Transpennine Electrification

[whole diary]

[woody]

It would appear that from the following link http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/48277-transpennine-electrification-manchesterleeds/page__st__75__p__545172#entry545172 that as well as Transpennine Electrification,Network Rail has also been asked to produce a report looking at the feasibility of extending the OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") to Hull, Scarborough and Middlesbrough.Quote "In ordinary times none of them would be remotely viable - they're all based around one train an hour. But we're not in ordinary times."
  So my question is surely then extending the wires from Cardiff to Swansea is also therefore justified in the circumstances(ie one HST^▸ (High Speed Train) an hour).

[Rhydgaled]

I think electrifying to Hull frees up rather more than one train per hour, and I think wires to Scarborough and Middlesbrough would enable a lot of diesel units to be released (the services would be under the wires for a very long time if the Manchester - York TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) route were wired) for reletivly little extra wiring (also makes the case for electrifying the central section stronger).

[eightf48544]

You are right Woody, it always made sense to extend the wires to Swansea. Via both Brigdend and Barry for diversions and local services particularly if the Valleys are wired so it will be more then one train an hour.

As for these other electrifications it's all good news.

One of the things with electrification is that it can be continuous process once the teams are up and running then they can be continuously employed on a rolling programme. Planning, procuring materials, doing the job and moving onto the next stretch of line. Hopefully they'll get the job done better and cheaper (per mile) over time as the teams gel and the supply chain gets geared up. Thus once the main lines are done then infills such a Hull Scarborough and Middlesborough, make a lot of sense and should be relatively cheap. Although hopefully in their quest to reduce costs the engineers will have learnt the lesson of the east Coast and put in a few more masts.

If DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) did away with the bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and went for an elctric loco with last mile diesel for Freight and hotel power for coaches when the wires are  down (although see above). plusthen a 4 engine diesel for the off wires bits which hopefully will get shorter and shorter as the wires spread. Then we would have a very good railway to be proud of.

[Tim]

I think the distinction between wiring the Pennines and to Swansea may be driven by the problem of getting new DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit).  DMUs are difficult to build (whilst staying within the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) loading gauge and meeting recent emissions standards) and expensive to fund (because investors worry that they may not have 30 years of revenue-earning use in them).  If you wire the TP route you release some almost new DMU units for use elsewhere.  I can understand the attraction of that.

Hull and Scarborough are much more similar propositions to Swansea.  A decision on all those places will turn I think on whether the government actually signs the contract for the Bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.).  If bi-mode provision is much more expensive than putting up extra wires (and running HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) under the wires for 2 or 3 extra years whilst we wait for that to happen)  then the wires should go up.  If they decide to electrify Hull and Scarborough then Swansea ought to be back on the agenda.

I hope all routes will be done eventually.

The big question about all these wires going up is how many new EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) do we need.  The ex-Thameslink 319's can't cover everthing and will themselves be due to retire before too long.  It would be nice to see a large EMU order in the next few years to take advantage of economies of scale.

[anthony215]

There are those who believe the reason why it was decided not to wire to Swansea is that they wanted to improve the business case for the Bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.)'s which looks now that it is about to be shot out of the water because of the high cost's.

I am looking forward to seing what the ROSCO^» (Rolling Stock Owning Company - about)'s have come up with as an alternative to IEP.

 I will put my money down that the Bi-mode IEP will be dropped with more electric versions being ordered instead especially if the scotish government decides to wire Edinburgh - Aberdeen

[eightf48544]

I think what Ian Walmsley who writes in Modern railways would want is an electric loco. with last mile diesel engine for movement and hotel power during wiring interuptions, and say rakes of 10+ coaches. Changing for a four engined (about 700 hp each) diesel loco for off the wire haulage. Both working push pull with the coaching coaching sets  splitable so intermediate driving trailers.

Unpowered coaches much cheaper, better ride and noise levels, we ought to able build a better Mark 3 these days. But no 737 interiors.

OK so you have a loco change but that ought to be no more than 3 minutes with modern auto couplings. It's likely that the train will be stopping for longer than that in any case. Swansea and Norwich you have a reversal Edingburgh a long stop. Splits should be equally fast.

[northwesterntrains]

I think the distinction between wiring the Pennines and to Swansea may be driven by the problem of getting new DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit).  DMUs are difficult to build (whilst staying within the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) loading gauge and meeting recent emissions standards) and expensive to fund (because investors worry that they may not have 30 years of revenue-earning use in them).  If you wire the TP route you release some almost new DMU units for use elsewhere.  I can understand the attraction of that.

Network Rail have identified that around 130 Pacers need replacing in the 2014 to 2019 Control Period.  They put a case in to the government to fund North TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) electrification (except York-Scarborough) and Valley Lines as a way of both replacing Pacers and replacing other DMUs that can replace Pacers with EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit).  The government have approved part of the North TPE electrification and apparently will talk with Network Rail next year about the viability of electrifying other parts not included so far like Hull and Middlesbrough.

The big question about all these wires going up is how many new EMUs do we need.  The ex-Thameslink 319's can't cover everthing and will themselves be due to retire before too long.  It would be nice to see a large EMU order in the next few years to take advantage of economies of scale.

The Guardian reported the government are looking at cascading EMUs to North TPE opposed to ordering new ones.  It is understood that refurbished 365s, due for replacement under the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) program, will be the 'new' TPE EMUs.  However, replacing 3 carriage trains with 23m carriages with 4 carriage trains with 20m carriages won't really provide the extra capacity required unless the intention is to run them all in 8 car formation but then you have problems with providing an on board trolley service.

[matt473]

This proves the commitment to Electrification by the government, though the political football over who is paying and having control of railways in Wales is delaying this I would say. Since IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) as days go on seems more and more unlikely the wires to Swansea will no doubt happen, although will no doubt only be confirmed the same time as Valley Lines electrification so that VoG will be funded as the valley lines project with the fact it would be a diversionary route an added bonus for "free" to the accountants working on wiring the main line. The WAG^» (Welsh Assembly Government - about) needs a kick up the backside to decide now what powers it wants and whether they will pay for infrastructure improvements too. Otherwise this politcal football will see pacers for a very long time yet and IEP not fit for actual purpouse

[Electric train]

Since IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) as days go on seems more and more unlikely the wires to Swansea will no doubt happen, although will no doubt only be confirmed the same time as Valley Lines electrification

When the valley lines get authorised by the Welsh Assembly the funding will only allow the wires to Bridgend, although the NR^» (Network Rail - home page) Electrification team expect that Bridgend to Swansea will get filled.

NR have got agreement in principle to buy another electrification train as the TP route is being constructed at the same time as the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) it is expected that the GWML unit will then move onto the MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about)

[anthony215]

Anyone know when Network rail are due to publish the report on the Cardiff Valley Lines electrification?

I knowsome have suggested using money from the EU^» (European Union - about) to pay for teh Cardiff Valley lines and wiring to Swansea.

I do think that they should wire  the Severn Tunnel Jct - Gloucester - Swindon since it will effectively kill off the need for the Bi mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) on the Swansea/Cardiff/- London route.

[Rhydgaled]

If DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) did away with the bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) and went for an elctric loco with last mile diesel for Freight and hotel power for coaches when the wires are  down (although see above). plusthen a 4 engine diesel for the off wires bits which hopefully will get shorter and shorter as the wires spread. Then we would have a very good railway to be proud of.

An electric loco with a last-mile diesel engine, for passenger purposes, would be almost as daft as bi-mode IEP I think. Stick to swapping an electric loco for a diesel one when the wires run out, or sticking a diesel loco on one end of an EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit).

Anyone know when Network rail are due to publish the report on the Cardiff Valley Lines electrification?

I think it is supposed to be complete this month. Personally I think they are missing a trick by making up seperate business cases for ValleyLines and Swansea - Cardiff, they improve the case for each other.

I think what Ian Walmsley who writes in Modern railways would want is an electric loco. with last mile diesel engine for movement and hotel power during wiring interuptions, and say rakes of 10+ coaches. Changing for a four engined (about 700 hp each) diesel loco for off the wire haulage. Both working push pull with the coaching coaching sets  splitable so intermediate driving trailers.

Unpowered coaches much cheaper, better ride and noise levels, we ought to able build a better Mark 3 these days. But no 737 interiors.

OK so you have a loco change but that ought to be no more than 3 minutes with modern auto couplings. It's likely that the train will be stopping for longer than that in any case. Swansea and Norwich you have a reversal Edingburgh a long stop. Splits should be equally fast.

My idea for the Pembroke Dock and Carmarthen services to/from Paddington is an Intercity 225 set (displaced by more electric IEPs for East Coast and less IEPs for Great Western) with wires to Swansea and the 91 being swapped for a life-extended, TDM-fitted, class 47. The time I heard for a loco swap is 9 minutes, making it unviable as a solution for most services but the long dwell at Swansea deals with that problem in that case.

[northwesterntrains]

Anyone know when Network rail are due to publish the report on the Cardiff Valley Lines electrification?

Network Rail released on report to the government recommending electrification for North TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express), Valley Lines and the London Overground 172 routes, providing the necessary facts and figures and asking for funding to be provided.  North TPE is the only one the government has announced.  I imagine that's because it's the only one that doesn't require another party's consultation.  Valley Lines will need to involve the Welsh Assembly, while London Overground will need to involve TfL^» (Transport for London - about).

[JayMac]

However, replacing 3 carriage trains with 23m carriages with 4 carriage trains with 20m carriages won't really provide the extra capacity

3 Car 185. 169 seats
4 Car 365. 242 seats

That's a fairly substantial boost in capacity per train.

[northwesterntrains]

However, replacing 3 carriage trains with 23m carriages with 4 carriage trains with 20m carriages won't really provide the extra capacity

3 Car 185. 169 seats
4 Car 365. 242 seats

That's a fairly substantial boost in capacity per train.

Add in:
* DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) compliance
* Sufficient luggage space for North TPE^▸ (Trans Pennine Express) services - they serve Manchester Airport and numerous university towns and cities. The 185s actually have insufficient luggage space and suitcases commonly get left in the doorways and aisles.
* Regional style seating with more tables replacing commuter style seating

And you'll be down to around 200 seats per 4 car set.  DDA compliance and the door layout are the main reasons why 3 car 185s have less seating than 3 car 158s.

TPE services have been 6 car sets full and standing at peak times now, so with passenger growth an 8 car set will be exactly the same by the time the electrification is complete.

[JayMac]

Add in:
* DDA^» (Disability Discrimination Act - about) compliance
<snip>
And you'll be down to around 200 seats per 4 car set.  DDA compliance and the door layout are the main reasons why 3 car 185s have less seating than 3 car 158s.

The Disability Discrimination Act has be repealed and replaced by the Equality Act 2010. The new Act contains provisions for the Secretary of State to exempt rail vehicles 'by exemption order' if he or she so choses:

183 Exemptions from rail vehicle accessibility regulations

(1)The Secretary of State may by order (an ^exemption order^

(a)authorise the use for carriage of a regulated rail vehicle even though the vehicle does not conform with the provisions of rail vehicle accessibility regulations with which it is required to conform;
(b)authorise a regulated rail vehicle to be used for carriage otherwise than in conformity with the provisions of rail vehicle accessibility regulations with which use of the vehicle is required to conform.

(2)Authority under subsection (1)(a) or (b) may be for^

(a)a regulated rail vehicle that is specified or of a specified description,
(b)use in specified circumstances of a regulated rail vehicle, or
(c)use in specified circumstances of a regulated rail vehicle that is specified or of a specified description.

(3)The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision as to exemption orders including, in particular, provision as to^

(a)the persons by whom applications for exemption orders may be made;
(b)the form in which applications are to be made;
(c)information to be supplied in connection with applications;
(d)the period for which exemption orders are to continue in force;
(e)the revocation of exemption orders.

(4)After consulting the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee and such other persons as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate, the Secretary of State may^

(a)make an exemption order in the terms of the application for the order;
(b)make an exemption order in such other terms as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate;
(c)refuse to make an exemption order.

(5)The Secretary of State may make an exemption order subject to such conditions and restrictions as are specified.

(6)^Specified^ means specified in an exemption order.

The above quote is an extract from the Equalities Act 2010 Chapter 3 'RAIL VEHICLES'
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/12/chapter/3

The above may be disappointing news for disabled people but it does give Train Operating Companies much more wriggle room to use rolling stock that would've failed compliance with the old DDA legislation. It may not be wise, politically, for an SoS to grant exemptions, but that SoS will also be mindful of the costs involved in seeing rail vehicles comply with the new Act and may well use their powers to grant exemptions.

As for luggage space or tables, unfortunately there is no legislation, old or new, that compels TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) to provide this!