Waterloo-Exeter Line

[whole diary]

[PhilWakely]

How would Basingstoke to Exeter be electrified - Overhead AC or third rail DC^▸ (Direct Current)? If overhead AC, wouldn't you need to introduce same for Basingstoke to Waterloo or would you simply introduce stock that can use both?

[Rhydgaled]

Assuming that the additional service will be a Barnstaple to Axminster stopper as the report seems to suggest, my guess is that the stock would more than likely to be the equivalent of a 150 assuming that they'd been replaced by the mid 20's

I was picking up on this point in particular:

Provision of an additional stopping service between Exeter St Davids and Axminster would support forecast passenger demand into Exeter in the peak periods as an alternative to substantial train lengthening of the London Waterloo service.

In other words, my suggestion above would provide longer trains on the Waterloo service, rather than an Exeter-Axminster stopper.

I will admit to having a certain bias having grown up near the route but there are a number of potential advantages to electrifying the whole of the Basingstoke-Exeter route over Newbury-Penzance.

1. You release 41 well-maintained class 158s and 159s which can work over various areas of the network - I'm sure Northern, ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company))) and Great Western could find a use for them. In comparison electrifying the Penzance route releases a large number of HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) which unfortunately due to their age and suitability for express services only would surely be going to the scrapyard. It also allows all-electric working into Waterloo.

This is essentially what I'm trying to get at, but without the cost of electrfiying the whole route (not that I don't think wiring the route is a good idea, just that there are bigger priorities, not least extending wires along the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) to Plymouth (at least) before the IC125s are finally withdrawn). All-electric working into Waterloo I believe was mentioned in Modern Railways as a requirement to maximise frequency, my hypothetical electro-diesel son-of-159 ought to provide that. Great Western I would suggest need their 158 fleet boosting by arround 12 2-car units to lengthen Cardiff-Portsmouth to 4-car units (with the real 3-car set moving to Northern). If ERTMS^▸ (European Rail Traffic Management System.) can be installed, the Cambrian Lines could be a good home for the orriginal batch of 159s (with their more-powerful engines) which would release ATW's existing 158 fleet for use eleswhere on the franchise. SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s Salisbury-Southampton stoppers could transfer to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) (to be worked by 150/165/166 units) and Eastleigh-Romsey would be a small stretch to electrify. The lower-power '159s' and any remaining 158s could be useful at Northern or perhaps the Bristol-Plymouth/Paignton/Penzance axis on GW^▸ (Great Western).

Electrifying to Exeter only wouldn't be much use without bi-mode trains, which aren't without their doubters. Electrifying to Plymouth only would not go down well west of the Tamar, but with the numerous tunnels and viaducts on the Cornish main line, it probably wouldn't be cheap.

I'm one of the doubters about bi-mode, but in my view there is quite a difference between 125mph trains, which cover a relatively restricted area of the network which can be focused on for electrification, and 90-100mph regional express units, like the 158s/159s, which cover long distances but mix main lines with quiet branches and will not be easy to entirely electrify in the lifetime of the stock.

[PhilWakely]

Assuming that the additional service will be a Barnstaple to Axminster stopper as the report seems to suggest, my guess is that the stock would more than likely to be the equivalent of a 150 assuming that they'd been replaced by the mid 20's

I was picking up on this point in particular:

Provision of an additional stopping service between Exeter St Davids and Axminster would support forecast passenger demand into Exeter in the peak periods as an alternative to substantial train lengthening of the London Waterloo service.

In other words, my suggestion above would provide longer trains on the Waterloo service, rather than an Exeter-Axminster stopper.

I would be extremely happy to see longer trains and higher frequency along the whole of an electrified Exeter to Waterloo line. However, I do not think that simple economics would warrant such on the Gillingham to Axminster section of the line - even allowing for some passenger growth in the long term. Looking at the Devon Metro proposals in the document, which are essentially for two half-hourly 'local' services through Exeter (Paignton to Exmouth and Barnstaple to Axminster), neither of these would warrant the use of anything more than 150s or their equivalent.

From the electrification point of view, if there are proposals to extend third rail from Basingstoke to Salisbury and potentially bring the wires from Castle Cary through Yeovil Junction to Exeter, then there would certainly be an argument to electrify Salisbury to Yeovil Junction.   

[paul7575]

Stock availability aside, if the aim is to grow the local travel market between Exeter and Axminster, that will be better served by two tph than one long tph, surely?

The lapsed GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise specification was proposing an extra train to/from Axminster every two hours, based on existing infrastructure limitations, and to be operated by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) in addition to the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) service.   The latest idea seems to add the second train with another bit of new infrastructure.  Seems a worthwhile and natural extension of existing plans to me...

Paul

[John R]

Great Western I would suggest need their 158 fleet boosting by arround 12 2-car units to lengthen Cardiff-Portsmouth to 4-car units (with the real 3-car set moving to Northern). If ERTMS^▸ (European Rail Traffic Management System.) can be installed, the Cambrian Lines could be a good home for the orriginal batch of 159s (with their more-powerful engines) which would release ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)))'s existing 158 fleet for use eleswhere on the franchise. SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s Salisbury-Southampton stoppers could transfer to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) (to be worked by 150/165/166 units) and Eastleigh-Romsey would be a small stretch to electrify. The lower-power '159s' and any remaining 158s could be useful at Northern or perhaps the Bristol-Plymouth/Paignton/Penzance axis on GW^▸ (Great Western)

I think you're forgetting that FGW is going to get enough additional stock for its dmu services once the Thames Valley is electrified, although some have questioned whether turbos are entirely suitable for Cardiff - Portsmouth. So I don't think you can justify your plan on that grounds. And as for swapping Cambrian 158s for more powerful 159s, you need to have a very welsh centric view to justify that cost for nothing more than increased oomph.

I don't think a fleet of hybrid diesel/ac units is very likely. A hybrid battery/ac unit is under test for short distances off the wires, but  I think the argument over IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) will have made politicians or the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) very wary suggesting it for classic multiple units.

If the Basingstoke to Exeter line were to be electrified then it would be ac. There is a lot of emu stock now which is dual voltage.

Edited to correct a typo/omission.

[Rhydgaled]

Great Western I would suggest need their 158 fleet boosting by arround 12 2-car units to lengthen Cardiff-Portsmouth to 4-car units (with the real 3-car set moving to Northern). If ERTMS^▸ (European Rail Traffic Management System.) can be installed, the Cambrian Lines could be a good home for the orriginal batch of 159s (with their more-powerful engines) which would release ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)))'s existing 158 fleet for use eleswhere on the franchise. SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s Salisbury-Southampton stoppers could transfer to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) (to be worked by 150/165/166 units) and Eastleigh-Romsey would be a small stretch to electrify. The lower-power '159s' and any remaining 158s could be useful at Northern or perhaps the Bristol-Plymouth/Paignton/Penzance axis on GW^▸ (Great Western)

I think you're forgetting that FGW is going to get enough additional stock for its dmu services once the Thames Valley is electrified, although some have questioned whether turbos are entirely suitable for Cardiff - Portsmouth. So I don't think you can justify your plan on that grounds. And as for swapping Cambrian 158s for more powerful 159s, you need to have a very welsh centric view to justify that cost for nothing more than increased oomph.

I agree with those who say Turbos aren't suitable for Cardiff-Portsmouth, which is one of the main points of my plan. As for the Cambrian, the main reason I suggested 159s is because I think 3-car formations could be more appropriate to the loadings than the current choice of 4-car or 2-car. As for the extra oomph, I meerly thought it would be a good idea to keep the class together and don't really know where there steepest gradients are, but believe the Cambrian is fairly steep in places. If the gradients aren't all that steep then perhaps the lower-powered 3-car 158s should be allocated instead.

[eightf48544]

Re bi-modes the French seem to have some very successful bi-modes

eg From Wikipedia

The B 82500 is a class of hybrid, multi-system, diesel and overhead electificatication (1.5 kV DC^▸ (Direct Current), 25 kV AC) powered multiple unit built by Bombardier for SNCF^▸ (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais - French National Railways).[2]

The class was officially launched at Gare de Troyes on 9 October 2007 for service on the TER Champagne-Ardenne lines.

Perfrmance looks quitr good too:
Power output    Diesel Engine: 2x 588 kW (789 hp) @ 1800rpm
Electric; 1,300 kW (1,700 hp)[1]
Acceleration    diesel: 0.47 m/s2 (1.5 ft/s2)
1.5kV : 0.66 m/s2 (2.2 ft/s2)
25kV : 0.67 m/s2 (2.2 ft/s2)

[stuving]

Re bi-modes the French seem to have some very successful bi-modes

eg From Wikipedia

The B 82500 is a class of hybrid, multi-system, diesel and overhead electificatication (1.5 kV DC^▸ (Direct Current), 25 kV AC) powered multiple unit built by Bombardier for SNCF^▸ (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais - French National Railways).[2]

The class was officially launched at Gare de Troyes on 9 October 2007 for service on the TER Champagne-Ardenne lines.

Perfrmance looks quitr good too:
Power output    Diesel Engine: 2x 588 kW (789 hp) @ 1800rpm
Electric; 1,300 kW (1,700 hp)[1]
Acceleration    diesel: 0.47 m/s2 (1.5 ft/s2)
1.5kV : 0.66 m/s2 (2.2 ft/s2)
25kV : 0.67 m/s2 (2.2 ft/s2)

Indeed, lots of regions have them, and there are some new ones from Alstom just come into service (and made the news last year as being "too wide"). They all have a 160 km/hr top speed, so are in a slightly different class from IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) - firmly "regional". And of course their more generous gauge means it's easier to add extras like engines anyway.

They come with a variety of electrical modes - all do 1500 DC, most do 25 kV 50 Hz, and the new ones do 15 kV 16.7 Hz (for Germany). If the one you are given is missing a mode you need, you can always switch to diesel, which helps in France. Apparently they also do this in Belgium under 3000V DC, and for ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) moves between services that are all electric.