GWML Electification

[The Stationmaster]

Coming back from Paddington today, I formed the opinion that most of the masts, cross arms, and register bits and bobs were in place between West Drayton and Slough, and a stretch of contact wire up on the up relief just west of Iver. There was also an impressive stretch with wires up on three lines (?four, I couldn't see through the roof!) between Burnham and Taplow. The further west from Maidenhead things fizzle out. Beyond Reading Mike gave a detailed report quite recently. The bridge at Wantage Road now has all the girders across the tracks, with decking, and shaping nicely.

 

The stretch of catenary between Burnham and Taplow is (or rather still was when I last passed that way a few weeks ago) a single section and is on all four roads.  It was installed over the Christmas/New Year holiday period when a two track timetable was running for a whole week (plus various blockades at Christmas/New Year).  The stretch just west of Iver is 'new' - or rather wasn't there when I last passed that way.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Several photos of bridge work in progress or completed.

(Link picked up from the RailUK forum....)

 

https://www.facebook.com/604788489597378/photos/pcb.1001534049922818/1001531936589696/?type=3&theater

 

 

 

.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Ron Ron Ron

[Southernman46]

Yes, definitely in that state when I went down to Trainwest a couple of weeks back.  I wonder if in respect of that May date we should read either Foxhall Jcn or Milton (almost) where it said Steventon? 

55m 40ch is the mileage quoted

[Peter Kazmierczak]

 

55m 40ch is the mileage quoted

 

That's on the London side of the overbridge at Steventon, about a quarter of the way along the down goods loop between Milton and Steventon.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Peter Kazmierczak

[The Stationmaster]

 

 

That's on the London side of the overbridge at Steventon, about a quarter of the way along the down goods loop between Milton and Steventon.

 

Actually it is about a mile short of Steventon.  Steventon station was at 56m42ch and the Down Loop exit is at 56m 32ch which together put the bridge pretty close to 56m40ch.  The A34 bridge is at 55m74ch and the Down Loop entrance is at 55m19ch which the newer of the Milton signalboxes was at 55m07ch (the original was at 56m67ch).  So in fact the section will terminate at Milton (although it is presumably no longer an official location) which more or less matches the location to which masts, and most booms, are already in place.

 

It would be interesting to know the Tilehurst mileage as well to see if it is east of the currently installed catenary which finishes at Purley (rather than Tilehurst at 38m52ch - and in fact judging by the various booms I think the next catenary section east of the that already in place will end somewhere around 38m40ish.

[Zomboid]

I imagine the initially energised wiring will either get as far as the sidings at Reading, or to a convenient turn back point short of there, so the trains can run to/from Didcot. Tilehurst has the necessary turn back on the slow lines, don't know about the fasts.

[The Stationmaster]

I imagine the initially energised wiring will either get as far as the sidings at Reading, or to a convenient turn back point short of there, so the trains can run to/from Didcot. Tilehurst has the necessary turn back on the slow lines, don't know about the fasts.

 

You can only reverse on the Down Relief Line at Tilehurst so a train from Didcot would have to go further east in order to reverse.  

 

The current (yesterday) state of play with structures and fittings on them immediately east of Tilehurst is little different from what it was several weeks ago - the missing booms just off the east end of the platforms are now in place (as of a couple of weeks back) as are some if not all at the station.  Beyond there it appears nothing additional has been done through Tilehurst East Junction with no new register arms or other fittings added for, probably, the best part of a month and the booms adjacent to the east end of the connections still bare of all fittings.  However what is present is booms on the Relief Lines all the way through to West Junction and beyond while they go to the foot of the flyover on the Mains.  

 

Thus with a lot of concentrated work effort the fittings could be put in place to allow eastwards extension of the catenary but to do the Relief Lines on the Reading side of Tilehurst East Jcn/Scours Lane will require blockades that will entail diversion of some Southampton container trains - either by reversal somewhere at Reading (if anywhere is long enough?) or via Acton due to the inability to now get from Oxford Road Curve onto the Mains without going over the Reliefs first.

[PenrithBeacon]

What is a 'Bang Road', please.

 

Regards

[The Stationmaster]

What is a 'Bang Road', please.

 

Regards

 

Internal railway slang for running in the wrong direction on a running line (but not when single line working).  It came into more widespread use with the introduction of reversible signalling (which is also know in some circles as 'bang road signalling/bang road working' or 'that train is running bang road').  The phrase has been in use on what was the WR for about 20 years and is probably used elsewhere

[PenrithBeacon]

Internal railway slang for running in the wrong direction on a running line (but not when single line working). It came into more widespread use with the introduction of reversible signalling (which is also know in some circles as 'bang road signalling/bang road working' or 'that train is running bang road'). The phrase has been in use on what was the WR for about 20 years and is probably used elsewhere

Thanks

[Banger Blue]

Posted on RailUK Forum was this link to a photo on Flickr showing one of the new Class 387's in the Bombardier factory in Derby. Looks to be in GWR Green:

 

https://flic.kr/p/GnBvA9

[wombatofludham]

Posted on RailUK Forum was this link to a photo on Flickr showing one of the new Class 387's in the Bombardier factory in Derby. Looks to be in GWR Green:

 

https://flic.kr/p/GnBvA9

 

It does look very dark, almost black, but at least the silver doors show up better.  Perhaps Bombardier have developed a new product, the Class 387 Electrohearse.

[Fat Controller]

It does look very dark, almost black, but at least the silver doors show up better.  Perhaps Bombardier have developed a new product, the Class 387 Electrohearse.

And the latest news from Waterloo- rewiring for 25kV overhead, and reopening of the Necropolis Railway.

[St. Simon]

Posted on RailUK Forum was this link to a photo on Flickr showing one of the new Class 387's in the Bombardier factory in Derby. Looks to be in GWR Green:

 

https://flic.kr/p/GnBvA9

Hi,

 

Not for GWR, the GWR ones are cascades from Thameslink, not new build, plus it's too dark to be GWR Green.

 

Simon

[phil-b259]

Hi,

 

Not for GWR, the GWR ones are cascades from Thameslink, not new build, plus it's too dark to be GWR Green.

 

Simon

 

Actually GWR will be getting some new 387s (4 IIRC) simply because the current 387 fleet temporarily on hire to Thameslink* is slightly too small for the future GWR fleet requirements.

 

*(covering for the late running Siemens stock plus the transfer of some 319s to the North West so they would actually have something to run under their new OHLE)

 

The 4 brand new FGW ones are I believe coming from the speculative build of 80 units ordered by the ROSCO Porterbrook on their own initiative (thus disproving one of the DfTs often quoted complaints that ROSCOS are not investing enough) who could see further electric stock being needed. As such its entirely possible the Green + Silver ones pictured at Derby could be the extras for the GWML.

 

On the future of the rest of the speculative batch, C2C are apparently getting 16 or so so as to boast train frequencies and lengths as part of their franchise commitment.

Edited April 25, 2016 by phil-b259

[James90012]

Not quite right I'm afraid.

 

GWR have 8 new builds coming,to be joined with the 387/1s from Thameslink.

 

The Porterbrook 387s are additional still - and out of the 20 C2C are taking 6 4 car sets.

[phil-b259]

Not quite right I'm afraid.

 

GWR have 8 new builds coming,to be joined with the 387/1s from Thameslink.

 

The Porterbrook 387s are additional still - and out of the 20 C2C are taking 6 4 car sets.

 

Yes I made a mistake with the numbers - its 80 vehicles, not units - but I was unaware the GWR units were in addition to (as opposed to part of) the Porterbrook order

Edited April 25, 2016 by phil-b259

[Banger Blue]

The 387s coming from Thameslink to GWR are on hold at the moment as Thameslink can't / don't want to release them. (issues with their new stock ????). There was something in an internal newsletter in the past week or so that mentioned the first 387s to run would be in GW livery.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Banger Blue

[modfather]

I suspect that they are for GWR. the initial cascades sets are undergoing testing now and should be in revenue traffic by September from memory.

[exet1095]

Hi,

 

Not for GWR, the GWR ones are cascades from Thameslink, not new build, plus it's too dark to be GWR Green.

 

Simon

GWR is getting 8 new ones, as well as the cascades. Livery looks right to me too.

[surfsup]

The 387s coming from Thameslink to GWR are on hold at the moment as Thameslink can't / don't want to release them. (issues with their new stock ????). There was something in an internal newsletter in the past week or so that mentioned the first 387s to run would be in GW livery.

As well as the Class 700 introduction, the original batch of 387s are also being modified by Bombardier as well prior to release to GW. Then they'll ultimately need 'desouthern-ising' at some point as well. This is also the reason why there is a GAT-EX 387 on hire to TSGN at the moment.

[phil-b259]

As well as the Class 700 introduction, the original batch of 387s are also being modified by Bombardier as well prior to release to GW. Then they'll ultimately need 'desouthern-ising' at some point as well. This is also the reason why there is a GAT-EX 387 on hire to TSGN at the moment.

All part of a DfT grand plan that has gone seriously wrong because of incompitance and procrastion by them / the Treasury. And some people still think nationalisation is the answer.

Edited April 26, 2016 by phil-b259

[Christopher125]

Yes I made a mistake with the numbers - its 80 vehicles, not units - but I was unaware the GWR units were in addition to (as opposed to part of) the Porterbrook order

 

IIRC these eight, plus the new Gatwick Express 387/2s, come from the Thameslink order for 387/1s which came with an option for further units. 

Edited April 26, 2016 by Christopher125

[159220]

All part of a DfT grand plan that has gone seriously wrong because of incompitance and procrastion by them / the Treasury. And some people still think nationalisation is the answer.

And nothing to do with the Class 700s initially being deemed by the unions as being un-safe and thus would not drive until the crash safety of the cab was proven? Then more significantly the interoperability between the train computer systems and track side equipment surrounding the door operation. I understand this specific issue around the doors has caused delay to the introduction of the Class 700s into service, now are reported to have been re-engineered / software corrected.

 

This delay to the roll-out programme of the Class 700s, has lead to the DfT requesting the transfer of the Class 387/1s to GWR to be deferred, and thus GWR now advising that their 8 x 4 car Class 387/3s currently under construction and to be delivered 'Summer' 2016 to be treated as the first Class 387s into the GWR franchise. Having been to Bombardier, Derby, recently I can confirm that the photo of the 387 is indeed the GWR 387/3 on the production line.

 

I would never say nationalisation is a good thing to support, but, I cannot see where the DfT have been incompetent or procrastination over the introduction of the GWR 387/1s? Seems firmly in Siemens inbox.

[Edwin_m]

I would never say nationalisation is a good thing to support, but, I cannot see where the DfT have been incompetent or procrastination over the introduction of the GWR 387/1s? Seems firmly in Siemens inbox.

I can't comment on the details but I think the gist is that the finance deal for the Thameslink trains, in the form required by DfT, took a lot longer to put together than expected, in the wake of the banking crisis.  This delayed the actual construction so 387s had to be ordered to fill the gap, and probably also there was less time to iron out the bugs.  By contrast the TfL-led procurement for Crossrail went much more smoothly.