GWML Electification

[Geoff Endacott]

2 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

As far as Swansea maybe???

 

 

Exactly - and Bristol Temple Meads.

 

Geoff Endacott

[St. Simon]

Hi,

 

As I said over on the ‘Network Rail Overheat’ thread there hasn’t been any reported OLE Problems on the Western this week, and very little if any (I certainly can’t recall any) since the new stuff entered into service. It has been extremely reliable and I think that’s vindicated the perceived ‘over-engineering’.

 

In other news, there is lots of things happening behind the scenes on the electrification, far more than I can say, but I’m sure it’ll all come out soon.

 

Simon

Edited July 26, 2019 by St. Simon

[Mike Storey]

Not sure if this has been posted before, so apols if so, but this report seems to indicate that per single track mile electrification costs on GWEP have plummeted back to what they claim is an efficient level. It also claims that per mile costs on the MML electrification programme have been as high as the highest costs on GWEP. Interesting. (Incidentally, I have also posted this on the MML thread, in case you think you are having Deja Vu...)

 

https://www.railjournal.com/infrastructure/british-electrification-costs-could-be-cut-by-50-says-report/

 

[Edwin_m]

6 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

Not sure if this has been posted before, so apols if so, but this report seems to indicate that per single track mile electrification costs on GWEP have plummeted back to what they claim is an efficient level. It also claims that per mile costs on the MML electrification programme have been as high as the highest costs on GWEP. Interesting. (Incidentally, I have also posted this on the MML thread, in case you think you are having Deja Vu...)

 

https://www.railjournal.com/infrastructure/british-electrification-costs-could-be-cut-by-50-says-report/

 

I believe this is a misquote.  As the error apparently relates more to the MML I have posted the details on that thread:

 

[caradoc]

At last ! An electric train has reached Oxford ! (although not sadly under its own power) - A Class 319 stabled in the Up Carriage Sidings today. Perhaps it will be there until the wires reach it ?

 

[Mike Storey]

On 28/07/2019 at 00:33, Edwin_m said:

I believe this is a misquote.  As the error apparently relates more to the MML I have posted the details on that thread:

 

 

True, for the MML costs, as you have pointed out. But the news that GWEP costs have returned to an "efficient" level is pretty interesting (and which appears to be true?). That is even more fascinating given the reportedly haphazard progress of the remaining work. So, one might conclude that there is method is what at first glance, appeared to be madness?

[Banger Blue]

1 hour ago, caradoc said:

At last ! An electric train has reached Oxford ! (although not sadly under its own power) - A Class 319 stabled in the Up Carriage Sidings today. Perhaps it will be there until the wires reach it ?

 

 

319439, it was hauled there by Rail Operations Group (Class 37) last Friday, from Reading TCD. It should remain at Oxford until called forward for conversion to a 769.

One of 439’s stablemates 319449 was recently in action carrying out Driver training runs between Reading & Didcot Parkway.

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

True, for the MML costs, as you have pointed out. But the news that GWEP costs have returned to an "efficient" level is pretty interesting (and which appears to be true?). That is even more fascinating given the reportedly haphazard progress of the remaining work. So, one might conclude that there is method is what at first glance, appeared to be madness?

I have had the impression from personal observation that the progress of work in South Wales has been considerably less haphazard than the way work was carried out east of Swindon (and east of Didcot in particular).  Things also appeared better organised between Wootton Bassett and Stoke Gifford although my sightings of works there was not frequent. 

 

The big question now - according to some sources - is the state of the overhead conductor in the Severn Tunnel which allegedly has again suffered corrosion problems to the extent that further remedial work is needed.

[D1059]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

I have had the impression from personal observation that the progress of work in South Wales has been considerably less haphazard than the way work was carried out east of Swindon (and east of Didcot in particular).  Things also appeared better organised between Wootton Bassett and Stoke Gifford although my sightings of works there was not frequent. 

 

The big question now - according to some sources - is the state of the overhead conductor in the Severn Tunnel which allegedly has again suffered corrosion problems to the extent that further remedial work is needed.

 

Maybe they should take a leaf out of the modellers handbook and only use nickel silver 

[jim.snowdon]

33 minutes ago, D1059 said:

 

Maybe they should take a leaf out of the modellers handbook and only use nickel silver 

Or avoided the use of aluminium, especially in direct contact with copper, in the first place. I'd take a bit of convincing that there were no other practical options.

 

Jim

[62613]

43 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

Or avoided the use of aluminium, especially in direct contact with copper, in the first place. I'd take a bit of convincing that there were no other practical options.

 

Jim

 

Another method might be to put some sort of insulating material between the copper and the aluminium, if that's possible.

 

[St. Simon]

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

the overhead conductor in the Severn Tunnel which allegedly has again suffered corrosion problems to the extent that further remedial work is needed.

 

The problem hasn't been corrosion., that's all I can say for the moment (I think)

 

Simon

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, St. Simon said:

 

The problem hasn't been corrosion., that's all I can say for the moment (I think)

 

Simon

 

It doesn't have to be corrosion that causes problems - wasn't there an issue back in the 1960s with soot from steam locomotives reducing the insulating properties of WCML OLE insulators by dumping a load of carbon (which is electrically conductive - hence its use in electric motor brushes) over them.

 

Given (i)  the amount of soot that musty have accumulate in the Severn tunnel over the years and (ii) the amount of water ingress in place then its quite possible that the same problems (i.e. insulators not insulating) is occurring.

[jamie92208]

There is an item ib the latest Modern Railways, page 16 about the delay ib ergising the wires. Apparently the copper contact wire has been replaced with aluminium because of bimetallic corrosion between rhe copper contact wire and the Aluminium conductor rail. They have apparently also had problems with the earth straps, which will need replacing with improved anti corrosion  sealing. Also the 14km of conductor bar need a thorough clean.

 

Jamie

[jim.snowdon]

4 hours ago, St. Simon said:

 

The problem hasn't been corrosion., that's all I can say for the moment (I think)

 

Simon

That's not what I had heard, and aluminium in wet tunnels, especially with any sea water leakage, is not a good idea. Time was when it would have been done with conventionally suspended copper wire.

 

Jim

[jonny777]

Goodness. Cloak and dagger stuff on the railways. Who would have thought it. 

 

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

That's not what I had heard, and aluminium in wet tunnels, especially with any sea water leakage, is not a good idea. Time was when it would have been done with conventionally suspended copper wire.

 

Jim

Not much in the way of sea water in the Severn Tunnel Jim - the tunnel itself is pretty watertight and the main water entering it is ground water under the landward parts which, of course, runs downhill and is then pumped out.   The problem in the Severn Tunnel is the atmosphere which while it doesn't really feel damp does have a moisture content and that has always caused trouble with electrickery.  That is why the Intermediate Block Signals were removed not too long after the war - May 1947 (I've got the Notice somewhere for their introduction during the war).  Having had the problem once the WR set to and did it again in 1969 when intermediate stop signals were installed in the Tunnel as part of Newport resignalling extension through to Pilning  - after numerous track circuit problems the signals were again removed and the track circuits were replaced with axle counters.

 

I'm not sure what happens in the Channel Tunnel which does have water leakage under the sea (I've even seen puddles in the four foot in the Channel Tunnel) but not only does the traction current work ok but the TVM does too.  However there is a lot more room for the air to move in this tunnel which might well make a difference and there is no noticeable damp feeling in the air.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

 

 

 

1

18 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Also the 14km of conductor bar need a thorough clean.

 

 

 

That'll use up a lot of PECO track rubbers then.....

[Fat Controller]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Not much in the way of sea water in the Severn Tunnel Jim - the tunnel itself is pretty watertight and the main water entering it is ground water under the landward parts which, of course, runs downhill and is then pumped out.   The problem in the Severn Tunnel is the atmosphere which while it doesn't really feel damp does have a moisture content and that has always caused trouble with electrickery.  That is why the Intermediate Block Signals were removed not too long after the war - May 1947 (I've got the Notice somewhere for their introduction during the war).  Having had the problem once the WR set to and did it again in 1969 when intermediate stop signals were installed in the Tunnel as part of Newport resignalling extension through to Pilning  - after numerous track circuit problems the signals were again removed and the track circuits were replaced with axle counters.

 

I'm not sure what happens in the Channel Tunnel which does have water leakage under the sea (I've even seen puddles in the four foot in the Channel Tunnel) but not only does the traction current work ok but the TVM does too.  However there is a lot more room for the air to move in this tunnel which might well make a difference and there is no noticeable damp feeling in the air.

The wettest bit I've encountered is just inside the UK Portal, at Holywell; not surprising with a name like that. During construction, there were occasions, after heavy rain, when it came up to axle level. 

[Titan]

21 hours ago, St. Simon said:

 

The problem hasn't been corrosion., that's all I can say for the moment (I think)

 

Simon

 

16 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

That's not what I had heard, and aluminium in wet tunnels, especially with any sea water leakage, is not a good idea. Time was when it would have been done with conventionally suspended copper wire.

 

Jim

 

The original problem was most certainly corrosion. In fact it was extremely severe, I have seen the pictures and it had to be seen to be believed!  I am not aware of what the current problem is.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Titan

[Northroader]

I suppose it can be solved in the same way as Steventon Bridge has been solved.

[Edwin_m]

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

I'm not sure what happens in the Channel Tunnel which does have water leakage under the sea (I've even seen puddles in the four foot in the Channel Tunnel) but not only does the traction current work ok but the TVM does too.  However there is a lot more room for the air to move in this tunnel which might well make a difference and there is no noticeable damp feeling in the air.

I can't imagine the amount of water coming into the Channel Tunnel is anywhere near what enters the Severn Tunnel, and it also has the benefit of a modern ventilation system that should clear away any humidity.  It also has a traditional contact wire rather than overhead rail, so whever has caused problems under the Severn wouldn't be present. 

[jamie92208]

34 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

I can't imagine the amount of water coming into the Channel Tunnel is anywhere near what enters the Severn Tunnel, and it also has the benefit of a modern ventilation system that should clear away any humidity.  It also has a traditional contact wire rather than overhead rail, so whever has caused problems under the Severn wouldn't be present. 

I suppose with the benefit of hindsight a test portion should have been erected and watched for potential degradation.

 

Jamie

 

[Edwin_m]

2 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

I suppose with the benefit of hindsight a test portion should have been erected and watched for potential degradation.

At the time they may have expected it to be in service much more quickly, so they would have had to erect all of it before the degradation became apparent.  This might also have reduced the rate of degradation, if it's related to the presence of disel exhaust which will be somewhat less when it goes live.  However even if the degradation correlates absolutely with exposure to diesel fumes the fact it's having problems after three years or so means it's unlikely it would have reached its design life. 

[talisman56]

On our day trip out, I had ample opportunity to eyeball the electrification progress between Patchway and Newport; it appears that the knitting is all present and correct until the triangular junction just outside Newport to the east of the station. The north to east single line curve at that junction does not have anything electricity-based on it, the north to west double-track curve does, apparently up to, or just after where the n-e curve joins it.

 

From the triangular junction in to Newport, there is catenary on all running lines, but while most of the register arms (?) do have a wire connected, there are some that don't; these appear to be the ones associated with crossovers, etc. Platform 4 at Newport does have a complete set of wired catenary, platform 3 has all the metalwork but no wiring; I didn't have a chance to investigate 1 or 2 as our inbound train was so late that our connection time was dangerously close to being negative minutes.

 

We needn't have worried, though, as within three refreshes of the display board the 16.40 to Paddington went from 'on time' to 12 minutes down.  What followed was the sound of a timetabled service gently unravelling; a Cheltenham service cancelled, a Chester service arriving late and then sitting in the platform for an inordinately long time and the following service being replatformed. The replatformed service being announced as the next service on platform 3, only for the regular announcement of the Paddington service which should have been next; announcements being cut off in their prime for announcements notifying of services being late, which were then cut-off for more such announcements... We eventually got a service in the Bristol direction, we didn't care which as long as we could get a train from either Parkway or Temple Meads back to Yatton.

Edited August 7, 2019 by talisman56
correction of spolling mistooks