East-West Rail (EWR): should it be electrified?

[edwin_m]

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/east-west-rail-ewr-progress-and-updates-not-speculation.99892

Perhaps there's an opportunity here to tell freight operators they can only use EWR with electric haulage. Making that condition appears to be impossible on existing lines (through I'm not sure if anyone has tried for, say, Shap and Beattock), but perhaps the right to exploit new opportunities could have some responsibilities attached.

They'd have to electrify EWR to do that of course. But if they don't I rather doubt how well diesel freight would keep up on a railway where the passenger trains do 100mph and don't stop that often, and the loops have been value engineered out.

 

[richieb1971]

No loops

 

[The Planner]

Perhaps there's an opportunity here to tell freight operators they can only use EWR with electric haulage. Making that condition appears to be impossible on existing lines (through I'm not sure if anyone has tried for, say, Shap and Beattock), but perhaps the right to exploit new opportunities could have some responsibilities attached.

They'd have to electrify EWR to do that of course. But if they don't I rather doubt how well diesel freight would keep up on a railway where the passenger trains do 100mph and don't stop that often, and the loops have been value engineered out.

You would get laughed out of a dispute hearing if you tried that on.

 

[mwmbwls]

What is the exact nature of the relationship between Network Rail and EWR?

 

[edwin_m]

You would get laughed out of a dispute hearing if you tried that on.

That's the whole problem. When you look at some of the upgrades needed to provide capacity for diesel freight, it would probably be cheaper for the Government to buy some electric locos and give them to the freight operators.

 

[ABB125]

That's the whole problem. When you look at some of the upgrades needed to provide capacity for diesel freight, it would probably be cheaper for the Government to buy some electric locos and give them to the freight operators.

We can't be having that! Government can't just give stuff to private industry for free...

 

[zwk500]

That's the whole problem. When you look at some of the upgrades needed to provide capacity for diesel freight, it would probably be cheaper for the Government to buy some electric locos and give them to the freight operators.

Electric freight isn't a magic bullet though. If it were so much better, then operators who run on the WCML between Wembley and Crewe (or Mossend) would switch to electric as soon as they could. The fact they quite often run diesel throughout indicates that it's the overall operation that needs to be as smooth as possible.

The most effective thing to increase electric freight is 1. Come up with a proper solution for OLE trains at top-loading terminals and 2. Electrify the full route of potential flows.

 

[Bald Rick]

If it were so much better, then operators who run on the WCML between Wembley and Crewe (or Mossend) would switch to electric as soon as they could. The fact they quite often run diesel throughout indicates that it's the overall operation that needs to be as smooth as possible.

Yes... and no.

The time / cost penalty of changing locos is not trivial, and the freight operators have access rights for diesel haulage.

The issue is that what is most efficient for the FOC isn’t necessarily the most efficient for the railway.

 

[zwk500]

The issue is that what is most efficient for the FOC isn’t necessarily the most efficient for the railway.

That was the point I was getting at, thanks for being able to put it down in such a clear way!

Going back to the topic, has the Oxford-MK (and Marston Vale) electrification been scrapped completely as part of EWR, or could it still get back in the scope? Presumably the designs work will have accounted for it, so it would be 'shovel-ready' or close to it, to use the forum's favourite phrase.

 

[Class 170101]

Perhaps there's an opportunity here to tell freight operators they can only use EWR with electric haulage. Making that condition appears to be impossible on existing lines (through I'm not sure if anyone has tried for, say, Shap and Beattock), but perhaps the right to exploit new opportunities could have some responsibilities attached.

They'd have to electrify EWR to do that of course. But if they don't I rather doubt how well diesel freight would keep up on a railway where the passenger trains do 100mph and don't stop that often, and the loops have been value engineered out.

Yes... and no.

The time / cost penalty of changing locos is not trivial, and the freight operators have access rights for diesel haulage.

The issue is that what is most efficient for the FOC isn’t necessarily the most efficient for the railway.

But they would have to win access rights first with their diesel traction (being a new railway) if they can find a path.

 

[swt_passenger]

That was the point I was getting at, thanks for being able to put it down in such a clear way!

Going back to the topic, has the Oxford-MK (and Marston Vale) electrification been scrapped completely as part of EWR, or could it still get back in the scope? Presumably the designs work will have accounted for it, so it would be 'shovel-ready' or close to it, to use the forum's favourite phrase.

It was completely removed from the scope of the TWA application in 2016. I doubt NR have done any active work on it since.

From the TWA inspectors report, this is the current position:

“Electrification - In 2015, the DfT took the decision to defer implementation of the ‘Electric Spine’ project. Because of this decision, electrification of EWR2 was reduced to cover the route between Oxford and the WCML at Bletchley only. Subsequently, in October 2016, the DfT announced that plans to electrify the route between Oxford and the WCML were also to be removed from the scope of EWR2. The decision was made to defer the electrification of EWR indefinitely to allow project resources to be focused on opening the EWR2 section of the railway at the earliest opportunity, but any proposed new structures being built as part of the project (including highway and footbridges) will allow sufficient clearance to accommodate electrification, should it be pursued in the future.”

East West Rail Bicester to Bedford improvements: Transport and Works Act order

Approval to upgrade the Bicester to Bletchley and Aylesbury to Claydon Junction.

www.gov.uk

 

[DavidGrain]

Electrification of EWR is dependent on the electrification of the Southampton-Birmingham line so I think you can assume that this is not even under consideration at the moment.

 

[The Planner]

Electrification of EWR is dependent on the electrification of the Southampton-Birmingham line so I think you can assume that this is not even under consideration at the moment.

Why is it?

 

[Bald Rick]

Electrification of EWR is dependent on the electrification of the Southampton-Birmingham line so I think you can assume that this is not even under consideration at the moment.

It isn’t.

 

[DavidGrain]

Why is it?

Department of Transport 2012 Electric Spine

 

[Ianno87]

Department of Transport 2012 Electric Spine
View attachment 92289

Nothing on that map says that you can't wire EWR in isolation if you wanted to (given that most/all EWR services are likely to be captive to it).

What the map does show is that EWR fits into the (then) long term Electric Spine strategy.

 

[hwl]

Department of Transport 2012 Electric Spine
View attachment 92289

I would strongly advise taking the wise words of Bald Rick and The Planner on board...

 

[The Planner]

Department of Transport 2012 Electric Spine
View attachment 92289

So what? the main purpose and business case for E-W phase 2 is based upon passenger services between Oxford Milton Keynes and to a lesser extent Aylesbury plus Bedford. Those services could quite happily exist as electric. Freight would be at best 1tph on E-W between Oxford and Bletchley and not all of that would necessarily be suited to electric.

 

[swt_passenger]

So what? the main purpose and business case for E-W phase 2 is based upon passenger services between Oxford Milton Keynes and to a lesser extent Aylesbury plus Bedford. Those services could quite happily exist as electric. Freight would be at best 1tph on E-W between Oxford and Bletchley and not all of that would necessarily be suited to electric.

The first part of the quote from the TWA inspectors report that I posted earlier had already “disconnected” Oxford to Bletchley from Electric Spine anyway. So at that time in 2015 they must have still thought it could usefully connect into the existing WCML wiring...

 

[DarloRich]

Electrification of EWR is dependent on the electrification of the Southampton-Birmingham line so I think you can assume that this is not even under consideration at the moment.

That is incorrect. The case for E-W is passenger based. Freight is an adjunct. Also that document is well out of date and is no longer looked on "favorably" by the powers that be

 

[Bald Rick]

Also that document is well out of date and is no longer looked on "favorably" by the powers that be

It was never looked on favourably from about 30seconds after it was published!

 

[mwmbwls]

It was never looked on favourably from about 30seconds after it was published!

I suspect the DfT have filed the Decarbonisation Strategy next to it.

 

[Dr Hoo]

It was never looked on favourably from about 30seconds after it was published!

I remember it well!

 

[Bald Rick]

I suspect the DfT have filed the Decarbonisation Strategy next to it.

They haven’t.

 

[jfowkes]

Most of the freight trains on the southern section of the WCML and on the NLL are diesel hauled.

Ah, I kind of assumed that the only reason that freight went through London and then out again was that that was where the wires went.

Why doesn't that diesel hauled freight go via quieter routes already then? It must be better for everyone if freight stays out of London unless it's actually the destination.

 

[zwk500]

Ah, I kind of assumed that the only reason that freight went through London and then out again was that that was where the wires went.

Why doesn't that diesel hauled freight go via quieter routes already then? It must be better for everyone if freight stays out of London unless it's actually the destination.

It would be better, except for a number of drivers based in London (or thereabouts). Also to get to Daventry not via London involves quite a long detour or a runround, neither of which freight companies like. And a fair amount of traffic on the NLL is london bound, to London Gateway, Ripple Lane, Barking, Wembley Yard, etc.

 

[Nottingham59]

Why doesn't that diesel hauled freight go via quieter routes already then?

Also because the freight companies have got rights to the paths in the timetable, which they fight to keep, and they don't get charged the full economic cost of using up precious capacity in the London area.

 

[Bald Rick]

Why doesn't that diesel hauled freight go via quieter routes already then? It must be better for everyone if freight stays out of London unless it's actually the destination.

Because the other routes aren’t quieter. They are just as busy in capacity terms.

 

[Wyrleybart]

, and the loops have been value engineered out.

Love that expression Edwin.

 

[Bald Rick]

and the loops have been value engineered out.

Love that expression Edwin.

Strictly speaking the loops would have been value managed out. Very simply:

Value Management is delivering the desired output for a lower scope.
(We can deliver the required timetable and performance without the loops, therefore no loops required)

Value engineering is delivering the desired scope with a cheaper spec.
(We are having loops, but they don’t need a track specification that is capable of 125mph, so we will use second hand sleepers, wider sleeper spacing, and a 200mm dig rather than 400mm).