GWML Electification

[simon47603]

When is the Swansea to Cardiff Section due to be electrified?

 

I thought that this was going to be the first section completed, as it was planned to use the area to test the trains and run them in ready for the entire route being electrified?

 

Simon

[jamie92208]

When is the Swansea to Cardiff Section due to be electrified?

 

I thought that this was going to be the first section completed, as it was planned to use the area to test the trains and run them in ready for the entire route being electrified?

 

Simon

I think that that was an idea floated in one or two magazines that the Swansea Cardiff saection would be an ideal place to bed in and commission the new electrification factory train.   I bel;ive that there are still some funding issues to resolve in terms of which bits are paid for by which department.

 

Jamie

[96701]

My take on the electrification of the railways in South Wales is that London - Cardiff will be electrified by 2017, extended to Swansea by 2018 with the 'row' being about the funding of the Valley Lines.

[Fat Controller]

My take on the electrification of the railways in South Wales is that London - Cardiff will be electrified by 2017, extended to Swansea by 2018 with the 'row' being about the funding of the Valley Lines.

That would seem logical, as it would allow a gradual migration westwards of electric traction, rather than having an isolated enclave in South Wales. The 'factory train'- actually, there seem to be several- is already working on the London end.

The controversy at the western end is about who funds the Valley Lines electrification; Westminster or Cardiff.

[Edwin_m]

Didn't Cardiff-Bridgend via the main line get counted as part of the Valley lines for some reason?  Meaning that if they can't resolve the funding Bridgend to Swansea will be pretty useless. 

[96701]

Didn't Cardiff-Bridgend via the main line get counted as part of the Valley lines for some reason?  Meaning that if they can't resolve the funding Bridgend to Swansea will be pretty useless. 

Nope. Vale of Glamorgan Cardiff - Bridgend via Barry is part of the Valley Line scheme, but it is often used as a diversionary route, so it'd make sense to me for it to be done with the main line, but what do I know?

[br2975]

Nope. Vale of Glamorgan Cardiff - Bridgend via Barry is part of the Valley Line scheme, but it is often used as a diversionary route, so it'd make sense to me for it to be done with the main line, but what do I know?

 

What we do know is there's a lot of petulent mud slinging between Cardiff Bay & Westminster

 

Nothing new there then.

 

Brian R

 

PS

I was the first paying customer at Fairwater when the City Line passenger service was introduced in Oct. 1987 - I never thought that would happen, I suspect a long wait is in store to catch the first electric service from the same station ............... even longer for a metro train to the M4 Junction 33 Park & Ride on the former Llantrisant No.1 Branch .......................... the Cardiff LDP (Local Development Plan) may mention it, but even a crocodile would find it hard to swallow !

Edited August 18, 2014 by br2975

[Xerces Fobe2]

 

This photo was taken the morning near Burnham Bucks Station  and shows one of the mountings for the OHLE gantries. The process appears to be a 3 stage one drill hole, insert mounting part way, pile drive mounting down which can take a couple of weekends to complete. This process does not appear to be being carried out in any logical sequence however my guess this posts  are only in certain places and  are seated well int the ground in areas which a vulnerable to subsidence.

 

 

XF

Edited August 21, 2014 by Xerces Fobe2

[Southernman46]

The whole scheme is running late and they are working wherever there are currently planned possession opportunities hence the apparent haphazard spread of work.................not getting in the way of the rest of us at all  

[The Stationmaster]

GWML Catenary Post Mounting LR.jpg

 

This photo was taken the morning near Burnham Bucks Station  and shows one of the mountings for the OHLE gantries. The process appears to be a 3 stage one drill hole, insert mounting part way, pile drive mounting down which can take a couple of weekends to complete. This process does not appear to be being carried out in any logical sequence however my guess this posts  are only in certain places and  are seated well int the ground in areas which a vulnerable to subsidence.

 

 

XF

To the casual observer the process with these foundation tubes seems very odd.  Between Reading and Didcot quite a few have been installed but every time I pass there still seem to be odd ones sticking up out of the ground, some missing completely and then the next one along already has the mast erected on it - quite why it's done that way I don't know but it does seem a bit hit & miss.

 

And it's going to get very interesting between Taplow and Maidenhead - I think they might need some very long tubes there!

[Southernman46]

Yes - longer tubes than first planned for in many places and that's been part of the delay issue

Edited August 21, 2014 by Southernman46

[The Stationmaster]

Yes - longer tubes than first planned for in many places and that's been part of the delay issue

Now I could have told them that - and could probably have charged them for the pleasure of doing so  (there are several places where the railway is not only on embankment but where the ground on which the embankment sits is rather soft and inclined to move every now & then -sometimes in places where you might not expect it)

[Titan]

GWML Catenary Post Mounting LR.jpg

 

This photo was taken the morning near Burnham Bucks Station  and shows one of the mountings for the OHLE gantries. The process appears to be a 3 stage one drill hole, insert mounting part way, pile drive mounting down which can take a couple of weekends to complete. This process does not appear to be being carried out in any logical sequence however my guess this posts  are only in certain places and  are seated well int the ground in areas which a vulnerable to subsidence.

 

 

XF

Pretty much, the hole is in fact a 'trial hole' to double check for obstructions before the pile goes in. It is dug down manually to a depth of one meter, and then a CAT (Cable Avoidance Tool) scan is done at the bottom. Once the all clear is given then the pile can be driven in. Most are 7 or more meters long depending on the geology and will comprise of two sections bolted together. In the photo it looks like the top section (the top 1.5m is painted for corrosion resistance) has just been bolted to the already well driven in bottom section and is awaiting to be driven down to the final finish level. The top section appears to be a 762mm diameter x 5.5m long according to the markings, so the total pile depth at this location is likely to be over 8 meters. It seems that there are also lines drawn at 1m intervals, presumably as an aid to the piling team. I expect the top line corresponds to the final finish level.  It is the standard foundation type, so all masts will have it unless there is a particular reason why it cannot be used.  It is quite likely that the order they are put in depends on what lengths of pile are in stock at the compound!

Edited August 21, 2014 by Titan

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks Titan - the odd piles lying around or 'missing' are now explained.

 

Interesting that cable scan is down at 1 metre depth - there can't be many unmarked cables around within mast distance from cess side rail that are deeper than that (oops).

[Titan]

The usual procedure was just to dig down 1m, until they piled through some cables buried at 1.010m! They now CAT scan the bottom of the hole once dug...

[RJS1977]

Just a thought....

 

Given that the GW main line was originally broad gauge and conversion to standard gauge led to wider-than-usual spacings between the up and down lines, couldn't they put tandem masts up the middle? Cheaper for Network Rail because they'd only have half as many masts to install, and better for photographers because the masts wouldn't get in the way of so many photos!

[The Stationmaster]

Just a thought....

 

Given that the GW main line was originally broad gauge and conversion to standard gauge led to wider-than-usual spacings between the up and down lines, couldn't they put tandem masts up the middle? Cheaper for Network Rail because they'd only have half as many masts to install, and better for photographers because the masts wouldn't get in the way of so many photos!

The wider 6 foot only really applies in some station platforms as elsewhere the general impression i have is that the space went into the 10ft rather than the 6ft.  And of course where platforms were subsequently altered or widened there is a standard (to GW dimensions) 6ft.  Add to that the fact that a lot of the quadrupling was done with 'narrow gauge' (by GWR definition) track and dimensions and there isn't all that much available in terms of wide 6 foots.  *And even where they exist I wonder if a mast in them might be foul of the kinematic envelope at modern speeds?

[Southernman46]

As Mike correctly states..............

 

Nope - cos the structure clearance standard for newly installed structures doesn't allow it

Edited September 14, 2014 by Southernman46

[Xerces Fobe2]

The whole GWML Electrification Project appears to a fragmented and haphazard way to electrify a railway when compared to the slick way the WCML was electrified in the 1960's i remember the BICC electrification train installed masts at rapid pace along with the "knitting"

 

Is it me or have we gone backwards when it comes to installing new OHLE?

[ess1uk]

It does seem to be taking a long time.

[jamie92208]

The Midland's Lancaster Morecambe Heysham scheme took less than 2 years from board approval to trains running.   This included a 3 month period where the two engineers, Dalziel and sayers were touring abroad to choose a system.  They then designed everything from scratch including signal immunisation, eart bonding, OLE and the trains and from opening the whole system was over 97% reliable, and yes delay minutes were counted.   We do seem to have lost that sense of get up and go.  It can be done quickly, eg Crewe Kidsgrove  but overall everything seems to go at snails pace.  The Trans Pennine scheme was authorised over 2 years ago.  I attended a talk by somene from Network Rail over a year ago,which showed that the basic structure surveys had all been done adn the 6 (IIRC) main problem strutures idetified. Yet not a single mast has been planted so far.

 

Jamie

[The Stationmaster]

It was interesting, enroute to Coventry yesterday, to get a visual update between Reading and Didcot, then one to Oxford (where some preliminary digging at mast sites is now apparent).

Things have changed but overall the situation looks odd with foundation tubes still missing in places plus quite a few inserted to different depths and apparently stopped in midstream so to speak (rather obvious to me that it is more difficult to go through chalk but shouldn't that have been thought about?).  However a far, far bigger stack of material etc at Moreton Cutting (or whatever it is now called) so at least the means is coming forward if not actually going into position on site.

 

But some oddities apart from 'trouble with tubes' as on the new flyover at Reading the mast bases all appear to be precast and in situ but again the masts are on a sort of seemingly hit & miss basis - no doubt there is a reason but it certainly looks odd.

 

Also it seems any programme of cutting back vegetation around mast bases - assuming there is one - is more miss than hit notwithstanding what I know to be the availability of local contractors with their own qualified Lookoutmen etc.

 

So over all I'm not quite sure what the problem is - lack of resources, lack of the right resources, poor project management, or what?  With the railway part of the Reading station scheme there are clearly shortcomings in perway design and, in my view, project management on what is essentially a very straightforward but equally very big job (I noticed another bit of pointwork yesterday which is going to be a maintenance headache once in full use - unless there is a slue which looks unlikely to happen all the way from West Main to West Jcn - as it is sited on a curve when it could have easily been set back onto straight track.  No wonder soem of the WR's retired perway engineers scratch their heads when looking at it.  

 

If a preliminary drawing I saw yesterday for another potential scheme was accurate as far as line speeds are concerned I reckon HST/IEP timings between Reading & London will be back to diesel hydraulic levels at some future - designing for 90 mph in what is currently a stretch of 125 mph sounds to me a sort of lunacy; very odd ideas about after years of progressing to improve linespeeds and speed profiles.

[Southernman46]

Is it me or have we gone backwards when it comes to installing new OHLE?

Yes and no.

 

There has been an awful lot of talent and equipment lost to the industry and the privatisation has happened since those days - the only significant scheme being HS1 which used a lot of foreign expertise (the OLE is SNCF derived) and was quite frankly dead easy as it was new build without all those pesky trains inconveniencing things. Amey have developed and are trying a lot of new equipment and techniques which to be fair to us them were VERY late in being delivered so they lost a lot of their original programme and probably more importantly as a result the momentum of the project. They are currently working wherever there are planned possessions which is making it seem haphzard.

 

The NR possession planning process especially for abnormal possessions involving diversion and "bustitution" is lengthy and has taken time for Amey to get back into a more structured plan which is now starting to come on line. NR can't just say to the TOC's "now our Contractor can start work we'll have possessions there, there and there for this long now please"......................

 

The Swindon - Kemble re-doubling was severely delayed but fortunately not enough to impact on the GWML electrification which will rely on that project for planned diversions.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Southernman46

[The Stationmaster]

Yes and no.

 

There has been an awful lot of talent and equipment lost to the industry and the privatisation has happened since those days - the only significant scheme being HS1 which used a lot of foreign expertise (the OLE is SNCF derived) and was quite frankly dead easy as it was new build without all those pesky trains inconveniencing things. Amey have developed and are trying a lot of new equipment and techniques which to be fair to us them were VERY late in being delivered so they lost a lot of their original programme and probably more importantly as a result the momentum of the project. They are currently working wherever there are planned possessions which is making it seem haphzard.

 

The NR possession planning process especially for abnormal possessions involving diversion and "bustitution" is lengthy and has taken time for Amey to get back into a more structured plan which is now starting to come on line. NR can't just say to the TOC's "now our Contractor can start work we'll have possessions there, there and there for this long now please"......................

 

The Swindon - Kemble re-doubling was severely delayed but fortunately not enough to impact on the GWML electrification which will rely on that project for planned diversions.

Surely a lot of the electrification work, particularly 'mast planting' could be done inside Rules Of the Route Possessions - especially on the quadruple track sections.  I can readily understand that would also have to fit 'within Rules' (of The Route) possessions east of Maidenhead but it is still - I would have thought - relatively simple to give an 8 hour night time blockade of either the Mains or the Reliefs between Reading West Jcn/Scours Lane and Moreton Cutting/Didcot East where all the present work is in or adjacent to the cess.  (incidentally I see there are weekend 2 track timetable periods in the Rules from May 2015 but it seems a bit odd not to include week nights when such a timetable would be a simple matter with minimum impact on the TOCs). 

 

Understandably if Amey's programme has fallen apart/suffered delays for various reasons I can also understand that any catch up work has to be fitted onto their current scheduled work (unless they can find extra resources and I know, from elsewhere, of some of the manpower problems that involves) but again most of the possessions would have struck me as being readily available (or should have been readily available) within Rules if anything like the old system for RoTR is being followed. 

[lmsforever]

Lots of problems at Challow motorists most miffed at having to divert and causing problems for local people,when an item about the bridge was on Oxford Today the NR man gave many excuses about length of build.Is there an other way to do this build ie new bridge next to old as when the film was shown there seemed to a lot of space next to the existing bridge so could it have been done?