Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[Electric train]

Yes, but it didn't travel at 125 mph though.

But surely a modern version could travel at 125 mph?

Exactly the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) have operated 125 plus with loco's and DVT^‡(resolve)'s for nearly 20 years

[onthecushions]

Yes, but it didn't travel at 125 mph though.

Not legally anyway.............

OTC

[paul7575]

One of the stupidist things the current regime has given us is HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) on the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) running Newcastle and Leeds services entirely under the wires because of lack of suitable electric stock.

One of the problems with the ECML is that most trains cannot do an out and back run in the same day.  Once you accept the concept of through trains from Inverness or Aberdeen to/from Kings Cross a few times a day, to get full utilisation of the stock they have to do additional 'short' runs to employ them fully.  So for example (theoretically cos I haven't got real diagrams) an EC HST might do Leeds > Aberdeen > Kings Cross > Newcastle over a day.   

If they hadn't already had the HSTs in service with a 25 yr remaining life at the time the electrification happened, maybe diesel haulage of Mk 4 coaching sets north of Edinburgh would have been introduced instead.

Paul

 

[Worcester_Passenger]

One of the stupidist things the current regime has given us is HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) on the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) running Newcastle and Leeds services entirely under the wires because of lack of suitable electric stock.

One of the problems with the ECML is that most trains cannot do an out and back run in the same day.  Once you accept the concept of through trains from Inverness or Aberdeen to/from Kings Cross a few times a day, to get full utilisation of the stock they have to do additional 'short' runs to employ them fully.  So for example (theoretically cos I haven't got real diagrams) an EC HST might do Leeds > Aberdeen > Kings Cross > Newcastle over a day.  

You're both partly-right. There are some diagrams posted at http://www.thejunction.org.uk/. If you look at the East Coast HST ones, there are 11 - of which 3 are wholly under the wires.

[paul7575]

I remember there was a time when there were no ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) HST^▸ (High Speed Train) diagrams fully under the wires, but increased services in recent years, such as the additional Leeds services have also led to more HST use, probably as they were all that was available. I expect the 91/HST balance was just about right in the nineties...

Paul 

[willc]

Slightly surprising that DafT seem to have ruled out the Voyager with an electric transformer coach idea which Bombardier has been pushing hard, in particular as a way to speed up MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) wiring.

That hasn't really been proposed as an IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) option though has it. Adding a pantograph to various Voyagers and Meridians is a way of allowing the existing fleet to run under wires where their routes currently allow them to, such as on the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) or south of Bedford, and at the same time lengthen to 5 or 6 coaches long.

That would be a huge benefit to those fleets, but they'd still be used in their current areas AFAICT^▸ (as far as I can tell)...

Paul 

I think that you are right Paul.  Although it is not completely clear to me that the governemnt will choose one of the EIP options on the table at the moment.  They might choose something else.  One option for them would be to choose an electric fleet for the routes that are wired and a diesel  fleet for the non-wired routes.  The temptation must be to choose DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) rather than proper deisel locos and the voyager/pantagraph argument could be used to justify that decision. 

The options the Government is now considering were made quite clear by DafT yesterday, which I posted on the previous page:

The Department has evaluated possible alternatives to the original IEP proposal and has narrowed the consideration to two leading options; a revised bid from Agility Trains, and an alternative for a fleet of all electric trains  which could be coupled to new diesel locomotives where the overhead electric wires end.

The bi-mode element of the revised bid from Hitachi/Agility, according to Modern Railways, now has underfloor diesel engines - sound familiar? - hence my surprise that a Voyager-type train with a transformer car was out of the running when the Japanese are now offering the exact same concept for IEP.

And note new diesels, not 67s or anything else, so I would imagine it would be easy enough to design them to be driven from the cab of the electric train they are coupled to, if this is the way they choose to go.

 

I think it is a no brainer to make those journeys with deisel traction the whole way.

And have a load of diesels with different performance characteristics sharing the fast lines from Paddington to Reading with electrics off to Bristol and Cardiff? That would be fun for the timetablers...

Does confirmation of electrification to Oxford mean that there will be some re-thinking on Crossrail? It would surely be a good opportunity to make better use of the Crossrail tunnel, reducing the number of trains that will terminate at Paddington from the East, and free up some platform space at Paddington.

There won't be any rethinking, at least not until the 319s need replacing. Using secondhand emus is critical to making the numbers stack up for Oxford and Newbury electrification. Crossrail and the extended Thameslink network are both intended to shove 20 or so trains per hour through the tunnels in the peaks, which implies lots of doors, like a Tube train, to get people on and off sharpish, which is why the 319s need to be replaced on Thameslink duties. Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.

[standclearplease]

Just out of interest, do the government have any plans to use North Pole depot for CrossRail or the new electric IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)?

[paul7575]

Just out of interest, do the government have any plans to use North Pole depot for CrossRail or the new electric IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)?

Crossrail definitely not, that's Old Oak Common, but GW^▸ (Great Western) IEP maybe, according to the GW RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy). 

Paul

[paul7575]

The options the Government is now considering were made quite clear by DafT yesterday, which I posted on the previous page:

The bi-mode element of the revised bid from Hitachi/Agility, according to Modern Railways, now has underfloor diesel engines - sound familiar? - hence my surprise that a Voyager-type train with a transformer car was out of the running when the Japanese are now offering the exact same concept for IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.).

As I see it, a 'Voyager type train' as an IEP alternative is currently a totally separate debate to Bombardier's existing proposal for alterations to Meridians and Voyagers. All that has been proposed in the rail press is additional intermediate carriages with pantographs etc to stick in the existing fleet.  That's really all I was pointing out.

I'm not sure Bombardier are yet in a position to officially tout it as an alternative to Hitachi's offering of an underfloor engined bimode 5 car unit - until (and if) such time as the competition is reopened.  So as of now, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) cannot bring an extended Voyager into the running - however this may change in future.

Paul

[willc]

All that has been proposed in the rail press

It is a bit more than a proposal in the rail press. It is a deadly serious idea, which Bombardier has been doing development work on with the support of other UK^▸ (United Kingdom) rail manufacturers, the leasing companies which own the Voyagers and Meridians, and XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)), Virgin and EMT^» (East Midlands Trains - about). It is detailed enough that there is a figure for new-build pantograph coaches, 123, plus 21 converted from existing coaches.

And DafT can bring anything into the running it likes, whenever it likes - and has, in the shape of an all-electric train plus diesel locos as a rival to the latest variant of the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) concept, having ruled out diesel drags previously.

If all Hitachi ends up being offered is a contract to replace FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and East Coast's HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), rather than all the other things IEP was supposed to do, will they still be interested, or be willing to build an assembly plant in the UK?

[Timmer]

Please no more underfloor engined long distance Intercity services. If changing from electrified to diesel traction using locos works in mainland Europe on routes where they wires end, why not here?

Still with the speed that this is all not happening at least I know there are a good few years yet of travelling on HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train)   I find it staggering that for a build of train that was meant to be temporary before the release of APT^▸ (Advanced Passenger Train), that no one has come up with a better train than the good old HST.

[XPT]

I haven't read through this massive thread, but the rumours that the replacement to the HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s *could* be 5-car Voyager like trains doesn't sound good.  I thought lessons would have been learnt after the fiasco of using those 4 or 5 car Voyagers on the long distance cross country routes where the trains are usually packed out.  Longer trains are needed.   With expected further growth in train passengers this decade, running 4/5 car trains on Intercity route is not a good idea.  And please let's hope these new trains have decent comfortable seating including seats that line up with the windows!  Here is a good example of what comfortable seating SHOULD be like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIMre6BKos

[Worcester_Passenger]

There was another interesting DMU^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) story tucked away in Modern Railways. A piece about Chiltern (p9) looking at loco haulage, which said that they're finding it difficult to finance new DMUs, partly because of the scarcity of finance, but also because "financiers are wary of putting money into new diesel trains with a 30-year life due to uncertainties surrounding the oil supply".

Perhaps someone should tell DfT^» (Department for Transport - about).

[broadgage]

I haven't read through this massive thread, but the rumours that the replacement to the HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s *could* be 5-car Voyager like trains doesn't sound good.  I thought lessons would have been learnt after the fiasco of using those 4 or 5 car Voyagers on the long distance cross country routes where the trains are usually packed out.  Longer trains are needed.   With expected further growth in train passengers this decade, running 4/5 car trains on Intercity route is not a good idea.  And please let's hope these new trains have decent comfortable seating including seats that line up with the windows!  Here is a good example of what comfortable seating SHOULD be like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRIMre6BKos

It is very early days as yet, but if other new trains are anything to go by, we will end up with some variety of 4/5 car multiple unit, with high density bus seats, minimal luggage space,and no buffet.
In theory multiple units are a good idea on account of the flexible train lengths. In practice though any seasoned and cynical traveller will know that flexible=shorter. Remember the adelantes ? flexible train length indeed, but normally 5 car replacing an HST.

[IndustryInsider]

Logically Crossrail should go out to Reading and given that they need to shave ^1bn off the bill to meet the government's new price target, not building stabling sidings at Maidenhead would certainly help. Since they aren't starting electrification just yet, there is time to thrash all this out.

Yes, can someone please announce that!  I thought it might have been included in Thursday's announcement given that electrification of Reading station was approved.  It is just such a logical thing to do given the passenger flows in the area!