• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Is there any valid reason to why Chester is not electrified (ignoring P7)

N

norbitonflyer

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2020
Messages
2,403
Location
SW London
john prytherch said:
The Crewe and Chester line is, I think, one of those built by Thomas Brassey. Of the approximately 40 overbridges, I think most are his originals, still in good condition and visually attractive, and they give the line much of its character. Whether they are listed, I don't know. But I think they may not be easy to lower the track under. The arches could be replaced, 1960s style, by concrete middle sections but again that would significantly alter the character of the line. Christleton Tunnel could also be a challenge. I hope that a way can be found of erecting continuous knitting and preserving the character of the line.
Click to expand...
Much more complex than, for example, Newark- Lincoln, which has four road overbridges (three A roads and a private access to a quarry) and two footbridges in a similar distance, all of them built since 1960 (and no tunnels!).
And what would electrification of Chester achieve, other than moving a traction change from Crewe to Chester on the London- N Wales services? Anything running west of Chester, whether from Crewe or from Manchester, would still have to be diesel or bimode.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

The exile

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,725
Location
Somerset
Falcon1200 said:
It would allow bi-modes to run electric vice diesel, and the shuttle between Crewe and Chester to be worked by EMUs. 2 trains an hour has justified electrification in lots of other places!
Click to expand...
But there’s a lot of difference between 2 tph in the days when it was “all or nothing” ( no bi-modes) and electrification could be justified by eliminating diesel running under the wires (eg Hazel Grove) and now. Not say ing Crewe - Chester should never be electrified, but there’s a lot of places higher up the queue.
 
cactustwirly

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,457
Location
UK
Falcon1200 said:
It would allow bi-modes to run electric vice diesel, and the shuttle between Crewe and Chester to be worked by EMUs. 2 trains an hour has justified electrification in lots of other places!
Click to expand...
What's the business case? How does that pay for the electrification?
There are other priorities like finishing the GWML and MML first
 
Y Ddraig Coch

Y Ddraig Coch

Established Member
Joined
1 Nov 2013
Messages
1,298
cactustwirly said:
What's the business case? How does that pay for the electrification?
There are other priorities like finishing the GWML and MML first
Click to expand...
If the electrification ended up going to North Wales also, which it would probably have to to make any sense then the Welsh Assembly government i suspect would throw a lot of money at it to help costs. They do enjoy throwing cash at things perceived to be environmentally friendly ( see the millions spent changing Wales to 20mph which is mainly ignored anyway)
 
D

Deepgreen

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
6,395
Location
Betchworth, Surrey
To answer the OP, it depends what is meant by "valid reason". Do the following count? 1) lack of business case so far presented/accepted, 2) lack of public spending funding, 3) availability of motive power and stock to continue to Chester and beyond on diesel power, etc. Some may find these unpalatable/unacceptable, but are they valid? The same question could be asked about innumerable other electrification projects around the country.
 
D

deltic08

On Moderation
Joined
26 Aug 2013
Messages
2,719
Location
North
cactustwirly said:
What's the business case? How does that pay for the electrification?
There are other priorities like finishing the GWML and MML first
Click to expand...
Yes, I agree with you 100%, but living in the North for 50 years and originating from near Chepstow, I would be happy to see the money reallocated to South Wales, extending electrification to Swansea rather than electrifying the North Wales line
There are 12 stations on this route with only 4 served by GWR Paddington trains hourly. The rest could be served by faster accelerating EMUs 2ph extended to Bristol.
What a tragedy 197s are diesel only and not bimode. Very short thinking when Crewe-Manchester, Manchester-Warrington and Newport-Cardiff is already wired and Cardiff-Swansea could be
 
7

73128

Member
Joined
8 Dec 2019
Messages
420
Location
Reading
The exile said:
How many services are there of which Crewe - Chester is the only unwired section?
Priorities should be short sections which would help to eliminate diesel running under the wires (either instal wiring or order bi-modes)
Click to expand...
Almost all the trains as the current timetable is primarily Chester to Crewe shuttles and Chester to London Avanti services (some of which go through to or towards Holyhead)
 
Bevan Price

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
7,343
Personally, I think that electrifying only Crewe to Chester would be a bit pointless. If it is done, it also needs to include Chester to at least Bangor & Llandudno, plus Warrington to Chester. It may be difficult to justify financially at present, but would be viewed (in part) as part of a national "decarbonisation" programme. Eventually, the Bangor / Holyhead "diesel island" would need to be eliminated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top