of that of a pneumatic wheel on a tarmac road. We give up some of that advantage by having heavy trains and more space per passenger (no kidding!) but rail will still win all through C21 as will electric traction, whether by storage or pick-up. Hydrogen is not a serious option as it is not a natural fuel, requires excessive storage pressures and volumes (x4), is difficult to contain with many materials and is excessively combustible. Remember the Hindenburg!

    It is a tragedy that our rail electrification program has failed but it is all our (DfT's) fault, in creating a railway administration that is led by out-of-touch executives without understanding of the industry, which strips itself of technical competence and is regulated by an unaccountable risk-averse quango. The latest news on the Sheffield - Rotherham Tram-Train (it's just 6 miles!), that has risen in cost from £15M to £75M reminds me of Rangi Ram (Michael Bates) in the now politically incorrect "It ain't 'alf hot Mum!" series. He would end by quoting "old Hindu proverb", in this case perhaps, "If you have hole in pocket, stop putting money in."

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: broadgage on July 21, 2017, 15:56:50
    Hydrogen remains a possibility in theory but is unlikely to be viable for reasons given above.
    Expensive, bulky, awkward to handle, and somewhat dangerous.

    Overhead electrification is of the agenda, not forever but probably for a generation, and conductor rails are of the agenda permanently due to safety concerns.

    So in the near term we are stuck with diesel, and the possibility of battery trains in some special cases.

    By about 2040 when the bi-modes are near end of life, the whole debate can start again and may lead to a return of electrification since oil will almost certainly be a lot more expensive by then.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on July 21, 2017, 18:07:35
    It is a tragedy that our rail electrification program has failed but it is all our (DfT's) fault, in creating a railway administration that is led by out-of-touch executives without understanding of the industry, which strips itself of technical competence and is regulated by an unaccountable risk-averse quango.

    NR have lost some skilled staff, but the major loss of skills was at privatisation when DfT's theorists decided to carve up BR's engineering into so many small pieces that many of them just walked.  They have lost more because HM Treasury have forced them to become "more efficient" and the only way the Treasury knows how to do that is get rid of people and hope those left can fill the gaps. 

    IIUI the problems with electrification were that NR took too many risks when setting the original programme and budget with little data and a lack of skills!

    Now they are public sector the Treasury forces them to take less risks.  So if they are too risk averse blame the Treasury not NR!

    Privatisation was put forward because Government could not run Nationalised Industries.  So we let them set up the new private industries badly.  It begs the question if they cannot run an industry how do we expect them to run a country!

    The latest news on the Sheffield - Rotherham Tram-Train (it's just 6 miles!), that has risen in cost from £15M to £75M reminds me of Rangi Ram (Michael Bates) in the now politically incorrect "It ain't 'alf hot Mum!" series. He would end by quoting "old Hindu proverb", in this case perhaps, "If you have hole in pocket, stop putting money in."

    In its defence Sheffield - Rotherham Tram-Train is supposed to be a pilot to find out how to do it.  That's what pilot studies are for!


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on July 21, 2017, 19:55:57

    It begs the question if they cannot run an industry how do we expect them to run a country!


    That's what keeps me awake at night.

    Going back to Rangi Ram, about 1000 British civil servants ran a country of 300M people, built 43 500 miles of railway (electrifying from 1925), irrigated 30% of agriculture, created a famine code that worked, implemented local government through municipal corporations and participatory state government for most else, founded cultural and green institutions like the Archaeological Survey of India, Imperial Forestry Service, Universities, Colleges, Schools, etc etc (using only 40 000 European policing troops because they mostly didn't annoy the locals). I've met a number of Indians who say their Grandad remembers the Raj and would vote for the British to come back.

    Not our present politicians, surely but perhaps Indian Railways Central Office for Railway Electrification (CORE) in Allahabad could teach the failing burrah sahibs of NR how to string up the wires.

    Jai Hind,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on July 21, 2017, 20:18:07
    The latest news on the Sheffield - Rotherham Tram-Train (it's just 6 miles!), that has risen in cost from £15M to £75M reminds me of Rangi Ram (Michael Bates) in the now politically incorrect "It ain't 'alf hot Mum!" series. He would end by quoting "old Hindu proverb", in this case perhaps, "If you have hole in pocket, stop putting money in."

    I think that may be apposite in another way too - it's what DfT are saying about electrification. Given NR's demonstrated inability to do the work for a reasonable-looking cost, and even more staggering incompetence at estimating its work content (hence both time and cost), it is understandable if the Grayling is an electrosceptic.

    Remember, all yesterday's announcements were really about the HLOS (and its SoFA). In his latest e-preview, Roger Ford predicted:
    Quote
    DfT has to present its High Level Output Specification (HLOS) and Statement of Funds Available (SoFA) for Control Period 6 (2019-2024) to the Office of Rail & Road by 20 July.

    So brace yourselves for a heavy read after the holidays. Unless of course, given the political turmoil, DfT revisits the 1974 Railways Act and the shortest HLOS ever simply says ‘provide a public service which is comparable generally with that provided at present’.

    It was definitely the latter; not much of a read at all. Apart from some recycled commuter totals, there were no numbers at all, not even for the Grayling's new SoFA (how did we let that pre-packaged basis for puns escape unmolested for so long?). That turns out to be more of a plank resting one a couple of old oil drums:
    Quote
    The Government wishes to further assure itself that the volumes and costs of operations and maintenance activity are reasonable and affordable in order to fulfil its statutory role to set a SoFA. Once this assurance has taken place, Government will confirm the SoFA in October 2017. The Secretary of State wants Network Rail to increase its efficiency and delivery capability across its portfolio of work during the Control Period and expects a strong and robust challenge from the ORR to reflect this.

    Subject to the satisfactory conclusion of this work, the Government believes that it is likely to have funds available to meet reasonable requirements subject to reasonable efficiency savings and deliverability. A further announcement of a final SoFA will be made following the completion of this work, no later than 13 October 2017.

    So provided you and the Grayling agree on what is "reasonable" that's all right, isn't it?

    HLOS is only about CP6, 2020-2024, and nothing else. The electrification pencilled in for CP6, and in theory not even started in design work, has been dropped. I don't see that as a statement about CP7 and later, not either way - no-one would be impressed by a promise of maybe for after 2024, so there would be no point making one.

    The deferred work wasn't mentioned, and it will be for NR to make a case for doing it in CP6. All of it (I think) has already incurred significant design costs, so its lower incremental cost might make it worth doing even with the new colour of glasses on, but maybe not that soon. Having bitten the bimode bullet, there is no need to do any electrification against a deadline, so why not take your time over both deciding and doing it?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on July 21, 2017, 20:34:44
    My guess is that we'll have to wait for CP13 (2054-2059) before we (I say 'we' - hah - I'll be long gone) Bath and Bristol electrified; assuming the bi-modes last as well as the HSTs.

    I was at a campaign training class last week, and during interactions where we all looked at each other's spheres of work (fare trade and microfibres though to spending more council money in West Somerset). And one of the other campaigners suggested that things/systems that have been around for 100 years need to be replaced with something newer. His suggestion's to scrap all buses and trains, and replace them with things like guided systems - automated or semiautomated, such as you'll see at Heathrow (https://londonist.com/2014/09/a-ride-on-heathrows-self-driving-pods) and in parts of Cambridgeshire (http://www.thebusway.info).  "Nothing that's been around over 100 years should still be in use" was his view; I disagree - a review of what technology we're using is valid, but we should not reject any technologies based on their age.   When I asked about flow capacity and journey speeds, the gentleman indicated that was something he was sure could be sorted, pointing me to other modes too such as the pneumatic capsule proposals which - err - have a history that dates back to the systems used to send cash to the registers in Edwardian shops, and prior to that to Brunel's initial traction system from Exeter to Newton Abbott.

    There are lots of ideas for the future - real answer has to be "goodness only knows".


    There's not much in transport that hasn't been around for more than 100 years, except space travel. Even electric cars were around in the late 19th century.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on July 21, 2017, 21:12:18
    Hydrogen remains a possibility...

    Hydrogen is a certainty, inasmuch as that it definitely exists. I don't think it has much of a future as a vehicle fuel though.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ray951 on September 15, 2017, 11:35:06
    I see that the demolition and rebuild of the bridge at Steventon has been delayed until the start of CP6 (April 2019).
    NR have determined that they will not have the bridge rebuilt in time for the introduction of electric trains in 2018.

    And I quote from NR "To enable electrification to proceed, a temporary solution must now be introduced at Steventon bridge (B4017) to enable us to deliver the electrified railway through Steventon. In advance of this, some preparatory work on the track underneath the bridge will begin at the end of November 2017. In the longer term, to enable the introduction of timetabled electric train services, the temporary solution will also require a speed restriction on the railway, to ensure the safe passage of trains through Steventon."

    I assume the delay must be for budgeting or resource reasons.

    NR Press Release can be found here http://www.steventon.info/railway.html (http://www.steventon.info/railway.html)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on September 15, 2017, 12:26:48
    A textbook example of why electrification costs so much.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on September 15, 2017, 14:03:19
    I assume the delay must be for budgeting or resource reasons.

    I doubt it is budget or even resources. After all the temporary solution will cost extra money.

    The planning committee will not make a decision before October.  With this dispute it could be refused and go to an appeal.  In that case I doubt if they will get approval before the end of 2018. 

    Even if it is approved in October it would be difficult to do the job before then deadline for testing etc to introduce the service for the December timetable. 

    So I think it is down to the local opposition. 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on September 15, 2017, 16:56:18
    AIUI the 'temporary solution' is to rig the OHLE with an excessive rate of change of its height above the rails, (i.e. out of the normal specified limits), on the section between the bridge (low height required) and the nearby level crossing (max height required). 

    The OHLE hardware will presumably be no different to the usual, but will require to be re-adjusted to optimum height once the bridge has been fixed, at which point the speed restriction will be lifted.

    Explained that way it doesn't sound as though it should incur a vast cost.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 15, 2017, 17:20:00
    Vast *extra* cost?....demolition & rebuild will still be necessary which won't, these days, be cheap at all.

    Surely, the council realise this work needs doing, so is presumably asking NR for how they will alleviate concerns as best as possible. Seems locals concern is 10 weeks of closed roads & access during that time. So maybe line closure, 24 hour working etc to complete as quickly as possible. Best time would be Xmas 2018?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: paul7575 on September 15, 2017, 17:37:14
    Yes, I meant that the extra cost of the 'temporary solution' wouldn't be high, given the bridge alterations/rebuild must already be budgeted for.  It is convincing the council to agree that it is a just an ordinary bridge of no historic significance that appears to be the main problem.

    Paul


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on September 15, 2017, 18:56:06
    Vast *extra* cost?....demolition & rebuild will still be necessary which won't, these days, be cheap at all.

    Surely, the council realise this work needs doing, so is presumably asking NR for how they will alleviate concerns as best as possible. Seems locals concern is 10 weeks of closed roads & access during that time. So maybe line closure, 24 hour working etc to complete as quickly as possible. Best time would be Xmas 2018?

    You would have thought so, but this has been going on for years now. The locals have got councillors or all types involved and their MP to create maximum of delay. Their original argument IIRC was that the closure would cause too much disruption. NR went into the alternatives in great depth and they didn't like the alternatives either.  Now after years of arguing they are back to the first solution.  Read the reports on the bridge and you will find it is not the fine example of an original GWR bridge - it has been messed about with in the past. 

    So how much have NR had to expend on consultants fees for that run-around? How much more will it cost to do the bridge with wires already under it? 



    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on September 15, 2017, 19:42:22
    The estimate given for the closure time at Steventon was eight months. Credibility was somewhat knocked locally by the Fulscot Road bridge replacement in South Moreton which took round about a year, about three times as long as first stated.

    The citation info for the Steventon Bridge grade II listing in 1988 is very vague: 'Road bridge. Probably c.1839. Probably by I.K. Brunel. Brick. Eliptical (sic) central arch over railway lines. Lower round arches to left and right. Plain brick parapet.'


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ellendune on September 15, 2017, 22:04:31
    The citation info for the Steventon Bridge grade II listing in 1988 is very vague: 'Road bridge. Probably c.1839. Probably by I.K. Brunel. Brick. Eliptical (sic) central arch over railway lines. Lower round arches to left and right. Plain brick parapet.'

    If you read the heritage report in the planning application it is highlights that parts of it have been rebuilt.  Can't check at the moment as I cannot reach the VoWH planning site. 


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 16, 2017, 12:40:37
    I couldn't get there yesterday either


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on September 16, 2017, 13:34:31

    IMHO, when this bridge problem began, NR should have applied for a specific Transport and Works Order. The decision then shifts from the LPA to the Secretary of State.

    NR should now apply for an emergency order. I have no doubt that this would be granted as a strategic national scheme is involved. Grayling and Maynard are aware of the cost of delay. The heritage value of the bridge does not outweigh the disadvantage to the electrification scheme.

    As far as local inconvenience is concerned, a bridge can be demolished over a weekend and replaced quite quickly - vide the GCR bridge at Loughborough and the abutment washout at Moses Gate, Lancs. Indeed, if a wider, 4-track span was adopted the supports could be be built safely away from the tracks, without possessions.

    Welly, please.

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: stuving on September 16, 2017, 14:28:59
    The latest (8 Sept) comment from Historic England says this:

    Quote
    Recommendation
    Historic England has no objection to the application on heritage grounds. As set out in our letter of 11th August we consider that an adequate justification for demolition has been given by Network Rail in order to meet the requirements of paragraph 132 of the NPPF. The proviso to this is that the consultant engaged by Steventon Parish Council does not produce a scheme that allows the bridge to be retained and that Network Rail are willing to accept as feasible. It is for your Council to weigh whether the public benefits which this application would help deliver are substantial and outweigh the loss of this grade II listed structure in accordance with paragraph 133 of the NPPF.

    In determining this application you should bear in mind the statutory duty of section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to have special regard to the desirability of preserving listed buildings or their setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess.

    Your authority should take these representations into account in determining the application. If there are any material changes to the proposals, or you would like further advice, please contact us. Please advise us of the decision in due course.

    Which does seem to put all the responsibility for delaying, or not, on the District Council. (The letter is actually addressed to South Oxfordshire, for some reason.)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: didcotdean on September 16, 2017, 15:20:21
    (The letter is actually addressed to South Oxfordshire, for some reason.)
    South Oxfordshire and Vale of the White Horse District councils are co-located in the same building on Milton Park sharing all services so easy for outside bodies to get mixed up.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 16, 2017, 19:40:46
    This does indeed show the crazy world of politics and bureaucracy around infrastructure projects at its daftest. We have a Grade II listed structure that has had a lot of modification already, and which Historic England says it is happy to see rebuilt, in the way of a major national investment project. Instead of rebuilding the bridge, we are likely to see a temporary workaround that will impose a speed restriction for a certain distance both sides of the bridge, which is likely to end up as temporary as the post-war prefabs in Bristol. It might speed up the decision making process if a need was found to have trains sound their horns on entering and leaving the speed restriction.
    Meanwhile, around Bristol and Bath, millions have been spent on preparing bridges for electric cables that aren't now coming in the timescale described, and millions more spent on the very diesel engines that were a big part of the problem that electrification was supposed to solve, and which may now mean that the next cancellation of electrification in the area has been kicked down the road for another 40 years. I say 40 years because of the designed 25-year useful life of the new trains.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 17, 2017, 17:31:32
    At least the dinosaurs of Steventon will be long gone by then


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 18, 2017, 10:14:08
    ...millions more spent on the very diesel engines that were a big part of the problem that electrification was supposed to solve, and which may now mean that the next cancellation of electrification in the area has been kicked down the road for another 40 years...

    Don't count on them lasting that long!

    For fear of having my Momentum membership cancelled, I suspect you may underestimate how wasteful a state-controlled organisation such as Britain's railway can be. Just think of those lovely state-of-the art steam locomotives that were rolled out in 1960 and then scrapped in 1965... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BR_Standard_Class_9F)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rower40 on September 18, 2017, 12:41:15
    Someone, somewhere, needs to look up from their desk, and see an inspirational picture (possibly of some large item of heavy engineering) with the caption:

    "What would the CEO of BR plc do?"


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on September 18, 2017, 12:46:43
    He might sing for Phil?
    (https://i.pinimg.com/736x/7e/d8/90/7ed8905c7ab3c15bccff5266b0da1c77--tom-holland-spiderman-marvel-dc-comics.jpg)


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: ChrisB on September 18, 2017, 13:07:43
    Well, the last one failed spectacularly to order any new stock.....hence the age of the kit only now being replaced. Be careful what you wish for....


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: rogerw on September 18, 2017, 17:36:20
    Or perhaps was not permitted by the government to order any new rolling stock because of the proposed privatisation


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 18, 2017, 18:26:02
    Don't count on them lasting that long!

    For fear of having my Momentum membership cancelled, I suspect you may underestimate how wasteful a state-controlled organisation such as Britain's railway can be. Just think of those lovely state-of-the art steam locomotives that were rolled out in 1960 and then scrapped in 1965... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BR_Standard_Class_9F)

    I am under no illusions, comrade! Any major part of infrastructure that needs a plan for development and finances covering decades drawn up by a government with a maximum lifespan of 5 years is always going to struggle for continuity. The waste involved in having worked up a plan, seeing it scrapped, then starting again from scratch a few years later is immense. That's even without external factors queering the pitch.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: onthecushions on September 18, 2017, 20:27:28
    Any news on the big commissioning/switch-on/blue sparks/red faces at Reading, over the weekend?

    Fingers crossed,

    OTC


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: SandTEngineer on September 19, 2017, 19:51:56
    From the Plymouth Herald.  I was going to post this in the 'Lighter Side' but had second thoughts...... ::) :P

    Quote
    'Spot' electrification could speed trains up through Plymouth
    Plans proposed to speed up main line service through Westcountry


    The next generation of trains running on the Westcountry main line could use electric power to speed up the region’s steep hills, under plans being explored.

    GWR’s new Hitachi Intercity Express trains, which will arrive in the Westcountry from next year, are capable of switching seamlessly between diesel and electric power.

    Now the Peninsula Rail Task Force is asking for £600,000 of funding to continue its study into speeding up services.

    Gary Streeter Conservative MP for South West Devon, said part of the money would be used for a feasibility study into “spot electrification”.

    Although the Government has cut short electrification of the Great Western main line at Newbury, Mr Streeter said he was optimistic that spot electrification could provide a long-term solution.

    We're edging closer to the start date for Plymouth's new 'bullet trains'
    “We know that electrification from London to Penzance isn’t going to happen, maybe not even in my lifetime. But spot electrification here and there could work.”

    Dan Panes from GWR believes the idea could work, but a cost-benefit analysis would need to be done.

    The Peninsula Rail Task Force delivered its rail improvement plan to the Department for Transport in late 2016.

    Last week Mr Streeter put a written question to the Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, asking whether the Government plans to publish a response.

    He was told: “The Government does not propose to publish a formal response ... at the present time as we continue to engage with the PRTF and other interested parties as the planning for Network Rail’s work programme for the period starting in April 2019 and the development of the specifications for the future Great Western and Cross Country franchises unfold.”

    Mr Streeter said the answer was not unexpected, but he wanted to “continue prodding the government”.

    He said the task force was pushing the Department for Transport to make improved onboard connectivity a condition of the next franchise, due in 2019. He said no operator could achieve that alone, but would have to work with mobile phone operators and councils along the route to have more phone masts.

    “The new Exeter-Waterloo franchise has onboard wifi several times more powerful than the GWR Paddington trains,” Mr Streeter said.

    “But I wouldn’t be happy if the Secretary of State just said, ‘You have to upgrade your onboard system’,” Mr Streeter said. “If they want the franchise, they’ll have to start talking to other operators and doing partnership deals.”


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: grahame on September 19, 2017, 20:04:15
    From the Plymouth Herald.  I was going to post this in the 'Lighter Side' but had second thoughts...... ::) :P

    "Spot" electrification has been quietly bubbled along as an idea in some very professional quarters for open stretches on straighish line in hilly countryside.    Interesting how the article seems to morph from speed of trains to speed of WiFi ... perhaps there's a tradeoff there - people will be happy with slower journeys if they have really good connectivity?


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: John R on September 19, 2017, 20:41:26
    I think spot electrification to deal with inclines is a great idea.  They could usefully start with Thingley Jn to Bathampton Jn, and Stoke Gifford Jn to Dr Day's Jn.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: martyjon on September 19, 2017, 20:49:36
    SETBACK ?

    Went to catch a bus today at my usual stop from which I can see the Westerleigh Junction to Yate curve. There was a platoon from the orange army which had set up 3 way temporary road traffic lights, a containerised store, mess room et al placed on the pavement and adjacent grassed area, and footpath diversion signs. In a conversation with one of the orange army it transpires that whist preparing piles for the Westerleigh Junction to Yate the thumping of the steel cylinders into the embankment at this point had caused a slip and they'd be there for about a week to carry out remedial work to shore up the embankment at the location. When I returned I did notice quite a small shallow slip of the base of the embankment and a noticeable bulge just below where the piling was started and halted. I shall keep watching.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Oberon on September 19, 2017, 21:20:16
    Maybe if they used less heavy gauge vertical steelwork, like on the West and East Coast main lines, it might help.

    Just a thought..


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 19, 2017, 22:12:53
    I think spot electrification to deal with inclines is a great idea.  They could usefully start with Thingley Jn to Bathampton Jn, and Stoke Gifford Jn to Dr Day's Jn.

    It would make sense to carry on the spot electrification after Bathampton junction, possibly as far as Temple Meads. And why have a gap between there and Dr Days?

    On the subject of electrification, I had cause to drive from the A38 by Filton Airfield along Gypsy Patch Lane today. There's a lot of new electric stuff in place, including some wiring. I was driving, so couldn't gaze for too long, nor take pictures.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Adelante_CCT on September 20, 2017, 13:00:53
    Quote
    Any news on the big commissioning/switch-on/blue sparks/red faces at Reading, over the weekend?

    Many unconfirmed rumours that it didn't happen with a handful of unconfirmed rumours that it did happen.

    What we know is that possession of the line was handed back a few hours early with the last couple of services from Paddington running via Reading instead of Wycombe


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Worcester_Passenger on September 20, 2017, 15:18:30
    I think that "spot electrification" is another version of "alternating current", albeit at very low Hertz.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Rhydgaled on September 20, 2017, 16:16:14
    Maybe if they used less heavy gauge vertical steelwork, like on the West and East Coast main lines, it might help.

    Just a thought..
    Alot of the steelwork (not just the vertical bits) in the GWML OHLE structures look WAY too chunky compared to the WCML and ECML OHLE. Yes the heavy-duty stuff might be needed in a few places on 125mph sections that could go up to 140mph in future, and headspans that can make dewirements worse (by knocking out all tracks instead of just one) are a bad idea but in a lot of places the GWML OHLE structures are overkill. Even HS1 OHLE seems smaller (from photos I've seen) that the GWML stuff. Also, single-track cantilevers like this (http://railsimroutes.net/blog/images/hi-res/xcs_v2_openbve_65.jpg) look alot nicer than the GWML twin-track cantilevers and portals.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 20, 2017, 19:07:02
    Following yesterdays post, I happened to be back in Gypsy Patch Lane, this time with camera.

    Just outside Patchway station, towards Parkway:
    (https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4391/36534030913_5cdd43b0d5_c.jpg)

    From opposite the Rolls Royce building - the wires I saw yesterday are at the Hitachi IEP depot:
    (https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4422/37203536411_92dd0a5db6_c.jpg)

    Nothing in the Welsh direction from Patchway yet:
    (https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4378/37155808216_b3aaac6c5d_c.jpg)

    Not the most picturesque station in Britain.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on September 20, 2017, 19:09:44
    Probably not the ugliest either. I think that title still goes to Birmingham New St, complete with Eye of Sauron.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: TonyK on September 20, 2017, 19:28:13
    Probably not the ugliest either. I think that title still goes to Birmingham New St, complete with Eye of Sauron.

    A little harsh these days! Away from the platforms, I quite like New Street, even if I do spend more time walking around it trying to find what I'm looking for than actually doing it. And during a long stopover, I went for a ride on the trams outside - very swish, if not rolling through beautiful scenery.


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Red Squirrel on September 21, 2017, 08:26:09
    Not the most picturesque station in Britain.

    Quite so. All the more reason to relocate it a few hundred metres to the north (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14751.0).


    Title: Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
    Post by: Bmblbzzz on September 21, 2017, 10:25:44
    Probably not the ugliest either. I think that title still goes to Birmingham New St, complete with Eye of Sauron.

    A little harsh these days! Away from the platforms, I quite like New Street, even if I do spend more time walking around it trying to find what I'm looking for than actually doing it. And during a long stopover, I went for a ride on the trams outside - very swish, if not rolling through beautiful scenery.
    Sure, it's nowhere near as horrid as it used to be but it's still rather a dark cave. The shopping centre above is much nicer. But still, that Eye of Sauron is a warning...



    This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net