A real case for electrification of Wolverhampton-Shrewsbury line?

[FLIRTfan18]

Reading an article from a local newspaper this morning, Shrewsbury MP Daniel Kawczynski seems to believe that there is a strong case for electrification of the Wolverhampton to Shrewsbury line, citing environmental and economic reasons. These are credible, however I'm very skeptical that it really makes sense.
The line is due to have a complete overhaul of its rolling stock in the coming years. West Midlands Railway are introducing their diesel 196s and in the not too distant future Transport for Wales will be bringing in the 197s. If the line was electrified both operators would need to bring in yet more new trains, which takes years and which will leave a surplus of perfectly good DMUS that will pollute the air somewhere else instead.
Avanti are replacing their voyagers with bi-modes, I believe, but they only operate a couple of services a day.
There are many places that are crying out for electrification, but for me this is just not one of them at this point in time - there are many that should jump the queue. Thoughts?

https://www.expressandstar.com/news...sport-officials-to-press-for-electrification/

MP Daniel Kawczynski, says he has had a 'very productive' meeting with officials from the Department for Transport where he pressed the case for electrifying the railway line between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.

Mr Kawczynski, MP for Shrewsbury & Atcham, said there would be huge environmental and economic benefits to electrifying the 28-mile stretch, which also has stations in Staffordshire and Telford.

"Having dirty diesel trains along the line is very antiquated."

 

[Class360/1]

Reading an article from a local newspaper this morning, Shrewsbury MP Daniel Kawczynski seems to believe that there is a strong case for electrification of the Wolverhampton to Shrewsbury line, citing environmental and economic reasons. These are credible, however I'm very skeptical that it really makes sense.
The line is due to have a complete overhaul of its rolling stock in the coming years. West Midlands Railway are introducing their diesel 196s and in the not too distant future Transport for Wales will be bringing in the 197s. If the line was electrified both operators would need to bring in yet more new trains, which takes years and which will leave a surplus of perfectly good DMUS that will pollute the air somewhere else instead.
Avanti are replacing their voyagers with bi-modes, I believe, but they only operate a couple of services a day.
There are many places that are crying out for electrification, but for me this is just not one of them at this point in time - there are many that should jump the queue. Thoughts?

MP meets with transport officials to press for electrification between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton

MP Daniel Kawczynski, says he has had a 'very productive' meeting with officials from the Department for Transport where he pressed the case for electrifying the railway line between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury.

www.expressandstar.com

Full MML, East West Rail, Hull, TransPennine, Felixstowe (ports) and electrification to Bath and Oxfordshire

 

[tbtc]

It'd be strange to find myself on the same side of any argument as Daniel Kawczynski... but there's something to be said for wiring the line - a half hourly service seems a threshold for whether a line is worth electrifying (i.e. the two WMT services - ignoring any Avanti services).

The two issues I'd have would be:

1. Would this mean a reduction in Welsh services (given that you'd want to run fewer diesels on the line to justify the electrification)? Can't see that being popular west of the border, but the TfW trains proposed for the line are all *pure* DMU (as I understand it), so would they continue to send as many diesels on the hundred mile round trip east of Shrewsbury, fully under the wires?
2. Would this mean an end to the semaphores at Shrewsbury? (apologies if they've been replaced, I've not been there recently)

 

[squizzler]

Do it. The new trains can easily find work elsewhere - there is no shortage of BR era DMUs yet to be replaced all over the network.

 

[40129]

IMHO this line should have been electrified many years ago, Ideally at the same time as Wolverhampton. That way there would never have been the need to swap from electric to diesel traction at Wolverhampton. If I were in charge of electrification I'd be wiring this route tomorrow and extending it to Chester as the start of a wider north and mid wales scheme including. This would include the Cambrian line to Aberystwyth as well as the North Wales main line to Holyhead (including the LLandudno branch). Not sure what I'd do about the Cambrian Coast or the Conwy Valley lines though the temptation would be to include them plus Wrecsam-Bidston and thus eliminate diesel trains from the region.

The downside for semaphore signal lovers would of course be the replacement of the signalling at Shrewsbury. How long ago was that first proposed? (I vaguely recall a mid-1980s Rail Atlas including a proposed Shrewsbury PSB)

 

[FLIRTfan18]

Do it. The new trains can easily find work elsewhere - there is no shortage of BR era DMUs yet to be replaced all over the network.

But where do the EMUs come from to replace them?

 

[40129]

Either a factory (trains) or Australia (bird)

I'll get my coat

 

[fgwrich]

But where do the EMUs come from to replace them?

West Mids could add a follow on order to Alstom for further Aventra's, while TfW could change the use or order more Flirts's from Stadler?

 

[squizzler]

Quite so. We have loads of new factories that will need new orders. Building new trains = skilled well paid jobs. As does electrification.

 

[FLIRTfan18]

Either a factory (trains) or Australia (bird)

I'll get my coat

There's my issue with it. It would mean ordering brand new trains to replace brand new trains. Meaning going through training staff on new trains twice, and all the delays associated with that etc.. when you can electrify a line elsewhere and replace ageing DMUs directly. Electrifying the line is at best inconvenient when it comes to rolling stock, when as I said there are many lines that would benefit just as much and where the situation in terms of rolling stock makes more sense.

 

[The Planner]

It's not high up the list....

 

[Undiscovered]

Semaphore signals will remain at Shrewsbury for many years to come. The mechanics and interlocking have been long acknowledged by Network Rail to be far to complex to easily transfer into Solid State.

With regards to the line, there are some challenges in Oakengates Tunnel, and the area around Preston Boats.
This area especially, as I understand, is precluded from heavy construction work due to issues found /arising from the construction of the Shrewsbury Bypass many years ago. The nature of these, however, I'm not at liberty to divulge - suffice to say you'd need very, very deep pockets to build the required earthworks to support the overhead masts.

These two problems make the project prohibitively expensive.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's not high up the list....

Indeed. As has been pointed out further upthread there are other schemes higher on the priority list.

 

[The Planner]

Semaphore signals will remain at Shrewsbury for many years to come. The mechanics and interlocking have been long acknowledged by Network Rail to be far to complex to easily transfer into Solid State.

With regards to the line, there are some challenges in Oakengates Tunnel, and the area around Preston Boats.
This area especially, as I understand, is precluded from heavy construction work due to issues found /arising from the construction of the Shrewsbury Bypass many years ago. The nature of these, however, I'm not at liberty to divulge - suffice to say you'd need very, very deep pockets to build the required earthworks to support the overhead masts.

These two problems make the project prohibitively expensive.

Shrewsbury will get resignalled at some point, I don't see what is different to any other mechanical conversion. You would just end up remodelling/rationalising the layout. Worcester is being looked at now.

 

[FLIRTfan18]

Semaphore signals will remain at Shrewsbury for many years to come. The mechanics and interlocking have been long acknowledged by Network Rail to be far to complex to easily transfer into Solid State.

With regards to the line, there are some challenges in Oakengates Tunnel, and the area around Preston Boats.
This area especially, as I understand, is precluded from heavy construction work due to issues found /arising from the construction of the Shrewsbury Bypass many years ago. The nature of these, however, I'm not at liberty to divulge - suffice to say you'd need very, very deep pockets to build the required earthworks to support the overhead masts.

These two problems make the project prohibitively expensive.

My instinct was that the low and long road bridge at Bilbrook station might a challenge as well, although I don't know very much about that kind of thing

 

[Bald Rick]

It'd be strange to find myself on the same side of any argument as Daniel Kawczynski... but there's something to be said for wiring the line - a half hourly service seems a threshold for whether a line is worth electrifying (i.e. the two WMT services - ignoring any Avanti services).

Much as it will be a personal disappointment, I suspect the 2nd off peak WMT service may not return any time soon.

But... electrification might be a way of getting a second service, as it could be an extension of the Wolves - Birmingham stopper.

 

[Undiscovered]

My instinct was that the low and long road bridge at Bilbrook station might a challenge as well, although I don't know very much about that kind of thing

Bilbrook, you can lower the track gradient and sort station access accordingly, not a problem. Oxley to Codsall is relatively straight.

Oakengates- the tunnel is curved, has stations immediately (almost) either side, and has infrastructure and housing built over the tunnel, meaning any track work you undertake has to be very considered.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

The downside for semaphore signal lovers would of course be the replacement of the signalling at Shrewsbury. How long ago was that first proposed? (I vaguely recall a mid-1980s Rail Atlas including a proposed Shrewsbury PSB)

Whilst you would expect resignalling to happen at the same time as a proposed electrification does it actually have to happen - what now prevents semaphores with OLE?

 

[Bald Rick]

Whilst you would expect resignalling to happen at the same time as a proposed electrification does it actually have to happen - what now prevents semaphores with OLE?

In complex areas, there is an issue with signal sighting to semaphores on any sort of gantry (as opposed to a straight post), because the signal gantry and signal arms take up a lot more space, and interfere with clearances to the OLE.

You can, just, get away with single post semaphores on OLE lines, but anything more complex is almost impossible.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

In complex areas, there is an issue with signal sighting to semaphores on any sort of gantry (as opposed to a straight post), because the signal gantry and signal arms take up a lot more space, and interfere with clearances to the OLE.

You can, just, get away with single post semaphores on OLE lines, but anything more complex is almost impossible.

Thanks for that - I wasn’t sure, thinking about it complex semaphores with OLE are generally found on the continent where there is a bigger loading gauge to start with.

With bi-mode trains coming to the West Coast and the majority of trains t serving Shrewsbury being long distance from Cardiff, Aberystwyth, Manchester, North Wales etc you do come to the conclusion there would be far more suitable places to electrify first that could bring benefit to far more services.

 

[adrock1976]

Bilbrook, you can lower the track gradient and sort station access accordingly, not a problem. Oxley to Codsall is relatively straight.

Oakengates- the tunnel is curved, has stations immediately (almost) either side, and has infrastructure and housing built over the tunnel, meaning any track work you undertake has to be very considered.

Regarding the tunnel at Oakengates, has it been looked at to see if it is possible to electrify using conductor bars similar to the Severn Tunnel?

 

[Bald Rick]

Regarding the tunnel at Oakengates, has it been looked at to see if it is possible to electrify using conductor bars similar to the Severn Tunnel?

Electrification hasn’t been looked at full stop.

In any event, conductor bar is not a solution for low clearance. It is a solution for low maintenance / high reliability.

 

[adrock1976]

Electrification hasn’t been looked at full stop.

In any event, conductor bar is not a solution for low clearance. It is a solution for low maintenance / high reliability.

Many thanks.

 

[Bald Rick]

Many thanks.

No worries. I should have said that low maintenance / high reliability is often required in tunnels either because of the difficulty of gaining access to do inspection / routine maintenance (Severn Tunnel), and/or because they carry a high frequency of traffic (Thameslink / Crossrail).

 

[HSTEd]

No worries. I should have said that low maintenance / high reliability is often required in tunnels either because of the difficulty of gaining access to do inspection / routine maintenance (Severn Tunnel), and/or because they carry a high frequency of traffic (Thameslink / Crossrail).

Any idea why it wasn't used in the Channel tunnel?

My understanding is, despite the huge loading gauge, they only have minimum clearance under the wire because of the huge trains.

 

[ac6000cw]

The Channel Tunnel is two fully bi-directional single-track bores with two sets of undersea crossovers between them, so closing a tunnel section for maintenance at quieter times isn't a problem. Also it has a service tunnel for access if needed.

You can't do that in the same way with a double-track bore like the Severn Tunnel.

 

[Bald Rick]

Any idea why it wasn't used in the Channel tunnel?

My understanding is, despite the huge loading gauge, they only have minimum clearance under the wire because of the huge trains.

it sure it was invented back then, at least not in the scale to put in the tunnel. But in any event, clearances aren’t why it is deployed...

The Channel Tunnel is two fully bi-directional single-track bores with two sets of underseas crossovers between them, so closing a tunnel section for maintenance at quieter times isn't a problem. Also it has a service tunnel for access if needed.

You can't do that in the same way with a double-track bore like the Severn Tunnel.

Exactly.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'd have thought the West Midlands devolved transport body would decide local electrification priorities in its area.
Diesels in New St and the approach tunnels are a factor in environmental planning, but there's a long way to go yet with XC and other diesel services.
Avanti will at least be using bi-modes from next year.
WMT and TfW may one day regret going for a diesel-only solution.

The route also suffers from a low line speed.
It's quite a few years (10+?) since 90mph instead of 70mph was planned, and a lot of route work was done plus resignalling (bar Shrewsbury).
But the line speed upgrade fell by the wayside, while TfW did manage to upgrade to 90mph from Shrewsbury towards Gobowen.

 

[Dunnyrail]

But where do the EMUs come from to replace them?

Plenty of 321 and 365’s available, bit or a refurbish inside and good for a decade or two.

 

[The Planner]

The route also suffers from a low line speed.
It's quite a few years (10+?) since 90mph instead of 70mph was planned, and a lot of route work was done plus resignalling (bar Shrewsbury).
But the line speed upgrade fell by the wayside, while TfW did manage to upgrade to 90mph from Shrewsbury towards Gobowen.

Nothing was done to facilitate 90mph, it never washes its face. The re-signalling was to get rid of Oxley and Madeley boxes, which as you say, were done 10 years ago.