Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[woody]

(a) Is there capacity via Bristol?

(b) Can Exeter to London be achieved 2 hours or less via Bristol?

If the answer to (a) is no, then would it be worth it?. If the answer to (b) is no, then under no circumstances should services be diverted! Journey time is the single number one priority. The trains are slow enough as it is.

Sorry to disagree but in the age of austerity we now live value for taxpayers money is now the number one priority on the railways not journey times.Change may not be welcome by some people but it is sometimes necessary for survival as all government spending will have to be drastically reduced whether we like it or not and if that means changes to the way FGW^▸ (First Great Western) operate their services to get the maximum benefit for the minimum money available then so be it.

[willc]

Journey time is the single number one priority.

Not according to a lot of passengers surveyed by Passenger Focus it isn't

http://www.passengerfocus.org.uk/news-and-publications/press-release.asp?dsid=4537

[Tim]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), the sensible approach to electrification in this age of autstery, would be to do Manchester-Liverpool and Paddington to Oxford and Bedwyn/Newbury.  Allow the ex-Thameslink EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) to be used and ease the DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) shortage, but replace the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) with more diesel and then in 10/20 years time when there is more money, transfer the HST replacements to cross country (releasing the voyagers for interegional) and electrify the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) in small steps (it will of cource already be done to Didcot).

Advantages - money spent relatively slowly, all existing stock used and nothing scrapped prematurely, no need to order new DMUs which run into emission regulation problems (as will the HST replacement, but the technical issues must be easier to solve when there is more space for the new engines), and, polically, the tory commuter belt gets improvements first.   
 

[broadgage]

I can certainly see the merits of electric trains with regards to reducing oil imports and reducing pollution, but why does everyone assume that passengers would prefer an electric train?
I would much prefer a 30 year old HST^▸ (High Speed Train) with legroom and a restaurant, to a new EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) with no catering and high density bus seats.
Faster journies would be appreciated by some but not if it means high density seats without tables, no view, and no catering.
Partial electrification would probably extend times owing to the need for changing.

Electrification also means 10 years of delays and buses at weekends, and no Christmas services.
Got to be faced eventualy, but I for one do not look forawrd to it.

[inspector_blakey]

I hate to be pessimistic, but from reading the details of Osborne's speech this morning it's not looking good for GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification. It would seem that the Fact Compiler's reading of Osborne's words is the same as mine:

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-and-new-trains-or-lack-there-of.html
http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-reading-between-lines.html

I suppose we'll have to wait until next week for the confirmation of all the details, but I'm not holding out too much hope anymore. Does just make you wonder just how much longer the government seems to think the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) fleet will stagger on for before something radical has to be done (i.e. squadron replacement)! I don't give it too many more years.

[autotank]

What really winds me up about the current situation is the number of highly paid consultants and engineers that have wasted their time and our money on detailed plans for something that will now probably not happen. This money (probably several millions for planning the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification) could have been much better used aquiring a few more DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s which are desperatley needed.

A lot has been wasted on something which a lot of us on here have known for a while is very unlikely to happen until at least 2020.

[standclearplease]

Will the HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) last until 2020, or will we see them disintegrate through overuse in the meantime?

[Electric train]

What really winds me up about the current situation is the number of highly paid consultants and engineers that have wasted their time and our money on detailed plans for something that will now probably not happen. This money (probably several millions for planning the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification) could have been much better used aquiring a few more DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit)'s which are desperatley needed.

A lot has been wasted on something which a lot of us on here have known for a while is very unlikely to happen until at least 2020.

Not really the team was quite small, also all the data collected is there waiting and the design would make a good bases in the future.  The GWML had not been survived for electrification before, BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) only had very broad concept with approx locations for substations, also the cost of the development was bourne by NR^» (Network Rail - home page)

[ChrisB]

I hate to be pessimistic, but from reading the details of Osborne's speech this morning it's not looking good for GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification. It would seem that the Fact Compiler's reading of Osborne's words is the same as mine:

http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-and-new-trains-or-lack-there-of.html
http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/10/csr-reading-between-lines.html

Yup, I concur. He mentioned electrifying some lines in the NW, but nothing in this neck of the woods.

[Tim]

A sensible, low cost, low risk, cut down electrification scheme would electrify just enough to allow all the displaced Thameslink EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) to be used.  Am I correct in thinking that the NW scheme(s) don't do that on their own? 

It would be a huge shame if not progress at all was made on the ground for the  route.  Electrifcation to Reading and then Oxford/Bedwinish would seem to be a sensible comprimise.   Useful stock would be used rather than scrapped, DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) would be released for low cost capacity increases elsewhere and HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) would soldier on for a decade or so longer and when they finally die, the wires will already be up as far as Didcot so taking them further would be lower cost.

[ChrisB]

A sensible, low cost, low risk, cut down electrification scheme would electrify just enough to allow all the displaced Thameslink EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) to be used.  Am I correct in thinking that the NW scheme(s) don't do that on their own? 

This will fill in a number of gaps up there that will allow DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) currently in use on those lines to be swapped out for some EMUs. Which will free up a few, not many, DMUs.

It would be a huge shame if no progress at all was made on the ground for the  route.  Electrifcation to Reading and then Oxford/Bedwinish would seem to be a sensible comprimise. 

That *is* the proposal as it stands currently, not a compromise of something larger.  Any talk of anything larger was just that, talk, not Govt proposal, as I understand it.



Edit note: Quote marks amended, for clarity. CfN.

[paul7575]

The initial DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) announcement about electrification, the one that took everyone by surprise, included a map of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) encompassing Maidenhead to Oxford, Bristol, Bath, Swansea and Newbury at para 39 and at para 77, this:

It is currently expected that early works will take place between 2012 and 2014,
with the bulk of the construction between 2014 and 2016. Electric services will be introduced progressively: London to Oxford, Newbury and Bristol by the end of 2016, and London to Swansea by the end of 2017.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/rail-electrification.pdf

In that announcement there was only to be one line in the NW, which allowed for Liverpool to Manchester only.  A further announcement in Dec 2009 suddenly added other NW routes to Preston and Blackpool.  This followed various surprising Adonis speeches that seemed to imply more than the earlier announcementrs had mentioned, IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly).

Paul

[ChrisB]

I blame my memory - thanks for the reminder!

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

An ^850m revamp of Reading railway station has been confirmed in the Spending Review but other schemes are still in doubt.

Transport minister Theresa Villiers visited the town to confirm the project but no decision has been made on a ^15m roads revamp around the station.

...

In Reading, the major revamp of the town's station was confirmed but decisions on the electrification of the Great Western Main Line, which will run through Berkshire, and a new fleet of intercity trains were absent from the review.

...

The Department for Transport said it was still assessing a number of projects following the Spending Review, including the electrification of the western line and the roads improvement plan for Reading.

[paul7575]

Odd that in all the spending review bumph it reads "the Government is supporting investment to improve journey reliability on Great Western Main Line services to Wales."  I just presumed (or hoped?) this actually meant the overall Reading redevelopment. 

They could have been so much more specific and avoided loads of debate if they'd been precise like earlier in the same section, where, for example, they wrote "station upgrades at Birmingham New Street".

Paul