Midland Main Line Electrification

[Glorious NSE]

Edwin - paragraph 12 in here:

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/hlos-2012/railways-act-2005.pdf

 

These aren't neccesarily the detailed schemes, they are the outputs that DfT wants NR to acheive, so there is scope for doing slightly more in places if that makes sense operationally/financially, to my mind wiring Leamington-Birmingham doesn't get you very far, as any electric freight would only allow you to get to Lawley St or route you through New St!

 

You need to also wire the Sutton Park line, plus Nuneaton-Birmingham and Derby-Birmingham before that starts looking at being a joined-up route for wiring...

 

And that's also included, if you look it says that much of this is also strategic with the aim of rolling out more electrification during period 6 - as Mike alludes in his recent post you can't do everything all at once, at least this gets things moving and Voyager pan cars should allow AC to be used on any leg where the wires appear!

 

For instance it would also make sense to me to wire up via Toton as well as via Derby if the objective is to create a through high capacity electric freight route to the North, that isn't in the text, but it may be a logical outcome of it...

[The Stationmaster]

 

These aren't neccesarily the detailed schemes, they are the outputs that DfT wants NR to acheive, so there is scope for doing slightly more in places if that makes sense operationally/financially, to my mind wiring Leamington-Birmingham doesn't get you very far, as any electric freight would only allow you to get to Lawley St or route you through New St!

 

Martyn I think you've overlooked turning right at Stetchford and taking the Grand Junction and Soho Road to get through Brum to W'hampton and the north

[The Stationmaster]

BR186 (Bombardier) and BR189 (Siemens) anyone?

 

Will they shrink (by quite a bit) if thoroughly washed?

[Glorious NSE]

Mike, you can't get onto that from the Tyseley direction AFAIK, although a new bit of line to connect things up wouldn't be impossible...?

[The Stationmaster]

Mike, you can't get onto that from the Tyseley direction AFAIK, although a new bit of line to connect things up wouldn't be impossible...?

That's true - the only way you can go is Leamington - Coventry (which is listed for wiring and 'additional double track' which sounds ok although it then dumps freights in the WM Corridor with heavy line occupation) and I was thinking of stuff being routed that way - and overlooked the WM corridor capacity issue (I wonder if 'someone else' has?).

 

The alternative - although I don't know the ground at all well could possibly be to connnect off the Midland line to the Grand Junction where the latter crosses it in the vicinity of Washwood Heath. Or are they envisaging freights for 'the north' avoiding Brum completely and going Leamington - Coventry - Nuneaton?

[jonny777]

Filton to Bristol capacity enhancement?

 

Well it is nice to know that the short sited removal of two of the four tracks here has now been admitted by the authorities.

 

I wonder how much extra costs have been incurred, rather than would have been the case by just keeping the four lines in place and maintaining them as running tracks for the last 30 years?

[pete_mcfarlane]

It did amuse me that the Labour Transport spokesperson is moaning that the work won't start until 2014. Presumably if this arts graduate who has never had a proper job MP was in office, they'd have announced the decision today and started planting the OHL masts first thing on Tuesday morning.

[DavidLong]

 

German build, so probably not Mike But major investment like this would also be a good opportunity to bring the small UK loading gauge up to UIC standards, eventually making the costly redesign for that limited loading gauge obsolete. I know it's not gonna happen to all lines, nor at the same time, but the Midlands line, being intended as a freight corridor, would be a prime candidate for UIC conversion, saving trans-loading costs for goods to and from the Continent.

 

Eurolight is being shrunk for DRS and possibly Chiltern. Is it harder to shrink electric locos than diesels?

 

David

Edited July 16, 2012 by DavidLong

[Ohmisterporter]

At today's press conference announcing these proposals the PM was asked if HS2 would still go ahead. He confirmed that it would, in addition to the work we are discussing here. Lord knows where the money will come from, but if we don't invest in a modern infrastructure the country will gradually fall behind its competitors.

This is all great news from the point of view of unemployment statistics in Poland and Romania.

[The Stationmaster]

Filton to Bristol capacity enhancement?

 

Well it is nice to know that the short sited removal of two of the four tracks here has now been admitted by the authorities.

 

I wonder how much extra costs have been incurred, rather than would have been the case by just keeping the four lines in place and maintaining them as running tracks for the last 30 years?

 

It would have cost a very large amount of money - which BR simply didn't have. It's a long time since I saw the figures but immediate renewal costs were into several millions before the maintenance savings were added. I don't doubt some renewals work could/would have been deferred but it certainly would have been required well before now and the traffic levels simply weren't there to justify it.

 

I presume the (re)quadrupling is largely predicated on local passenger flows as a 3 minute headway for non-stopping services gives considerable capacity and in the 1980s we had no real problems pathing the (fairly limited in number, and then declining) freight services using the route although they have increased in number in recent times due to use of Portishead for imported coal etc.

 

Don't forget that decisions made in the 1980s (and even into the early 1990s) were based on a very different situation from that of today - Govt pressure was on to save ever more money, some traffics were declining or held down by price pressure (usually down to political 'initiatives') and the railway was increasingly required to be 'lean' and fit for for purpose. What was actually done was as nothing compared with what would have happened had the Serpell Report really been followed - I know that because I developed most of the 'rationalisation' proposals it would have brought on the Western. De-quadrification (as it was called) on Filton Bank preceded that and was based on avoided costs and removing excess capacity.

 

Correct typo

Edited July 16, 2012 by The Stationmaster

[Glorious NSE]

The alternative - although I don't know the ground at all well could possibly be to connnect off the Midland line to the Grand Junction where the latter crosses it in the vicinity of Washwood Heath. Or are they envisaging freights for 'the north' avoiding Brum completely and going Leamington - Coventry - Nuneaton?

 

From my reccolection you could do that, there is plenty of 'space' around to build such a thing, although road overbridges complicate matters and would need to be dealt with...

 

But my impression?

 

Most of this isn't about electric freight trains going to Birmingham, at least not yet. Daventry-excepted the West Midlands has many rail terminals unwired, most will still be unwired after this is implemented, so electric trains to Birmingham are not the point of the excercise, you can however run them to Bescot if needed via that route, but don't expect lots of that.

 

Period 6 I would bet on wires going from Derby and Nuneaton to Leamington and Walsall, filling that gap in and connecting several diesel-served intermodal terminals to both Southampton and Felixstowe.

 

A quick look at flows via that axis (Southampton-Reading - routes based on the Eastleigh FMi table) would suggest you'll still have a mix once P5s stuff is delivered - this assumes the same routes except where i've noted, but there may be a case for re-routing or a traction change en-route(*) particularly on longer runs like the Yorkshire flows? :

• Cars - Halewood - Electric
  
• Cars - Castle Bromwich - Diesel
  
• Cars - Oxford - Electric
  
• Intermodal - Lawley St - Diesel
  
• Intermodal - Trafford Park - Electric
  
• Intermodal - Ditton - Electric
  
• Intermodal - Birch Coppice - Diesel
  
• Intermodal - Crewe - Electric
  
• Intermodal - Wentloog - Electric
  
• Intermodal - Wakefield - Diesel (*) but could be electrically hauled to Sheffield?
  
• Intermodal - Leeds - Diesel (*) but could be electrically hauled to Sheffield?
  
• Intermodal - Garston - Electric
  
• Intermodal - Hams Hall - Diesel
  
• Intermodal - Daventry - Electric (assumed this would be rerouted via Bletchley, currently runs via London)
  
• Wagonload/MOD - Didcot (& connects North) - Electric
  

A P6 'Water Orton' scheme would allow a further 4 of these to go electric, as well as their equivalent services from Felixstowe (paths via London permitting)

Edited July 16, 2012 by Glorious NSE

[bmthtrains - David]

I wasn't expecting the Electric Spine bit of this - very interesting to see Southampton will gain OHLE up to Basingstoke, then up to Reading and the Midlands. I would expect that EVoyager announcement to follow soon then, as it makes perfect sense now.

 

I wonder if this is the start of the end for third rail? Given all the rolling stock can be very simply converted to OH pick up, how long before Basingstoke to Waterloo gets masts as well...

 

David

[lapford34102]

Welcome to the new world order!

 

Amen to that. This'll give the Roads lobby indigestion - hopefully :-)

 

I wonder if this is the start of the end for third rail? Given all the rolling stock can be very simply converted to OH pick up, how long before Basingstoke to Waterloo gets masts as well..

 

Think it more likely they would head West first; Basing - Exeter hopefully joining up with an eventually electrified GW main line there, you could then start filling in the gaps such as Soton - Salisbury then on to Bristol. Also west from Soton to Bournemouth/Weymouth.

 

Dual mode on the 444/450's is fairly straightforward as I understand it and Basing would be a logical changeover point.

 

Stu

[Glorious NSE]

David, the governments suggestion to NR is that Basingstoke-Southampton is viewed as a pilot scheme to judge how effective it would be elsewhere - with the freight and e-voyager aspect then this bit makes a lot of sense on it's own!

 

37.The southern end of the Electric Spine entails the conversion of a section of the existing Southern ‘third rail’ (750V DC) electrification system to the more modern and capable ‘overhead’ (25kV AC) system to upgrade its capability. The Secretary of State also wishes the industry to develop a longer-term proposition and business case for the systematic upgrade from DC to AC of the whole Southern network, for consideration for future control periods. As part of this work the industry will wish to treat the conversion work required for Southampton to Basingstoke as a pilot scheme for such a potential modernisation programme, and review plans for renewing or upgrading the DC network to avoid the risk of nugatory expenditure.

[Edwin_m]

I agree with Martyn, Leamington-Tyseley only really comes into its own in conjunction with Birmingham-Derby and Sheffield-Leeds/Doncaster and this sort of package is a strong candidate for the next announcement. Whether that is in five years or six months remains to be seen.

 

I also agree with Mike and others that all this announcement is getting well ahead of the industry's ability to deliver. I don't think signalling immunisation is so much of a problem as modern signalling moreorless gives this for free, and most of the routes announced have been recently resignalled or are in the pipeline. There will be some pressure on signalling resources for any remodelling schemes and for a range of sighting and other small works. Electrification skills are probably more readily transferable from other countries - I'm told for example that Spain has built up a lot of rail systems capability and they probably can't expect many domestic orders for some time. Although this takes UK taxpayers money overseas, at least with infrastructure schemes a lot of the work has to be done on site and this brings a fair chunk of the money back to the UK. Unlike rolling stock where nearly all the capital and quite a bit of the maintenance cost could end up propping up someone else's economy.

 

Conspiracy theorists may wish to consider how much freight the Spine will take off WCML and whether that is enough to give the Government a reason to back out of HS2...

[jamie92208]

This is all great news and at last there is some joined up thinking. My mate and I have often said, whilst putting the world to rights watching trains, that we needed a rolling programme of at least 100 track miles per year of electrification. I just hope that all this work is done to the sort of reliablity standards that the WCML was done do in the 60's and not on the cheap like the ECML was done. This will obviously include good beefy electrical connections to the National Grid with plenty of spare capacity built in.

 

As to the Sheffield Leeds bit there are I believe some proposals being worked up in West and South Yorkshire that will address that and it would just need connections such as Hare Park to Wakefield Kirkgate wiring.

 

As always the devil will be in the detail and I just hope that it doesn't get slimmed down like the Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement project is being with various chords ad other bits being taken out of the scheme.

 

Jamie

[Glorious NSE]

The industry as of lately, has developed a keen interest in 'last-mile' dual-system loco's. Effectively a diesel with OH pickup and an electrical circuit to suit. So the electric backbone could be operated by such freight machines, who then connect to, and possibly shunt at, unwired terminals using their limited powered diesel engine.

 

If we're talking Lawley St, Hams and Birch then you'd need something capable of much more than just the last mile!

[Edwin_m]

Think it more likely they would head West first; Basing - Exeter hopefully joining up with an eventually electrified GW main line there, you could then start filling in the gaps such as Soton - Salisbury then on to Bristol. Also west from Soton to Bournemouth/Weymouth.

 

Dual mode on the 444/450's is fairly straightforward as I understand it and Basing would be a logical changeover point.

 

Agreed, the 444/450 has a dual-voltage traction package and (I think, we've discussed this before somewhere) also a pantograph well. However converting the 455/456 fleet to dual voltage would involve huge amounts of work, but these rarely venture west of Basingstoke so the most cost-effective strategy is to wait until they are life-expired before looking at any conversion in towards Waterloo.

 

What's the betting on 25kV reaching Exeter via Salisbury before it does via Reading?

[Glorious NSE]

As always the devil will be in the detail and I just hope that it doesn't get slimmed down like the Edinburgh Glasgow Improvement project is being with various chords ad other bits being taken out of the scheme.

 

One of the really encouraging things about most of the discussions recently has been that they have taken account of longer term strategic uses (including gradually building a potential electric freight network) - i'm hoping the expanded GWML spec also means that they aren't just talking 'fast lines only' through South Wales any more, which was rumoured at one point.

[Glorious NSE]

Agreed, the 444/450 has a dual-voltage traction package and (I think, we've discussed this before somewhere) also a pantograph well. However converting the 455/456 fleet to dual voltage would involve huge amounts of work, but these rarely venture west of Basingstoke so the most cost-effective strategy is to wait until they are life-expired before looking at any conversion in towards Waterloo.

 

What's the betting on 25kV reaching Exeter via Salisbury before it does via Reading?

 

Yep - both the 444 and 450 have pan wells. Would agree that inner suburban extensions would probably depend on cost-effectively replacing DC-only stock though.

 

I suspect that you'll still need 3rd rail from St Denys west though to deal with Southern services to Southampton with SWT's services returning to DC (and the Voyagers firing up their engines) to head South West from there? If a 'last mile' solution is found for freight loco's then a limit of wiring at Southampton loops would seem to be logical?

 

Not sure about wires via the Southern, it may be that some of these other schemes free up enough 158s to keep expanding the SWT fleet in line with growth?

[DavidLong]

Agreed, the 444/450 has a dual-voltage traction package and (I think, we've discussed this before somewhere) also a pantograph well. However converting the 455/456 fleet to dual voltage would involve huge amounts of work, but these rarely venture west of Basingstoke so the most cost-effective strategy is to wait until they are life-expired before looking at any conversion in towards Waterloo.

 

What's the betting on 25kV reaching Exeter via Salisbury before it does via Reading?

 

At last, the Southern's revenge!

 

David

[DavidLong]

Eurolight is being shrunk for DRS and possibly Chiltern. Is it harder to shrink electric locos than diesels?

 

David

 

Sorry to bump my own post but I wasn't being facetious. I am genuinely interested in whether it would be more difficult to make electric locos fit for our loading gauge than it is for diesels especially as Vossloh seem confident to do it for Eurolight.

A degree of this plan announced today seems to be predicated on more electric haulage of freight and it is unlikely in this case that the USA would be a source for motive power so European sources would seem to be favourite.

 

David

[Kris]

Just read through the document issued by the DfT and it seems to suggest that the new Bi mode HST replacement will not be used West of Bristol.

At the moment I can't see wires reaching Exeter via either route for a very long time. Going to Salisbury would make sense given the extra traffic that goes from there especially if combined with wiring the Bristol > Portsmouth route.

[jonny777]

It would have cost a very large amount of money - which BR simply didn't have. It's a long time since I saw the figures but immediate renewal costs were into several millions before the maintenance savings were added. I don't doubt some renewals work could/would have been deferred but it certainly would have been required well before now and the traffic levels simply weren't there to justify it.

 

I presume the (re)quadrupling is largely predicated on local passenger flows as a 3 minute headway for non-stopping services gives considerable capacity and in the 1980s we had no real problems pathing the (fairly limited in number, and then declining) freight services using the route although they have increased in number in recent times due to use of Portishead for imported coal etc.

 

Don't forget taht decisions made in the 1980s (and even into the early 1990s were based on a very different situation from that of today - Govt pressure was on to save ever more money, some traffics were declining or held down by price pressure (usually down to political 'initiatives') and the railway was increasingly required to be 'lean' and fit for for purpose. What was actually done was as nothing compared with what would have happened had the Serpell Report really been followed - I know that because I developed most of the 'rationalisation' proposals it would have brought on the Western. De-quadrification (as it was called) on Filton Bank preceded that and was based on avoided costs and removing excess capacity.

 

Thanks for taking the time to put me right.

 

I am afraid that my simple enthusiast ignorance and rose tinted views of the network tend to get in the way of the hard commercial decisions that have to be taken.

[The Stationmaster]

Sorry to bump my own post but I wasn't being facetious. I am genuinely interested in whether it would be more difficult to make electric locos fit for our loading gauge than it is for diesels especially as Vossloh seem confident to do it for Eurolight.

A degree of this plan announced today seems to be predicated on more electric haulage of freight and it is unlikely in this case that the USA would be a source for motive power so European sources would seem to be favourite.

David

While it some months since I spoke to them a number of past colleagues from the traction engineering side (plus one still heavily involved in that field in a consultancy role) were very sceptical about Vossloh's ability to shrink the loco to fit UK gauge constraints. Clearly equipment accessibility ought to be an issue so taking a fair bit off each side of the body together with reduced bogie width in some places could present problems (even GM made a silly error with the first Class 59s which led to a hole having to be cut in the bodyside). S with a diesel I suspect a lot more fairly comprehensive re-design rather than just shrinking.

 

I would have thought electrics ought to be simpler and easier - after all the TGV basic package was reduced to Eurostar size, albeit with some redistribution through the train of some auxiliary kit, and Siemens is already well used to the UK railway scene and its limitations in gauge terms.