Fill in 3rd rail?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

An interesting presentation at last week's GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) Stakeholder conference concerning the North Downs line, and in particular future growth. Point came up (in questions as I recall) that it's already 3rd rail at both ends and in the middle, and whether it might be sensible to infill the diesel-only bits with third rails.   I think it was suggested that the technologies are sufficiently different to overhead electrification for there to be technical resources available to do it in parallel with other electrification rather  that having to wait in an OHL^▸ (Over-Head Line) queue.

Comment was also made at the conference about the streamlining of the fleet / keeping to a sensible number of types, with note that 143, 153 and 180 are on GWR exit paths. But wouldn't this electrification mean a new cascaded - does not serve a London terminus - fleet of 3rd rail stock?

Reminded by a sign posted on Twitter reminding people of the danger of electrocution from the rail at Cranbrook -
https://twitter.com/clinnick1/status/676014597564981248

[Richard Fairhurst]

365s were originally dual-voltage - it may be possible to reinstate that. Though I suspect it would be just as easy to hand the line over to SWT^▸ (South West Trains).

[Oberon]

I'd be amazed if this sort of rational independent thinking was converted into anything other than a string of reasons why this would be impossible. Unless the contenders for the GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise put it into their bids, but some hope there..

[grahame]

Though I suspect it would be just as easy to hand the line over to SWT^▸ (South West Trains).

If you look back 100 years (regrouping), the Redhill to Reading line was an outpost of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway, and in my youth it ran (with "tadpoles") Reading to Tonbridge (my goodness - what a s-l-o-w journey that was, as I recall!).   So perhaps in the interest of competition it should go in the SouthEastern Franchise, with an Ashford to Reading connection off the Eurostar from Paris, Brussels, Frankfurt and Amsterdam using class 395 trains, picking up a Gatwick portion at Redhill.

[stuving]

The Wessex route Study looked at both AC and DC^▸ (Direct Current) options versus the current DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) performance. AC gave roughly twice the time gain of DC. The semi-fast trains don't gain that much (2.5/5 mins), and no-one may be too fussed about the timings for stoppers (7/11.5 mins).  But that suggests this is one of the few places where DC might be seen as a true fill-in and so worth considering. 

Then they say:

5.7.63 The Electrification RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) (draft for consultation), due to be
published later in 2015, will set out the case for North Downs Line
electrification. It will compare the costs and benefits with other
electrification schemes nationally to determine priorities for CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024)
and beyond.

I wonder what's been holding that up ...

[Adelante_CCT]

Point came up (in questions as I recall) that it's already 3rd rail at both ends and in the middle, and whether it might be sensible to infill the diesel-only bits with third rails.

This is something I have thought about for years and surprised they still have done nothing about it, and as you say, the more complex parts such as the Reading station area (down to Wokingham), Guildford station area (including up to Ash) and Reigate down to Gatwick are already in place. It would simply require the up and down lines of the 'infill areas', no major crossovers or junctions to contend with.

AC gave roughly twice the time gain of DC^▸ (Direct Current). The semi-fast trains don't gain that much (2.5/5 mins), and no-one may be too fussed about the timings for stoppers (7/11.5 mins).

Whilst the time savings may not prove to be much, I would have thought the main draw would be more electrified stock being used and the savings of fuel. The downside of DC is that AC is of course safer.

365s were originally dual-voltage - it may be possible to reinstate that. Though I suspect it would be just as easy to hand the line over to SWT^▸ (South West Trains)

Class 387s could be used? Though I agree that having SWT run North Downs services makes more sense than GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway).

[bobm]

Though I suspect it would be just as easy to hand the line over to SWT^▸ (South West Trains).

If you look back 100 years (regrouping), the Redhill to Reading line was an outpost of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway, and in my youth it ran (with "tadpoles") Reading to Tonbridge (my goodness - what a s-l-o-w journey that was, as I recall!).   So perhaps in the interest of competition it should go in the SouthEastern Franchise, with an Ashford to Reading connection off the Eurostar from Paris, Brussels, Frankfurt and Amsterdam using class 395 trains, picking up a Gatwick portion at Redhill.

Gosh I remember the through Reading to Tonbridge services.  I used them a few times to see relations in Kent.  Seemed like the other side of the world.  Was it tadpoles?  I wasn't that clued up on rolling stock back then but I seem to recall it was the same DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) that ran the stopping services to London Paddington.

[ellendune]

I remember the Tadpoles.  They were different to the Paddington DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s.

Is the reason why no infill is being considered due to the possibility of converting the 3rd rail to OHL^▸ (Over-Head Line) once the now much delayed pilot is over?

[grahame]

I remember the Tadpoles.  They were different to the Paddington DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s.

3 car trains - 2 cars from a Hastings line DeMU which were narrow bodies due to the tunnels on the line having limited clearance, and 1 car from an EPB unit (electric).   So they look very odd.  Seemed a bit underpowered too, even though the generator occupied the best part of half the carriage behind the driver. Gawd they were slow ... Leigh Halt, Penshurst, Edenbridge, Godstone ....

Plenty of pictures of the (preserved) Hastings unit at http://www.hastingsdiesels.co.uk/ontour/ - and this has one wide carriage it in these days, so you can almost look along the train and see the bump.  For the EPB carriage, see http://www.semgonline.com/gallery/class415_3.html and look at the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) variant (top pictures) not the Bullied on units up to 5300 (5261 was a mix like 150925 and 150926 are these days).    Tadpole - picture on Wikipedia via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_206 .

[eightf48544]

What about the elegant SECR D clas 4-4-0 that I used to see on Reading South Shed in the late 40's early 50's.

[stuving]

Is the reason why no infill is being considered due to the possibility of converting the 3rd rail to OHL^▸ (Over-Head Line) once the now much delayed pilot is over?

Is it not? That was my point: the Route Study itself suggested that both AC and DC^▸ (Direct Current) should be considered (perhaps that wasn't clear).

It then passed the buck to the electrification RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy). The last one of those (in 2009) only considered DC and ranked it is tier 4 (out of 6) meaning it didn't make it into their list of infill schemes "in the core strategy", nor even of "further options". 

[ellendune]

But since conversion of 3rd rail to OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") was to be informed by the trial between Basingstoke and Southampton, I assume any 3rd rail infill is on hold pending the results of the delayed pilot.

[stuving]

But since conversion of 3rd rail to OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") was to be informed by the trial between Basingstoke and Southampton, I assume any 3rd rail infill is on hold pending the results of the delayed pilot.

Doing DC^▸ (Direct Current) infill might be on hold - but not considering it, together with the relevant timescales for either route. If DC now would give 15-25 years of operation before AC conversion was remotely likely, that might still make sense.

And since the conversion south of Basingstoke is now only to be considered for CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024), perhaps putting DC infill on hold has to be put on hold.

[onthecushions]

I always thought that the RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) failed to classify the route properly as it is an international gateway (their words) and should have therefore had tier 1 priority for electrification. Perhaps Gatwick Express wanted GW^▸ (Great Western) originating customers for itself.

It also struck me that given dual voltage operation, 25kV to Wokingham or even Aldershot South Jn (where it joins the Alton line) would have given simpler interfacing with the dc system  than at Reading. The remaining Shalford - Reigate section could have had dc electrification using surplus equipment from the power supply upgrades - only two substations were needed I believe.

It may be early days to expect a strategy for moving AC ahead in the South, especially with the horrific overspend on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line). The South Western main line interface should probably be at Pirbright Junction, rather than Basingstoke, as it was before the Bournemouth scheme in 1967.

The "tadpoles" would make Pacers seem attractive today particularly with the driving trailer locked out of use. This left only one and a bit, narrow coaches for customers even during school term time.

OTC

[stuving]

There was a rather odd item on BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) South Today about electrification (flavour unspecified) of the North Downs line. I've no idea what triggered it - and it wasn't done by Paul Clifton, which probably didn't help.

It was based on the idea that the cascade after GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification would leave the North Downs Line with nothing extra, and more and faster trains could only be electric. No mention of the third tph due (still, I think) from May next year or the longer trains that might be possible (still being talked about).