Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[eightf48544]

When steam still reigned supreme GW^▸ (Great Western) outside cylinder locos such as Halls and Granges were banned form Salisbury to Easleigh and Southampton whilst they were cleared for Reading to Bournemouth and Portsmouth (via Botley).

Something to do with tight clearance by platfoms. Hence GW engines were taken off at Salisbury and an ancient T9 took their place. If you lucky you might have got a West Country.

[ChrisB]

It's a matter of clearance - and paying for platforms / bridges / possibly tunnels to be altered.

There was mention of the possibility of turbos to Westbury during the next Reading blockade, so that may be where they start.

[Rhydgaled]

I've often wondered what the problem with the 165/166s is when it comes to gauge clearance. They seem to operate on a fairly wide cross section of routes at the moment. What's the main issue regarding them working further afield?

Personally, I think I'd file it under railway myths. 

As has been discussed fairly regularly elsewhere, there is a world of difference between 'can't be cleared' and 'hasn't been cleared yet'. 

Paul

165/166s are supposedly slightly wider than other stock. I've found the following material that may be helpful to this discussion:

• RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board) - T787
• Might be the same as the above, but has a different filename
• RSSB - T787 Appendix B-G - This is the big one.

Note particularly:

The Class 166 has the most limited alternative deployment because of its wider body profile. The Class 166 was built for use on Great Western routes, historically built to a wider gauge

From the maps, (if I'm interpereting them correctly) it looks like a small area east and north of Newcastle could be a suitable location for deployment (picked that one out because it isn't in the GW^▸ (Great Western) region and may help Northern replace Pacers). I'd suggest putting them on Bristol - Taunton myself (after electrifcation, which might split CDF^» (Cardiff - next trains) - Taunton at Bristol) but the maps seem to suggest they will not fit on that route.

[IndustryInsider]

Interesting links, Rhydgaled, thanks.

Though one thing struck me, and that's how many more routes are suddenly opened up to Turbos (and other traction) should these 10% or less structures be modified.  All sorts of opportunities are then opened up such are sending them to ATW^▸ (Arriva Trains Wales (former TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company))) to work the Aberystwyth services leading to 158's being transferred to strengthen Pompey to Cardiff services. Just an example by the way! 

Though, forgive me for being a little pessimistic on the accuracy of the report, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though?  And how come Turbos have visited Weymouth and Llandudno over the years on excursion trains, when all routes to those destinations are, according to the diagrams, red for no-go?  Anyone?

[Electric train]

Though, forgive me for being a little pessimistic on the accuracy of the report, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though?  And how come Turbos have visited Weymouth and Llandudno over the years on excursion trains, when all routes to those destinations are, according to the diagrams, red for no-go?  Anyone?

It might be they are cleared at reduced speed that may be ok for an excursion but not acceptable for normal service.

Not all the 165/6's will be released post the TV area GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) electrification the branches (Greenford, Windsor, Marlow, Henley) will remain diesel like wise North Downs, Reading Basingstoke, beyond Newbury to Great Bedwin, I would guess perhaps 50% of the fleet will remain in the TV area.

[ChrisB]

Indeed, along with 15 or so HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) to run the PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains)/PNZ services.

It's the cost of platform & bridge clearance that is the concern. With zero money in the coffers to do this, it again goes back to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) to 'allow' these costs to be offset within a project.

For example, the Reading re-modelling might be used to get clearances for turbos to run beyond Bedwyn.....if the HST was proving to be expensive to run & not carrying many passengers.

[Zoe]

For example, the Reading re-modelling might be used to get clearances for turbos to run beyond Bedwyn

165s/166s are already cleared as far as Castle Cary.

[ChrisB]

Indeed, they could go further....

[Zoe]

Indeed, they could go further....

Not sure you'd get them through the Dawlish tunnels though so would rule out use in the Westcountry even though they would be suitable for regional services there.

[ChrisB]

Tunnels & bridges would need work, indeed.

[Tim]

Interesting links, Rhydgaled, thanks.
I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though? 

Only thing I can think of is that the 166s have "sticking out" bits of air conditioning units?  Or does the extra weight of the air con units (at the top of the train making them a bit top heavy?) cause them to sit lower on their suspension or bounce about the track a bit more?

[Andrew1939 from West Oxon]

I recall that many years ago the Class 165/6 Thames Turbos were sometimes sent to Eastleigh for some maintenance work that could not be carried out at Reading. It was necessary to remove all the steps at the carriage doors as they would otherwise have fouled some platforms on the way to Eastleigh. Of course it was possible to do this because they were running empty stock out of service.
CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) also ran a charter train from Thames Trains using a Class 166 Turbo on 14 June 1997 to Weymouth and I don't recall any clearance problems for that trip. There is a picture of the Turbo at weymouth station at http://www.clpg.co.uk/sptrns3.htm

[paul7575]

The point I was trying to make (when mentioning Redhill - Selhurst and Guildford - Woking - Basingstoke) is that infrastructure problems may not be anything like as much of a stopper as some people believe.  The above routes are presumably not built to GW^▸ (Great Western) greater clearances - but was any physical work done to clear the stock?  None that I heard of.

Removing stop boards used to be required for 442s en route to Ilford on the NLL - but it could be anything between one platform edge or all of them, as an example.

Paul

[ChrisB]

PLatform edges, bridges & tunnels are the likely problems

[bobm]

Don't HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) have a problem when diverted onto the Reading-Waterloo line. I remember reading somewhere that they had issues with some platform edges. Not sure what they did about it.