Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 11:15 29 Mar 2024
* Attempted murder charge after man stabbed on train
* Easter getaway begins with flood alerts in place
* KFC Nigeria sorry after disabled diner refused service
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
29th Mar (1913)
Foundation of National Union or Railwaymen (*)

Train RunningCancelled
09:30 Weymouth to Gloucester
10:55 Bedwyn to Newbury
11:05 Swindon to Westbury
11:29 Newbury to Bedwyn
11:57 Bedwyn to Newbury
12:17 Westbury to Swindon
12:52 Bedwyn to Newbury
13:15 Swindon to Westbury
14:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
16:23 Westbury to Swindon
16:54 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
17:36 Swindon to Westbury
18:37 Westbury to Swindon
20:13 Swindon to Westbury
21:16 Westbury to Swindon
22:30 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton
10:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
10:55 Paignton to London Paddington
13:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
13:42 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington
13:55 Paignton to London Paddington
Delayed
06:05 Penzance to London Paddington
07:10 Penzance to London Paddington
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
08:15 Penzance to London Paddington
09:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
09:10 Penzance to London Paddington
10:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
10:20 Penzance to London Paddington
11:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
12:15 Penzance to London Paddington
13:15 Plymouth to London Paddington
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 29, 2024, 11:23:29 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[132] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[56] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[52] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[51] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
[46] Return of the BRUTE?
[32] 2024 - Service update and amendment log, Swindon <-> Westbury...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 [54] 55 56 ... 78
  Print  
Author Topic: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion  (Read 283548 times)
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #795 on: April 23, 2019, 11:55:18 »

Well, remember that after B****T day that we will no longer have to comply with EU» (European Union - about) Regulations and we can therefore revert to using the much simpler, lightweight (and hence, cheaper) BR (British Rail(ways)) MK3 catenary..... Tongue
Logged
bradshaw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1450



View Profile
« Reply #796 on: April 23, 2019, 12:03:20 »

The letters page of the new edition of Modern Railways has a reply from the ORR» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) to Ian Warmsley’s article. Effectively it says that the role of the ORR is to enforce legislation on Health and Safety. It quotes the Electricity at Work Regulations as the reason that 3rd rail can only be extended in certain circumstance.
It also relates the changes imposed when the UK (United Kingdom) ‘special national condition’, reflecting historic custom and practice, ceased to be used, forcing the increases in clearances.
It ends with a note on the work being done with NR» (Network Rail - home page) to try and produce solutions where minimum clearances are difficult to achieve.
Logged
Adrian
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 171


View Profile
« Reply #797 on: April 23, 2019, 19:53:23 »

Well, remember that after B****T day that we will no longer have to comply with EU» (European Union - about) Regulations and we can therefore revert to using the much simpler, lightweight (and hence, cheaper) BR (British Rail(ways)) MK3 catenary..... Tongue

The massive square masts, though - surely the EU didn't mandate those did it?  I don't remember seeing anything like those anywhere on the continent?
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4452


View Profile
« Reply #798 on: April 23, 2019, 20:47:00 »

Well, remember that after B****T day that we will no longer have to comply with EU» (European Union - about) Regulations and we can therefore revert to using the much simpler, lightweight (and hence, cheaper) BR (British Rail(ways)) MK3 catenary..... Tongue

The massive square masts, though - surely the EU didn't mandate those did it?  I don't remember seeing anything like those anywhere on the continent?

Agree and the closer spacing and not using headspan was to make them more resilient, none of that is in EU regulations.  Of course the larger clearances come from an EN standard, but that is not an EU organisation either and RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board) did not have to adopt it straight away and could have added more guidance on risk assessments, which designers could have done anyway. 

So as usual it is people trying to blame the EU for all the problems of their own making.  Just like politicians have been doing for the last 40 years. 
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #799 on: April 24, 2019, 09:55:17 »

I did put a 'tongue in cheek' smiley at the end of my post......
Logged
Adrian
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 171


View Profile
« Reply #800 on: April 24, 2019, 19:32:16 »

Seriously, though - will NR» (Network Rail - home page) be expected to pare down the spec a bit for the not-yet-authorised bits of the GW (Great Western) electrification to get the costs more in line with what DfT» (Department for Transport - about) think is reasonable?
Logged
onthecushions
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 977


View Profile
« Reply #801 on: April 25, 2019, 11:15:10 »

Seriously, though - will NR» (Network Rail - home page) be expected to pare down the spec a bit for the not-yet-authorised bits of the GW (Great Western) electrification to get the costs more in line with what DfT» (Department for Transport - about) think is reasonable?

I don't think that the "cheap and cheerful"  route is being followed.

The article below (may have been referenced before) explains some of the considerations.

https://www.railengineer.co.uk/2019/03/15/relearning-electrification/

Hope this helps,

OTC
Logged
Noggin
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 514


View Profile
« Reply #802 on: April 25, 2019, 14:30:22 »

Well, remember that after B****T day that we will no longer have to comply with EU» (European Union - about) Regulations and we can therefore revert to using the much simpler, lightweight (and hence, cheaper) BR (British Rail(ways)) MK3 catenary..... Tongue

The massive square masts, though - surely the EU didn't mandate those did it?  I don't remember seeing anything like those anywhere on the continent?

Yes and no - AIUI (as I understand it), the TSI (interoperability standards) mandate a higher level of tension in the wire, which means a thicker (and thus heavier) gauge wire, and so you need beefed up steelwork to carry it.

That said, yes it could be done with much lighter structures. AIUI, the Series 1 catenery had a number of objectives including speed of installation and adjustment on site, minimal maintenance, maximum electrical and mechanical separation, allowing running on one track if the other was isolated, dewired, being worked in etc. 

At the end of the day, the steelwork is the visible bit of electrification, but its capital (and enen installation) costs are relatively low - things like feeder stations and control rooms, resignalling, trackwork, rebuilding structures and project management are where most of the money goes.
Logged
DidcotPunter
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 166


View Profile Email
« Reply #803 on: April 26, 2019, 12:36:21 »

Yes and no - AIUI (as I understand it), the TSI (interoperability standards) mandate a higher level of tension in the wire, which means a thicker (and thus heavier) gauge wire, and so you need beefed up steelwork to carry it.

That said, yes it could be done with much lighter structures. AIUI, the Series 1 catenery had a number of objectives including speed of installation and adjustment on site, minimal maintenance, maximum electrical and mechanical separation, allowing running on one track if the other was isolated, dewired, being worked in etc. 

At the end of the day, the steelwork is the visible bit of electrification, but its capital (and enen installation) costs are relatively low - things like feeder stations and control rooms, resignalling, trackwork, rebuilding structures and project management are where most of the money goes.

You're right, Andrew McNaughton quoted by Modern Railways on Twitter:

Quote
TransPennine Route Upgrade to be the poster child for affordable electrification. Scotland has shown the way by doing schemes affordably. Headline figure £1.2m per single track kilometre - a third civils, a third power supply, a third knitting


https://twitter.com/Modern_Railways/status/1121736492517330951
Logged
Adrian
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 171


View Profile
« Reply #804 on: April 26, 2019, 19:42:46 »

Seriously, though - will NR» (Network Rail - home page) be expected to pare down the spec a bit for the not-yet-authorised bits of the GW (Great Western) electrification to get the costs more in line with what DfT» (Department for Transport - about) think is reasonable?

I don't think that the "cheap and cheerful"  route is being followed.

The article below (may have been referenced before) explains some of the considerations.

https://www.railengineer.co.uk/2019/03/15/relearning-electrification/

Hope this helps,

OTC

An interesting article.  I'm struggling with the statement about 15 metre deep foundations, though - the masts are no more than 10 metres high, and I reckon the longest piles I've seen are about 5 metres.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40692



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #805 on: April 26, 2019, 19:52:59 »

An interesting article.  I'm struggling with the statement about 15 metre deep foundations, though - the masts are no more than 10 metres high, and I reckon the longest piles I've seen are about 5 metres.

It says "up to 15 metres" and they may be the exception - I can imagine them on very soft ground or on the top of high embankments having to go right down - for example those between Chippenham and Thingley Junction.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #806 on: April 29, 2019, 20:18:16 »

Goring Gap issues not to be resolved (too long to quote here):
https://www.henleystandard.co.uk/news/goring/138707/campaigners-lose-fight-to-replace-ugly-rail-gantries.html
Logged
Lee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7519


GBR - The Emperor's New Rail Network


View Profile WWW
« Reply #807 on: April 29, 2019, 21:08:13 »

If Network Rail are that keen to mitigate an act of electrification vandalism, then they could always pledge £3.75 million towards the cost of Pilning Westgate...
Logged

Vous devez être impitoyable, parce que ces gens sont des salauds - https://looka.com/s/78722877
MVR S&T
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 438


View Profile
« Reply #808 on: April 29, 2019, 21:47:28 »

That much might buy the nameboards, with all the asoicated planning, meetings about the typeface, who should run it etc.
Logged
Celestial
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 674


View Profile
« Reply #809 on: April 29, 2019, 21:55:16 »


The press is a little late picking this up. I reported this here a fortnight ago, though it didn't seem to trigger any interest from anyone.
Logged
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 ... 52 53 [54] 55 56 ... 78
  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 customers 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 to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page