GWML Electification

[phil-b259]

Why can't the Didcot - Oxford section be wired now?

 

 

For the very practical reason that none of the signalling in the Oxford area is 'AC Immune'. In laymans terms this means that simply sticking up OLE at 25KV could, in the worst instance end up causing a Clapham Junction style train crash.

 

Now if signaling resources allowed, you could go and replace all the kit on a 'like for like basis' to make it AC immune and all would be well..... BUT..... Oxford station desperately needs extra platforms which involve significant remodeling - and resignalling to accommodate the revised layout . As such it has been decided to defer electrification work until Oxford station gets rebuilt - the problem with that of course is electrification has to wait until NR & Oxford Council have started work on the station rebuild.

 

Not that different to Crossrail initially planning on finishing at Maidenhead for fear of being saddled with the bill for resignalling Reading - none of which was AC Immune until NR replaced it as part of the station rebuild.

[Southernman46]

Problem is, like vegetation clearance, scrap clearance needs to be a year round activity to be effective.

 

I also know of a place where there has been redundant CWR sitting in the 4ft for what must be around 5 years now. Every so often we get the p-way to chop a bot off the end where it is starting to damage our (S&t) kit as it shuffles along with train vibration....

Totally agree ....................

 

It should be a regular activity especially for the PW and was in my areas - I can still recall the MIMS code 9089 for a scrap rail !!) and plenty of 1 tonne bags of nefarious steel & other PW shite gathered and removed with an RRV & trailer - as with most things on the Network it is largely down to those that can be arsed to keep their sections tidy ....................

 

However I do remember (to much embarrassment) we managed to wipe out the same TPWS grid at West London Jn twice in 6 months despite loping 6ft off the CWR 1st time round ................... well it was during the original RCF "madness" when replacement rail got flung about like confetti - as if that was going to cure the problem ............ it had to be installed too

[Pandora]

Scrap is also a hazard and a  safety risk,  trespassers on the line stealing material and a ready source of supply  for vandals to purposely obstruct the line  damaging trains or worse, such  as the major West Ealing derailment in 1989 of  an express hauled by a class 50 50025

Edited March 15, 2018 by Pandora

[royaloak]

For the very practical reason that none of the signalling in the Oxford area is 'AC Immune'. In laymans terms this means that simply sticking up OLE at 25KV could, in the worst instance end up causing a Clapham Junction style train crash.

 

Now if signaling resources allowed, you could go and replace all the kit on a 'like for like basis' to make it AC immune and all would be well..... BUT..... Oxford station desperately needs extra platforms which involve significant remodeling - and resignalling to accommodate the revised layout . As such it has been decided to defer electrification work until Oxford station gets rebuilt - the problem with that of course is electrification has to wait until NR & Oxford Council have started work on the station rebuild.

 

Not that different to Crossrail initially planning on finishing at Maidenhead for fear of being saddled with the bill for resignalling Reading - none of which was AC Immune until NR replaced it as part of the station rebuild.

I think Pete is saying the foundations, masts and wires could be erected up to the location where alterations are required but not energised to get ahead of the game, then, when Oxford station is remodelled and the signalling sorted out it would just be a case of finishing off the last bit before testing and commissioning, rather than having to start from Didcot.

Edited March 15, 2018 by royaloak

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Spot-on RO.

The material is on hand so why throw it away for a pittance?

 

"It's full steam ahead for £70m revamp of Oxford rail station" - Oxford Mail November 2013. Yes, 2013!

Anything happened in almost five years - lots of talking and shiny graphics.

 

The on-off saga of rebuilding Oxford goes back decades. Cost now (I believe) has risen to £75m. Doubtless will be well over £80m

when the scheme is (or if??) finally completed.

 

Electrification will have to come at some point, unless Didcot is going to become "Oxford Junction"; or maybe "Oxford Road" as

the GW would've called it.

[dibber25]

Was at Oxford a week ago. What a crummy station it is, for one of Britain's great university cities. Peeling paint, rusting steel, plywood sheets nailed up all over the place, and a load of builders' clutter beside the new platforms. At least the old torched-off columns seem to have been either removed or converted to new uses since I was last there, last summer. Oxford seems to lurch from one 'temporary' station to another. Not to mention platform staff who are in stark contrast to GWR's delightful on-train crews. (CJL)

Edited March 15, 2018 by dibber25

[locoholic]

Was at Oxford a week ago. What a crummy station it is, for one of Britain's great university cities. Peeling paint, rusting steel, plywood sheets nailed up all over the place, and a load of builders' clutter beside the new platforms. At least the old torched-off columns seem to have been either removed or converted to new uses since I was last there, last summer. Oxford seems to lurch from one 'temporary' station to another. Not to mention platform staff who are in stark contrast to GWR's delightful on-train crews. (CJL)

Oxford station site seems to be pretty hemmed in these days. I presume more platforms are needed - could at least one of the through lines be sacrificed to allow a new platform to be built?

Edited March 15, 2018 by locoholic

[Mark_A]

From a planning document from Bath and North East Somerset Council, the third paragraph of a communication there states

 

"As you may know, as there is to be no electrification of the railway through Bath, Network Rail no longer intend to remove trees along the railway embankment adjacent to the site".

 

Presumably the wrong end of a stick has been picked up. Here's (hopefully) a link to the original...

 

https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/publisher/docs/6D86E6B89AD80C03C3169520B1B9AB2B/Document-6D86E6B89AD80C03C3169520B1B9AB2B.pdf

[corneliuslundie]

What about the announcement (haven't seen it but others at club had last night) that diesel is to be eliminated from the railways as well as the roads? Did they imagine it? Or has that nice Secretary of State for Transport not been told?

Jonathan

[david.hill64]

What about the announcement (haven't seen it but others at club had last night) that diesel is to be eliminated from the railways as well as the roads? Did they imagine it? Or has that nice Secretary of State for Transport not been told?

Jonathan

There is a thread about this already.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131136-end-of-diesel-by-2040/page-1

G

[caradoc]

Spot-on RO.

The material is on hand so why throw it away for a pittance?

 

"It's full steam ahead for £70m revamp of Oxford rail station" - Oxford Mail November 2013. Yes, 2013!

Anything happened in almost five years - lots of talking and shiny graphics.

 

The on-off saga of rebuilding Oxford goes back decades. Cost now (I believe) has risen to £75m. Doubtless will be well over £80m

when the scheme is (or if??) finally completed.

 

Electrification will have to come at some point, unless Didcot is going to become "Oxford Junction"; or maybe "Oxford Road" as

the GW would've called it.

 

By the time Oxford station is sorted, so many new houses will have been built that Didcot will actually be Oxford South !

 

 

Was at Oxford a week ago. What a crummy station it is, for one of Britain's great university cities. Peeling paint, rusting steel, plywood sheets nailed up all over the place, and a load of builders' clutter beside the new platforms. At least the old torched-off columns seem to have been either removed or converted to new uses since I was last there, last summer. Oxford seems to lurch from one 'temporary' station to another. Not to mention platform staff who are in stark contrast to GWR's delightful on-train crews. (CJL)

 

Oxford station is an utter disgrace and all those responsible should hang their heads in shame at the first impression of one of Britain's major tourist centres given to visitors.

I have lost any hope that the city will have a fit and proper station in my lifetime. However, it is not just the station that lets the city down; Frideswide Square outside the station was expensively remodelled within the last couple of years, but is currently partly closed again for repairs !

[Coryton]

There is a thread about this already.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131136-end-of-diesel-by-2040/page-1

G

 

Where it says that diesel-only trains are supposed to be eliminated, so bi-modes are fine (even if you never actually use the electric capability?)

[royaloak]

<off topic>

Where it says that diesel-only trains are supposed to be eliminated, so bi-modes are fine (even if you never actually use the electric capability?)

Where does that leave the freight sector?

 

Please answer in the other thread please, ta muchly.

[HillsideDepot]

Two photos from snowy Royal Wootton Bassett today:

Typically as I arrived they were working on the gantry nearest the bridge, but in the minute or so it took to park and walk back, they'd moved off.

 

The wires, freshly strung out.

 

There was another part of the wiring train working in the distance on the Swindon side, I presume it was properly fixing the wires that had just been run out. But there is no footway on that side of the bridge (its newly rebuilt, but still not wide enough for two cars to freely pass, and the single sided footpath has a safety fence as traffic is so close).

 

In other news the gap in masts between Dauntsey and Friday Street is being filled, but there is still the situation where you go from complete apart from the actual catenary and contact wires to nothing, not even a bare mast. Between Langley Crossing and (nearly) the River Avon bridge it appears to just need the catenary. There are still gaps west of Chippenham, but the possession extends that way tomorrow, so I'll take a look if the snow stays away.

[lmsforever]

Last week on Rail Cam  at Newbury  they focused on the gang putting in bases and working on the masts etc very interesting actually seeing how its done not an easy task.

[NIK]

Hi,

 

The wires are up at Brimpton and Thatcham east of Newbury. The bi-mode units are being seen more on the Berk and Hants.

 

 

Regards

 

Nick

Edited March 18, 2018 by NIK

[royaloak]

Hi,

 

The wires are up at Brimpton and Thatcham east of Newbury. The bi-mode units are being seen more on the Berk and Hants.

 

 

Regards

 

Nick

Only the trains crewed by Bristol or Paddington crews though because Exeter and Plymouth are not being trained yet, although they have started training the trainers at Exeter.

 

I really must make every effort to be as close to the bottom of the list as possible, bloody modern rubbish bah humbug back in my day grumble grumble.    

[talisman56]

Only the trains crewed by Bristol or Paddington crews though because Exeter and Plymouth are not being trained yet, although they have started training the trainers at Exeter.

 

I really must make every effort to be as close to the bottom of the list as possible, bloody modern rubbish bah humbug back in my day grumble grumble.    

 

Still hankering for a shovel and a few tons of best S.Wales black stuff...?

[The Stationmaster]

Still hankering for a shovel and a few tons of best S.Wales black stuff...?

 

Somehow I doubt if GWR are employing OAPs on mainline footplate duties (or indeed on any sort of footplate work).  Anybody who was passed for firing on the WR would now be at least 69 years old and in reality I reckon virtually all would now be over 70. And in fact anybody passed for firing on any part of BR would now be at least 66 years old assuming they were Passed Cleaners.

[HillsideDepot]

The Swindon Advertiser website, in an article mainly about a bus struggling to get up Victoria Road in the snow, had a gallery of photos which included several "snow scenes" besides the struggling bus. Among them were these two:

Swindon station

Some of the wires in place at the Works Weigh House.

Incidentally, the bus, in line with Thamesdown's tradition was named, in this case 'Queen Boadicea', and the newspaper notes that it is named after "the Queen of the Brits". Actually, Thamesdown, now rebranded as Swindon's bus company, names its buses after GWR locomotives. 

[The Stationmaster]

An evening session with Mark Hopwood chaired by the MP John Howell on Firiday produced some interesting stuff.  

 

One truly daft thing (literally) is that a GWR intention to increase an 8 car formation to 12 cars on an overcrowded morning commuter service into Paddington has rto be agreed by DafT - I know it's a management contract but that's going to the nth degree of micromanagement when there's capacity in the fleet to allow it, what a uttterly daft way to run a railway.  

 

The GWR 387 fleet now stands at 45 sets, including one undergoing commissioning at Reading, and that was stated to be the final figure for fleet size - it currently has to cover 41 diagrams but various problems (read on) are leading to trains running round in short formation. Miles per casualty currently stands at 6,000 (compared with 44,000 on C2C) and this seems to be entirely down to pantograph woes.  Apparently the fancy new ohle installed by NR at a leisurely pace is causing excessive wear of pantograph carbons leading to too rapid exposure of the system for detecting an problems which in turn causes pans to auto-drop - efforts are underway to resolve teh problems.  GWR is also continuing to suffer traincrew problems due to delayed training and late delivery of trains (and the wires under which to run them) but 387 training should be finished soon.

 

Best news (see also the Crossrail thread) is that GWR is proposing to continue running 2 off peak trains per hour east of Reading to Paddington once Crossrail is up and running through to Reading - these trains sound like an excellent improvement on the current abysmal off- peak timings as they will call only at Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough, Hayes, and Ealing Broadway and I asked that they be the ones to connect with the branches (which will of course remain GWR worked anyway).

 

GWR has also agreed with DafT that shortly it will start developing and introducing 'smart ticketing' on the Thames Valley (and presumably further afield).

[jonny777]

An evening session with Mark Hopwood chaired by the MP John Howell on Firiday produced some interesting stuff.  

 

One truly daft thing (literally) is that a GWR intention to increase an 8 car formation to 12 cars on an overcrowded morning commuter service into Paddington has rto be agreed by DafT - I know it's a management contract but that's going to the nth degree of micromanagement when there's capacity in the fleet to allow it, what a uttterly daft way to run a railway.  

 

 

 

 

You know why that is, don't you?

 

DOO. 

 

It might not work with 12 car trains, and we couldn't have anyone scuppering that right wing dogma. (sorry if this is political). 

[Mike Storey]

An evening session with Mark Hopwood chaired by the MP John Howell on Firiday produced some interesting stuff.  

 

One truly daft thing (literally) is that a GWR intention to increase an 8 car formation to 12 cars on an overcrowded morning commuter service into Paddington has rto be agreed by DafT - I know it's a management contract but that's going to the nth degree of micromanagement when there's capacity in the fleet to allow it, what a uttterly daft way to run a railway.  

 

The GWR 387 fleet now stands at 45 sets, including one undergoing commissioning at Reading, and that was stated to be the final figure for fleet size - it currently has to cover 41 diagrams but various problems (read on) are leading to trains running round in short formation. Miles per casualty currently stands at 6,000 (compared with 44,000 on C2C) and this seems to be entirely down to pantograph woes.  Apparently the fancy new ohle installed by NR at a leisurely pace is causing excessive wear of pantograph carbons leading to too rapid exposure of the system for detecting an problems which in turn causes pans to auto-drop - efforts are underway to resolve teh problems.  GWR is also continuing to suffer traincrew problems due to delayed training and late delivery of trains (and the wires under which to run them) but 387 training should be finished soon.

 

Best news (see also the Crossrail thread) is that GWR is proposing to continue running 2 off peak trains per hour east of Reading to Paddington once Crossrail is up and running through to Reading - these trains sound like an excellent improvement on the current abysmal off- peak timings as they will call only at Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough, Hayes, and Ealing Broadway and I asked that they be the ones to connect with the branches (which will of course remain GWR worked anyway).

 

GWR has also agreed with DafT that shortly it will start developing and introducing 'smart ticketing' on the Thames Valley (and presumably further afield).

 

On the 8 to 12 car increase, daft or not, the TOC will no doubt want DfT to underwrite the additional cost. If Mark was trying to make out he agreed that it was micromanagement, did you ask why he didn't sanction the increase without waiting for DfT to agree the additional cost?  (I know the anwer....)

 

On excess panto wear, we had very similar problems in the early days of Class 91 operation on the ECML, and then later when auto-drop wear detection was introduced, after multiple dewirements, involving a dual strip of multi-section carbon. For the former, BR worked on trialling slight alterations to OLE tension and panto pressures, until they found a solution that worked (problem with sine wavelengths?? dunno). For the latter, in post-privatisation days, much time was lost whilst GNER blamed Railtrack and vv. It was not until roof-mounted cameras were installed on a couple of locos that the real problem was understood (excessive bounce mainly but also excessive sparking at certain locations). I am no engineer, but I recall most of the remedial work was on the loco panto design and upward pressure changes, although RT also changed OLE tension, overlaps and stagger at some locations. (This was after the additional tensioning and extra posts work when localised, very high speed gusting was identified as the cause of many dewirements.) Looks like corporate or industry memory loss once more, although of course, Mark 3b is a different animal.

[royaloak]

Somehow I doubt if GWR are employing OAPs on mainline footplate duties (or indeed on any sort of footplate work).  Anybody who was passed for firing on the WR would now be at least 69 years old and in reality I reckon virtually all would now be over 70. And in fact anybody passed for firing on any part of BR would now be at least 66 years old assuming they were Passed Cleaners.

We have a 68 year old driver at my depot, but he started as a motorman on the Southern.

[Mike Storey]

You know why that is, don't you?

 

DOO. 

 

It might not work with 12 car trains, and we couldn't have anyone scuppering that right wing dogma. (sorry if this is political). 

 

Don't understand. 12 car DOO has been in operation on the GN for decades. Is there something on the GW that makes that a greater difficulty there?

 

(I do not make the argument for one or the other, just interested in what you perceive as the difference.)