Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[ellendune]

Design is almost always a series of compromises in my experience. 

Many of the Victorian structures which we regard as aesthetically pleasing were criticised as being ugly in their time. 

The difficulty here is that they the ole equipment needs to be about reliability, economy and aesthetics. 

[onthecushions]

So this isn't what you'd call a mess? 

Nice one!

Depends on setting and context of course. And you could do a lot more than 140mph under it.

The image is trimmed and in perspective, maximising the impact of the supports.

All I hesitantly ask is that NR^» (Network Rail - home page) show some awareness of its surroundings, aka good manners.

OTC

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Design is almost always a series of compromises in my experience. 

Many of the Victorian structures which we regard as aesthetically pleasing were criticised as being ugly in their time. 

The difficulty here is that they the ole equipment needs to be about reliability, economy and aesthetics. 

Aluminium is about ^1,000 per tonne, so nothing very economical about ^160,000 of underused aluminium above the booms which does nothing for reliability. 

[ellendune]

Aluminium is about ^1,000 per tonne, so nothing very economical about ^160,000 of underused aluminium above the booms which does nothing for reliability. 

I thought it was made of galvanised mild steel, but that is of little relevance.

If (and I do not know) the extra steel is to allow them all to be made to a standard size, rather than each one being different.  Then the reduced manufacturing and logistics costs could easily outweigh the additional cost of metal.   

[onthecushions]

Mark 1 seemed to work.  (without the siding!)




try:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/new-sidings-keeps-deliveries-on-track-at-stafford-rail-development

(link won't embed)

[Chris from Nailsea]

You mean this?



 

[SandTEngineer]

Well a lot of work went into the Mark 1 design during the late 1950s/early 1960s.  if you want to really understand how it came about this document gives the full story with the particular part on structures etc. on pages 308-321 and 350-399 here: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/BTC_ElectrificationConference1960.pdf

Health Warning: This is a very large PDF file and may take some time to download

[SandTEngineer]

There are photographs of the Series 1 booms at the bottom of the page here and personally I don't think they are as bad as some are making out.  In particular look at Photos 7 and 8 (click on the photographs to enlarge them).  http://www.furrerfrey.ch/en/systems/Series-1.html

[SandTEngineer]

In the 1960 document I quoted above I thought this was the telling moment on page 308:

1.5 Aesthetic Design
To ensure structure designs which are individually and collectively
satisfying, a Design Consultant has been employed to
examine and advise on all basic proposals with beneficial
results. The effect will be noticed particularly on later sections,
where this consideration has not had to give way to the need
to work to a very close programme.

........and on page 340:

Special attention in design, detailing and workmanship has
been given to ensure a high degree of resistance to corrosion,
and also to aesthetical considerations in the appearance of the
structures, not only in standard equipment, but in special
designs connected with important station construction, so that
the appearance of the electrical equipment will merge successfully
with the architectural features of new station buildings

Of course as a Signal Engineer I am not really qualified to comment too much (however, the look of some modern signal structures is truly horrendous and far worse than the Series 1 OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") )

 

[Chris from Nailsea]

If you'd had highlighter pens in the 1960s, I'm sure you'd have marked those particular paragraphs. 

In fact, having researched my point, I discover that highlighter pens were invented in 1962. 

[Bmblbzzz]

Errmmm... I don't think "dark, satanic mills" was an aesthetic reference. Or rather, it was aesthetic, but not primarily visual. The National Trust does appear to be largely aesthetically motivated, but I'm not too sure it would meet Blake's approval either. Perhaps I should have followed my post with a (!).

[Electric train]

Errmmm... I don't think "dark, satanic mills" was an aesthetic reference. Or rather, it was aesthetic, but not primarily visual. The National Trust does appear to be largely aesthetically motivated, but I'm not too sure it would meet Blake's approval either. Perhaps I should have followed my post with a (!).

The Mk1 OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") you see on the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) and its secondary routes has been modified quite a bit over the years; the compound design was simplified in the 80's and 90's.  The compound design had 3 OLE wires - contact wire, catenary wire (the very top wire) and the compound wire in between the 2 all of which was copper with ceramic insulators and very heavy.  The Mk1 has had its issues bridal wires parting, birds nesting in amongst the gondola insulators are just some.    The Mk1 structures have there limitations when it comes to supporting the auto transformer feed in some locations.

GEWP will be using a much harder drawn contact wire with polymeric insulators tensioned with "tensorex" and not counter weights.  The tension will be higher on GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) to allow for the 225 kmh (140 mph) aspiration also for TSI compliant pans.

Are the GEWP structures ugly yep and so are the WCML, ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) and the GE / LTS, the railways in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) needs to finally convert to electric traction we are 60 or 70 years late in doing this.

[Rhydgaled]

Are the GEWP structures ugly yep and so are the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line), ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line)

While all three may be considered ugly by some, I'm sure they aren't considered equally ugly. The East Coast OHLE in this pic (not one of mine) is a little unsightly, but far less obtrusive than most of the new stuff Network Rail is installing. One way this ECML OHLE could be further improved aestheticly I think would be making the main vertical posts cylindrical (like lamposts) (I've probably already posted this earlier in the topic, but I can't remember for sure).

the railways in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) needs to finally convert to electric traction we are 60 or 70 years late in doing this.

Agreed, but I'd much rather we did it with a strong regard for aesthetics.

[Bmblbzzz]

Certainly the railways need to electrify, with regard for aesthetics in all measures ^ which might mean accepting some structures which are ugly but efficient or have other values.

Moving away from the pretty><ugly, to the wider scope of electrification, beyond what is currently being done on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line): it's my understanding ^ which could well be incorrect, I'm not an engineer ^ that the main benefits of electric traction over diesel are efficiency and cost of energy, reduced pollution (air and noise pollution). In performance terms, the first would seem to be much improved acceleration, with higher top speeds being more dependent on track and signalling as well as arguably benefiting fewer services. With this in mind, would it not be more beneficial to prioritise electrification of stopping services? Every stop is followed by acceleration, so the more stops, the more time is gained by higher acceleration.

[IndustryInsider]

In terms of performance it certainly would be, you could argue either way in terms of capacity, but in terms of not having loads of SET^▸ (Super Express Train (now IET)) trains idle but being paid for it definitely isn't.