The Anonymous Widower

Thoughts On High Speed Two

These are a few thoughts about High Speed Two, after the reports of major changes today.

This article on the BBC is entitled HS2 Line Between Birmingham And Crewe Delayed By Two Years.

This is the sub-heading.

The Birmingham to Crewe leg of high speed railway HS2 will be delayed by two years to cut costs.

These are the three opening paragraphs.

Some of the design teams working on the Euston end of the line are also understood to be affected.

Transport secretary Mark Harper blamed soaring prices and said it was “committed” to the line linking London, the Midlands and North of England.

HS2 has been beset by delays and cost rises. In 2010, it was expected to cost £33bn but is now expected to be £71bn.

Delivering The Benefits Of High Speed Two Early

It is my belief that with a large project taking a decade or more , it is not a bad idea to deliver some worthwhile benefits early on.

The Elizabeth Line opened in stages.

  • The new Class 345 trains started replacing scrapyard specials in 2017.
  • The rebuilt Abbey Wood station opened in 2017.
  • Paddington local services were transferred to the Elizabeth Line in 2019.
  • Outer stations reopened regularly after  refurbishment from 2018.
  • The through line opened in May 2022.

There’s still more to come.

Some projects wait until everything is ready and everybody gets fed up and annoyed.

Are there any parts of High Speed Two, that could be completed early, so that existing services will benefit?

In 2020, the refurbishment of Liverpool Lime Street station and the tracks leading to the station was completed and I wrote about the station in It’s A Privilege To Work Here!, where this was my conclusion.

Wikipedia says this about Liverpool Lime Street station.

Opened in August 1836, it is the oldest still-operating grand terminus mainline station in the world.

I’ve used Lime Street station for fifty-five years and finally, it is the station, the city needs and deserves.

I’ve been to grand termini all over the world and Lime Street may be the oldest, but now it is one of the best.

Are there any stations, that will be served by High Speed Two, that should be upgraded as soon as possible to give early benefits to passengers, staff and operators?

Avanti West Cost have solved the problem of the short platforms at Liverpool South Parkway station, by ordering shorter Class 807 trains. Will High Speed Two lengthen the platforms at this station?

A good project manager will need to get all the smaller sub-projects in a row and work out what is the best time to do each.

Digital Signalling

I would assume, as this will be needed for High Speed Two services in the West Coast Main Line to the North of Crewe, this is surely a must for installing as early as possible.

If the existing trains could run for a hundred miles at 140 mph, rather than the current 125 mph, that would save five worthwhile minutes.

Trains could run closer together and there is the possibility of organising services in flights, where a number of trains run together a safe number of minutes apart.

Remove Bottlenecks On Classic Lines, That Could Be Used By High Speed Two

I don’t know the bottlenecks on the West Coast Main Line, but there are two on the East Coast Main Line, that I have talked about in the past.

Could ERTMS And ETCS Solve The Newark Crossing Problem?

Improving The North Throat Of York Station Including Skelton Bridge Junction

Hopefully, the digital signalling will solve them.

Any bottlenecks on lines that will be part of High Speed Two, should be upgraded as soon as possible.

Birmingham And Crewe

I will start by looking at the leg between Birmingham and Crewe.

 

This section of the HS2 map shows High Speed Two between Birmingham and Lichfield.

Note.

  1. The blue circle on the left at the bottom of the map is Birmingham Curzon Street station.
  2. The blue circle on the right at the bottom of the map is Birmingham Interchange station.
  3. The High Speed Two to and from London passes through Birmingham Interchange station.
  4. The branch to Birmingham Curzon Street station connects to the main High Speed Two at a triangular junction.
  5. North of the triangular junction, High Speed Two splits.
  6. The Eastern branch goes to East Midlands Parkway station.
  7. The Northern branch goes to Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Manchester Piccadilly, Preston and Scotland.

At the top of the map, the Northern branch splits and lines are shown on this map.

Note.

  1. The junction where the Northern and Eastern branches divide is in the South-East corner of the map.
  2. To the North of Lichfield, the route divides again.
  3. The Northern purple line is the direct line to Crewe.
  4. The shorter Southern branch is a spur that connects High Speed Two to the Trent Valley Line, which is the current route taken by trains between London Euston and Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Manchester Piccadilly, Preston and Scotland.
  5. Crewe station is in the North-West corner of the map.

The route between the junction to the North of Lichfield and Crewe is essentially two double-track railways.

  • High Speed Two with a routine operating speed of 205 mph.
  • The Trent Valley Line with a routine operating speed of 140 mph.
  • High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains can run on all tracks.
  • High Speed Two Full-Size trains may be able to run on the Trent Valley Line at reduced speed.
  • Eighteen trains per hour (tph) is the maximum frequency of High Speed Two.

I feel in an emergency, trains will be able to use the other route.

Will This Track Layout Allow An Innovative Build?

Suppose the link to the Trent Valley Line was built first, so that High Speed Two trains from London for Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Manchester Piccadilly, Preston and Scotland, could transfer to the Trent Valley Line as they do now.

  • All lines used by High Speed Two services North of the junction, where High Speed Two joins the Trent Valley Line would be updated with digital signalling and 140 mph running. This will benefit current services on the line. For instance Euston and Liverpool/Manchester services could be under two hours.
  • The current services would be replaced by High Speed Two services run by High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains.
  • The direct High Speed Two route between Lichfield and Crewe would now be built.
  • When this section of High Speed Two is complete, High Speed Two services would use it between Lichfield and Crewe.
  • As the direct route would be built later, this would delay the building of the Birmingham and Crewe high-speed route.

Currently, trains run the  41.8 miles between Lichfield and Crewe in 28 minutes, which is an average speed of 89.6 mph.

I can build a table of average speeds and times for Lichfield and Crewe.

  • 100 mph – 25.1 minutes – 2.9 minutes saving
  • 110 mph – 22.8 minutes – 5.2 minutes saving
  • 120 mph – 20.9 minutes – 7.1 minutes saving
  • 125 mph – 20.1 minutes – 7.9 minutes saving
  • 130 mph – 19.3 minutes  – 8.7 minutes saving
  • 140 mph – 17.9 minutes – 10.1 minutes saving
  • 160 mph – 15.7 minutes – 12.3 minutes saving
  • 180 mph – 13.9 minutes – 14.1 minutes saving
  • 200 mph – 12.5 minutes – 15.5 minutes saving

Note.

  1. Even a slight increase in average speed creates several minutes saving.
  2. Times apply for both routes.

I believe that a 125 mph average should be possible on the Trent Valley route, which may be enough for Euston and Liverpool/Manchester services to be under two hours.

Improving Classic Lines Used By High Speed Two North Of Lichfield

Real Time Trains shows these figures for a Glasgow Central to Euston service.

  • Glasgow and Lichfield Trent Valley is 298.2 miles.
  • Glasgow and Lichfield Trent Valley takes five hours.

This is an average speed of 59.6 mph.

Note.

  1. The average speed is low considering the trains are capable of cruising at 125 mph and 140 mph with digital signalling.
  2. High Speed Two services between Euston and Glasgow will use the classic network, to the North of Lichfield.

I can build a table of average speeds and times for Glasgow and Lichfield.

  • 100 mph – 179 minutes – 121 minutes saving
  • 110 mph – 163 minutes – 157 minutes saving
  • 120 mph – 149 minutes – 151 minutes saving
  • 125 mph – 143 minutes – 157 minutes saving
  • 130 mph – 138 minutes  – 162 minutes saving
  • 140 mph – 128 minutes – 172 minutes saving

This table illustrates why it is important to improve all or as many as possible of classic lines used by High Speed Two to enable 140 mph running, with full digital signalling. Obviously, if 140 mph is not feasible, the speed should be increased to the highest possible.

Routes that could be updated include.

  • London Euston and Glasgow Central
  • London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street
  • London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly (all routes)
  • London Euston and Blackpool
  • London Euston and Holyhead
  • London Euston and Shrewsbury

Not all these routes will be served by High Speed Two, but they could be served by 140 mph trains.

What Times Would Be Possible?

The InterCity 225 was British Rail’s ultimate electric train and these two paragraphs from its Wikipedia entry, describe its performance.

The InterCity 225 was designed to achieve a peak service speed of 140 mph (225 km/h); during a test run in 1989 on Stoke Bank between Peterborough and Grantham, an InterCity 225 was recorded at a speed of 162 mph (260.7 km/h). Its high speed capabilities were again demonstrated via a 3hr 29mins non-stop run between London and Edinburgh on 26 September 1991. British regulations have since required in-cab signalling on any train running at speeds above 125 mph (201 km/h) preventing such speeds from being legally attained in regular service. Thus, except on High Speed 1, which is equipped with cab signalling, British signalling does not allow any train, including the InterCity 225, to exceed 125 mph (201 km/h) in regular service, due to the impracticality of correctly observing lineside signals at high speed.

The InterCity 225 has also operated on the West Coast Main Line (WCML). In April 1992, one trainset achieved a new speed record of two hours, eight minutes between Manchester and London Euston, shaving 11 minutes off the 1966 record. During 1993, trials were operated to Liverpool and Manchester in connection with the InterCity 250 project.

  • The fastest London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly services appear to be two hours and six minutes tomorrow, with stops at Nuneaton and Stoke-on-Trent.
  • The fastest London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service is four hours seventeen minutes tomorrow.

It does appear that British Rail’s 1980s-vintage InterCity 225 train did very well.

Trains that would be able to run at 140 mph with updated signalling include.

  • Alstom Class 390
  • Hitachi Class 800, 801, 802, 803, 805, 807 and 810
  • British Rail InterCity 225
  • High Speed Two Classic-Compatible.

All are electric trains.

Could High Speed Two, West Coast Main Line and East Coast Main Line Services Be Run By  High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains?

I don’t see why not!

  • They would be able to use short stretches of High Speed Line like Lichfield and Crewe.
  • LNER and CrossCountry could also use the trains.
  • High Speed Two is providing the framework and it’s there to be used, provided the paths are available.

This graphic shows the preliminary schedule.

It only shows ten trains going through Crewe, so there could be up to eight spare high speed paths between Birmingham and Crewe.

Could High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains Be Used To Advantage On The East Coast Main Line?

I published this extract from the Wikipedia entry for the InterCity 225 earlier.

The InterCity 225 was designed to achieve a peak service speed of 140 mph (225 km/h); during a test run in 1989 on Stoke Bank between Peterborough and Grantham, an InterCity 225 was recorded at a speed of 162 mph (260.7 km/h). Its high speed capabilities were again demonstrated via a 3hr 29mins non-stop run between London and Edinburgh on 26 September 1991.

The London and Edinburgh run was at an average speed of around 112 mph.

I wonder what time, one of LNER’s Class 801 trains, that are all-electric could do, once the new digital signalling has been fully installed on the route? I suspect it would be close to three hours, but it would depend on how long the trains could run at 140 mph.

It should be noted that the Selby Diversion was designed for 160 mph, when it was built by British Rail in the 1980s.

In Are Short Lengths Of High Speed Line A Good Idea?, I look at the mathematics of putting in short lengths of new railway, which have higher speeds, where this was part of my conclusion.

I very much feel there is scope to create some new high speed sections on the current UK network, with only building very little outside of the current land used by the network.

I would love to know what some of Network Rail’s track experts feel is the fastest time possible between London and Edinburgh that can be achieved, by selective upgrading of the route.

If some of the trains were High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, with a top speed of 205 mph, provided the track allowed it, there could be some interesting mathematics balancing the costs of track upgrades, new trains with what passengers and operators need in terms of journey times.

Could High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains Be Used To Advantage On The West Coast Main Line?

Much of what I said about the East Coast Main Line would apply to the West Coast Main Line.

But in addition, the West Coast Main Line will be a superb place to test the new High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains.

I believe, that before High Speed Two opens, we’ll see High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, carrying passengers between Euston and Avanti West Coast’s destinations.

Could High Speed Two Be Split Into Two?

Consider.

  • Under earlier plans, the East Coast Main Line to the North of York, will be used by High Speed Two.
  • With digital signalling the East Coast Main Line will support continuous running at 140 mph for long sections of the route.
  • The East Coast Main Line has a recently-rebuilt large Southern terminal at King’s Cross with eleven platforms and good suburban services and excellent connections to the London Underground.
  • The East Coast Main Line has a very large Northern terminal at Edinburgh Waverley with twenty platforms and good local train connections.
  • There are large intermediate stations on the East Coast Main Line at Doncaster, Leeds, Newcastle, Peterborough and York. All these stations have good local train connections.
  • The East Coast Main Line has important branches to Cambridge, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Hull King’s Lynn, Lincoln, Middlesbrough, Nottingham, Scarborough, Sheffield, Skegness and Sunderland.

We are talking about an asset, that needs improving rather than sidelining.

 

Could High Speed Two Be A One-Nation Project?

Over three years ago, I wrote Could High Speed Two Be A One-Nation Project? and tried to answer the question in the title.

But now the core network is better defined, perhaps it is time to look at extending the High Speed network again.

The next few sections look at possible extensions.

Serving Chester And North Wales

I looked at this in Could High Speed Two Trains Serve Chester And North Wales?, which I have updated recently.

This was my conclusion.

It looks to me, that when High Speed Two, think about adding extra destinations, Chester and Holyhead could be on the list.

I also suspect that even without electrification and High Speed Two services, but with the new Class 805 trains, the route could be a valuable one for Avanti West Coast.

These are current and promised times for the two legs to Holyhead.

  • Euston and Crewe – 90 minutes – Fastest Class 390 train
  • Euston and Crewe – 55 minutes – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train from Wikipedia
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 131 minutes – Fastest Class 221 train
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 70 minutes – 90 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 63 minutes – 100 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 57 minutes – 110 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 53 minutes – 120 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 45 minutes – 140 mph average speed

Note.

  1. I have assumed that Crewe and Holyhead is 105.5 miles.
  2. The operating speed of the North Wales Coast Line is 90 mph.
  3. In the following estimates,  I have assumed a change of train at Crewe, takes 6 minutes.

I think there are several options to run fast services to Chester and North Wales.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • The fastest Class 221 train between Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 3 hours 41 minutes.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way, but with perhaps less stops and some track improvement

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 110 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 2 hours 27 minutes.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead uprated largely to 125 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 120 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 2 hours 23 minutes.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead Crewe and Holyhead electrified and uprated to 140 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 140 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 2 hours 15 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, the Class 805 train to Holyhead

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • The fastest Class 221 train between Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 3 hours 12 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, the Class 805 train to Holyhead, but with perhaps less stops and some track improvement

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 110 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 58 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, the Class 805 train to Holyhead, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead uprated largely to 125 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 120 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 54 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, Class 805 train to Holyhead, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead electrified and uprated to 140 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 140 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 46 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train all the way, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead electrified and uprated to 140 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 140 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 40 minutes.

From these estimates, I have come to these conclusions.

  • A sub-two and a half-hour service can be attained with the new Class 805 trains and some improvements to the tracks along the North Wales Coast Line.
  • A sub-two hour service can be attained with a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe and a Class 805 train to Hplyhead along a 140 mph electrified North Wales Coast Line.
  • If the North Wales Coast Line is electrified, the journey from London Euston, Birmingham Interchange, Crewe, Chester, Liverpool and Manchester would be zero-carbon.

We should be looking to building a zero-carbon fast passenger ferry for sailing between Holyhead and Dublin.

  • The current fastest ferries appear to take three hours and 15 minutes, which means that a six-hour low-carbon journey between London Euston and Dublin, should be possible with the new Class 805 trains, prior to the opening of High Speed Two.
  • A five-hour journey after the opening of High Speed Two to Crewe and electrification of the North Wales Coast Line should be possible.

If the advanced zero-carbon ferry could knock an hour off the journey, four hours between London and Dublin along a spectacular coastal railway with a fast sea voyage, would be a route that would attract passengers.

  • High Speed Two would need to be opened to Crewe.
  • The North Wales Coast Line would need to be upgraded to a 140 mph digitally-signalled line.
  • The North Wales Coast Line would need to be electrified.
  • Full electrification may not be needed, as discontinuous electrification will have advanced to provide zero-carbon running, in a more affordable and less disruptive manner.
  • Trains could either be High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains all the way from London or there could be a change at Crewe to Class 805 trains.
  • The ferry would use the best zero-carbon and operational technology.

The improvement and electrification of the North Wales Coast Line could be planned to take place in a relaxed manner, so that journey times continuously got quicker.

I would start the improvement of the North Wales Coast Line, as soon as possible, as all these improvement will be used to advantage by the new Class 805 trains.

Serving West And South West England And South Wales

Suppose you want to go between Glasgow and Cardiff by train, after High Speed Two has opened.

  • You will take one of the half-hourly High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains between Glasgow Central and London.
  • Three and a half-hours later, you will get off the train in one of the below ground platforms at Old Oak Common station.
  • A short ride in an escalator or lift and you will be in the Great Western Railway station at ground level.
  • From here, fifty minutes later, you will be in Cardiff.

The journey will have taken four hours and twenty minutes.

This may seem a long time but currently Glasgow and Cardiff by train takes over seven hours by train.

  • Glasgow and Bristol Temple Meads takes eight hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 5 hours.
  • Glasgow and Cheltenham Spa takes six hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 5 hours and 30 minutes.
  • Glasgow and Penzance takes twelve hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 8 hours and 33 minutes.
  • Glasgow and Swansea takes nearly nine hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 6 hours and 9 minutes.

The High Speed Two route only has one simple change, whereas some routes now have up to four changes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

March 10, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 97 Comments

Thoughts On Watford DC Line Electrification At Euston Station

I was in Euston station this morning and took these pictures of the electrification on Platform 9.

Note.

  1. Watford DC Line trains usually use Platform 9.
  2. The first two pictures show the 750 DC third rail electrification.
  3. The last three pictures show the 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
  4. The train is a five-car Class 710/3 train, which is a dual-voltage train.

The train’s pantograph was in the down position, as far as I could see.

This Google Map shows the ends of Platforms 6 to 11 at the station.

Note.

  1. The platforms have their numbers painted on the end.
  2. The train in the top-left corner of the image is in Platform 5.
  3. Platforms 9 and 10 appear to be fitted with 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
  4. All Platforms also seem to have 25KVAC overhead electrification.

So platforms 9 and 10 appear to be able to handle trains which need either form of electrification. When I took the first set of pictures, there was a Class 350 train in Platform 10.

These dual voltage platforms 9 and 10, may help with the operation of the station.

I have some questions.

Do TfL Intend To Increase Watford DC Line Services?

Currently, the services on the Watford DC Line are as follows.

  • Four trains per hour (tph) between Euston and Watford Junction stations.
  • In the last few weeks, I’ve seen both four-car Class 378 and five-car Class 701 trains on the route.
  • All trains that work the route appear to be dual voltage.

This TfL infographic illustrates their plans.

It says Watford and Euston would be run by five-car trains at a frequency of four tph.

TfL have ordered six five-car Class 701/3 trains for the Watford DC service.

Will The Watford DC Platforms Be Moved In The Euston High Speed Two Rebuild?

The operation of the Watford DC Line works well at present, but as Euston station is going through a major rebuild for High Speed Two, the platforms could be moved or rebuilt.

Would Health and Safety object to laying third-rail electrification and insist that Watford DC services used 25 KVAC to access Euston?

They could do this, as all trains running on the Watford DC Line are dual-voltage trains.

Would Removing Third-Rail Electrification From Euston Station Improve Safety?

Health and Safety would say it did and as the trains are dual-voltage, they could transition at Queen’s Park or South Hampstead stations.

An Alternative To Changing The Electrification

The distance between Euston and Queen’s Park stations is just under four miles.

In Will London Overground Fit On-board Energy Storage To Class 378 Trains?, I asked whether it would be worthwhile.

I finished with these two sentences.

I have no idea how much electricity would be saved by regenerative braking on the London Overground, but various applications of regenerative braking technology talk of electricity savings of between ten and twenty percent.

I think it is only a matter of time before the technology is proven to be sufficiently reliable and the numbers add up correctly for the Class 378 trains to be fitted with on-board energy storage.

What would be the advantages from fitting on-board energy storage?

  • There would be the savings of electricity by the use of regenerative braking to the batteries.
  • Trains could be rescued from the Thames Tunnel, if there was a power failure.
  • Hotel power would be maintained, if there was a power failure.
  • Trains can be moved in depots and sidings without power.
  • Trains would be able to move in the event of cable theft.
  • The battery would probably have sufficient capacity to move the train into and out of Euston.

There could be a saving in train operating costs and safety would be improved.

 

March 5, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

West Coast Main Line Electro-Diesels On Test

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.

This is the first paragraph.

The first two of 13 Hitachi Class 805 electro-diesel trainsets ordered for Avanti West Coast services are undergoing testing on the West Coast Main Line ahead of entry into service later this year.

These Class 805 trains will go to places like Chester, Bangor and Holyhead via Crewe.

It is interesting to look at various Crewe to London Euston services this morning.

  • 0740 – Class 390 train – From Liverpool – One Stop – 1 hour 40 minutes
  • 0755 – Class 221 train – From Holyhead – One Stop – 1 hour 40 minutes
  • 0832 – Class 390 train – From Manchester – One Stop – 1 hour 37 minutes
  • 0844 – Class 390 train – From Glasgow – 1 hour 28 minutes

Note.

  1. The first field is the four-figure time that the train left Crewe.
  2. The last field is the journey time between Crewe to London Euston.
  3. The Class 390 and 805 trains will use electricity to run between Crewe and London Euston, whereas the Class 221 train will use diesel.
  4. Crewe and London Euston is 158 miles.
  5. The Glasgow train covers the 158 miles at an average speed of 107.7 mph.

I have some thoughts.

What Will Be The Time For A Class 805 Train Between Crewe And London Euston?

Consider.

  • From Crewe, the Class 805 train will be using the electrification to London Euston.
  • The Class 390 train can tilt, whereas the Class 805 train can’t!
  • The Class 805 train is at least three tonnes lighter per car, than the Class 390 train.
  • The lighter weight and possibly more power of the Class 805 trains, will give better acceleration.
  • There is twenty-one years of difference in the build dates of the two trains. In that time, I also suspect that Network Rail have improved the track between Crewe and London Euston.
  • Norton Bridge junction has been improved to avoid conflicts.
  • It would be very convenient for Avanti West Coast and Network Rail, if the performance under electrification of the two trains were similar.

For these reasons, I believe that the performance of a non-stop Crewe And London Euston service using a Class 805 train will be such that it can match that of a Class 390 train.

I would also expect that with a similar stopping pattern between Crewe And London Euston, there would be little to choose between the two trains.

I can see with its better acceleration and lighter weight that the time between Crewe and London Euston will be perhaps a dozen minutes faster than the current time.

Using the electrification will also save a lot of diesel fuel with all its emissions.

Along The North Wales Coast Line

Consider.

  • Crewe and Holyhead is 105.5 miles and takes two hours and two minutes in a typical service.
  • These figures give an average speed of 52 mph.
  • There are six stops, which are scheduled to take a total of ten minutes.
  • About half the North Wales Coast Line has a maximum operating speed of 90 mph, but through Chester, Llandudno Junction and West of Bangor, the operating speed is 75 mph or less.

I am fairly sure, that with both the current Class 221 trains and the new Class 805 trains, it will be the track, rather than the train that determines the average speed.

It would therefore appear that if the average speed can be raised by track improvements these time savings could be achieved.

  • 60 mph – 105.5 mins – 16.5 mins
  • 70 mph – 90 mins – 32.5 mins
  • 80 mph – 79 mins – 43 mins
  • 90 mph – 70 mins – 52 mins
  • 100 mph – 63 mins – 59 mins
  • 110 mph – 58 mins – 64 mins
  • 120 mph – 53 mins – 69 mins
  • 130 mph – 49 mins – 73 mins
  • 140 mph – 45 mins – 77 mins

Note.

  1. The first column is the average speed.
  2. The second column is the time between Holyhead and Crewe.
  3. The third column is the saving.
  4. I suspect that 90 or 100 mph would be the highest possible practical average speed.
  5. Trains average 100 mph on several long sections of the Great Eastern Main Line.
  6. I put in the higher speeds to show what is possible, if the North Wales Coast Line were to be converted into a 140 mph electrified line with digital signalling.

Even at these relatively slow speeds compared to High Speed Two, there are considerable time savings to be made, just by improving the tracks.

Incidentally, High Speed Two is quoted in Wikipedia as aiming for a Crewe and London Euston time of 56 minutes, so by averaging 100 mph between Crewe and Holyhead, London Euston and Holyhead could be under two hours.

Batteries And Class 805 Trains

I wouldn’t be surprised that soon after the Class 805 trains are delivered, they could be converted to a version of Hitachi’s Intercity Tri-Mode  Battery Train, the specification of which is shown in this Hitachi infographic.

Note.

  1. I suspect that the batteries will be used to handle regenerative braking on lines without electrification, which will save diesel fuel and carbon emissions.
  2. The trains accelerate faster, than those they replace.
  3. The claimed fuel and carbon saving is twenty percent.
  4. It is intended that these trains will be introduced in 2023.

But Hitachi have not given any predictions of the range of these trains on battery power alone.

However, they do claim a battery range of 56 miles for the Hitachi Regional Battery Train, which is based on similar technology.

These trains could help in speeding the stops between Crewe and Holyhead.

  • Batteries would be charged at Holyhead and on the electrification to the South of Crewe.
  • At each stop, trains would use a proportion of the power in the battery to accelerate faster and save fuel and cut emissions.
  • Battery power would be used in stations for train hotel power.
  • Westbound trains would arrive in Holyhead and Southbound trains would arrive in Crewe, with not much power in the battery.

I suspect that, whether diesel or battery power is used, will be controlled by a sophisticated computerised control system.

Electrification Along The North Wales Coast Line

I think this will eventually happen to allow High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains to run to Chester and along the North Wales Coast Line to Llandudno, Bangor and Holyhead.

But there is no benefit to be gained in electrifying until higher speeds are possible, after track improvements.

I believe these times will be possible with track improvements and the opening of High Speed Two.

  • Holyhead and Crewe – Class 805 train and 80 mph average – 79 mins
  • Holyhead and Crewe – Class 805 train and 90 mph average – 70 mins
  • Holyhead and Crewe – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train, electrification and 100 mph average – 63 mins
  • Crewe and London Euston – Class 805 train – 80 mins
  • Crewe and London Euston – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train – 56 mins

Note, electrification will be needed, to run High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains along the North Wales Coast Line.

I am confident that these times will be possible.

  • Holyhead and London Euston – Class 805 train and 90 mph average  along the coast – 2 hours 30 mins
  • Holyhead and London Euston – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train and 100 mph average  along the coast – 2 hours

The current time between Holyhead and London Euston is over three hours 45 minutes.

Conclusion

These trains will certainly speed up trains to North Wales.

 

February 15, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Reopening Of Abandoned Merseyside Railway Under Consideration

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on New Civil Engineer.

This is the sub-heading.

St Helens Borough Council is investigating the possibility of reopening part of the abandoned St Helens and Runcorn Gap railway in Merseyside.

This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the section of railway that will be reopened.

Note.

  1. The line runs between St. Helens Central and St. Helens Junction stations.
  2. St. Helens Central is in the North-West corner of the map and is marked by a blue arrow.
  3. St. Helens Junction station is in the South-East corner of the map.
  4. Both stations have two tracks and two platforms.
  5. St. Helens Central appears to have full disabled access,
  6. Both stations are electrified.
  7. It appears, that the route is still viable, but the track is not intact.

I have a few thoughts.

St. Helens Junction Station

This Google Map shows St. Helens Junction station.

Note.

  1. There are two platforms.
  2. Platform 1 is the Northern platform and trains go East.
  3. Platform 2 is the Southern platform and trains go to Liverpool Lime Street.
  4. There appears to be a footbridge at the Eastern end.
  5. Trains from the new route from St. Helens Central station would approach from and leave to the South-West.
  6. In a typical hour, between five and eight trains per hour (tph) go through the station in both directions on the main line.

I feel that a bay platform would need to be built at the station to handle the proposed service at St. Helens Junction station. But it would be able to handle four tph.

St. Helens Central Station

This Google Map shows St. Helens Central station.

Note.

  1. There are two platforms.
  2. Platform 1 is the Western platform and trains go to Wigan North Western.
  3. Platform 2 is the Eastern platform and trains go to Liverpool Lime Street.
  4. There appears to be a footbridge in the middle, with lifts.
  5. Trains from the new route from St. Helens Junction station would approach from and leave to the South-West.
  6. In a typical hour, between two and three tph go through the station in both directions on the main line.

It may be possible to run two tph on the route to St. Helens Junction station, by using the Southern end of Platform 2.

It would probably be able to handle two tph, by fitting in between the current services.

If a new bay platform were to be built at St. Helens Central four tph would be possible.

What Would Be The Frequency Of The Service?

Consider.

  • As I said earlier, because of the current frequency of trains through St. Helens Junction station, I feel a dedicated bay platform will be needed at that station, which would probably handle four tph.
  • Without building a dedicated bay platform, I doubt that St. Helens Central station could have more than two tph.
  • Two tph on the new route, would fit well with the services through St. Helens Central station.

I believe that providing it gave sufficient capacity for the route, that two tph will be the frequency, as it only needs one bay platform at St. Helens Junction station to be built.

What Length Of Train Will Be Used?

As a bay platform will have to be built at St. Helens Junction station, this will probably determine the length of train.

I would build the bay platform to accept a three or four car train, as lengthening platforms is always a pain.

Looking at the map of St. Helens Junction station, I suspect that a four-car platform may be the longest possible.

What Type Of Train Should Be Used?

If you look at all the Beeching Reversal schemes, there isn’t one like this, where two electrified lines are connected by a short length of new railway, which in this case is only 3.5 km, according to the New Civil Engineer article.

Consider.

  • A round trip is only 7 kilometres.
  • I suspect each trip between the two stations will take no more than ten minutes.
  • If the frequency is two tph, there will be plenty of time to turn a train at each end.
  • All new routes opened on UK railways from now on, should have carbon-free traction.

For these reasons, I suspect that the route could be run by a battery-electric train, which is charged at one end.

Putting up a short length of overhead electrification in the new bay platform at St. Helens Junction, as the station is already electrified, would not be the most challenging of tasks.

Alternatively, the train could be charged, whilst it is waiting to return in St. Helens Central, using the existing overhead electrification.

Will There Be Any Intermediate Stations Between St. Helens Central And St. Helens Junction?

On the first map the station sites of two former stations are shown; Peasley Cross and Sutton Oak.

According to the Wikipedia entry for Sutton Oak station, there was quite an intensive service a hundred years ago.

Why shouldn’t they be rebuilt? Especially, if there are plans for housing or regeneration in the area.

Will Between St. Helens Central And St. Helens Junction Be Single Track?

This would still enable two tph, if the trains did a quick turn-round in the bay platform at St. Helens Junction.

But it would mean.

  • Lower cost infrastructure.
  • Simple tram-style intermediate stations.
  • One train on line operation for safety.

I feel that it is highly likely the new route will be single-track.

Carr Mill Station

This map shows Merseyrail’s future plans.

 

Note the proposed new station at Carr Mill, which is North-East of St. Helens Central on the Liverpool and Wigan Line.

The Wikipedia entry for Carr Mill station, says this about a proposed new station.

Proposals to construct a new station to serve the expanding population have been suggested by Merseytravel but funding has yet to arrive. A new proposal to open a station was raised by Metro Mayor of the Liverpool City Region Steve Rotheram as part of his re-election plans in January 2020.

It should be noted, that a new Carr Mill station could be on the East Lancashire Road, so it might be a good place to create a Park-and-Ride station for Liverpool and St. Helens.

Perhaps if a bay platform were to be incorporated into the new Carr Mill station, it might be better to run a service between Carr Mill and St. Helens Junction.

  • There would be two tph.
  • Intermediate stops would be St. Helens Central, Peasley Cross and Sutton Oak.
  • I estimate the distance would be about four miles of which 1.8 miles would be electrified.
  • The trains would be charged on the electrified line between Carr Mill and St. Helens Central stations.

There would be no need to electrify the bay platform at St. Helens Junction

Should The Service Go All The Way To Wigan?

It must surely be a possibility to run the service between Wigan North Western and St. Helens Junction.

  • There would be two tph.
  • Intermediate stops would be Carr Mill, Bryn, Garswood, St. Helens Central, Peasley Cross and Sutton Oak.
  • I estimate the distance would be about eleven miles of which nine miles would be electrified.
  • The trains would be charged on the electrified line between Wigan North Western and St. Helens Central stations.

This would create an excellent connection to Wigan North Western for all the long distance trains to Scotland and the South.

Should The New Route Be Electrified?

Consider.

  • St. Helens and Wigan North Western is a fully-electrified route.
  • It is only 2.2 miles, which would probably be single track railway.
  • As there is electrification at both ends of the new route, there would be no problem arranging power.
  • It would remove the need for battery-electric trains.

I suspect that this is one that accountants will decide, as both battery-electric and electrification will work equally well!

What Trains Would Be Used?

If the route is electrified, any electric train of a suitable length could be used. I would argue, that the same class of train, as is used through the two St. Helens stations, should be used for operational and passenger convenience.

To maintain the operational and passenger convenience, if battery-electric trains are used, then Northern’s Class 331 trains and Merseyrail’s Class 777 trains come or will come in both electric and battery-electric versions.

Conclusion

This looks like a very sensible scheme.

 

 

 

February 15, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

ECML Net Zero Traction Decarbonisation

This project was one of the winners in the First Of A Kind 2022 competition run by Innovate UK.

In this document, this is said about the project.

Project No: 10036245

Project title: ECML Net Zero Traction Decarbonisation
Lead organisation: SIEMENS MOBILITY LIMITED
Project grant: £59,983

Public description: Electrification is the foundation of all modern railways and fundamental to decarbonisation. Through
delivering faster, smoother, quieter and more reliable train services, rail electrification reduces
industry fuel cost by 45%, rolling stock costs by 33%, and track maintenance costs by 10-20%
(compared to diesel operation). Electric railways are the most efficient, lowest carbon form of
transportation in the UK.

Network Rail operates the largest power distribution network in the UK, and is the largest consumer
of electricity in the UK, consuming 4TWh electricity per year. Power is provided from the electricity
supply industry, a mix of gas, nuclear, coal and renewables, emitting approximately 944,000 tonnes
of carbon dioxide annually. Connecting new renewable generation directly to the railway reinforces
the railway power supply, while reducing coal and gas use in the UK and is a longstanding Network
Rail industry challenge statement. To date, engineering incompatibilities between renewable,
electricity supply systems and the railway single-phase electrical and other railway systems have
prevented local renewable connection in rail.

In a world first, Siemens Mobility, working with British Solar Renewables, DB Cargo UK, Network
Rail, ECML operators, and the University of York, will directly connect large-scale renewable
generation to the East Coast Mainline. The demonstrator phase will deliver up to 1GWh green
electricity direct to trains each year, reducing UK gas imports by 151,000 cubic metres and carbon
emissions by 236 tonnes annually. It will gather vital data creating a new green industry, creating a
precedent and setting standards to enable larger scale roll-out across the UK.

My Thoughts And Conclusion

This page on the Network Rail web site is entitled Power Supply Upgrade.

Since 2014, Network Rail and its partners have been upgrading the overhead electrification and the associated substations and electricity supply on the East Coast Main Line (ECML).

  • It is not a small project which includes fifty new substations and 1,600 km. of new cabling between London and Edinburgh.
  • When complete, fleets of electric trains on the route will be receiving high-quality electric power from the upgraded overhead electrification.

However, the East Coast Main Line is unique among British electrified main lines, in that it runs more or less close to a coast, that is populated by a large number of massive wind farms.

I believe the objective of this project, is to more directly connect the massive wind farms to the East Coast Main Line.

Lessons learned could then be applied to other electrified main lines.

We may even see onshore wind farms or small modular nuclear reactors built to power the railways.

November 19, 2022 Posted by | Energy, Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Protection and Resilience for OLE using ComputerVision Techniques (PROLECT)

This project was one of the winners in the First Of A Kind 2022 competition run by Innovate UK.

In this document, this is said about the project.

Project No: 10037158

Project title: Protection and Resilience for OLE using ComputerVision Techniques (PROLECT)
Lead organisation: ONE BIG CIRCLE LTD
Project grant: £247,115

Public description: 

This project will utilise Computer Vision techniques applied to existing video footage and capturing
a new type of video sensor to address two main challenges which are exacerbated by weather
events and can result in the railway being closed. Providing means in which these type of challenge
can be predicted and prevented will help provide the railway to become more resilient to weather
events and season agnostic.

The following two areas will be addressed:

  • Extreme hot weather causes OLE wires to extend and cause the tensioners to come into contact with the ground which can reduce tension and cause damage or event dewirement. Utilising existing video footage this project will automatically identify OLE tensioners, position and measure them and generate an live asset map with current status level. This can be utilised as part of a digital twin model and fed into systems which are able to alert maintainers to the issue so they are able to take preventative action.
  • Hot, cold and humid weather can also have an impact causing Corona discharge from electrical assets such as insulators. The Corona discharge is an early warning sign of potential damage and failure of the equipment and can be measured as part of a predictive maintenance regime to prioritise preventative maintenance activities. This project will install a UV Corona camera onto a measurement fleet or in-service train and enable automated data capture with real-time data transmission and processing. The results will be evaluated by experienced working groups to tune and amend the level of Corona events to ensure an optimum level of precision and recall ensuring an operationally useful tool.

Both of these events can have very impacts on the railway in terms of delay, safety and customer
experience. By providing tools which have the capability of preventing these from occurring the
railway will have an increased resilience to the weather conditions.

My Thoughts And Conclusions

November 18, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , | 1 Comment

A Thought On Broughton Station

This Google Map shows Hawarden Airport to the West of Chester.

Note.

  1. Airbus make wings for their aircraft at their Broughton factory on this airport.
  2. The wings are flown to Europe for final assembly.
  3. The North Wales Coast Line passes the Northern end of the runway.

When I bought my return ticket between Chester and Holyhead, which was good value at £25.25 with my Senior Railcard, I got chatting with the clerk about Airbus and their Broughton factory.

He felt it needed a station and afterwards I checked and found that the Welsh Government had been trying to build one for some time.

Thinking back, I wonder if he keeps getting asked about getting to the Airbus factory and wishes that the government and Airbus would make his job easier by building a  Broughton station.

A station at Broughton might also cut the factory’s carbon footprint, by allowing more staff to go to work by train.

A Merseyrail Extension To Shotton

Shotton is already served by the Borderlands Line which connects Wrexham and Bidston.

This line is shown on the West side of this map, which shows how the Merseyrail network might look in the future.

Note.

  1. Chester could have services that terminate in the East at Crewe and Runcorn East stations.
  2. Chester already has electric services from Liverpool, which will receive new Class 777 trains in the next few months.
  3. The new trains can be fitted with a battery electric capability.

I just wonder, if a Cross-Chester Metro could be built.

  • Eastern termini would be Runcorn East or possibly Warrington Bank Quay and Crewe.
  • Shotton is only 7.9 miles from Chester.
  • Shotton low-level station used to have four tracks.
  • I suspect that Shotton or even Flint could be the Western terminus.
  • Extra stations could be added as required.

Note.

It would probably be best, if the trains were battery-electric that could use 25 KVAC overhead electrification, as this would allow them to charge at the Eastern termini.

I also feel that Crewe and Chester should be electrified, so that Chester could be reached by the new Class 805 trains running under electric power.

This would also allow Chester to become a High Speed Two destination, that was served by High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains.

I believe that a Cross-Chester Metro is a possibility.

October 12, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Could Chiltern Go Battery-Electric?

In the October 2022 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article, which is entitled Chiltern Considers Turbo Future, with a sub-title of Battery Replacement Could Be On The Cards.

These are the first two paragraphs.

In early September Chiltern Railways was preparing to launch a market sounding exercise to consider options for the future of the Class 165 Turbo DMU fleet.

The operator has 28×2-car and 11×3-car ‘165s’. which operate alongside its more modern Class 168 DMUs and its loco-hauled sets. The market sounding exercise will consider two options for the future of the fleet – some sort of hybrid conversion, or outright replacement.

The Class 165 Trains

The Class 165 trains were built in 1990-1991.

  • Maximum Speed – 75 mph
  • Prime Movers – One per car, Perkins 2006-TWH
  • 2-car Trains – 28
  • 3-car Trains – 11

One is being converted to a diesel/battery hybrid.

The Class 168 Trains

The Class 168 trains were built in 1998-2004.

  • Maximum Speed – 100 mph
  • Prime Movers – One per car, MTU 6R 183TD13H
  • 2-car Trains – 9
  • 3-car Trains – 8
  • 4-car Trains – 11

One has been converted to a diesel/battery hybrid.

Conversion To Hybrid Operation

If this proves to be feasible, it will surely be the more affordable of the two options.

But it does leave Chiltern with a mixed fleet with two types of train with different maximum speeds and these lengths.

  • 2-car Trains – 37
  • 3-car Trains – 19
  • 4-car Trains – 11

Would a fleet of similar trains, with perhaps a maximum speed of 100 mph, be better operationally?

Battery-Electric Operation

The Modern Railways article introduces the concept of battery-electric operation with this paragraph.

If a replacement fleet is considered the best option for the Turbo units, the replacements could take the form of a straight battery EMU, taking advantage of recent advances in ‘fast charge’ technology.

The article also says this about battery technology and electrification.

There is optimism that advances in battery technology will provide a smooth pathway to decarbonise Chiltern’s operations – the company serves the only non-electrified London terminus.

In the longer-term, it is hoped electrification from Birmingham to Banbury as part of a strategy to decarbonise CrossCountry and freight services would enable Chiltern to run a battery EMU on London to Birmingham duties, running under battery power as far north as Banbury and switching to overhead wires from there, both powering the unit and enabling the batteries to be recharged.

The Modern Railways article looked at each route and I will do this in more detail.

London Marylebone And Aylesbury via High Wycombe

London Marylebone and Oxford would be under battery operation for 40 miles.

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone and Aylesbury stations.

London Marylebone And Aylesbury Vale Parkway

London Marylebone and Oxford would be under battery operation for 41 miles.

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone and Aylesbury Vale Parkway stations.

It might be better to electrify between Aylesbury and Aylesbury Vale Parkway stations.

London Marylebone And Banbury

London Marylebone and Oxford would be under battery operation for 69 miles.

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone and Banbury stations.

Leamington Spa And Birmingham Moor Street

Assuming the Birmingham and Banbury section of the route is electrified, this route will be electrified.

London Marylebone And Birmingham Moor Street Or Birmingham Snow Hill

Assuming the Birmingham and Banbury section of the route is electrified, this route can be considered to be in two sections.

  • London Marylebone and Banbury – Battery operation – 69 miles
  • Banbury and Birmingham – Electric operation – 42 miles

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone station and on the electrified section.

London Marylebone And Gerrards Cross

London Marylebone and Oxford would be under battery operation for 19 miles or 38 miles both ways.

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone station.

London Marylebone And High Wycombe

London Marylebone and Oxford would be under battery operation for 28 miles or 56 miles both ways.

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone station.

London Marylebone And Oxford

London Marylebone and Oxford would be under battery operation for 66.8 miles.

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone and Oxford stations.

London Marylebone And Stratford-upon-Avon

Assuming the Birmingham and Banbury section of the route is electrified, this route can be considered to be in two sections.

  • London Marylebone and Banbury – Battery operation – 69 miles
  • Banbury and Hatton Junction – Electric operation – 26 miles
  • Hatton Junction and Stratford-upon-Avon – Battery operation – 9 miles

Trains would be charged at London Marylebone station and on the electrified section.

Chiltern’s Mainline Service

Chiltern’s Mainline service between London and Birmingham is run by either a Class 68 locomotive pulling a rake of six Mark 3 coaches and a driving van trailer or two or three Class 168 trains.

As the locomotive-hauled train is about eight coaches, it could surely be replaced by two four-car multiple units working together.

I believe that if Chiltern obtained a fleet of four-car battery electric trains, this would be the most efficient fleets for all their routes.

Charging At London Marylebone Station

I took these pictures at Marylebone station today.

Note.

  1. It is a surprisingly spacious station and I feel that Furrer+Frey or some other specialist company could add some form of charging to the platforms.
  2. Charging would probably performed using the train’s pantograph.

It appears that the turnround time in Marylebone is typically twelve minutes or more, which should be adequate to fully charge a train.

 

Conclusion

Both solutions will work for Chiltern.

But I prefer the new battery-electric train, which has some crucial advantages.

  • Battery-electric trains will be quieter than hybrid trains.
  • Marylebone station has a noise problem and battery-electric trains are very quiet.
  • Chiltern have ambitions to built new platforms at Old Oak Common and to serve Paddington. This could be easier with a battery electric train.

Rhe only disadvantage is that Banbury and Birmingham would need to be electrified.

 

 

September 25, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

York To Church Fenton – 10th August 2022

These pictures show the new electrification between York and Church Fenton.

My train was going towards York.

Half-an-hour later, I went to Manchester via Leeds and took the newly-electrified line.

  • The Class 802 train was on diesel on this section, but it was cruising at 100 mph.
  • One the train had passed Church Fenton station, it appeared to slow noticeably.
  • Today, York and Church Fenton took eight and a half minutes.

It will be interesting to see timings, when the wires are switched on.

August 10, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Boris Baldrick’s Cunning Plan

This written statement to Parliament on the UK Government web site, is entitled Transport Update: Transpennine Route Upgrade.

It has been published by Grant Shapps and this is the sub-title.

Additional funding has been made available for the Transpennine route upgrade.

This is the complete statement.

Today 19 July 2022, the government has made available £959 million of additional funding to continue to progress the delivery of the ambitious Transpennine route upgrade.

This funding is a significant milestone and another step towards upgrading the key east-west rail artery across the north of England, to further this government’s levelling up and decarbonisation objectives.

In addition to progressing the design of aspects of the upgrade, this funding will enable further on-the-ground delivery of electrification and journey time improvement works, mostly west of Leeds.

One of the first tangible benefits will be enabling electric trains to run between Manchester and Stalybridge by the middle of the decade. We are also developing scope that will enable the Transpennine route upgrade to become the first phase of Northern Powerhouse Rail, including plans to unlock freight flows and take thousands of lorries off our roads.

We are also more than trebling the investment in the Transpennine route upgrade from £2.9 billion to between £9.0 billion and £11.5 billion.

This additional investment will enable the roll out of digital signalling technology, electrification of the full route and the provision of additional tracks for commercial and freight services, giving rail users more reliable, more punctual, more comfortable and greener rail journeys.

I have some thoughts.

It’s Not A Wish List, But A Reality

The last paragraph reads like a wish list.

This additional investment will enable the roll out of digital signalling technology, electrification of the full route and the provision of additional tracks for commercial and freight services, giving rail users more reliable, more punctual, more comfortable and greener rail journeys.

But it’s not a wish list, it’s what is to be done.

Where Will The Government Get Between Nine and Eleven-And-A-Half Billion Pounds?

It’s not the sort of small change that you have in a sock draw.

This document on the UK government web site, is entitled PM Opening Remarks At Press Conference With German Chancellor Olaf Scholz: 8 April 2022, where this is these three paragraphs.

We will also agree on the importance of weaning ourselves off dependence on Russian gas and oil, and ensuring that our energy security cannot be threatened by a rogue state.

This is not easy for any of us, and I applaud the seismic decisions taken by Olaf’s government to move Germany away from Russian hydrocarbons.

Today we have agreed to maximise the potential of the North Sea and collaborate on energy security and on renewables, where Germany and the UK lead the way in new technology.

So did Boris and Olaf sign the world’s first Green Alliance based on zero-carbon energy?

  • They may not have signed an Alliance, but they have agreed on common actions.
  • Over the last year or so, German money and technology has started to be more visible in our offshore wind farms.
  • BP have been backed by German utility; enBW in some of their huge wind farms.
  • Siemens Gamesa are providing a lot of wind turbines.
  • Will German shipyards build the floats for floating wind farms?
  • An interconnector between the Isle of Grain and Wilhelmshaven is planned.
  • Rolls-Royce and its German subsidiary MTU are charging into battle against climate change.
  • The Germans have taken a liking to ITM Power’s electrolysers to produce hydrogen.

I can see the North Sea or the German Ocean becoming Europe’s power station, with by 2030, a large amount of the energy not needed by the UK, being exported to the Continent, either as electricity or hydrogen.

The Germans could become our magische Geldbäume.

But unlike gas and oil, wind power in the North Sea won’t run out, as it’s renewable.

In How Britannia With Help From Her Friends Can Rule The Waves And The Wind, this was my conclusion.

Boris’s vision of the UK becoming a Saudi Arabia of wind is no fantasy of a man with massive dreams.

Standard floating wind turbines, with the possibility of also harvesting wave power could be assembled in ports along the coasts, towed into position and then connected up.

Several GW of wind-power capacity could probably be added each year to what would become the largest zero-carbon power station in the world.

By harvesting the power of the winds and waves in the seas around the British Isles it is an engineering and mathematical possibility, that could have been developed by any of those great visionary Victorian engineers like Armstrong, Bazalgette, Brunel and Reynolds, if they had had access to our modern technology.

Up Yours! Putin!

This energy and the money it provides will finance our infrastructure and our tax cuts.

 

July 19, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

« Previous Entries