GWML Electification

[royaloak]

Pity of it is it will make the operating costs even worse.

dont go looking at the route it takes or who is driving the ECS.

 

Edit-

It aint GWR drivers.

Edited January 23, 2018 by royaloak

[Vanders]

I think so! It's not getting any prettier as it spreads westwards, after all!

 

Brunel's railway was to a great extent a work of art as well as engineering. The 21st century embellishments are simply hideous.

The railway isn't there to be a work of art. It's a functional thing. The catenary is designed to fulfill a function, which it will do better than the cheap knitting on the ECML which regularly comes down.

 

Besides which many landowners considered the railway a hideous scar on the landscape. Very few welcomed the construction of the GWML as a great work of art, visually.

[D854_Tiger]

I think so! It's not getting any prettier as it spreads westwards, after all!

 

Brunel's railway was to a great extent a work of art as well as engineering. The 21st century embellishments are simply hideous.

 

I'm not so sure, whatever else we might say about this GW electrification, it does look well engineered, and Brunel would have appreciated that.

 

Unlike other knitting patterns we could mention.

[Covkid]

dont go looking at the route it takes or who is driving the ECS.

 

Edit-

It aint GWR drivers.

 

 

Yes. Not sure how the GWR drivers' Council allowed that to slip by.

Wouldn't have happened at some other TOCs I am sure.

 

They will blame it on IET Training or Brexit or something !!!

Edited January 24, 2018 by Covkid

[royaloak]

Yes. Not sure how the GWR drivers' Council allowed that to slip by.

Wouldn't have happened at some other TOCs I am sure.

 

They will blame it on IET Training or Brexit or something !!!

Is the correct answer.

[The Stationmaster]

dont go looking at the route it takes or who is driving the ECS.

 

Edit-

It aint GWR drivers.

 

What - straight up and down between Paddington and Reading and back - I'm amazed it goes that way after all the alternative routes are much longer and could involve reversal unless it went via the Joint Line and came back off that via Oxford (which would ,make sense if there's a need to turn the train),

 

As for drivers I woudl have thought the answer ought to be blindingly obvious (especially judging by the number of Drivers I saw getting out of a Class 800 cab at Reading a week or two back) - GWR has a big training programme on its hands for Class 800 introduction and its hardly likely to take people on to cover for that and then make them redundant a year down the line.  Obvious thing to do - provided traction and Route knowledge is available - is to hire in until such time as training commitments at the London end scale back (and I'm assuming of course that 387 training is also complete).  The only GWR Drivers who could cover diesel loco work at that end will be London based men in any case as Reading lost their loco knowledge years ago.

[Banger Blue]

dont go looking at the route it takes or who is driving the ECS.

 

Edit-

It aint GWR drivers.

  

Yes. Not sure how the GWR drivers' Council allowed that to slip by.

Wouldn't have happened at some other TOCs I am sure.

 

They will blame it on IET Training or Brexit or something !!!

The route is pretty straight forward:

5C99 Reading TCD - Paddington via Up Relief

5A40 Paddington - Reading TCD via Down Relief

 

There are GWR 57 drivers involved but they are a bit of a scarce breed!!

[TheSignalEngineer]

Is there actualy a plan for this work or do they roll a dice as to were they will start actualy putting up the wires.?

If it's anything like West Coast Route Modernisation project in the early Railtrack days there was little appreciation amongst the "grown-ups" of that edifice as to how a railway was put together and even less idea of how track, signalling and electrification works affected each other. On top of that they had no idea of the true cost of what they had promised to the TOCs. It didn't make for efficient working on the shop floor.

[DavidB]

Looks as if things are still taking time to settle down in the London Division - this morning there were six 387s on Reading depot at 07:30, against a quoted requirement of 40/41 in service, and westbound 800s were leaving Reading on diesel power again. HST formations are looking very ragged too, with the loss of sets to Scotland. Can't be easy for the GWR staff at the moment.

[Banger Blue]

Looks as if things are still taking time to settle down in the London Division - this morning there were six 387s on Reading depot at 07:30, against a quoted requirement of 40/41 in service, and westbound 800s were leaving Reading on diesel power again. HST formations are looking very ragged too, with the loss of sets to Scotland. Can't be easy for the GWR staff at the moment.

The Hayes shuttles are diesel operated at the moment. The bay at Hayes is blocked to electric traction due to an issue with the OLE there (awaiting NR rectification) so not all 387 diagrams required. There were a couple stopped for Exam today and an 8 car was taken out of service after an ADD activation out on the mainline somewhere this morning.

 

I only saw one report of one 800 unit being restricted to diesel power today so most would (should ) be on the ‘leccy’.

[Mike Storey]

If it's anything like West Coast Route Modernisation project in the early Railtrack days there was little appreciation amongst the "grown-ups" of that edifice as to how a railway was put together and even less idea of how track, signalling and electrification works affected each other. On top of that they had no idea of the true cost of what they had promised to the TOCs. It didn't make for efficient working on the shop floor.

 

A popular view, I entirely concede, but a little harsh. Richard Middleton (who was at the time the Commercial Director, RT) put the Virgin deal together on the back of the WCML Upgrade. He was a senior BR engineer, originally civils but later multi-disciplinary, and then a Route Director (albeit ECML) with responsibilities covering infrastructure maintenance, renewal and new build, for some 23 years before attaining that position. So he did have some idea as to how a railway was put together. His main crimes were not being sufficiently critical of what the promoters of the "innovative" signalling fraternity were telling him, and being rather gung-ho about costs. It is absolutely true that there was insufficient, remaining, senior and experienced engineering expertise within RT HQ to challenge what he was being told at the time, and that is the primary cause of that fiasco. He later became their first Technical Director, and was allowed to recruit engineers back into the organisation as fast as he was able.

 

The lack of any meaningful cohort of engineering or project management expertise within RT HQ at the time of the WCML Upgrade does not correspond to the current situation with GWIP. We must look at other reasons for the current problems.

[royaloak]

  

The route is pretty straight forward:

5C99 Reading TCD - Paddington via Up Relief

5A40 Paddington - Reading TCD via Down Relief

 

There are GWR 57 drivers involved but they are a bit of a scarce breed!!

That has changed then, it went a more 'scenic' route to start with, every trip on the down and most trips on the up.

 

If GWR and ASLEF had got their arses in gear there shouldnt be any need to hire in, there are more than enough GWR drivers available to do everything else so why is the Sleeper ECS so 'special',it only goes an extra 40 miles compared to what it used to do but 'needs' outside drivers to work it, where are the drivers that used to work it?

 

Edit-

I see there are 2 Up paths, one takes 49 minutes (up relief), the other takes 180 minutes (via Oxford), the down path takes 155 minutes (down relief).

Edited January 25, 2018 by royaloak

[The Stationmaster]

That has changed then, it went a more 'scenic' route to start with, every trip on the down and most trips on the up.

 

If GWR and ASLEF had got their arses in gear there shouldnt be any need to hire in, there are more than enough GWR drivers available to do everything else so why is the Sleeper ECS so 'special',it only goes an extra 40 miles compared to what it used to do but 'needs' outside drivers to work it, where are the drivers that used to work it?

 

Edit-

I see there are 2 Up paths, one takes 49 minutes (up relief), the other takes 180 minutes (via Oxford), the down path takes 155 minutes (down relief).

 

So no doubt, as I said, there is an ability to turn it or perhaps to provide a diversionary route during possessions and problems.

 

interesting to hear the GWR have got lots of surplus Drivers while in the middle of a major training programme - not exactly what they were anticipating last year so no doubt there might be redundancies once the 80X training is finished after all.

[Banger Blue]

There might be “more than enough” / a surplus of drivers (not too sure of that!) but there doesn’t appear to be that many that sign the 57s.

 

The hire in driver is for the pilot loco. Usually the ECS move to Paddington has the two drivers with it. The ECS move to Reading may have both or just the one driver. Yesterday it was two, this morning it was just the one.

 

5C99 runs Reading TCD to Paddington Top ‘n’ tail.

1C99 Paddington to Penzance runs to Reading Top ‘n’ Tail.

At Reading, rear 57 drops off and runs L/E to the TCD (0C99), 1C99 continues to Penzance behind single 57 (GWR driver)

 

1A40 Penzance - Paddington runs to Reading with single 57 (GWR driver)

At Reading the L/E (now 0A40) comes off TCD and drops onto the rear of the sleeper stock, runs the rest of the way Top ‘n’ tail.

 

5A40 runs to Reading TCD Top ‘n’ tail.

 

Repeat!

Edited January 26, 2018 by Banger Blue

[caradoc]

Down in Oxford for a few days, did a trip up to London today and on the way back changed at Reading so I could sample a 387 to Didcot. Despite being shown with an electric 'flash' in the pocket timetable, what turned up was a 6-car Class 165 ! Still, at least the connection at Didcot for Oxford was cross-platform (4 to 5).

 

Noted that despite the postponement of wiring to Oxford, some work is still being done; Last summer a new trailing crossover was laid in south of Oxford station, and now a huge new signal gantry has been erected at the south end of the platforms; I presume this will carry, among other things, a main aspect signal to allow trains to depart from the Down platform (2, now 4) in the Up direction ? There is also a new canopy being built at the north end of platforms 2/3. 

[St. Simon]

Noted that despite the postponement of wiring to Oxford, some work is still being done; Last summer a new trailing crossover was laid in south of Oxford station, and now a huge new signal gantry has been erected at the south end of the platforms; I presume this will carry, among other things, a main aspect signal to allow trains to depart from the Down platform (2, now 4) in the Up direction ? There is also a new canopy being built at the north end of platforms 2/3.

 

Yep, a new signal will allow moves from Platform 4 in the Down Direction, it will also hold a signal for the new Platform 5 when that's built.

 

Simon

[Pandora]

A letter by Roger Ford of Modern Railways, published in the Financial Times today. Mr Ford points out the fractional   buying power of  money for railway hardware and software compared to  the 1980's, effectively   a six-fold reduction in purchasing power.

Mr Ford refers  to the  GWML project,  stating that railway electrification   is no longer affordable

Edited February 2, 2018 by Pandora

[jim.snowdon]

A letter by Roger Ford of Modern Railways, published in the Financial Times today. Mr Ford points out the fractional   buying power of  money for railway hardware and software compared to  the 1980's, effectively   a six-fold reduction in purchasing power.

Mr Ford refers  to the  GWML project,  stating that railway electrification   is no longer affordable

Judged solely by the carry on with the GW project, that might be true, but one of its other effects has been to overshadow the work that has been going on with electrification in the Northwest and in Scotland, which have been proceeding quietly and with much less fuss. The obvious inference is that it's not electrification that is the problem but the organisations involved in delivering it. Given the state of the country's railway industry currently, it might well have been better to have given the whole job to a company like Siemens, for example, with acceptance that if their equipment is good enough for DB and other railways, it is good enough for use in this country without further certification.

 

Jim

[The Stationmaster]

Judged solely by the carry on with the GW project, that might be true, but one of its other effects has been to overshadow the work that has been going on with electrification in the Northwest and in Scotland, which have been proceeding quietly and with much less fuss. The obvious inference is that it's not electrification that is the problem but the organisations involved in delivering it. Given the state of the country's railway industry currently, it might well have been better to have given the whole job to a company like Siemens, for example, with acceptance that if their equipment is good enough for DB and other railways, it is good enough for use in this country without further certification.

 

Jim

 

I think the big problem has been the gross mismanagement of the GWML electrification project with clearly inadequate costing in the first place, obvious shortcomings in design (again resulting in inaccurate costing), changes of method midstream due to either poor original decisions or lack of proper planning, atrocious possession management, abysmal use of possession availability (with the last two resulting no doubt in extra payments to train operators and yet more cost added to the project).  There has clearly been a major managerial failure within NR in terms of overseeing and monitoring the management of the project and project progress.  Plus what would appear to be a failure to understand the implications of the need to carry out other works, such as resignalling, in a timescale which matched available resources to the critical path for the overall project.  Even now with the overhead live and electric trains running east of Reading there are items of work which are outstanding and which can only be carried out with isolations - what sort of project manager allows a situation like that to develop?  There is surplus material dumped here there and everywhere, lineside worksites not cleared and with buildings still on hire long after commissioning - yet again a simple failure to get hold of the project and actually run it.

 

Hopefully things have been better managed elsewhere on NR and it certainly looked at times as if some contractors involved with Crossrail works east of Maidenhead had a better idea of what they were about than the shambles which continues further west.  I'd love t know how often the project management team have actually walked, or even travelled by train, through the site of their great endeavour.

[caradoc]

Other electrification projects seem to have gone OK, eg Liverpool to Wigan and Manchester, and in Scotland the Springburn/Gartsherrie to Cumbernauld and Rutherglen to Whifflet routes. Even the Glasgow Queen St/Newbridge Jc progressed albeit with some setbacks, but nothing on the scale of the GW scheme. The issues have gone on for so long now, and the project seems still so far from completion, even in its truncated form, that it has undoubtedly poisoned the well for future main line electrification in the UK.

 

I noted on a trip from Oxford to Paddington last week a number of Class 387 sets stabled at Reading Depot and West Ealing; While some of these may well have been used during the peak, the 45 sets that Great Western has seems far in excess of what is required for the present electrically operated service. What a shame, not to mention waste.

Edited February 2, 2018 by caradoc

[robertcwp]

Other electrification projects seem to have gone OK, eg Liverpool to Wigan and Manchester, and in Scotland the Springburn/Gartsherrie to Cumbernauld and Rutherglen to Whifflet routes. Even the Glasgow Queen St/Newbridge Jc progressed albeit with some setbacks, but nothing on the scale of the GW scheme. The issues have gone on for so long now, and the project seems still so far from completion, even in its truncated form, that it has undoubtedly poisoned the well for future main line electrification in the UK.

 

I noted on a trip from Oxford to Paddington last week a number of Class 387 sets stabled at Reading Depot and West Ealing; While some of these may well have been used during the peak, the 45 sets that Great Western has seems far in excess of what is required for the present electrically operated service. What a shame, not to mention waste.

Most of the 387 fleet is scheduled for use in the peaks but there have been some diesel substitutions recently due to problems with the Hayes bay platform. Even though Crossrail will displace some of them, and there may be a few spare due to the decision not to wire to Basingstoke, Henley and Windsor, utilisation will go up again when the wires reach Newbury and eventually Oxford.

 

Not all other schemes have gone to plan. The Bolton line is seriously delayed.

[Banger Blue]

Other electrification projects seem to have gone OK, eg Liverpool to Wigan and Manchester, and in Scotland the Springburn/Gartsherrie to Cumbernauld and Rutherglen to Whifflet routes. Even the Glasgow Queen St/Newbridge Jc progressed albeit with some setbacks, but nothing on the scale of the GW scheme. The issues have gone on for so long now, and the project seems still so far from completion, even in its truncated form, that it has undoubtedly poisoned the well for future main line electrification in the UK.

 

I noted on a trip from Oxford to Paddington last week a number of Class 387 sets stabled at Reading Depot and West Ealing; While some of these may well have been used during the peak, the 45 sets that Great Western has seems far in excess of what is required for the present electrically operated service. What a shame, not to mention waste.

“Far in excess of what is required and a waste” ????

 

You are right with the fact the sets would have been used during the peak and they will be back out for the evening peak services.

 

At the moment there are 44 units (387174 is still to arrive) for 39 diagrams. That leaves 5 units able to be stopped for routine exams (GWR 387s are currently on time based and mileage based exams) and any faults that will and do arise from daily service.

 

Originally there were 41 diagrams (at the moment those two extra diagrams are being covered by Turbos). There is not a day I’ve been on shift since the EMU introduction that we have had spare units sat round doing all.

 

Taking a snapshot as you whizz past Reading Depot and claiming there are excess units and being a shameful waste is a tadge unfair and misleading!

 

Edited for some dodgy maths and getting my figures right!

Edited February 3, 2018 by Banger Blue

[royaloak]

Judged solely by the carry on with the GW project, that might be true, but one of its other effects has been to overshadow the work that has been going on with electrification in the Northwest and in Scotland, which have been proceeding quietly and with much less fuss. The obvious inference is that it's not electrification that is the problem but the organisations involved in delivering it. Given the state of the country's railway industry currently, it might well have been better to have given the whole job to a company like Siemens, for example, with acceptance that if their equipment is good enough for DB and other railways, it is good enough for use in this country without further certification.

 

Jim

The GW electrification started off badly with the DaFT expecting NR to hit the ground running, but there werent the required numbers of qualified engineers available so it started off really slowly as people were trained and got the necessary experience, (in my opinion) the slow start was one of the main reasons the costs spiralled.

 

The annoying bit is that it was going really well with some of the delays and cost overruns being reduced when that #@£$%& Grayling pulled the plug!

Now it is going to cost millions when it is restarted to train up more staff because the present ones will have moved on to other things and most wont be interested in going back to something which ended so badly for them.

Edited February 2, 2018 by royaloak

[George Leacon]

The GW electrification started off badly with the DaFT expecting NR to hit the ground running, but there werent the required numbers of qualified engineers available so it started off really slowly as people were trained and got the necessary experience, (in my opinion) the slow start was one of the main reasons the costs spiralled.

 

The annoying bit is that it was going really well with some of the delays and cost overruns being reduced when that #@£$%& Grayling pulled the plug!

Now it is going to cost millions when it is restarted to train up more staff because the present ones will have moved on to other things and most wont be interested in going back to something which ended so badly for them.

 

Plus the loss of economies of scale, re-planning, etc.  

 

That announcement came about the same time the Government publicly committed to the end of fossil fuel road vehicle production by 2040. True genius.  

[caradoc]

“Far in excess of what is required and a waste” ????

 

You are right with the fact the sets would have been used during the peak and they will be back out for the evening peak services.

 

At the moment there are 44 units (387174 is still to arrive) for 38 diagrams. That leaves 5 units able to be stopped for routine exams (GWR 387s are currently on time based and mileage based exams) and any faults that will and do arise from daily service.

 

Originally there were 41 diagrams (and at the moment two of those three extra diagrams are being covered by Turbos). There is not a day I’ve been on shift since the EMU introduction that we have had spare units sat round doing ###### all.

 

Taking a snapshot as you whizz past Reading Depot and claiming there are excess units and being a shameful waste is a tadge unfair and misleading!

 

Not wishing to dispute what you say Banger Blue, you obviously have in-depth knowledge of the workings, but if there are 38, or 41 diagrams, for the 387s now, before Newbury and Oxford are wired, for 45 sets, how are they going to manage when those additional sections are electrified ? Are there long enough turnrounds at Reading and Didcot which would accomodate the extra time required to go to Newbury and Oxford, and the turn round there ? Or will this be solved when some of the 387 workings are displaced by Crossrail ?