GWML Electification

[43009]

By the way 800002 is going with GWR

[modfather]

Class 800 sets 800002 and 800004 carried out three nights of testing this week between North Pole and Bristol Temple Meads.

 

Virgin coloured 002 standards on Platform 9 at Temple Meads, on Friday 02nd September 2016.

002 is in hitachi house colours - 058 is in virgin Azusa colours.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Virgin coloured 002 standards on Platform 9 at Temple Meads, on Friday 02nd September 2016.

 

 

By the way 800002 is going with GWR

 

 

002 is in hitachi house colours - 058 is in virgin Azusa colours.

 

 

As stated already, 800002 has one driving car in a temporary red Hitachi promotional/launch livery.

It isn't in Virgin colours.

 

The Virgin "Azuma" (not Azusa) liveried train, is 800101 - a nine car Class 800.

This is in a temporary promotional/launch livery.

 

800004 is the GWR liveried 800.

The only one so far, to be seen in an "as delivered" paint/vinyl job.

 

 

..

[The Stationmaster]

Hi,

 

In relation to the sleeving, I attended a meeting during summer last year about a totally seperate project on Western where the OLE design team were present. During this meeting we discussed clearance for the OLE. They revealed that the standards had changed in summer last year to increase the clearance required in and around station areas.

 

I presume at this time the bridges for Tilehurst etc were probably still in the design stage, or maybe early construction phase, so the change in clearance requirements may have delayed the installation and the sleeving may be a way of getting around a change in standards quickly and effectively. 

 

Of course, I can only guess at it, but that might explain the sleeving

 

Simon

 

I had heard that there were 'problems' with the Tilehurst footbridge and the contractors were involved in an awful lot of messing about on the site (although that might have been the problem of course?) but it definitely does not feel as high the one at Twyford (where my arthritic knee prefers me to use the lift, but it is quite happy with the one at Tilehurst).

 

Coming back to the insulation I can see the point of it as explained by Titan which confirms my assumption for its presence but the odd thing is that it has also appeared under some electrification structures as well as under the bridge at Tilehurst station.

[Zomboid]

Electrification structures are earthed, just like the bridge. So if the live conductor is sufficiently close to the metalwork it'll need insulating. Not every wire has registration on every structure.

[Titan]

Electrification structures are earthed, just like the bridge. So if the live conductor is sufficiently close to the metalwork it'll need insulating. Not every wire has registration on every structure.

 

The thing is a new electrification structure should not have earthed metalwork anywhere near the wiring, let alone close enough to warrant extra insulation. If it has, something has gone seriously wrong in the design and/or construction process.

[Richard E]

The thing is a new electrification structure should not have earthed metalwork anywhere near the wiring, let alone close enough to warrant extra insulation. If it has, something has gone seriously wrong in the design and/or construction process.

Surely the masts/gantries are earthed?

[Titan]

Surely the masts/gantries are earthed?

 

They are, but they should be at least 600mm from the wires so no insulation on the wires is required.

Edited September 2, 2016 by Titan

[Zomboid]

The thing is a new electrification structure should not have earthed metalwork anywhere near the wiring, let alone close enough to warrant extra insulation. If it has, something has gone seriously wrong in the design and/or construction process.

It's certainly surprising if it is the case, but it's not impossible that something had to be modified once construction was under way.

I've not seen the structure in question, and wouldn't know what I was looking at if I did.

[RJS1977]

They are, but they should be at least 600mm from the wires so no insulation on the wires is required.

 

We're being told the electricity can jump at least nine feet....

[Titan]

We're being told the electricity can jump at least nine feet....

 

Sounds like a misinterpretation of the 9 foot rule - when working near live OLE you must be a minimum of nine feet away at all times, that does not mean electricity will jump nine feet, it is just to give an adequate margin of safety for humans. Permanently fixed earthed metalwork can safely be a lot closer, as it wont accidentally move too near and die if the current happens to flash over...

[talisman56]

Went away for the weekend (by car...), but the journey involved travel down the A420 where it runs parallel to the GWML before diving under the bridge en-route to Oxford. No sign of any vertical structures on that stretch, but there were some circular objects at the top of the embankment which I took for the bases. No sign of any progress on the stretch west of Wootten Bassett junction visible from the M4, either.

[The Stationmaster]

Email from the local commuter group says GWR intend (hope?) to introduce an electrically operated suburban service using Class 387s between Maidenhead and Paddington from May next year.  However certain aspects of the service west of Maidenhead are 'rather unclear' as it has not been stated what the service from Maidenhead will be replacing (or supplementing). 

[Siberian Snooper]

I have just travelled to Heathrow on the connect service and there are sporadic GWML eletrification masts between Pad and Airport junction,some are near replacements and some are duplicates, some have head spans and are wired, some are just masts. There is no sign of partial bore holes or bases.

[Christopher125]

Today was the first day in passenger use for the GWR 387s, 4 units in a pair of 8-car formations.

Edited September 5, 2016 by Christopher125

[SwissRailPassion]

Very impressive!

[The Stationmaster]

Paths now online for Class 387 test running between Reading and Didcot on12 September

[Talltim]

There seems to be an issue with the wiring proceeding in Scotland which may impact the new electrification on the GW mainline as well. Regulations regarding height have changed (to be higher) and 'whoever' (DfT or ORR) does not seem to have got a derogation for existing work in progress and/or UK sized trains.

An article on the Scottish delays, a bit light in detail, but with more information in the comments

Edited September 5, 2016 by Talltim

[DavidB-AU]

Great Western goes electric

 

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/great-western-goes-electric.html

[DavidB-AU]

Curiously they are running as 2Sxx.

 

Cheers

David

[Banger Blue]

Curiously they are running as 2Sxx.CheersDavid

GREAT WESTERN AREA WTT DESTINATION INDICATIONS

TRAINS RUNNING WITHIN THE SECTION PA AREA

Letter

A Trains to or within the PA WTT Area (unless shown otherwise).

Chiltern Line services trains to Aylesbury.

B Class 1 trains to the PB WTT Area (unless shown otherwise).

Class 2 trains between Paddington and Maidenhead/Bourne End and all

Maidenhead to Bourne End/Marlow branch trains.

C Trains to the PC WTT Area.

D First Great Western Link and First Great Western services class 1 from Paddington

to Oxford and Banbury.

E First Great Western Link class 2 trains (including associated class 5 ECS

movements) to or from the Cotswold line starting or terminating at Oxford.

F First Great Western Link up class 1 trains to Paddington except through trains

from Maidenhead (P),Henley (P), Bedwyn/Newbury (K).

G Trains between Paddington and Greenford and from Paddington to Chiltern Line

(except Aylesbury (A)).

All Class 1 trains from Paddington to Cheltenham/Worcester via Kemble.

H Trains to/from Henley-on-Thames except up through trains to Paddington (P).

Up trains from Chiltern Line to Paddington.

J Trains to/from Basingstoke

K Trains to/from Newbury/Bedwyn. Class 1 trains to/from Paddington, class 2 trains

Denotes Destination/Routes

to/from Reading.

L Class 2 trains between Reading, Didcot Parkway, Oxford, Banbury and Bicester Town.

First Great Western services Class 1 originating in the PB WTT area.

N All down class 2 trains from Paddington except as shown under E, G, H, K R and

S. Class 1 up services from Reading/Henley/Bourne End to Paddington. P All class 2 trains to Paddington except G and S.

Class 1 up services from Reading/Henley/Bourne End to Paddington.

R All down trains terminating at Reading.

S All class 2 trains from Paddington to Hayes & Harlington or Slough and vice

versa.

T All down class 1 Heathrow Express and class 2 Heathrow Connect services.

W Class 2 trains to/from Windsor & Eton Central.

Class 1 services from Paddington to Moreton-in-Marsh, Evesham, Worcester, Great Malvern and Hereford. To avoid confusion at Hereford only the series 1W01 to 1W04 to be used for services terminating there.

Y All up class 1 Heathrow Express and class 2 Heathrow Connect services.

[Zomboid]

There seems to be an issue with the wiring proceeding in Scotland which may impact the new electrification on the GW mainline as well. Regulations regarding height have changed (to be higher) and 'whoever' (DfT or ORR) does not seem to have got a derogation for existing work in progress and/or UK sized trains.

An article on the Scottish delays, a bit light in detail, but with more information in the comments

A nice, balanced report there, concisely getting the facts across with no hyperbole or hidden agenda.

[Talltim]

I agree that it is a crap article, however there doednt seem to be much in the press about it yet.

[4630]

. 

Edited November 12, 2016 by 4630

[corneliuslundie]

I am very surprised at the UK government implementing legislation like this which has retrospective requirements as this has always been alien to our culture, though I fear that is changing. Everyone refers to this as EU legislation and assumes that it will cease to be relevant if/when we leave. However, much of our railway and other technical regulation comes from European standards bodies and organisations such as the UIC. That will not change.

But quite why all this slipped through our (too) many railway regulation bodies without anyone apparently noticing is a bit of a mystery as they should be involved in the drafting/ approving/vetting of any proposals in these organisations anyway.

But back to this particular case, would anyone really stand up and say that what was safe yesterday is not safe today, especially if he/she was involved in the earlier standards? There must be more to it that just clearance distances.

Jonathan