E.R.T.M.S.

[St. Simon]

On 29/06/2021 at 13:03, Shed said:

What freight locomotives are fitted for ETCS level2?

 

Hi,

 

Only the Class 97s that are used on the Cambrian are fitted at the moment. There is a 'first in class' project  to start the ball rolling, but nothing else.

 

Simon

[ess1uk]

On 16/07/2021 at 12:48, St. Simon said:

 

Hi,

 

Only the Class 97s that are used on the Cambrian are fitted at the moment. There is a 'first in class' project  to start the ball rolling, but nothing else.

 

Simon

see here

so in 2 years which locos have they managed to fit out?

[St. Simon]

2 hours ago, ess1uk said:

so in 2 years which locos have they managed to fit out?

Hi,

 

I haven’t heard of any being properly fitted, I assume they are still in the design stage of fitment

 

Simon

[ess1uk]

On 08/06/2021 at 19:36, ess1uk said:

The Northern City Line Project is progressing well with on site teams who are fully mobilised installing equipment in a difficult environment working within two tunnel bores.

REB and Tunnel Locs are built and ready to be installed over the next 2 months across multiple disruptives, with the first major disruptive starting on 19th June 2021.

seven weekend possessions of the route between Finsbury Park and Moorgate are planned before 3rd October to allow the conversion to in cab signalling.

trains will divert into Kings Cross 

[ess1uk]

https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/great-northern-train-tests-successfully-for-first-stage-of-east-coast-digital-programme 

 

testing started on 717
 

Edited September 23, 2021 by ess1uk
Adding information

[ess1uk]

when is Paddington (high level) to Airport Junction (0 to 12 miles) ETCS expected to go live?

 

 

 

[St. Simon]

9 hours ago, ess1uk said:

when is Paddington (high level) to Airport Junction (0 to 12 miles) ETCS expected to go live?

Hi,

 

It’s a still a bit of a moving target shall we say! Bear in mind that it’s, at the moment, being done in two stages, one from Acton to Heathrow / West Drayton and one from Paddington to Acton.

 

However, the hard date for completion is Christmas 2022 (it might be 2023, I can’t remember off the top of my head and can’t see the date on my emails!), when the derogation for TPWS Plan B ends.

 

Simon

Edited December 6, 2021 by St. Simon

[ess1uk]

21 hours ago, St. Simon said:

Hi,

 

It’s a still a bit of a moving target shall we say! Bear in mind that it’s, at the moment, being done in two stages, one from Acton to Heathrow / West Drayton and one from Paddington to Acton.

 

However, the hard date for completion is Christmas 2022 (it might be 2023, I can’t remember off the top of my head and can’t see the date on my emails!), when the derogation for TPWS Plan B ends.

 

Simon

is it being done in stages for a particular reason?

[Edwin_m]

3 hours ago, ess1uk said:

is it being done in stages for a particular reason?

Probably because Heathrow was needed first.  The Heathrow Express 332 units and the tunnel were fitted with GW ATP, but the replacement 387 units weren't.  They were supplied ready for fitting ERTMS but fitting the old system would have been very difficult.  Just using TPWS instead was deemed an unacceptable reduction in safety levels, so they fitted the new units and the tunnel with ERTMS.  

 

I'm not totally clear why the same argument didn't apply to the line between Paddington and Airport Junction - perhaps as a non-tunnel route the risks were just lower?

[DY444]

22 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

Probably because Heathrow was needed first.  The Heathrow Express 332 units and the tunnel were fitted with GW ATP, but the replacement 387 units weren't.  They were supplied ready for fitting ERTMS but fitting the old system would have been very difficult.  Just using TPWS instead was deemed an unacceptable reduction in safety levels, so they fitted the new units and the tunnel with ERTMS.  

 

I'm not totally clear why the same argument didn't apply to the line between Paddington and Airport Junction - perhaps as a non-tunnel route the risks were just lower?

 

I guess because 387s were already operating on the main line section anyway without ATP and so it wasn't seen as a priority.  AIUI the branch only had GW ATP and so would have needed TPWS to be fitted in any event so going the whole hog to ERTMS avoided the cost of doing that.  Probably less risky doing it on a branch as the first stage too.  I note the Moorgate branch is going to be the first part of the ECML, again a branch where if it all goes wrong it doesn't stuff up the entire route.

[St. Simon]

On 07/12/2021 at 18:48, Edwin_m said:

Probably because Heathrow was needed first.  The Heathrow Express 332 units and the tunnel were fitted with GW ATP, but the replacement 387 units weren't.  They were supplied ready for fitting ERTMS but fitting the old system would have been very difficult.  Just using TPWS instead was deemed an unacceptable reduction in safety levels, so they fitted the new units and the tunnel with ERTMS.  

 

I'm not totally clear why the same argument didn't apply to the line between Paddington and Airport Junction - perhaps as a non-tunnel route the risks were just lower?

 

Hi,

 

Not quite, the decision to provide the Heathrow Branch with E.T.C.S. Level 2 Overlay first was made way before the swapping of 332s with 387s was thought of (by 2 years at least!). I believe the decision was based on the need to allow the Class 345s to run to Heathrow as part of the agreed changes from Heathrow Connect to TFL Rail.

 

The argument about TPWS over E.T.C.S. does apply, however, it is the case that E.T.C.S. was simply not going to be ready for the Mainlines before the required introduction of the Class 345s, so a Derogation against using E.T.C.S. was given until Christmas 2023, on the proviso that the TPWS provision was modified to enhance it to close the protection gap as much as we could. So, E.T.C.S. must be installed between Paddington and West Drayton before Christmas 2023.

 

On 07/12/2021 at 15:42, ess1uk said:

is it being done in stages for a particular reason?

 

Basically, the two stages on the Main & Relief Lines is because of the complexity of the job and to take advantage of other bits of work.

 

Ealing Broadway to West Drayton isn't all that complex, so by doing that bit first, it allows you do get on with Driver Training, Train Testing etc. whilst you focus on the complexity of Paddington and the Crossrail Core Interface. Also, this bit was the first area to have it's interlocking data re-written to clean it up after all the Crossrail works, so they could take advantage of that data re-write to include all the RBC interface data in the interlocking data. Also, at the time that the first phase was being designed, Old Oak Common (GWR) was still being fiddle around with, so it was sensible to wait for a 'final' layout to stabilise before writing the E.T.C.S. data. 

 

I also believe that there also has / had to be some work undertaken to increase the capacity of the radio links before advancing towards Paddington and including all the E.C.S. moves to and from Old Oak Common (XRail) & North Pole Depot. 

 

Plus, there is also the complexity of the resourcing for design, installation & testing (and funding of course) that has meant it has to be split up.

 

Simon

Edited December 10, 2021 by St. Simon

[St. Simon]

11 minutes ago, DY444 said:

 

I guess because 387s were already operating on the main line section anyway without ATP and so it wasn't seen as a priority.  AIUI the branch only had GW ATP and so would have needed TPWS to be fitted in any event so going the whole hog to ERTMS avoided the cost of doing that.  Probably less risky doing it on a branch as the first stage too.  I note the Moorgate branch is going to be the first part of the ECML, again a branch where if it all goes wrong it doesn't stuff up the entire route.

 

Hi,

 

Yes, there is also the argument of providing, from scratch, a Class B Train Protection system (TPWS) to completely replace a Class A Train Protection System (ATP) rather than with another Class A Train Protection System (E.T.C.S.) is rather harder to justify.

 

The other advantage of doing the Moorgate and Heathrow Branches is that they have, effectively, their own special fleets that are the only ones allowed down the Branches (717s for Moorgate and 345s / 387s for Heathrow), so there is less to fit!

 

Simon

[ess1uk]

1 hour ago, DY444 said:

 

I guess because 387s were already operating on the main line section anyway without ATP and so it wasn't seen as a priority.  AIUI the branch only had GW ATP and so would have needed TPWS to be fitted in any event so going the whole hog to ERTMS avoided the cost of doing that.  Probably less risky doing it on a branch as the first stage too.  I note the Moorgate branch is going to be the first part of the ECML, again a branch where if it all goes wrong it doesn't stuff up the entire route.

Hertford loop is Fitted, test bed it’s true.

[ess1uk]

1 hour ago, St. Simon said:

I also believe that there also has / had to be some work undertaken to increase the capacity of the radio links before advantaging towards Paddington and including all the E.C.S. moves to and from Old Oak Common (XRail) & North Pole Depot. 

 

Simon

Yep radio work started in 2019 and was signed off by ORR recently ready for ETCS.

[DY444]

3 hours ago, ess1uk said:

Hertford loop is Fitted, test bed it’s true.

 

Indeed albeit only a bit of it north of Hertford, I was meaning the big plan to do the whole ECML from Kings X/Moorgate to Stoke Tunnel.

[ess1uk]

11 hours ago, DY444 said:

 

Indeed albeit only a bit of it north of Hertford, I was meaning the big plan to do the whole ECML from Kings X/Moorgate to Stoke Tunnel.

it's gone quiet on the plans for this

[DY444]

15 minutes ago, ess1uk said:

it's gone quiet on the plans for this

 

Has it?  The Moorgate branch has been closed for the past 3 weekends for what NR describes as "work to upgrade the track and signalling system on the route in the latest stage (sic) of the East Coast Digital Programme".   "Latest stage" of the digital programme might be over-stating things a tad but the plan AIUI was to start with Moorgate and that seems to be what is happening.

Edited December 9, 2021 by DY444

[ess1uk]

1 minute ago, DY444 said:

 

Has it?  The Moorgate branch has been closed for the past 3 weekends for what NR describes as "work to upgrade the track and signalling system on the route in the latest stage (sic) of the East Coast Digital Programme".   "Latest stage" of the digital programme might be over-stating things a tad but the plan AIUI was to start with Moorgate and that seems to be what is happening.

yes

i reported that up this thread

what has gone quiet is the further rollout northwards to Stoke Tunnel

[Shed]

Is it tied to the recontrol of Peterborough PSB?

[ess1uk]

https://news.railbusinessdaily.com/network-rails-train-testing-site-achieves-major-digital-milestone/

ETCS tested 

[ess1uk]

https://www.railengineer.co.uk/unlocking-innovation-the-digital-railway/?amp
interesting article but a little dated.

[jim.snowdon]

On 09/12/2021 at 09:43, DY444 said:

 

Has it?  The Moorgate branch has been closed for the past 3 weekends for what NR describes as "work to upgrade the track and signalling system on the route in the latest stage (sic) of the East Coast Digital Programme".   "Latest stage" of the digital programme might be over-stating things a tad but the plan AIUI was to start with Moorgate and that seems to be what is happening.

The latest, ie most recent, stages have been about preparing the line for ETCS, which is still some time away, and replacing all the trainstops with TPWS. That change goes live in May 2022. Early in 2023 the line should go over to ETCS overlaid on the existing fixed signalling, before eventually going over to full ETCS with no fixed signals.

 

[DY444]

7 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

The latest, ie most recent, stages have been about preparing the line for ETCS, which is still some time away, and replacing all the trainstops with TPWS. That change goes live in May 2022. Early in 2023 the line should go over to ETCS overlaid on the existing fixed signalling, before eventually going over to full ETCS with no fixed signals.

 

 

How bizarre.  If NR had gone GW ATP -> TPWS -> ETCS (eventually) on the Heathrow branch it would have been so much easier initially (no need for 387s to have ETCS from the get go, 7 car 345s could go to Heathrow, de-risk Crossrail completion due to one less signalling system to get working initially etc etc).  But no they went GW ATP -> ECTS.  Yet on Moorgate they are going to the trouble and, importantly, cost of going Train Stops ->  TPWS -> ETCS eventually despite 717s having been successfully tested on ETCS.

 

And I thought regional variations of doing things went out with Sectorisation.  Good job NR isn't pressed for money and can afford to install TPWS which will be used for about 5 minutes.  Hey ho.

Edited January 24, 2022 by DY444

[Edwin_m]

5 minutes ago, DY444 said:

 

How bizarre.  If NR had gone GW ATP -> TPWS -> ETCS (eventually) on the Heathrow branch it would have been so much easier initially (no need for 387s to have ETCS from the get go, 7 car 345s could go to Heathrow, de-risk Crossrail completion due to one less signalling system to get working initially etc etc).  But no they went GW ATP -> ECTS.  Yet on Moorgate they are going to the trouble and, importantly, cost of going Train Stops ->  TPWS -> ETCS eventually despite 717s having been successfully tested on ETCS.

 

And I thought regional variations of doing things went out with Sectorisation.  Good job NR isn't pressed for money and can afford to install TPWS which will be used for about 5 minutes.  Hey ho.

Two problems with the Heathrow branch.  Firstly the 332 units didn't have TPWS (as they were only ever operated on GW-ATP routes) and secondly it was deemed that GW-ATP could only be replaced by something with similar levels of safety.  

 

I don't know why they need an interim TPWS stage for Moorgate, but at least TPWS is designed to be interfaced into existing signalling with minimum disruption.  

[TheSignalEngineer]

15 minutes ago, DY444 said:

Good job NR isn't pressed for money and can afford to install TPWS which will be used for about 5 minutes. 

That was what people were saying twenty years ago. Railtrack had promised Beardy that we would have full cab signalling and 140mph running on WCML by 2005.