Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum
GWR advice (Project Phoenix)
Forum in and beyond Coronavirus
Great Western Coffee Shop
[home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 12/08/20 - Comm. Rail & Recovery ONLINE
24/08/20 - Challenge of Decarb. - ONLINE
16/09/20 - Melksham Rail User Group
17/09/20 - National Rail Awards
Random Image
Train Running Polls Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
August 06, 2020, 11:00:21 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[101] Porkway Partway
[90] Project Phoenix - "Let's travel safely this summer"
[74] Route Availability of GWR Steam Engines and Associated Matters
[60] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
[53] More dangerous overcrowding to the Westcountry
[49] Misuse of level crossings - highlighting but not limited to Ma...
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 70
  Print  
Author Topic: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion  (Read 148864 times)
DidcotPunter
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 165


View Profile Email
« Reply #105 on: November 10, 2017, 08:36:09 am »

Class 387 and a Class 800 on AC did test runs on Saturday night between Slough and Didcot.

800 002 has made a number of runs this week between North Pole and Didcot on AC throughout. Passed it yesterday running on the down relief near Twyford while on 800 005 heading towards Padd (on diesel up to Maidenhead!)
Logged
Thatcham Crossing
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 731


View Profile
« Reply #106 on: November 10, 2017, 09:26:47 am »

Quote
On a bustitution last night - Reading to Thatcham just after midnight. Noticed an engineering train at work near Midgham.

Updating my own post - this morning in daylight, quite a lot of metal dangly bits have appeared in the last few days at various points between Aldermaston and Thatcham. Also, some more uprights near to the M4 at Theale, which was one of the remaining gaps with no metalwork.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4895


View Profile
« Reply #107 on: November 10, 2017, 10:32:08 am »

Class 387 and a Class 800 on AC did test runs on Saturday night between Slough and Didcot.

800 002 has made a number of runs this week between North Pole and Didcot on AC throughout. Passed it yesterday running on the down relief near Twyford while on 800 005 heading towards Padd (on diesel up to Maidenhead!)

There are no more Sunday morning closures, so presumably they can now do all their testing by running trains. I imagine soon they will want to run enough trains to fully load the system, and see what it does.

Or can they? I'm still puzzled about where and how much power can be fed in at Reading ATFS. There is no National Grid site at Reading, and the intended feed from Bramley hasn't been built. (Yet.) Plan B was a longer feeder along the track from Didcot; I'm 99% sure that is not going to happen. So presumably it has a temporary feed from SSEN at 132 kV. Their nearest "bulk supply point" is at the back of their offices in Vastern Road, less than 1 km away, but I doubt that could supply the full rated power of the ATFS.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8250


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: November 10, 2017, 10:33:51 am »

Sounds like a question for ‘Electric Train’...
Logged

To view my GWML Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
paul7755
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4745


View Profile
« Reply #109 on: November 10, 2017, 12:16:04 pm »

Surely power isn't 'fed in' from the Grid at Reading ATFS, it comes along the route (ie the traction OHLE and ATF) from Didcot. 

AIUI Kensal Green feeds as far as Maidenhead MPATS, just west of the station.  From the Reading side of the Maidenhead MPATS to (somewhere between Didcot and Thingley) is fed from Didcot.   There are only 4 national grid supply points on the whole route, Kensal Green, Didcot, Thingley (Melksham) and somewhere in Wales.

As described by Electric train here a couple of years ago:  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=15735.msg176211#msg176211

I don't think Bramley is an absolute necessity yet, it is a sort of belt and braces for when Newbury and Basingstoke are added into the whole system.

PS I have now checked the Sep 17 NR enhancement plan and the "Reading Independent feeder" is about levels of redundancy in the event of failures elsewhere.  It is a separate project for completion during CP6 and will either come from Bramley or along the track (separately) from Didcot.

Paul

A MPATS is a "mid point autotransformer feeder site", it is the limits of normal feeding, but there is switchgear to allow cross feeding under reversionary conditions.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 12:41:49 pm by paul7755 » Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4895


View Profile
« Reply #110 on: November 10, 2017, 06:53:37 pm »

I don't think Bramley is an absolute necessity yet, it is a sort of belt and braces for when Newbury and Basingstoke are added into the whole system.
That's really what I was getting at - the "standard design" does allow for any one feed point to be lost with little or no effect, but how big an issue is it to leave one out and operate permanently in this reversionary mode? And is that no effect, or just a little, or an important power contraint? Didcot-Kensal is significantly further than the normal upper limit of 60 km between feed points, and it's not to be lightly  used.

The Bramley feed point was a late addition, but I think that was based on the realisation that one was needed even if the grid wasn't very helpfully arranged. The full design had an ATFS at Bramley as well as a high-level feeder along the line, but no sooner had that been planned than that stretch of OLE was deferred and may not be undeferred.

So if the "F" in "Reading ATFS" is silent, as in MPATS, the heavily-used section from Reading to Maidenhead is always fed at the end of another section. And when Reading-Newbury is added, that has no feed point, so gets fed the same way..

There is also a loss of feed diversity while the OLE through Bath and Bristol is missing. Thingley ATFS should feed to Bristol Parkway, and even on to Cardiff, by both routes. There is (or was) to be another high-level feeder along the track from Thingley to an ATFS at Royal Wootton Basset - is there any sign of that? That was explained as needed to feed the line between Wales and Swindon when the B&H is turned off. You can see the concern over only feeding a main line by power along another line (branch or branch main).

No doubt DfT will now be telling NR that backup power is another luxury not needed if trains have on-board power at the push of a button. But that logic doesn't hold east of Didcot (or eventually Swindon) and Newbury, where the 387's run.

Quote
A MPATS is a "mid point autotransformer feeder site", it is the limits of normal feeding, but there is switchgear to allow cross feeding under reversionary conditions.

"Mid Point Autotransformer Site" does seem to be the standard interpretation, keeping the "F" for Feeder only for sites that feed in external power. Of course "feeder" does, confusingly, have other uses, as in ATF.
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5090


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: November 10, 2017, 07:10:12 pm »

On my way by car along the M4 twixt Bath and Swindon, I saw actual wires in place around RWB. Fantastic - they are going through with it after all! Not only that, Bristol Temple Meads seems hopeful in CP6 after all.

"Mid Point Autotransformer Site" does seem to be the standard interpretation, keeping the "F" for Feeder only for sites that feed in external power. Of course "feeder" does, confusingly, have other uses, as in ATF.

WTF?
Logged

Now, please!
patch38
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 615


View Profile
« Reply #112 on: November 10, 2017, 07:46:14 pm »

I saw actual wires in place around RWB. Fantastic - they are going through with it after all!

RWB area wiring was never in doubt, was it? Beyond Thingley was where it all got a bit questionable...



Logged
paul7755
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4745


View Profile
« Reply #113 on: November 10, 2017, 09:19:57 pm »

I don't think Bramley is an absolute necessity yet, it is a sort of belt and braces for when Newbury and Basingstoke are added into the whole system.
That's really what I was getting at - the "standard design" does allow for any one feed point to be lost with little or no effect, but how big an issue is it to leave one out and operate permanently in this reversionary mode? And is that no effect, or just a little, or an important power contraint? Didcot-Kensal is significantly further than the normal upper limit of 60 km between feed points, and it's not to be lightly  used.

The whole advantage of the ATF system is to allow grid feeders as far apart as Kensal and Didcot, isn't it?   Lets say that 60 km is the upper limit of a conventionally fed system - (said to be 40 - 60 km between grid connections in an online resource). 

The addition of the ATF then allows one of 3 things:
Additional distance been grid feeders for the same power drawn,
Or additional power draw (less volt drop) for the same distance between supply points,
Or a combination of the two.

Paul
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4895


View Profile
« Reply #114 on: November 10, 2017, 11:34:03 pm »

The whole advantage of the ATF system is to allow grid feeders as far apart as Kensal and Didcot, isn't it?   Lets say that 60 km is the upper limit of a conventionally fed system - (said to be 40 - 60 km between grid connections in an online resource). 

The addition of the ATF then allows one of 3 things:
Additional distance been grid feeders for the same power drawn,
Or additional power draw (less volt drop) for the same distance between supply points,
Or a combination of the two.

Paul

You're right, that 60 km was for "classic" systems, so not really the appropriate value. But in the area around Reading I would expect most of the benefit of AT feeding to be used up in the high traffic load, so not available for extra distance (and Kensal-Didcot is 80 km).  However, that's off the end of my thumb - you'd need to do the right sums to really know.
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5090


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: November 11, 2017, 09:15:27 pm »

RWB area wiring was never in doubt, was it? Beyond Thingley was where it all got a bit questionable...

Never was in doubt - I mention it purely as a matter of record of progress.
Logged

Now, please!
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3288


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #116 on: November 12, 2017, 08:57:11 am »

Class 387 and a Class 800 on AC did test runs on Saturday night between Slough and Didcot.

800 002 has made a number of runs this week between North Pole and Didcot on AC throughout. Passed it yesterday running on the down relief near Twyford while on 800 005 heading towards Padd (on diesel up to Maidenhead!)

There are no more Sunday morning closures, so presumably they can now do all their testing by running trains. I imagine soon they will want to run enough trains to fully load the system, and see what it does.

Or can they? I'm still puzzled about where and how much power can be fed in at Reading ATFS. There is no National Grid site at Reading, and the intended feed from Bramley hasn't been built. (Yet.) Plan B was a longer feeder along the track from Didcot; I'm 99% sure that is not going to happen. So presumably it has a temporary feed from SSEN at 132 kV. Their nearest "bulk supply point" is at the back of their offices in Vastern Road, less than 1 km away, but I doubt that could supply the full rated power of the ATFS.

I doubt they will fully load the system, sufficient loading will be done to check Vl-Vt (Voltage longitudinal - Voltage transverse) basically the interference on telecoms circuits, and any touch potentials at public areas also to check the stability and direction of the (power) protection.

Reading depot has always been a concern regards power in the event of an all line isolation is required between it and Didcot, I believe feeding has been designed such that Reading can be kept alive from Kensal Green.  As far as I am aware there are no plans to bring in a feed from Reading Grid, it just does not have the capacity, indeed the 33kV feed to Reading third rail substation generally only feeds a couple of subs on the network due to capacity at the Grid.  Even a standby supply would need to be in the order of 10MVA
Logged

Neither a wise man nor a brave man lies down on the tracks of history to wait for the train of the future to run over him.     
Dwight D. Eisenhower
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 30131



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #117 on: November 18, 2017, 11:08:45 am »

In answering questions elsewhere I came across http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/sites/default/files/sitedocuments/Planning-and-Building-Control/Planning/nr_a_guide_to_overhead_electrification.pdf ... which is I suspect a general Network Rail guide mirrored by Bath and North East Somerset.   Perhaps already mentioned here in the past - but worth repeating even if it has been as it seems like a useful guide ...
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4895


View Profile
« Reply #118 on: November 18, 2017, 11:32:10 am »

In answering questions elsewhere I came across http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/sites/default/files/sitedocuments/Planning-and-Building-Control/Planning/nr_a_guide_to_overhead_electrification.pdf ... which is I suspect a general Network Rail guide mirrored by Bath and North East Somerset.   Perhaps already mentioned here in the past - but worth repeating even if it has been as it seems like a useful guide ...

Indeed I did, last year: http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=5066.msg200603#msg200603

Note that the much-derided (for good reasons) forum search facility seems to work quite well on little-used text strings in a link - even if that string is invisible.
Logged
Chris from Nailsea
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 17719


I am not railway staff


View Profile Email
« Reply #119 on: November 18, 2017, 09:20:47 pm »

Note that the much-derided (for good reasons) forum search facility seems to work quite well on little-used text strings in a link - even if that string is invisible.

Yes, that's how I still manage to dredge up various historic posts / information - with some determined digging!  Wink Cheesy Grin

Logged

William Huskisson MP was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830.  Many more have died in the same way since then.  Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.

"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner."  Discuss.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 70
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the 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 the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page