Sparks effect

[whole diary]

[devon_metro]

Is also a good place to run a 'metro' service from Exeter Central - Paignton at high frequency. Perhaps I was reading figures during Summer when the place is invaded by our lovely tourist friends 

[eightf48544]

Electrification to Torbay would be good, it deserves a good service to London considering it has a similar population to Plymouth.

Far be it for me to argue, but I had always believed the population of Plymouth to be approaching 240,000, whilst that of Torbay is around the 130,000 mark.  http://www.torbay.gov.uk/appendix-b-key_statistics_for_torbay_apr.pdf


That said, the importance of Torbay as a holiday destination could well  be justification for continuing the wires from Newton Abbot.

It is also makes sound operating sense to electrify to Paigton when the wires go to Plymouth.

Otherwise you'd have the absurb situation of running HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) to Padd under the wires for 90% of their journey. It would also mean keeping a few units 142s? for local services to Exeter.

It's the like the Sudbury branch One (the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) not HM) has to keep a couple of DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)  just to work this line.

[G.Uard]

Is also a good place to run a 'metro' service from Exeter Central - Paignton at high frequency. Perhaps I was reading figures during Summer when the place is invaded by our lovely tourist friends 

"Crying grockles and emmets, alive alive oh"

[willc]

More thoughts on a rolling electrification programme in the November Modern Railways.

After the two studies mentioned back at the start of this thread, Network Rail and ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies see - here) have been working together on a further study as part of the national Route Utilisation Strategy, while DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) has now done its own study.

Network Rail say wiring London-Bristol via Bath and London to Swansea both more than pay for themselves, along with wires out to Oxford - costs would be ^637m, with benefits of ^1.097bn. They also say Midland Main Line wiring to Sheffield and Nottingham, including the branch to Corby, would cost ^353m with benefits of ^763m.

Even by making highly optimistic claims for the performance of a diesel IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project. This will offer more capacity on routes, save money, give a consistent and safe service and meet customer requirements. Intended to replace HSTs.) compared with electric traction, DfT says GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) wiring would be value for money.

Roger Ford says the diesel IEP power car is a fantasy - no engine available packs the power suggested within the proposed weight (60 tonnes all in versus an HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) power car at 69) and brands it the Zombie Train - it's walking dead because wiring would make any type of IEP a waste of time and money. Ford is a big loco fan, both electric and diesel - I'll return to locos below.

NR^» (Network Rail - home page) is also already working on financial modelling of a rolling electrification programme to follow GWML and MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about), with North TransPennine and CrossCountry next on the list, with GMWL and MML wires improving the financial case for XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)). Once you do XC, then how about the Cotswold Line, as infill and a handy wired diversion for XC during engineering work? And for all you fans of buying lots of 172s straight away, think how many Voyagers/Meridians and 185s could be knocking about looking for something to do in a few years' time.

NR is looking at three purpose-built electrification trains, able to plant foundations, then the masts and wire them up, able to complete one mile in an eight-hour possession, combined with modular plug-in sub-stations to help speed things along. A programme of 650km of wiring a year is suggested.

At this stage, wires to Plymouth or beyond don't look on the cards as a priority, but an option Ford has previously floated is a fleet of big, powerful diesel locos to take over from electric locos where the wires run out. Another fan of this type of solution appears to be Ian Walmsley, engineering development manager of train leasing firm Porterbrook, who writes about a visit to Innotrans, a big annual European rail industry event, held in Berlin.

He discusses the locos on show and notes that Bombardier's Traxx family of locos now offers multiple working of its electric and diesel variants and can also work with Siemens-built Taurus locos. A man from Bombardier told him they were looking at how the kit could fit into the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) loading gauge, which Walmsley says is "very good news for those of us who think the IEP must die". He suggests that instead of a distributed power IEP, costing ^3m per car, you buy a ^4m Traxx loco and 10 new coaches at ^1m a time, so for a 10-car train, you pay ^14m, against ^30m for IEP - "Let's call it half price and for a better product". For a 1,400-vehicle intercity fleet, that would save ^2bn.

And you get a diesel for places like Cornwall, where out and out speed isn't necessarily what you need. How about a Voith Maxima, with 3,600kW (4,894hp) packed inside and (what else for the GWML?) hydraulic transmission. It was even displayed at the show with yellow cab ends! Pictures of this big beast out on test here: http://www.voithturbo.com/vt_en_act_highlights.htm

[G.Uard]

The major stumbling block to GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification to Wales must be the Severn Tunnel. Whilst new techniques can speed electrification, how long will it take to plan, approve and construct a new Severn Crossing?

[willc]

The major stumbling block to GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification to Wales must be the Severn Tunnel.

In the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) franchise terms thread, Chris from Nailsea posted the following in his report on the TravelWatch SouthWest meeting earlier this month

"Dave (Ward of Network Rail) was quite specific that the Severn Tunnel could be electrified"

[G.Uard]

Not for me to dispute with an engineering pro, but the tunnel is certainly wet and possibly not suitable for OHLE^▸ (Over-Head Line Equipment (electrification via catenary)) due to height constraints.  As there is a sump tunnel underneath, it could be difficult to lower trackbed.

I think it would be an engineering triumph if the tunnel could be wired though. More power, (no pun intended), to network rail if they and the contractors can do it.

[Btline]

Unfortunately, the tunnel cannot be wired.* This is a major flaw in the economics of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) - if 2 tph are still HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units))!

Better get cracking on the barrage!

[Chris from Nailsea]

The major stumbling block to GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification to Wales must be the Severn Tunnel.

In the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) franchise terms thread, Chris from Nailsea posted the following in his report on the TravelWatch SouthWest meeting earlier this month

"Dave (Ward of Network Rail) was quite specific that the Severn Tunnel could be electrified"

Thanks, willc!

Indeed, Dave Ward was quite emphatic at that meeting that it is not impossible to electrify the Severn Tunnel.  His words were, "Yes, it gets wet - but what tunnel doesn't?" and he also made the point that, with all the work that's been carried out recently, "the Severn Tunnel's in a better condition now than it's ever been."

I was so impressed with his enthusiasm that I noted down what he said.   

[G.Uard]

But take a look at this, which although a few years old, seems to accept that electrification of the tunnel is not an option.



http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmwelaf/458/3111708.htm

[Btline]

It is a shame, but I still think electrification of the core GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) would be made viable with full electrification of all lines which branch to it.

[devon_metro]

The GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) is the only mainline of high volume (MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) can be exluded in this) that is not electrified. I can imagine journey times from Bristol, Cardiff etc could be slashed if electrification occurred. Perhaps a diesel/electric set up would work better. Bristol Parkway - Newport could for example be run off diesel power.

[willc]

Why all the negativity? Dave Ward doesn't strike me as a wild fantasist, so if he says the Severn Tunnel can be electrified and the Network Rail study clearly indicates this is the view throughout the organisation, why not just accept it can be done and get behind it?

You don't always need to use conventional hangers and wiring for an overhead supply. As I pointed out months ago, the Germans have tested a lengthy stretch of overhead conductor bar in a tunnel with trains running at high speed.

And on the contrary, what might make electrification of the further-flung parts of the area possible is first wiring the core routes - where most of the trains are and you make the serious money - not flinging up wires willy-nilly.

Until now, the problem in this country has been that while we may have done the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) and ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) routes, so long as the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) amd MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) were diesel-powered, there was no point wiring connecting routes and the core Cross-Country routes. If you can crack this, then the numbers start to stack up in favour of going on to the likes of the Cotswold Line, Swindon-Gloucester-Chepstow-Newport and Exeter, Torbay and Plymouth, especially as diesel trains come due for replacement, an approach often adopted by the French on services away from the TGV^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse) network.

[Electric train]

Unfortunately, the tunnel cannot be wired.* This is a major flaw in the economics of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) - if 2 tph are still HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units))!

Better get cracking on the barrage!

I am not totally convince about this, a full detailed electrification engineering survey has never been conducted in the Seven Tunnel.

The major route electrification is being projected for CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024) (CP = Control Period which are 5 years NR^» (Network Rail - home page) are just about to enter CP4^▸ (Control Period 4 - the five year period between 2009 and 2014)) therefore some 10 years away; although the NR Board and Engineering are working on reducing costs and to speed up the process of installation. The rate of installation will be at three times that BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) achieved when the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) was electrified, and all within the 7 day railway optimistic but firmly believed to be achievable

[John R]

If the government are really committed to electrification, then I can suggest a self contained  "inter-city" service that can be electrified at minimal infrastructure cost, and result in 8500 train miles per day being converted from diesel to electric. (That compares with around 8000 miles per day if every service from London to Bristol Temple Meads became electric.)

The minimal cost is a nice round number, 0.

Any guesses?

Why bother stringing up wires when you can do this? And if they won't do this, are they really serious about electrification?