The Anonymous Widower

Hull Trains Take The Pragmatic Decision

The September edition of Modern Railways has an article entitled Hull Trains Plans Bi-Mode Fleet.

Like First Great Western, First Hull Trains seem to have lost patience with Network Rail and the article said they were thinking about ordering bi-mode or electro-diesel trains.

They have now ordered five Class 800 trains from Hitachi, as is reported here on the BBC. This is the start of the article.

A rail company is investing £68m in a fleet of faster trains to ensure shorter journey times to London.

Hull Trains said it was buying five trains capable of running on either electricity-powered routes or with diesel fuel.

The firm said the trains had been bought because of delays in country-wide electrification of the rail network.

 

So it looks like the non-electrification of Selby to Hull has caused the company to take this pragmatic decision. In the last few months, they’ve even looked at electrifying that line themselves.

At least they will not be left with a fleet of incompatible trains, as when the electrification finally happens on all their routes to Hull and Beverly, the trains can be converted to all-electric Class 801 trains.

I do wonder if the delayed electrification across the UK, will cause a few more companies to take pragmatic decisions!

I think we might see.

  1. First TransPennine ordering Class 800 Trains for Liverpool to Hull and Newcastle.
  2. Virgin ordering Class 800 Trains for London to Chester, North Wales and Holyhead.

To get around the problems of non-electrified lines.

September 5, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | Leave a comment

Ilkeston Station In A Few Years Time

I am not putting a time-scale on this, as there are so many possibilities in the mix.

I think we can assume that at some point, there will be a new station, that will look substantially like this visualisation.

Ilkeston Station Visualisation

Ilkeston Station Visualisation

The Wikipedia entry for Ilkeston station says that the station is expected to open in August 2016. I think this may be challenging, but there is one factor that makes building a station here easier. It would appear that there will not be any substantial new track, so other than the station, there should not be a great deal of work to do, before trains can provide a service at the station.

There was also a substantial amount of engineering work done to the line through Ilkeston and Langley Mill in Summer 2007.

The Initial Train Service

I had intended to check whether trains between Nottingham and Leeds that call at Langley Mill, actually pass through the Ilkeston station site, when I visited Ilkeston. But as the weather was so bad and I was sitting on the other side of the train, I didn’t see anything.

I shall certainly be going to Nottingham on October 24th, so if I don’t get the information by then, I can take a detour.

If the trains that go through Langley Mill can stop at Ilkeston, the station would not have to wait long before the timetables were adjusted, so that they called. According to Wikipedia, this is the services at Langley Mill.

Northern Rail run an hourly service between Nottingham and Leeds that stops at Langley Mill. This service started from the December 2008 timetable change.

East Midlands Trains operate a few services per day from Langley Mill southbound to Nottingham and beyond (usually Norwich) and northbound to Sheffield (usually continuing to Liverpool Lime Street).

Some East Midlands Trains Mainline services from London St Pancras to Sheffield / Leeds call here, but generally interchange with London services should be made at Nottingham.

 

Incidentally a typical Nottingham to Leeds service stops at Langley Mill, Alfreton, Chesterfield, Dronfield, Sheffield, Meadowhall, Barnsley and Wakefield Kirkgate.

So will the new station at Ilkeston get a similar service? I think that the service will be at least as good as that to Langley Mill.

After all the timetable change of 2008 was implemented, when it was quite likely that a station would be built at Ilkeston, so I would assume timings make allowance for a possible stop at Ilkeston

In fact of the two stations, if either gets preference for services, it is more likely to be Ilkeston, as unless Langley Mill is upgraded it is a very basic station according to Network Rail.

One of the usual problems, when starting a service is finding the trains to run it. This delayed the opening of the Todmorden Curve by several months.

But in the case of services at Ilkeston, it’s mainly a process adjusting schedules so that passing trains, stop at the station.

Problems On The Midland Main Line Through Derby

It’s an ill wind, that blows nobody any good!

Ilkeston station is actually on the Erewash Valley Line, which runs from Long Eaton to south of Chesterfield joining the Midland Main Line at both ends.

In the Future section for the Erewash Valley Line on Wikipedia, this is said.

Network Rail as part of a £250 million investment in the regions railways has proposed improvements to the junctions at each end, resignalling throughout, and a new East Midlands Control Centre.

As well as renewing the signalling, three junctions at Trowell, Ironville and Codnor Park will be redesigned and rebuilt. Since the existing Midland Main Line from Derby through the Derwent Valley has a number of tunnels and cuttings which are listed buildings and it is a World Heritage Area, it seems that the Erewash line is ripe for expansion.

So it looks like Ilkeston could be on a by-pass of the Midland Main Line.

Electrification

The Midland Main Line is scheduled to be electrified and the services on the line could be provided by Class 800 and Class 801 trains,

I just wonder if Class 800 electro-diesel trains were run through Derby and Class 801 electric trains were run on the Erewash Valley Line, this might get round the problem of the heritage lobby objecting to electrifying through the World Heritage Area of the Derwent Valley, with its Grade 2 Listed tunnels and cuttings.

Derby would still get new trains. It would just be that the faster electrified ones ran up the Erewash Valley Line.

Would these trains call selectively at Long Eaton, Alfreton and Ilkeston?

Services To Derby

Ilkeston is in Derbyshire, so I expect there will be pressure to have a direct service to Derby.

At present, if you want to go between Langley Mill and Derby, you have to change at either Nottingham or Chesterfield.

I suspect that when Ilkeston station opens the route between Ilkeston and Derby will be as tortuous as it is now from Langley Mill.

Look at this Google Map of the area.

Around Ilkeston

Around Ilkeston

Ilkeston is indicated by the red arrow.

There must be a better way, than changing trains in Nottingham or Chesterfield.

But what?

The Erewash Valley Line goes South to Long Eaton, which has several trains per hour direct to Derby, so this could be the key to getting to Derby.

In a Notes on Current Station section on the Wikipedia entry for Long Eaton station, this is said.

The usable length of the station platforms is shorter than the express trains which stop here, so passengers arriving from London, Derby or Sheffield will usually have to get off from the front four carriages. Elderly passengers or those with pushchairs, heavy luggage or bicycles wishing to alight at Loughborough should take particular care to board the correct portion of the train. Cycles may have to be stored in vestibules away from the cycle lockers depending on the orientation of the train.

It is planned that both platforms will be extended by up to 10 metres by no later than 2012.

It is anticipated that developments along the Erewash line will result in changes for Long Eaton station. A plan drawn up in 2011 recommended a new Derby to Mansfield service via new stations at Breaston & Draycott, Long Eaton West (renamed from Long Eaton), Long Eaton Central, Stapleford & Sandiacre, Ilkeston, Eastwood & Langley Mill (renamed from Langley Mill), Selston & Somercotes and then to Pinxton via new trackbed connecting with the Mansfield line from Nottingham at Kirkby in Ashfield.

It strikes me that work at Long Eaton, the several new stations and improvements north of Langley Mill would enable direct services from Ilkeston to both Derby and Mansfield. A trackbed from Langley Mill to Kirkby in Ashfield is shown on Google Maps.

Langley Mill to Kirkby-in-Ashfield

Langley Mill to Kirkby-in-Ashfield

Alfreton is the station at the top left and Kirkby-in-Ashfield is at the top right. The Erewash Valley Line from Langley Mill, enters at the bottom and splits with one branch going to Alfretonand the other going East to cross the M1 and join the Robin Hood Line south of Kirkby-in-Ashfield.

On an Ordnance Survey map, dated 2009, the railway is shown as a multiple track line, probably serving collieries and open cast coalfields.

It all sounds very feasible too! Especially, as the Erewash Valley is an area of high unemployment, low car ownership and a dependence on public transport.

IPEMU Trains For Ilkeston?

If the Erewash Valley Line is electrified, so that Class 801 can run fast from London to Chesterfield and Sheffield, one option for the local services is to use Aventra IPEMU trains, which will be built in Derby.

IPEMU stands for Independently Powered Electric Multiple Unit. These trains have all the features of the standard four-car electric multiple unit, but they have an on-board battery that is charged when running from the overhead line and gives them a range of about sixty miles, when the wires run out.

So chargeing the battery on the Erewash Valley Line, they could reach Derby, Mansfield and Nottingham.

If Nottingham and Derby weren’t electrified until a later phase, then Class 800 electro-diesel trains could work the routes to London, until full electrification were to be completed.

Watch what happens about IPEMU trains.

Rumours have appeared in Modern Railways that orders for trains powered by the technology are imminent.

Tram-Trains For Ilkeston?

In my view the Nottingham Express Transit will get overcrowded in a few years and the capacity of the system will have to be increased.

One way to increase capacity would be to run tram-trains to destinations away from the city on the heavy rail lines. Once in the city centre they transfer to the tram lines and run as trams to suitable destinations, thus increasing the number of trams running on the various lines.

So tram-trains could say run between Ilkeston and say the Old Market Square or the Queens Medical Centre and then on to one of the terminals.

It all sounds rather fanciful, but go to Karlsruhe or Kassel and see the tram-trains in action.

Ilkeston To HS2

Tram-trains, IPEMU or standard trains from Ilkeston and other places to the North could link quite a few places to the proposed East Midlands Hub station at Toton.

Conclusion

The more I look at the future of Ilkeston station, the more I realise that constructing the new station is just petty cash in the big scheme of things around rail and tram expansion in the East Midlands.

A lot of money has been spent in sorting Nottingham station and expanding the Nottingham Express Transit and a lot more will be spent in improving and electrifying the Midland Main Line and the Erewash Valley Line. The latter will be equipped with several new stations and probably new trains of some sort.

 

 

September 4, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | 3 Comments

Walking To And From Ilkeston Station

I got off the bus on the roundabout in Ilkeston and walked along Millership Way to the construction site of Ilkeston station.

It took me about twenty minutes, so I would suspect that Ilkeston will need a shuttle bus to actually get between the town and the station.

Not much seemed to be happening, but then, it appears to my untrained eye, ythat the station is being built in the middle of a swamp. It’s certainly a challenging project. \Wikpedia saus this about construction delays.

During preliminary work at the site in June 2014, an ecological survey found protected great crested newts, delaying the start of construction until October 2014. This, together with additional flood protection work means that the station opening is deferred to spring 2015.

In October 2014, it was announced that the cost of proposed flood protection work exceeds the available budget, requiring a cheaper solution to be found. This further delays the start of construction until 2015, and the earliest opening date to ‘late 2015’..

In February 2015, it was announced that more great crested newts had been found, further delaying work on site. The opening is now expected to be by August 2016.

Hopefully, it will look like this when it is finished.

Ilkeston Station Visualisation

Ilkeston Station Visualisation

All of the pictures of the station site, were taken from the road on the left.

I walked back to Ilkeston and then had to climb the hill to where I was meeting local residents interested in their train station.

It was a challenging walk. As I said before, when they build the station there will be a need for a shuttle bus!

September 2, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , | Leave a comment

Nottingham To Ilkeston And Back

Ilkeston is a town without a railway station and this is said in Wikpedia about the town and its railway links.

Ilkeston has not had a railway station since 1967, despite its substantial population and the fact that the Midland Main Line (formerly part of the Midland Railway, later the LMS) skirts the eastern edge of the town. Due to recent rail reopenings in similarly-sized towns it is now, by some definitions, the largest town in Britain with no station.

So I had to go to the nearest station at Langley Mill and hopefully, I could organise a taxi. I took these pictures on the journey.

After trying three taxi numbers at Langley Mill and all saying they couldn’t help, I got a bus to Heanor from where I got another bus to Ilkeston. To be fair to the buses, I’ve travelled on much worse services elsewhere in the UK. Cambridge to Haverhill for a start. And I was not issued with a dreaded ticket.

After my meeting, I decide to take the easy route back, so I got an express bus into Nottingham and then use the Nottingham Express Transit to get to the station.

I don’t think that in the twenty-first century, where we’re supposed to use green public transport, that this is the best we can do to get in a reasonable time from Nottingham to Ilkeston.

A related question, is, Is it easier to get to Ilkeston by taking a train to Derby and getting the bus from there?

September 2, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | Leave a comment

Queen’s Medical Centre On The Nottingham Express Transit

The Queen’s Medical Centre is Nottingham’s big hospital.

The tram climbs onto a viaduct to pass through the hospital and although the walkways into the hospital aren’t fully completed, it is surely the way to provide transport to a hospital.

The guy manning the station, as surely it is too grand just be a stop, was proud of his charge, saying it is the only hospital with a tram stop in the UK. I think he could be right, although University station in Birmingham serves the Queen Elizabeth Hospital and my three local hospitals are all served by the Overground or Underground.

Having seen this station, there is no doubt in my mind, that to serve a hospital with its large number of people with mobility problems is the best way to do it, if it is possible.

Nottingham’s solution at the Queen’s Medical Centre is definitely world class.

Nottingham certainly passes the Two Elderly Siblings test with a score of at least nine out of ten.

One sibling is in the hospital and the other lives some distance away but can get to the nearest station to the hospital reasonably easy. Can they then get from the nearest station to the hospital using local transport? Even if they are being pushed in a wheelchair.

In Nottingham, you would use a lift at the station to get to the tram and then it’s a simple ride on a step-free low-floor tram to the station. The hospital is actually on the other side of the tram tracks on arrival from Nottingham station, but as it’s a tram, you just walk or be pushed across, to enter the hospital.

September 2, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , | 1 Comment

NG2 On The Nottingham Express Transit

I took these pictures at the NG2 tram stop.

It’s just a pretty normal tram stop by Nottingham’s standard, but the reason I stopped off here to take pictures, was that it is close to the triangular junction to the west of Nottingham station, where trains for Nottingham turn off the main Midland Main Line to access the station. This Google Map shows the area.

NG2 Nottingham

NG2 Nottingham

The NG2 tram stop is just South of the place where the road crosses the railway at the Western point of the junction, which goes in the direction of Beeston and the South. The line to the East leads to Nottingham station, and that to the North leads to Chesterfield, Sheffield and the North, as well as the Robin Hood Line.

The tram route curves away to the West to go to the Queen’s Medical Centre and Nottingham University.

In some ways it illustrates how Nottingham’s railways and the new trams weave a pattern around the  city, with very large numbers of possible routes.

As tram-trains are now on the menu and tram-trains were first employed in Nottingham’s twin city of Karlsruhe, I doubt that anybody can predict the next line to be developed in Nottingham.

The only certain thing, is that in my two trips to the city recently, is that the people of Nottingham are proud of their trams and are using the system in large numbers.

As I said in Conclusions On Phase 2 Of The Nottingham Express Transit, the system may suffer from London Overground syndrome, of being built without enough capacity and new trams, tram-trains or extensions will soon be in the pipeline.

 

 

 

September 2, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | | Leave a comment

Toton Lane On The Nottingham Express Transit

Toton Lane tram stop is the Southern Terminal of Line 1 of the Nottingham Express Transit.

It opened on the 25th August 2015 as part of Phase 2 of the NET. These are pictures. I took on a visit a week later.

The stop and the associated Park-and-Ride are very similar to the similar facility at Clifton South.

September 2, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | | Leave a comment

Walking Around Nottingham Station

When I arrived in Nottingham, the weather was still good, despite rain being forecast, so I went for a walk right around the train station to see if there was space for the junctions to connect tram-trains coming in as trains from points East and West to access the tram line that crosses the station in a North South direction with a tram stop above the station. This Google Map shows the area, where I walked.

Around Nottingham Station

Around Nottingham Station

Note that this map was created before the tram line over the station and the multi-coloured multi-story car park were built, but the old tram-stop on Station Street is clearly marked. The foot bridge over the station, which is a public footpath that also allows pedestrians to access the trains is the only bridge across the station.

These are pictures I took as I walked around the station

I started by walking East along Station Street that runs along the North side of the station, then crossed the rail lines on the road bridge before walking back to the station along Queen’s Road.

After a brief pit stop in the station, I crossed South and followed the tram route intending to pick it up at the next stop to go to Toton Lane. But it was a long walk, so I crossed back North across the railway and walked back to the station along the canal, from ewhere I caught the tram South.

Currently Wikipedia lists three possible tram-trains routes from Nottingham to expand the NET. Two are in the East; Gedling and Bingham and one is in the West; Ilkeston.

I think there is plenty of space around the station to accommodate these routes.

I suspect too, that as the routes have been discussed since the mid-2000s, any current or future development has been or is being built, so that it doesn’t compromise any possible tram-train connections.

September 2, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | Leave a comment

An Open Letter To All Those Along The Gospel Oak To Barking Line

I should say that I don’t live on the Gospel Oak To Barking Line (GOBlin), but I use it regularly.

I must say that I’m looking forward to using the new four-car trains on the line, but I’m not looking forward to all of the years of disruption, as the line is electrified.

In an article on the RailFuture web site,  how the electrification will be implemented is described.

It is expected that NR will electrify first one half of the line and then the other half, and that whilst electrification is in progress on each half, that part of the line will be closed and the service provided by rail replacement bus. Whilst electrification is in progress LOROL will be able to run longer trains on the remaining half of the line with the existing stock, provided platform lengthening is completed early whilst work proceeds. Therefore if electrification keeps to current plans and if TfL could source electric stock (possibly temporarily, until the new stock is available) when electrification is completed, overcrowding will only be a problem for a period of a year between now and the start of electrification.

That sounds like a plan for organising chaos.

Everywhere in the UK electrification projects are in trouble. Network Rail are getting the blame, but underneath it all is the crumbling Victorian infrastructure and other political and environmental problems. The problem is also made worse by a shortage of engineers and equipment and on top of this, you also have the justifiable desires of passengers, politicians and train companies to get things done as soon as possible and at an affordable cost.

On the Great Western, the train operating company, First Great Western have lost patience and have ordered extra electro-diesel go-anywhere trains, so they can increase their services to the West.

In the September edition of Modern Railways there is an article entitled  Class 387s Could Be Battery Powered.

The trains referred to in the article are an order of eight four-car Class 387 trains that will be used by First Great Western to provide electrified services to places like Newbury and Oxford.

The Class 387 train is a modern electric train produced by Bombardier, but will probably be the last of their ubiquitous Electrostar family to be produced before the company switches production in Derby to the new Aventra train for Crossrail and the London Overground.

In their article, Modern Railways says the following about the First Great Western order.

Delivery as IPEMUs would allow EMUs to make use of as much wiring as is available (and batteries beyond) while electrification pushes ahead under the delayed scheme, and in the longer term would allow units to run on sections not yet authorised for electrification, such as Newbury to Bedwyn. The use of IPEMUs might also hasten the cascade of Class 16x units to the west of the franchise.

Note that these trains are called IPEMUs or independently powered electric multiple units.

To passengers, there is no difference between the standard train and the IPEMU variant, but the IPEMU variants use overhead wires where they are available and charge their batteries at the same time. The batteries give the IPEMU trains a range of about sixty miles, where the wires are not available.

I think that IPEMU will be an acronym we’ll be hearing increasingly in the future.

Especially, as all Aventra trains are being built so they can be fitted with batteries, so every train is a potential IPEMU.

But don’t think that these new trains, are some form of second-class cobbled-together stop-gap!

Last year, I rode the prototype based on a modified Stansted Express from Manningtree to Harwich and back. The only thing that told me it wasn’t a normal Class 379 train, was the engineer sitting opposite, who was monitoring everything on a laptop.

They are a serious innovation using proven technology, developed by serious engineers, serious companies and cost-conscious train operators.

As I believe that electrifying the GOBlin will be a nightmare for contractors, train companies, passengers and residents alike, I feel there is a possible chance, that IPEMU variants of the Bombardier Aventra trains could be ordered for the line, as they’d charge their batteries on the stretch of overhead wires at Barking and then make the twenty-four mile trip from Woodgrange Park to Gospel Oak and back silently on the batteries.

The only work that would need to be done, would be platform lengthening to accept the new four-car trains and the electrifying of the terminal platform at Barking and possibly Gospel Oak. This work would not need a long closure and once it was done, the trains could be delivered. Similar platoform work on the North and East London Lines has been done to accept the new five-car trains, during weekend closures.

The extension to Barking Riverside would probably be fully-electrified and then when the passenger trains are all delivered, the rest of the line could be electrified using a method and pace, that would be acceptable to all.

One possible benefit could be a lower cost of providing the new electric trains and that some of the savings could be used to upgrade stations with full step-free access, better shelters and other facilities.

So if you should hear rumours that electrification of the GOBlin is to be delayed and battery-powered trains are to be used in the interim, don’t think slow, uncomfortable, overcrowded milk-floats!

It’s more like ordering a Ford Escort hire car from Hertz for your holiday and finding that on collection they’ve given you a Toyota Prius.

 

 

 

August 31, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , | 1 Comment

Affordable Electrification

In First Great Western’s Pragmatic Large And Little Solution To The Problems Of Great Western Electrification, I put forward a theory that First Great Western were thinking pragmatically and using new innovative trains to provide services on their network.

The Large And Little Approach

I called it a Large (Class 800 train or similar) and Little (IPEMU) approach. In the related article I was assuming that the IPEMU or Independently Powered Electrical Multiple Unit was based on a Class 387 train, but as Electrostars are being succeeded by Aventras, the IPEMU could equally well be based on the newer design.

So how will these trains affect electrification in other parts of the country?

Also in the September 2015 Edition Modern Railways are three articles, where a Class 800 or an IPEMU could be the solution.

  1. Hull Trains are reported looking for a bi-mode fleet to run their Hull services, as they would bridge the unelectrified seventy miles of line between Selby and Hull. Their specification seems to have been written for the Class 800 train.
  2. Services to Blackpool have also been approved, which if the electrification is not ready in time, is a route that could be handled by a Class 800 or an IPEMU.
  3. Roger Ford is also talking about Open Access Hotting Up. Some of the routes would be ideal for either a Class 800 or an IPEMU, as lots of places without a decent service to London, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow or other large cities, are thirty or so miles off a main electrified line. Places like Yarmouth, Lowestoft, Sudbury, Cromer, Lincoln, Skegness, Wisbech, Windermere, Chester and Burnley come to mind.

Part-Time Electric Trains

Both the Class 800 trains and an IPEMU, are effectively part-time electric trains.

The Class 800 is an electric train with an on-board diesel engine for use, where there are no overhead wires. It will thus be able to go between London and the South West in a few year’s time, by using electric power between London and Newbury and diesel power eldsewhere. As more and more of the line is electrified, more of the journey will be done under electric power.

The IPEMU uses an on-board battery, charged when working under the overhead wires to effectively serve the same purpose as the diesel engines of the Class 800, and provide power on sections of the line without overhead wires.

Common to both types of train will be a sophisticated control system, that puts the pantograph up and down depending on whether the train is running under electrified wires.

So as more and more overhead wires are installed, the trains become much more full-time electric trains.

When a Class 800 is no longer needed to use its diesel engines, they can be removed to convert the train into an all-electric Class 801 train.

With the IPEMU, you just remove the batteries.

So one of the big advantages of these two trains, is that you never end up with a surplus of trains, that are no use anywhere else on the network.

We’re always going to have a need for 200 kph high-speed electric trains for long-distance services and four-car electric trains will find plenty of work all over the network.

Thoughts On IPEMU Trains

I also think, that as the years pass, IPEMU technology will get better and much more efficient with a longer range when running on the batteries. Drivers and computerised train management systems will also learn how to coax the maximum range out of the trains.

Also with Bombardier switching production to the new lighter and more efficient Aventra train, which according to this article on Global Rail News, is designed so that lithium-iron batteries can added as required. This is said.

AVENTRA can run on both 25kV AC and 750V DC power – the high-efficiency transformers being another area where a heavier component was chosen because, in the long term, it’s cheaper to run. Pairs of cars will run off a common power bus with a converter on one car powering both. The other car can be fitted with power storage devices such as super-capacitors or Lithium-Iron batteries if required.

The prototype train based on a Class 379 train, weighs in at forty tonne a car, as against the planned weight of thirty-five tonne for an Aventra. The article also says this.

Bombardier’s EBI Drive 50 Driver Assistance System enables drivers to achieve an economical driving style and energy savings of up to 15%. Regenerative dynamic braking saves yet more, as does the use of ‘intelligent’ air conditioning and a ‘Smart Stabling’ system to shut unused vehicles down when out of service but come back online quickly when required.

So what sort of range will an Aventra set up to run as an IPEMU, have on batteries, bearing in mind that the heavier and less-efficient prototype can do sixty miles. But does it really matter what the train can do on batteries, if you can provide short lengths of overhead wire and have intelligent systems on the train to put the pantograph up and down accordingly.

I believe that there is probably an opportunity to create the ultimate Aventra IPEMU within a few years.

This could enable services like.

  1. London to Yarmouth via Cambridge, Thetford and Norwich
  2. London to Salisbury and Exeter
  3. Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough
  4. Manchester to Sheffield
  5. Newcastle to Carlisle

In my list, there would seem to be a large number of routes in East Anglia. But then Anglia Greater Anglia were part of the trials of the Class 379 IPEMU test train.

Aventra And Aventra IPEMU Compared

If what I gleaned on my tip in the Class 379 IPEMU at Manningtree is true, the performance difference between the two trains will be minimal.

I also believe that from a passenger’s view, the trains will be identical.

The big difference comes, when you convert a line for the two trains.

Suppose you want to run either train on say a branch line like Felixstowe, which is a dozen miles off an electrified line with a station at the end.

Obviously, you would need to modify stations, track, bridges and tunnels accordingly, so they fitted the new trains and any freight traffic on the route. You would probably make enough space, for overhead wires, even if you were not fitting them at this time.

If the line was only going to be served by the IPEMU variant and there was to be no other electric traffic, the wires would not need to be installed.

Once the line was complete with signalling and fully inspected and certified, the trains would be able to run.

If the trains to be used were to be the IPEMU variant, you would be running test services on the line long before you would with conventional trains.

In how many places would the use of these trains provide a modern service without the expense and time-scale of full electrification, which seems to be riddled with all sorts of cost-elevating problems?

Case Study 1 – Edinburgh To Inverness

I’m including this as it is a journey I have done in the cab of an InterCity 125. I took a video.

The journey takes three hours thirty three minutes with stops along the way.

At present only a small amount of the route close to Edinburgh is electrified, but by 2018, the line will be electrified as far as Dunblane.

When the new Class 800 trains are delivered, these trains will run this route from London, as my train had done.

As there is now so little electrification between Edinburgh and Inverness, these trains will probably take the same time on introduction, but as more electrification is commissioned, the time through the Highlands will drop.

They will at least get up from London to Edinburgh in a faster time, than they do now, as they will take full advantage of the fully electrified route.

Other very long routes would probably benefit from the use of Class 800 trains.

  1. Aberdeen to Penzance
  2. Bournemouth to Manchester
  3. Liverpool to Norwich
  4. Cardiff to Manchester
  5. London Euston to Holyhead

Many like London to Holyhead have long stretches of electrified line.

One great advantage, is that if say the route gets electrified in the future, you can use Class 801 electric trains, to give passengers the same or better level of service.

Case Study 2 – Carlisle To Newcastle

I have listed that IPEMU trains would be able to run between Carlisle to Newcastle.

So I will look at this line as a case study.

I don’t know the Tyne Valley Line well, but it is about sixty miles long and has electrified lines at both ends. Traditional electrification may require a lot of bridge and station reconstruction to accommodate the overhead wires, whereas an IPEMU could use the line without any modifications to infrastructure, as it can use any line that the current Class 156 trains on the line can. There would of course be a need to make sure that at both ends of the line, there was sufficient electrification to fully charge the train for its return journey.

So the cost of replacing diesel trains on this line with modern electric ones, would be solely the cost of the new trains, and perhaps the cost of a small amount of electrification in the stations and the stabling sidings at each end of the line.

In this case, I suspect Network Rail would breathe a big sigh of relief, if they didn’t have to electrify this line, with all its logistical and possibly environmental problems.

How many lines in the UK, could be given new electric passenger trains in this way?

Infrastructure Problems

Much of the infrastructure problems delaying and increasing the costs of electrification is dealing with inadequate Victorian infrastructure like the flying buttesses at Chorley and Farnworth Tunnel.

Some of these infrastructure problems have to be fixed as they are in danger of collapse and others offer inadequate clearance for modern freight trains.

I also heard from drivers in Liverpool, that they notice the quality of the land as they drive the Class 319 trains over Chat Moss. It caused Stephenson a lot of trouble and also didn’t help in the erection of the overhead wires between Liverpool and Manchester.

So perhaps we should adopt a pragmatic approach to putting up the overhead wires.

For instance, if IPEMU trains had been a standard UK train, when the electrification between Liverpool and Manchester was designed, would engineers have decided not to electrify across Chat Moss, as the batteries could be used?

Visual Intrusion Of Electrification

I think too, we shouldn’t underestimate the lack of visual intrusion if say a picturesque branch line was to be served by an IPEMU rather than by a traditional electric train. The Windermere branch and some lines in South Wales may well be better served by a more visually acceptable IPEMU.

Case Study 3 – The Windermere Branch

So will we see the electrification on the ten mile long, Windermere branch cut back and IPEMU serving this branch? According to this government document, the project will cost sixteen million pounds. Buying trains is often quoted at a million pounds a carriage, so would the budget be better spent on buying two or three  IPEMU for First TransPennine?

There are other reasons, why this could happen.

  1. First TransPennine is owned by the same company as First Great Western and they have the same problems over electrification as their West Country cousins. So will we see the same pragmatism in both companies?
  2. There would be no infrastructure work required at all on the branch and the electric trains could serve any desired point to the south like Preston, Liverpool, Manchester and Crewe.
  3. This area is very special to a lot of people and it only wants someone with deep pockets and no sense, who objects to electrification to cause Network Rail to blow the whole budget on legal fees. Replacing one diesel train with a quieter battery train probably doesn’t cause these problems.
  4. Remember too, that working from the overhead line, the Class 387 is an 110 mph train, that could mix it with the Class 390 Pendolinos on the West Coast Main Line.
  5. Network Rail probably don’t want to do the electrification of the Windermere branch, as it will consume resources that could be better deployed elsewhere.

So if I was in charge, I wouldn’t electrify the Windermere branch, but use IPEMU trains. Windermere would get smart new electric trains and Network Rail would have one less job to do.

The Big Beast Enters The Jungle

Sir Peter Hendy has now been made the Chairman of Network Rail.

In my view, he is an excellent choice and he will make a difference to the perceived shambles that is Network Rail’s record on electrification.

He has certainly got proven qualities that will help him in his new job.

  1. Anybody who can work with Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone and not get fired, must have the knack of dealing with politicians.
  2. In the creation of Crossrail and the London Overground, he seems to have got on well with train companies and Network Rail, despite some of them having to give way on decisions, that meant they lost revenue and profits.
  3. From what I’ve heard from workers and engineers, project management in Transport for London is pretty good and projects regularly come in on time and under budget.
  4. On the Over/Underground innovative infrastructure solutions like the Circle Line becoming a spiral and the Clapham Kiss are encouraged.

The way a company or organisation behaves starts at the top.

Tram-Trains

I like tram-trains and I’ve seen them working successfully all over Germany. In their simplest form, they allow trams on a self-contained tram network like Croydon, Manchester or Sheffield to transfer onto the heavy rail network and run as trains to another town or city. The tram-train trial in Sheffield, where Class 399 tram-trains will run between Cathedral and Rotherham Parkgate, is fairly simple, but some tram-train networks in Germany like Kassel and Karlsruhe stretch for over a hundred miles.

There is no reason, why extensive tram-train networks could not be developed in some UK cities and towns. How about?

  • Birmingham
  • Blackpool
  • Cardiff
  • Edinburgh
  • Nottingham
  • Sheffield

Obviously the trial in Sheffield must be successful.

If a city has a modern tramway, I feel that to use it as a base for tram-trains, has many advantages.

  • Affordable electrification on rural and secondary routes
  • Increasing the number of trams running through city centres and on parts of the network needing an increase in capacity.
  • Tramway running to difficult to reach local attractions and locations
  • Relieving capacity problems in stations by putting some lines on a much better-routed tramway, like say through a Shopping Centre, past a sports ground or along the coast.
  • In some places in Germany, tram-trains have even released the main station for redevelopment for other uses.
  • Also in Germany, I have a feeling that tram-trains have been used to link two separate tram networks by using a connecting heavy rail route. Think Manchester and Sheffield along the Hope Valley Line.

In addition, we could even make a particular type of tram-train a standard and develop methods of standardised tramway construction.

But would say Yarmouth accept the same system as Blackpool? Or Liverpool the same one as Manchester?

Tramway construction in this country has a bad reputation, as systems like Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield and Edinburgh have been delivered late and have caused excessive grief during construction. It is worth comparing these unhappy experiences with the current progress of the Wimbledon Line Enhancement Programme on the London Tramlink. It is a tricky project to provide a new terminal platform within Wimbledon station. Work started on July 13th this year and the new platform is scheduled to open in October.

We must get our project management of tramway construction and enhancement right!

Case Study 4 – Tram-Trains In Blackpool

Blackpool Tramway used to be much larger and is one that could be grown by the use of tram-trains.

This report on the BBC, talks about Balfour Beatty withdrawal from the project to electrify the lines around the North-West, which includes Blackpool.

Modern Railways in September is also reporting that the Liverpool to Blackpool North service will be split to allow Class 319 electric trains to work the southern part of the route.

Let’s hope this hiatus results in a sensible solution for Blackpool.

Included in the report of the North of England Electrification Task Force is a proposal in Tier Two to electrify Burnley to Colne  and Kirkham to Blackpool South.

These two routes meet at Preston, so why not use a tram-train to connect Colne to Blackpool. The line is mainly single-track and around Burnley, there are some massive viaducts, which probably would be expensive to electrify to main line standards.

So electrifying this route to allow tram-trains to serve it, would probably be more affordable. The route would be as follows.

  • Colne to Rose Grove – Single-line tramway
  • Rose Grove to Kirkham via Preston – Double track electrified heavy rail
  • Kirkham to Blackpool South – Single-line tramway
  • At Blackpool South the tram-train would join the Blackpool tramway.

There would also be possibilities to use tram-trains on the former Fleetwood Branch to link the town to Preston.

In the long term, I believe that tram-trains emanating from Blackpool and Preston could make use of some of the disused or rather badly-served rail lines in the area.

Could the Ormskirk to Preston Line be served by tram-trains working from Blackpool, thus improving connection between Preston and Blackpool and the area of Lancashire north of Liverpool and around Southport?

Around the turn of the Century, Blackpool was a decaying resort living on former glories, with a rather quaint tram going up the coast, no direct rail service to London and only a fleet of decrepit trains taking visitors and residents to Preston and beyond.

Now fifteen years later, it has a modern tramway, that compares well with any in the world and it is due to get electrified services to Preston, the rest of the North West and London, if the electrification project can be rescued.

Adding tram-trains into the town to increase connectivity can only be good for Blackpool, Preston and the Greater North West. They would also have the benefit of taking two lines off the list of lines to be electrified.

Power Stations

If we look at the IPEMUs, they will have a range of at least 60 miles. So suppose an IPEMU wanted to go from perhaps fifty miles one side of an electrified station like Crewe to fifty miles the other side. Could the train sit at the platform at Crewe, whilst passengers are unloaded and loaded with its pantograph up to charge the battery for the next part of the journey? Or perhaps its journey could be arranged so that for a short distance, the train ran along an electrified line?

I thin engineers will come up with innovative ideas to get power to IPEMUs.

Suppose for example, a branch line from an electrified main line was say about thirty miles long, which as the train would have to go out and back from the main line, this might be towards the range limit of an IPEMU. Perhaps by electrifying a few miles at the main line end of the branch, the branch would now be well within the range of an IPEMU. As the electric power would be taken from the main line, there would be no problems getting power to the short length of overhead wire.

Case Study 5 – London to Yarmouth Via Cambridge And Norwich

Could this route be run by an IPEMU?

The journey is effectively in four parts.

  1. London to Ely – Electrified
  2. Ely to Norwich – Not Electrified
  3. Norwich Station – Electrified
  4. Norwich to Yarmouth – Not Electrified

The longest section that is non-electrified is the section between Ely and Norwich at just over fifty miles.

Yarmouth is just twenty miles from Norwich, so it would appear that if the wait at Norwich station is sufficient to charge the battery, then a London to Yarmouth service via Cambridge, Cambridge Science Park and Ely would be a feasible service for an IPEMU. The only infrastructure needed might be to electrify some extra platforms at Norwich and the bay platforms at Cambridge.

I think that this case study shows the flexibility and capabilities of an IPEMU, AND illustrates why Abellio Greater Anglia (AGA) were very keen to help out in the trial of the Class 379 IPEMU. They knew that it was likely that a four-car IPEMU could start from London or Cambridge, stop at the new Cambridge Science Park station, Ely and Thetford and reach Norwich, where after charging batteries it would proceed to Yarmouth and return to Norwich. Most of the journey to Norwich could possibly be done at a line speed of upwards of 70 mph, thus comfortably outperforming the current diesel multiple unit in terms of time, frequency and comfort. The service could also bring Yarmouth into the electrified network and give the town a direct connection to London. AGA would be rewarded in extra passengers bringing in more revenue.

Knowing the area well, I think that if two trains an hour ran each way between Cambridge and Norwich, the locals would be very pleased.

Whilst looking at Norwich the distances of Cromer, Sheringham and Lowestoft from the city are twenty, thirty and twenty-five miles respectively. So all four major destinations on the branches from Norwich could be served by IPEMUs.

Case Study 6 – Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough

To be fair to Ipswich and Suffolk, I will also look at how IPEMUs could be used between Ipswich and Cambridge and Peterborough

Ipswich to Cambridge is electrified at both ends, so the IPEMU trains would just have to bridge the gap between Haughley Junction and Cambridge, which is a distance of about thirty miles. At both ends of the line they would fully charge their batteries.

Ely to Peterborough is not electrified for about thirty miles, so even if an Ipswich to Peterborough IPEMU didn’t pick up power at Ely, it could probably travel direct from Haughley to Peterborough under battery power.

The two branch lines at Ipswich to Felixstowe and Lowestoft are twelve and fifty miles long respectfully, so although Felixstowe would be easily served by an IPEMU, unless some form of charging could be provided at Lowestoft, serving Lowestoft is probably not possible.

But then Suffolk people are very resourceful and as the county is pretty flat, so I suspect they’ll find some way of getting the standard IPEMU between Ipswich and Lowestoft.

One way might be for the Lowestoft trains to actually go between Ipswich and Norwich via Lowestoft. Trains would leave Ipswich and Norwich at times, so that they arrived in Lowestoft a few minutes apart. The trains would then leave in a few minutes to the alternate start point.

An advantage of this routing, is that towns like Beccles and Halesworth, would get a direct connection to Norwich and those on the Norwich to Lowestoft Line would get a direct connection to Ipswich.

So both trains would travel a distance of seventy-five miles over some very flat countryside, which could probably be managed by an Aventra IPEMU.

If the Felixstowe branch was to be electrified, this would cut a couple of miles off the non-electrified route.

This analysis is probably totally wrong, but I suspect that Network Rail have a cunning plan to get IPEMUs from Ipswich to Lowestoft.

The only other line in East Anglia run with diesel trains is the twelve-mile long Gainsborough Line from Marks Tey to Sudbury. It therefore could be easily served using a single IPEMU, This would give the possibility of all London and local passenger services in East Anglia being served by electric trains.

Saying they were an all-electric railway, would not be a negative marketing point for AGA or their successors. But perhaps more importantly, what would it save in running and maintenance costs?

Extending Local Networks With IPEMUs

In the earlier Case Studies 5 and 6, I showed how a network of lines running electric trains could be created around Cambridge, Ely, Ipswich and Norwich, using IPEMUs.

So are there any other hubs, which have a network of local lines converge, where IPEMUs could be used to create an electric network or expand an existing one?

The following cities have networks of local lines and are on electrified major routes.

  • Birmingham
  • Edinburgh
  • Glasgow
  • Leeds
  • Liverpool
  • Manchester
  • Peterborough

In the next few years the following places should be added.

  • Bristol
  • Cardiff
  • Middlesbrough
  • Nottingham

In some places like Cardiff and Leeds, the local networks are being developed by traditional electrification,  and in others like Nottingham, tram-trains may play a big part, but could IPEMUs be used as I showed they could be in East Anglia?

Case Study 7 – Bristol

This entry in Wikipedia entitled Rail Services in the West of England gives details of all the myriad lines that exist or did exist in the Bristol area.

This page on the Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways shows a rather jolly map of railways around the city.

There have also been plans for a Greater Bristol Metro for some time, that ties all of the lines together.

Once Bristol Temple Meads station and some of the lines are electrified, it might be possible to use IPEMUs to serve some of the branch lines, as most of them are less than twenty miles long.

Electro-Diesel Freight Locomotives

Nobody except possibly the operators, love the Class 66 locomotive, which is extensively used for freight in the UK. It doesn’t meet the latest EU regulations and it’s noisy and unloved by the drivers to whom I’ve spoken.

Electrifying freight routes like Felixstowe to Nuneaton, would allow operators to send freight trains between Felixstowe and the Midlands, North and Scotland, using electric haulage all the way.

Next year, we’ll see the first of the new electro-diesel locomotives; the Class 88, which is an electric locomotive, that can use an on-board diesel engine, where there are no overhead wires.

How will these and other locomotives using similar technology affect the costs and need for electrification?

In the case of any electrified route to a port like Felixstowe or London Gateway, overhead wires in the port can present a problem, which an electro-diesel locomotive solves, as it uses the on-board diesel, anywhere near the sidings in the port.

Future Electrification

In England and Wales, there are several big electrification projects in progress in addition to the Great Western.

  • Gospel Oak to Barking Line
  • East Anglia and Freight Routes From Felixstowe
  • Trans Pennine from Liverpool to Hull
  • Midland Main Line/Electric Spine
  • Secondary and Branch Lines In The North
  • South Wales Valleys
  • Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter
  • Ashford to Hastings and Eastbourne
  • Hurst Green and Uckfield
  • Reading to Gatwick

I’ll now discuss each in detail with respect to the pragmatic attitude that seems to be being taken by train operating companies and Network Rail.

Gospel Oak to Barking Line

The problems on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line (GOBLin) are summed up as follows.

  • Not enough passenger capacity
  • Too many environmentally-unfriendly Class 66 locomotives pulling freight trains through the area.

The line is also being extended to Barking Riverside, where given the infrastructure in the area, the new extension will be fully electrified. So the layout of the line is effectively a twelve mile or so non-electrified line connected to fully electrified lines at both ends.

As new Aventra trains are being delivered for the line, why not add batteries to the GOBlin part of the order so that these trains can run as IPEMUs, thus just leaving the problem of the freight locomotives.

The money saved could be used to improve some of the stations, with full step-free access, longer platforms,better shelters and other facilities.

Incidentally, this line would surely make a very good test track for the Aventras with batteries. If the trains were available tomorrow, they could probably start running after a few modifications to the platforms and electrification of the platform the trains use at Barking station.

The Class 66 locomotive problem will only be solved by full electrification, but an interim solution would be to use Class 88 locomotives on the GOBlin.

I think Network Rail would file abandonment of full electrification under Relieved, as electrifying this line is going to be difficult with all the viaducts and bridges and the need to run lots of replacement buses across a congested city to get passengers to work, rest and play. There is an article on the Railfuture web site, which describes how the electrification might be performed. This is a paragraph.

It is expected that NR will electrify first one half of the line and then the other half, and that whilst electrification is in progress on each half, that part of the line will be closed and the service provided by rail replacement bus. Whilst electrification is in progress LOROL will be able to run longer trains on the remaining half of the line with the existing stock, provided platform lengthening is completed early whilst work proceeds. Therefore if electrification keeps to current plans and if TfL could source electric stock (possibly temporarily, until the new stock is available) when electrification is completed, overcrowding will only be a problem for a period of a year between now and the start of electrification.

It sounds like a lesson in how to organise chaos.

Changing the trains to Aventra IPEMU would also release eight Class 172 diesel trains, for cascade to other routes all over the country on delivery of the new trains.

Obviously, the GOBlin needs to be fully electrified for freight trains, but if the passenger train problem has been solved, this could surely be done at a slower pace, without closing the line, for more than the odd day or two at weekends.

Also if all stations were made step-free before the full electrification, there would be some easier routes for passengers to use to by-pass the works.

East Anglia and Freight Routes From Felixstowe

East Anglia in general suffers from similar problems to the GOBlin of not enough quality passenger  train capacity and large numbers of freight trains, mostly going to and from the Port of Felixstowe.

The main routes are electrified from London to Ipswich, Norwich, Cambridge and Ely, but there are several large gaps in the electrification.

  • Ely to Ipswich
  • Ely to Norwich
  • Ely to Peterborough
  • Ipswich to Cambridge
  • Ipswich to Felixstowe
  • Norwich to Yarmouth

In addition, there are branch lines that need better trains or are being talked about for reopening.

  • Ipswich to Lowestoft
  • March to Wisbech
  • Marks Tey to Sudbury
  • Norwich to Cromer
  • Norwich to Lowestoft

I haven’t included it, but given the right trains would it be possible to re-open Sudbury to Cambridge via Haverhill? Perhaps, as a single track or even a tramway.

There is also a new station at Cambridge Science Park being built and I believe this needs direct services to Norwich and Ipswich.

I believe most, if not all, of the main line gaps could be bridged and the branch lines could be served by IPEMUs. These trains would also open up the possibility of direct services between London and Bury St. Edmunds, Lowestoft, Thetford, Yarmouth and perhaps a few other places. In recent memory both Lowestoft and Yarmouth had direct services to and from London.

I feel that Norwich in Ninety will require faster trains with better acceleration on the route. These would probably be nine-car Class 801 electric trains. Would perhaps, a couple of electro-diesel Class 800 trains be added, to run London to Norwich and Yarmouth via Cambridge, Ely and Thetford?

It might appear that this would remove a lot of the need for completing the electrification in East Anglia, but I believe two lines should be electrified.

The Felixstowe branch line, which serves the Port of Felixstowe should probably be electrified, so that engine changes at Ipswich are avoided for freight trains that are being hauled all the way by an electric  or electro-diesel locomotive.

The line from Peterborough to Ely should also be electrified, as this would provide a valuable electrified diversion route for the East Coast Main Line. Such a diversion would have been invaluable last Christmas, when Kings Cross was closed, due to overrunning engineering work. A twelve coach shuttle could have been run between Liverpool Street and Peterborough via Cambridge and Ely.

As I showed in Case Studies 5 and 6, all other lines in East Anglia could be run by IPEMUs.

At some point in the next couple of decades, Network Rail will tackle the biggest bottleneck on the railways of the UK; the Digswell viaduct. This will obviously need line closures and if Ely to Peterborough is electrified, a shuttle can be run bypassing the trouble.

Trans Pennine Routes from Liverpool to Hull

The routes across the Pennines are both complex and comprehensive. This map shows the current and planned electrification.

Northern Electrification Map

Northern Electrification Map

At present Network Rail is attempting to electrify the lines shown in yellow and to be frank, is not really performing on time and on budget.

In Crossrail Of The North, I said this.

Is it farther between Liverpool and Hull or from London to Norwich?

Actually, they are about the same being around two hundred kilometres for both.

But compare the train times between the two city pairs.

Liverpool to Hull takes three and a quarter hours, with at least one change, whereas London to Norwich takes five minutes under two hours.

We;re not far off now, before Network Rail publish their Norwich in Ninety plans. In this recent article in the Eastern Daily Press, this is said.

Recommendations from a task force which has been pressing for improvements – which includes £476m of infrastructure investment and new trains to be demanded in the next operator contract – were supported by chancellor George Osborne in the autumn statement.

So what are they doing about the similar problems of speeding up the myriad rail routes across the Pennines?

The problems across the Pennines are in addition to the timing problems, one of inadequate capacity in the Class 185 trains, that run on most of the long distance routes. They may have a 100 mph top speed, but these three-car trains are definitely budget trains, specified by the Treasury.

The first solution is for the operator; First TransPennine Express to do what its sister company First Great Western has done and get some trains, that can do the job that the infrastructure will allow.

These are the various routes run by First TransPennine Express.

Much of the North Transpennine Route from Liverpool to Newcastle and Hull via Manchester and Leeds, is electrified, although the Manchester to Leeds section and the three branches to Hull, Scarborough and Middlesborough are not.

The South TransPennine Route, is only electrified round Manchester, whereas on the TransPennine NorthWest Route only the branches to Blackpool, Barrow and Windermere are without electrification.

Timings are generally slow and I do hope that Network Rail are coming up with the track improvements that will speed up the journeys. They seem to have been able to find savings between London and Norwich, so can they do the same across the Pennines?

Perhaps Liverpool to Hull in Hundred would be a catchy target?

As some parts of the route are electrified, a Large and Little solution to the trains may also be appropriate.

The Large component could be a variant of the standard electro-diesel Class 800, of an appropriate size and layout. I suspect that the standard five-car train being built at Newton Aycliffe for First Great Western and Virgin Trains East Coast might be a good starting point. In the September edition of Modern Railways, there is a headline of Bi-Modes for TPE? Translated out of jargon, that is saying will TransPennine Express get Class 800 trains or similar?

Electro-diesel trains would be specified, as I can’t see the Northern Electrification being finished in the near future. But when it is finished, the diesel engines will just be removed to convert the trains to the electric Class 801.

The Little component would be the IPEMU. It would probably be needed as some of the destinations and branches may not accept the larger train.

In the Future section for the Wikiedia entry for First TransPennine Express, this is said.

In June 2014 the DfT confirmed that there will be two separate franchises in the north of England, one providing intercity rail services and a second providing local rail services. There are proposals to transfer theManchester Airport to Blackpool North, Preston and the Lancaster to Barrow-in-Furness, Oxenholme to Windermere and the York to Scarborough and Doncaster to Cleethorpes services to the Northern franchise and transfer the Nottingham to Liverpool portion of the Norwich to Liverpool service currently operated by East Midlands Trains to the TransPennine franchise.

So before I leave TransPennine Routes, I had better look at what this might mean.

It looks like the Scarborough, Cleethorpes, Windermere and Barrow branches will become part of Northern Rail.

I showed earlier that the Windermere branch would be an easy trip for an IPEMU and this could run over the electrified network from there to Manchester Victoria, Piccadilly and Airport, Liverpool and hopefully, Blackpool.

The Barrow branch would also be possible for an IPEMU as it is well under sixty miles for a return trip from Carnforth, so this would mean that one of the most scenic rail routes in the UK, wouldn’t ruin the countryside by electrification.

The Scarborough branch is forty-two miles long, so it is too long for the current predicted performance of a IPEMU. If a simple method of charging the train at Scarborough station could be developed, then this route would probably be feasible.

The Cleethorpes Branch is probably possible with an IPEMU.

So I come to the conclusion, that although electrification of the TransPennine routes, would be nice and will eventually be done, the same high-quality passenger service across the Pennines, you would get with electric trains, can be obtained with a Large and Little mixture of new Class 800 and IPEMU trains.

Midland Main Line/Electric Spine

The Midland Main Line and the closely-related Electric Spine is one project that will be electrified conventionally, although there would be scope for perhaps using a mix of Class 800 and Class 801 trains,so that new services can be added out of St. Pancras.

Once resources are released from the Great Western Main Line, I would start to electrify North from Bedford to Corby, Derby and Nottingham.

One issue in Nottingham, is where the tram-trains that have been proposed will go. As the tram-trains when they run on heavy rail line can use the standard overhead lines at 25KVAC, there could be scope for some meaningful co-operation.

Another issue was thrown in, when I wrote Ilkeston Station In A Few Year’s Time. Network Rail have a major project on the Erewash Valley Line, which has been upgraded and may become a high-speed by-pass for high speed electric trains to Chesterfield and Sheffield, as electrifying the line through Derby and the World Heritage Site of the Derwent Valley might prove a difficult project.

So I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bedford to Sheffield electrified first and electro-diesel Class 800 trains used to serve Derby and Nottingham, until those branches on the line were fully electrified.

Secondary and Branch Lines In The North

This is virtually every line that isn’t electrified north of a line from the Humber to the Mersey.

Depending on the line and its relationship to electrified lines and major centres of population, different solutions will be proposed by engineers as they look at the alternatives.

  • Full Electrification
  • Using high-quality diesel trains, like the Class 172 trains displaced from the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
  • Running an IPEMU on the line, as I proposed earlier for between Carlisle and Newcastle.
  • Conversion to Tram or Tram-Train Operation

The engineers are going to have fun on this one, as new or refurbished modern trains running on electric power are delivered all over the North.

In the report of the North of England Electrification Task Force, the various lines were grouped into three tiers in order of priority.

Tier One included. The comment at the end, is my view of what is possible.

  • Calder Valley – Leeds to Manchester and Preston via Bradford and Brighouse – Full Electrification
  • Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington Central – Full Electrification
  • Southport/Kirkby to Salford Cresent – Full Electrification
  • Chester to Stockport – See Note 1
  • Northallerton To Middlesbrough – Full Electrification
  • Leeds to York via Harrogate – Full Electrification
  • Selby to Hull – Full Electrification
  • Sheffield (Meadowhall) to Leeds via Barnsley/Castleford – Full Electrification – See Note 4
  • Bolton to Clitheroe – Possible IPEMU
  • Sheffield to Doncaster/Wakefield Westgate (Dearne Valley) – Full Electrification – See Note 4
  • Hazel Grove to Buxton – Possible  IPEMU
  • Warrington to Chester – See Note 1

Tier Two included.

  • Manchester to Sheffield and South East Manchester Local Services – Partial Electrification with Possible IPEMU
  • York to Scarborough – See Note 3
  • Bishop Auckland/Darlington to Saltburn and Sunderland –  See Note 3
  • Barnsley to Huddersfield – IPEMU when Huddersfield and Sheffield are electrified. – See Note 4
  • Sheffield to Lincoln via Retford – Partial Electrification with Possible IPEMU – See Note 4
  • Chester to Crewe – See Note 1
  • Burnley to Colne & Kirkham to Blackpool South – Tram-Train or IPEMU
  • Knottingley to Goole – IPEMU

Tier Three included.

  • Barrow to Carnforth – IPEMU
  • Pontefract to Church Fenton
  • Hull to Scarborough –  See Note 3
  • Omskirk to Preston – Tram-Train or IPEMU
  • Carlisle to Newcastle – IPEMU
  • Skipton to Carlisle – Full Electrification or Cascaded DMUs
  • Barton on Humber – See Note 2
  • Cumbrian Coast – Full Electrification or Cascaded DMUs
  • Doncaster to Gilberdyke – See Note 2
  • Cleethorpes to Thorne (Doncaster) – See Note 2
  • Middlesbrough to Whitby – See Note 3
  • Skipton to Heysham – Possible IPEMU

The various notes are as follows.

  1. Chester is the centre of a busy network and probably needs full electrification, especially if the North Wales Line to Holyhead is electrified. Although that line could use Class 800 trains.
  2. Humberside is a mass of small railways and I wouldn’t discount a very innovative solution being found for the area.
  3. Teesside is trying to develop a Tees Valley Metro and this could be partially electrified and see use of IPEMU
  4. Routes to Sheffield might also be served using tram-trains. I would also connect Sheffield’s trams to those in Manchester and Nottingham using tram-trains running along the electrified connecting heavy rail lines.

And after the North there’s the South, the Midlands, Wales and Scotland.

South Wales Valleys

This follow-on project after the Great Western electrification to Cardiff and Swansea, will electrify the Valley Lines in South Wales. This project will probably be done in a very conventional manner, especially, as the Welsh seem to have got much of the bridges, stations and other infrastructure ready for electrification.  I don’t know for sure, but I suspect that IPEMUs running on battery power aren’t the best trains at climbing hills.

It would now appear that tram-trains are entering the plans and who’s to say if IPEMUs creep into the project somewhere.

Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter

Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter on the West of England Main Line is not a wholly electrified journey, as the third-rail stops at Basingstoke.

As the Class 800 train is closely related to the Class 395 train that works the high-speed commuter services out of St. Pancras, which is configured to use third-rail electricity collection, I wonder whether the solution to getting electric trains to Salisbury and Exeter is to create a third-rail variant of the Class 800.

Ashford to Hastings and Eastbourne

Electrification has been promised on the Marshlink Line to allow High Speed services from Hastings and Eastbourne to St. Pancras using HS1.

As with electrification to Salisbury and Exeter, more third-rail electrification is probably not going to be performed.

But could an electro-diesel variant of the Class 395 train be built to serve Hastings and Eastbourne.

Probably not, as the certification costs would be high for a small number of units.

But I would hope that engineers are looking at ways to bridge the gap between Ashford and Hastings. It would certainly be possible with a dual-voltage IPEMU!

Hurst Green and Uckfield

The route between Hurst Green and Uckfield on the Oxted Line is current served by Class 171 diesel trains. As the Aventra is built to a similar size as these trains, to run this line with IPEMUs would probably be just a matter of delivering the trains and driver and staff training.

If the Ashford to Hastings and Eastbourne route was also converted to electric trains, as I showed was possible in the previous section, a total of ten 2-car and six 4-car Class 171 trains would be released for service elsewhere. I think too that Southern would become an electric-only train operating company.

Reading to Gatwick

Reading to Gatwick along the North Downs Line is effectively in three sections.

  • Reading to Guildford – 19 miles
  • Guildford to Redhill – 25 miles
  • Redhill to Gatwick – 4 miles

Of the forty-eight miles of the line, just nineteen miles are electrified using third rail.

it would appear that a dual-voltage IPEMU with third-rail pickup, would give a faster electric service along the route.

It would appear that Surrey County Council would like to improve this line and perhaps with a look at stations, level crossings and speed restrictions, the service on this line could be considerably improved by using IPEMUs.

No electrification work would be necessary, although filling easy gaps in the third-rail would give more improvement.

This route looks like it has been specially designed for an IPEMU.

A dual-voltage IPEMU could also extend the route at either end.

Conclusion

Innovate like crazy using proven trains and methods!!!

Some things have surprised me in this analysis.

  1. The Aventra IPEMU has a specification, range and capability, that is very well-matched to lots of sections of the UK rail network, that either need electrification and/or new electric trains.
  2. A mix of Class 800 electro-diesel and Class 801 electric trains will be found working on lots of lines.
  3. A large number of high quality diesel multiple units are available for cascade. Many could go to replace the dreaded Pacers all over the country.
  4. South of the Thames is as far as passenger trains are concerned is virtually a diesel-free zone.

The first two points mean that a lot of the difficult electrification can be done in nice warm factories in Newton Aycliffe and Derby. So perhaps we might see a line improved using the following project structure.

  1. Stations, bridges and tunnels are modified to fit both the passenger and freight trains that will run on the route. If there is a chance that electrification might happen eventually, then clearances would be improved accordingly.
  2. All stations would be upgraded to the modern standards of accessibility and customer facilities. Many like the new Custom House station for Crossrail would be built in factories.
  3. The chosen trains would then be introduced on the line.
  4. Finally, the overhead wires would be erected, if that has been decided is appropriate.

The first phase of the project is the difficult one, as there is some truly horrendous Victoria infrastructure out there and much of it is Listed and infested with bats, great crested newts and other protected wildlife.

Get this sort of project structure right and there might be a chance that we’d find an affordable way to do electrification!

As improved stations are delivered early, passengers may still be being carried in dreaded Pacers, but at least they’ll have a modern, customer-friendly interface to the railway.

Hopefully, by the time that full electrification is implemented, all local problems wil have been solved and the electrification is a much easier business.

 

 

 

 

 

August 30, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment