Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[ellendune]

Oddly, on the return 9 car (stopping at Didcot) we went on to diesel for the Didcot restart before reverting to OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") after a few minutes and while in motion. 

That is to ensure that they did not have to slow down to get under the bridge at Steventon. AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) on the up journey you presumably did slow down as you were on the approach to Didcot. 

[eightonedee]

They were at one time the parts delivery and supplies operation of BLMC / Austin Rover.

...and now an apparently successful outsourcing/logistics/parts supplier, including to the rail industry - see https://unipart.com/

It does not look like they manufacture signalling equipment, but can probably help you find a supplier

[welshman]

That is to ensure that they did not have to slow down to get under the bridge at Steventon.  AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) on the up journey you presumably did slow down as you were on the approach to Didcot.

I confess that I didn't notice - the up service wasn't stopping at Didcot and I didn't have my anorak on.

[Dispatch Box]

Remember the furore over the OHLE through Goring?  Well this is the outcome, from the Henley Standard:

"LANDOWNERS in the Goring area can apply for grants from Network Rail to improve plots that adjoin the Great Western main line through the village.

The company is offering sums of between £10,000 and £100,000 to offset the impact of the electrification of the route, which started in 2015 and prompted complaints about the “unsightly” metal gantries that were installed to hold up overhead cables.

Network Rail promised to consider installing alternative designs but progress stalled as opponents said these wouldn’t reduce the visual impact. Now the company says it wants to support any projects which would result in new woodland being planted, enhance existing woodland or improve access between wooded areas.

The deadline for applications is October 26 and applicants should be able to deliver their schemes over a four-year period.

For more information, visit www.trustforoxfordshire."

Found this?. Why do they not cover them over in gwr railway colour green paint, that would disguise them from the residents. I expect B - Q have got some offers on cheap paint.

[Dispatch Box]

Did anyone watch TONIGHT ON ITV1?. It was very riveting, it was saying that we got these new trains and that many of them do not seem to be using the overhead wires. Also stated that they were fitted with diesel engines that was mentioned, added to weight and made them less economic. It also stated that 10 billion has been spent on electrifying the line and still does not reach Swansea yet. Some much needed schemes have been shelved. Some passengers were interviewed and were not happy. I think the whole lot was badly planned.

The government and NR^» (Network Rail - home page) should of allocated funds to do the following work in stages.

1. Start a Paddington, put up wires, sort track and signalling.

2. Then reading.

3. Then Didcot.

4. Then Oxford and Cotswold line.

5. Then Swindon.

6. Then BPW^» (Bristol Parkway - next trains) and BTM^▸ (Bristol Temple Meads (strictly, it should be BRI)).

7. Then Gloucester, Cheltenham and Worcester.

8. Then line to Newport.

9. Then Cardiff.

Numbers above should have been done under groups shown.

I.E 1 - 2 CP1. 2 -3 CP2 4 - 5 CP3 6 - 7 CP4^▸ (Control Period 4 - the five year period between 2009 and 2014) CP5^▸ (Control Period 5 - the five year period between 2014 and 2019) REST OF COUNTRY.  8 - 9 CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024). CP7 - LATER = MAINTAIN IT.
Then we would of had an electrified railway all complete and new tracks and trains and would of been much more cheaply, as abroad.

Worcester would not be electrified or the Cotswold line.

[Red Squirrel]

Following on from a post by S&TE concerning No-Signalman Token Remote working, I realised that railsigns.uk might be just the place to find out what the electrification signs now festooning the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) mean! With apologies if this has already been posted elsewhere, and for those like me who find this kind of thing interesting, the answer is here: http://www.railsigns.uk/sect18page2/sect18page2.html

[onthecushions]

Interesting report below to download:

Apologies if already posted elsewhere.

OTC

https://www.riagb.org.uk/RIA/Newsroom/Stories/Electrification_Cost_Challenge_Report.aspx

[stuving]

Interesting report below to download:

Apologies if already posted elsewhere.

OTC

https://www.riagb.org.uk/RIA/Newsroom/Stories/Electrification_Cost_Challenge_Report.aspx

Yes, already posted on Re: Cutting the cost of electrification, with surprisingly little reaction to its contents.

This is a quote from the introduction, which certainly does belong here as it is specifically about GWEP^▸ (Great Western Electrification Program):

The Great Western Electrification Programme (GWEP) was announced in 2009, and was set to cost £1bn to electrify the route to Swansea by December 2017. By the time of the Hendy Review in November 2015 the estimated cost had risen to £2.8bn for electrification to Cardiff by December 2018. In July 2017 the Government announced the cancellation of electrification between Cardiff and Swansea and on the Midland Main Line, north of Kettering. It opted instead for diesel ‘Bi-mode’ trains.

So what went wrong?

The GWEP programme was over-ambitious in trying to introduce internationally novel technology – Overhead Line Equipment (OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE")) and Plant – on a live project resulting in the design and development of the equipment being incomplete before construction started. Additionally, there was a non-negotiable date for the introduction of new electric trains over which industry had no control, announced before the infrastructure project had been fully scoped and costed, and which added a further major level of risk to timely and cost-efficient delivery. All this against the background of an industry that had not undertaken an electrification project the scale of GWEP for 20 years and so skills and experience needed to be rebuilt.

To further compound the challenge, an unprecedented number of other new electrification projects were commenced at the same time, all requiring and competing for similar resources. Although, as will be discussed later, most electrification projects were delivered successfully, GWEP, which was the largest and a number of other projects ran into difficulty, and the programme and therefore budget significantly overran.

[onthecushions]

"An indication of the additional maintenance cost of a diesel-powered fleet is given by the differing procurement costs of the Great Western and East Coast IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) fleets, which include a 27-year maintenance contract. The Great Western IEP fleet costs £4 million per coach more than the electric East Coast one, mainly because it operates more miles in diesel bi-mode. Thus, the additional diesel maintenance cost of the 369-vehicle GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) bi-mode fleet is around a billion pounds over the period of the maintenance contract."

(Rail Engineer May 2018)

Paying more for less?

OTC

[TonyK]

Finishing the electrification is beginning to look like a bargain we said "No" to.

[stuving]

"An indication of the additional maintenance cost of a diesel-powered fleet is given by the differing procurement costs of the Great Western and East Coast IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) fleets, which include a 27-year maintenance contract. The Great Western IEP fleet costs £4 million per coach more than the electric East Coast one, mainly because it operates more miles in diesel bi-mode. Thus, the additional diesel maintenance cost of the 369-vehicle GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) bi-mode fleet is around a billion pounds over the period of the maintenance contract."

(Rail Engineer May 2018)

Paying more for less?

OTC

Depends what you mean. I presume that figure of £4 million was taken from the 2014 NAO report, which gives 7.1 and 11.1 £m for the two fleets. Note that this was after the VTEC option order was added, but before the switch to all bimodes for GW^▸ (Great Western).

The NAO report says the difference was due to:

• a reduction in contract price offered by Agility for the additional East Coast fleet as a result of the Department exercising the option to procure an additional 270 carriages (see Part Five);
• lower costs of finance on East Coast due to this part of the deal reaching financial close in April 2014, when economic conditions and the Japanese yen to pound sterling exchange rates were more favourable; and
• a higher proportion of miles done by bi-mode trains in the Great Western fleet, which are more expensive to manufacture and maintain than the electric variants.

Note that last point is not just that the GW bimodes were to do more miles each on diesel, but that they were then a higher fraction of the fleet so the cost of the motor/generators was higher. But really all we know is that the figure as quoted is wrong - it could be wrong in any direction.

[TonyK]

Depends what you mean. I presume that figure of £4 million was taken from the 2014 NAO report, which gives 7.1 and 11.1 £m for the two fleets. Note that this was after the VTEC option order was added, but before the switch to all bimodes for GW^▸ (Great Western).

The NAO report says the difference was due to:

• a reduction in contract price offered by Agility for the additional East Coast fleet as a result of the Department exercising the option to procure an additional 270 carriages (see Part Five);
• lower costs of finance on East Coast due to this part of the deal reaching financial close in April 2014, when economic conditions and the Japanese yen to pound sterling exchange rates were more favourable; and
• a higher proportion of miles done by bi-mode trains in the Great Western fleet, which are more expensive to manufacture and maintain than the electric variants.

Note that last point is not just that the GW bimodes were to do more miles each on diesel, but that they were then a higher fraction of the fleet so the cost of the motor/generators was higher. But really all we know is that the figure as quoted is wrong - it could be wrong in any direction.

Until the electrification pause, there were going to be a lot fewer diesels fitted to IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train) trains.  You would think environmental considerations would come into play as well as cost. It's all very well the government making futile demands that we all switch to electric cars very soon, but the example is not a good one.

[Red Squirrel]

As I understand it these trains have a design life of 27.5 years. Would it be far-fetched to imagine that they will probably have a mid-life refit? If so, perhaps we can hope that this will involve some removal of diesel kit, to coincide with the extension of electrification.

[johnneyw]

As I understand it these trains have a design life of 27.5 years. Would it be far-fetched to imagine that they will probably have a mid-life refit? If so, perhaps we can hope that this will involve some removal of diesel kit, to coincide with the extension of electrification.

That would give about 14 years to have the remaining electrification completed. Once upon a time I would have said that was no problem but now......

[TonyK]

As I understand it these trains have a design life of 27.5 years. Would it be far-fetched to imagine that they will probably have a mid-life refit? If so, perhaps we can hope that this will involve some removal of diesel kit, to coincide with the extension of electrification.

That would give about 14 years to have the remaining electrification completed. Once upon a time I would have said that was no problem but now......

My thinking too, although I think the most likely outcome will be a mad panic in just under 27½ years' time. Years later, as the 40th anniversary of the first IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) approaches, plans will be announced to replace them. This will raise a storm of protest from the many passengers who love them greatly, especially for their comfy seats and visionary catering trolleys, and don't think the replacements, to be supplied under the only international trade we have signed since Brexit, will be much good. I mean, what does North Korea know about trains, eh?