Is electrifying Windermere worth it?

[nw1]

If Windemere was in Switzerland it would have been done in the 70s as part of the WCML. As well as the HGVs being moved by trains.

Certainly the German-speaking countries seem to be particularly keen on electrifying relatively minor lines. A case in point, kind-of related to Windermere in the sense of being in a mountainous tourist area: not only is the secondary Munich-Garmisch-Innsbruck route electrified (an equivalent line in the UK probably wouldn't be) but also the branch at Garmisch through Ehrwald to Reutte in Tirol and even the small branch to Oberammergau.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Are there any comparable, similar-length stretches of non-electrified line in the London/Home Counties conurbation which perhaps also ought to be done?

 

[AndrewE]

Are there any similar length stretches of non-electrified line in the London/Home Counties conurbation which perhaps also ought to be done?

Of course there are. St Albans and Bedford off the WCML for a start.
However the SE has had the lion's share of investment over the last few decades and electrifying the trivial little Windermere branch would demonstrate the govt's commitment to "levelling up," improve railway efficiency, cut diesel fuel use and hence carbon emissions, get some pollution out of the Greater Manchester conurbation, attract passengers to the railway by the "sparks effect" and maybe even reduce traffic into the Lake district...
I can't imagine why it hasn't been done. Not visible from Westminster, I suppose.

 

[supervc-10]

Marshlink and the Uckfield line spring to mind, although they're diesel in a 3rd rail island, rather than 25kV overhead like Windermere.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Marshlink and the Uckfield line spring to mind, although they're diesel in a 3rd rail island, rather than 25kV overhead like Windermere.

Presume Marks Tey to Sudbury is still non-electrified. Possible issue there is maybe that the junction with the London-Ipswich mainline is possibly facing in the "wrong" direction.

 

[The Planner]

Of course there are. St Albans and Bedford off the WCML for a start.
However the SE has had the lion's share of investment over the last few decades and electrifying the trivial little Windermere branch would demonstrate the govt's commitment to "levelling up," improve railway efficiency, cut diesel fuel use and hence carbon emissions, get some pollution out of the Greater Manchester conurbation, attract passengers to the railway by the "sparks effect" and maybe even reduce traffic into the Lake district...
I can't imagine why it hasn't been done. Not visible from Westminster, I suppose.

St Albans? Errrr....

 

[GRALISTAIR]

How seasonal is traffic to Windermere? Would it be possible, for example, to close the line one winter to get the work done more cheaply?

pardon my ignorance but I had assumed ( probably mistakenly) that this approach would be exactly how they did it. Prep work beforehand and deliver stuff to site. Then - wham bam thank you ma’am 2 month closure and all done, handed back and approved.

 

[AndrewE]

St Albans? Errrr....

Sorry, brain fade. It was a long time coming, I had forgotten it had been done.

 

[ac6000cw]

Are there any comparable, similar-length stretches of non-electrified line in the London/Home Counties conurbation which perhaps also ought to be done?

Ipswich - Felixstowe

 

[Agent_Squash]

Edit: Just remembered it's used by the Barrow service... d'oh! (Beyond Lancaster it's presumably empty though)

The Barrow services are often busier than the Windermere service these days. The 195s have definitely bought a quasi sparks effect to the route.

 

[MattRat]

The Barrow services are often busier than the Windermere service these days. The 195s have definitely bought a quasi sparks effect to the route.

And? Don't they use the same line? Still is a great electrification case.

 

[Agent_Squash]

And? Don't they use the same line? Still is a great electrification case.

I was repsonding to the quote saying the Barrow services are empty - not saying that Windermere electrification isn’t worth it (else I wouldn’t have started a thread saying it was!)

I use both services regularly, and while both seeing increased passenger numbers, the Barrow services are often busier day to day from my experience.

And they only share the same line up to Carnforth - after that they go their own ways.

 

[zwk500]

And? Don't they use the same line? Still is a great electrification case.

The Carnforth-Barrow line is not a great electrification case because the engineering challenges are far greater. The line is longer, has several junctions, Arnside viaduct, some quite restrictive station setups and (a big problem) it would need completely resignalling from Absolute block. Even if the trains are a bit busier, the costs are disproportionately greater, so the business case is weaker.
Windermere is a quick win, with very little in the way of structures to modify/replace and very little signalling to worry about. The only serious questions appear to be about what stock and service patterns.

 

[paul1609]

Clearly it makes sense to electrify it. Clearances are generous, it would remove a comparatively short section of non-electrified rail from a heavily used tourist route, meaning no need for diesel/awkward bi-mode sub fleets. It could be worked from the general pool of electric units and strengthened potentially as needed.

It's single track, so a line of stanchions would be little more obtrusive visually than a line of telegraph poles.

People objecting to this really need to have words with themselves.

Is it actually a heavily used tourist line though? ORR figures give exit/entrances consistently of 400k at Windermere and 200k at Kendal. That's probably a third of Marshlink in Kent/Sussex probably less than that if you take the through passengers in to account. Marshlink probably has better diesel elimination savings. As we now have levelling up shouldn't we be ranking all schemes nationally?

 

[Agent_Squash]

Is it actually a heavily used tourist line though? ORR figures give exit/entrances consistently of 400k at Windermere and 200k at Kendal. That's probably a third of Marshlink in Kent/Sussex probably less than that if you take the through passengers in to account. Marshlink probably has better diesel elimination savings. As we now have levelling up shouldn't we be ranking all schemes nationally?

Windermere’s main struggle is lack of direct trains to the airport. Presumably any electrification would also include at least a two hourly airport service.

 

[507020]

Is it actually a heavily used tourist line though? ORR figures give exit/entrances consistently of 400k at Windermere and 200k at Kendal. That's probably a third of Marshlink in Kent/Sussex probably less than that if you take the through passengers in to account. Marshlink probably has better diesel elimination savings. As we now have levelling up shouldn't we be ranking all schemes nationally?

The Windermere trains I’ve used (and I don’t live there, hence tourism) have always been full, so there is a capacity limiting aspect to the 3 car 195s. If they had longer EMUs then they could have more passengers. What are the passenger numbers like at Blackpool North?

 

[zwk500]

Is it actually a heavily used tourist line though? ORR figures give exit/entrances consistently of 400k at Windermere and 200k at Kendal. That's probably a third of Marshlink in Kent/Sussex probably less than that if you take the through passengers in to account. Marshlink probably has better diesel elimination savings. As we now have levelling up shouldn't we be ranking all schemes nationally?

FWIW: (all figures from Wikipedia, roughly averaged ignoring the year when COVID clearly impacted numbers).

Kendal: C.200K	Three Oaks: c.10K but growing 1K/yr pre covid
Burneside: c.15K (but can vary a lot from year to year)	Doleham:c.3.5K
Staveley: c.40K	Winchelsea: c.9K
Windermere: c.400K	Rye: C.400K
	Appledore: c.40K
	Ham Street C.90K

Collectively, the Windermere line gets c.650K across 4 stations spanning 10 miles. Marshlink gets c.550k across 6 stations spanning just under 25 miles. Windermere has less mileage, less stations, less level crossings, more passengers and is OLE rather than 3rd rail so doesn't need substations. Given that the only thing I thought might be a problem for Windermere (local opposition) apparently doesn't exist, it really does seem to be a no-brainer.

 

[Ken H]

The Carnforth-Barrow line is not a great electrification case because the engineering challenges are far greater. The line is longer, has several junctions, Arnside viaduct, some quite restrictive station setups and (a big problem) it would need completely resignalling from Absolute block. Even if the trains are a bit busier, the costs are disproportionately greater, so the business case is weaker.
Windermere is a quick win, with very little in the way of structures to modify/replace and very little signalling to worry about. The only serious questions appear to be about what stock and service patterns.

What junctions? Carnforth North yes but then its just double track to Barrow.
Why can't you have absolute block on an electric line? True, semaphores are difficult but you can have colour lights in an absolute block signalled line. Just 2 boxes to do. Arnside and Ulverston I think. But Arnside could be replaced with intermediate block signals.
Carnforth should be part of the WCML power signalling area. Should have been done in the 70's.

 

[507020]

What junctions? Carnforth North yes but then its just double track to Barrow.
Why can't you have absolute block on an electric line? True, semaphores are difficult but you can have colour lights in an absolute block signalled line. Just 2 boxes to do. Arnside and Ulverston I think. But Arnside could be replaced with intermediate block signals.
Carnforth should be part of the WCML power signalling area. Should have been done in the 70's.

Don’t forget there is also the Barrow avoiding line for freight use. There is Absolute Block with colour lights on an electric line in the Stockport area.

 

[Ken H]

Don’t forget there is also the Barrow avoiding line for freight use. There is Absolute Block with colour lights on an electric line in the Stockport area.

sorry. forgot the avoiding line.

 

[zwk500]

What junctions? Carnforth North yes but then its just double track to Barrow.

In addition to Carnforth North and Dalton Jn, there's a few freight connections around Barrow and the Barrow station area isn't straightforward.

Why can't you have absolute block on an electric line?

AB itself isn't the problem, although you may need to do some electrical shielding work to the block instrument connections. However AB can't give you the capacity you would want to justify electrification.

True, semaphores are difficult but you can have colour lights in an absolute block signalled line. Just 2 boxes to do. Arnside and Ulverston I think. But Arnside could be replaced with intermediate block signals.

Carnforth Station Jn, Arnside, Grange over Sands, Ulverston, Dalton Jn, Barrow. Possibly another in between there.

Carnforth should be part of the WCML power signalling area. Should have been done in the 70's.

Yes, but it wasn't and here we are now.

 

[paul1609]

FWIW: (all figures from Wikipedia, roughly averaged ignoring the year when COVID clearly impacted numbers).

Kendal: C.200K	Three Oaks: c.10K but growing 1K/yr pre covid
Burneside: c.15K (but can vary a lot from year to year)	Doleham:c.3.5K
Staveley: c.40K	Winchelsea: c.9K
Windermere: c.400K	Rye: C.400K
	Appledore: c.40K
	Ham Street C.90K

Collectively, the Windermere line gets c.650K across 4 stations spanning 10 miles. Marshlink gets c.550k across 6 stations spanning just under 25 miles. Windermere has less mileage, less stations, less level crossings, more passengers and is OLE rather than 3rd rail so doesn't need substations. Given that the only thing I thought might be a problem for Windermere (local opposition) apparently doesn't exist, it really does seem to be a no-brainer.

Your figures for Marshlink though rather ignore flows like Ashford International to Hastings and Eastbourne which are wholly on the current Marshlink Diesel service. Marshlink is also the obvious route now from Eastbourne and Hastings to Stratford and East London as well as several cross country flows. The Windermere Branch being a dead end has none of these flows. I'm confident that Marshlink passenger flows considerably exceed those of Windermere.
There is no reason whatsoever that Marshlink electrification has to be dc, there is considerable spare ac capacity available today at Ashford International and would be so for the foreseeable future. Both Southern and Southeastern have dual voltage stock with pantograph fitted today. Extending existing diagrams would mean that the extra stock required to cover the service would be much less than the 5 diesel units now required.
The closure of the Dungeness Branch will mean that there is no longer any need for 2 platforms there.

 

[zwk500]

Your figures for Marshlink though rather ignore flows like Ashford International to Hastings and Eastbourne which are wholly on the current Marshlink Diesel service.

Indeed I do but that's because I dont have those figures.

Marshlink is also the obvious route now from Eastbourne and Hastings to Stratford and East London as well as several cross country flows.

It may be the obvious route but its hardly a popular journey.

The Windermere Branch being a dead end has none of these flows. I'm confident that Marshlink passenger flows considerably exceed those of Windermere.

Can't comment, but yes I'd expect the through passengers to exceed 100k a year.

There is no reason whatsoever that Marshlink electrification has to be dc

There are many reasons. Not the least of which is thst to run any electric services on AC you'd need dual voltage units. HS1 to Marshlink doesn't have the pointwork at Ashford.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Has anyone from Vivarail ever made any comment regarding a possible use of their battery train version as a shuttle from Oxenholme to Windermere on this short branch line?

 

[Oxfordblues]

Of more benefit to the average passenger would be if at least once a day an Avanti Class 805 bi-mode could turn left at Oxenholme and run down the branch. Speaking to staff at the downside refeshment room I discovered that most of their business comes from travellers who have missed their connection because of Avanti's woeful performance. Pre-covid, large numbers of foreign tourists could be seen waiting patiently, often for 45-50 minutes. Advertising short connectional margins at Oxenholme is the triumph of optimism over experience!

 

[507020]

Of more benefit to the average passenger would be if at least once a day an Avanti Class 805 bi-mode could turn left at Oxenholme and run down the branch. Speaking to staff at the downside refeshment room I discovered that most of their business comes from travellers who have missed their connection because of Avanti's woeful performance. Pre-covid, large numbers of foreign tourists could be seen waiting patiently, often for 45-50 minutes. Advertising short connectional margins at Oxenholme is the triumph of optimism over experience!

This is why the branch should be double track, so they could hold the shuttle to connect with late Avantis without compromising later branch services as well

 

[Agent_Squash]

This is why the branch should be double track, so they could hold the shuttle to connect with late Avantis without compromising later branch services as well

But there’s only a train leaving the branch every four hours or so - so all you’d be doing is holding the same train. And if you made it any more frequent, the argument would then be why not go the whole hog and just extend all the services down to at least Preston, thereby significantly reducing the risk of missing a connection?

Your figures for Marshlink though rather ignore flows like Ashford International to Hastings and Eastbourne which are wholly on the current Marshlink Diesel service. Marshlink is also the obvious route now from Eastbourne and Hastings to Stratford and East London as well as several cross country flows. The Windermere Branch being a dead end has none of these flows. I'm confident that Marshlink passenger flows considerably exceed those of Windermere.
There is no reason whatsoever that Marshlink electrification has to be dc, there is considerable spare ac capacity available today at Ashford International and would be so for the foreseeable future. Both Southern and Southeastern have dual voltage stock with pantograph fitted today. Extending existing diagrams would mean that the extra stock required to cover the service would be much less than the 5 diesel units now required.
The closure of the Dungeness Branch will mean that there is no longer any need for 2 platforms there.

But this is a thread about a branch line that is half the length, accesses one of our national parks, and is in an area which our government claims to want to level up. Windermere electrification is far easier task than Marshlink.

 

[MattRat]

On the topic of Marshlink vs Windermere, I get the feeling if people did turn their support to Marshlink, similar excuses to Windermere would pop up, and we'd be back to square 1 again.

It's always a game to spin the topic elsewhere instead of actually solving anything.

 

[yorksrob]

Is it actually a heavily used tourist line though? ORR figures give exit/entrances consistently of 400k at Windermere and 200k at Kendal. That's probably a third of Marshlink in Kent/Sussex probably less than that if you take the through passengers in to account. Marshlink probably has better diesel elimination savings. As we now have levelling up shouldn't we be ranking all schemes nationally?

I certainly have seen the Marshlink well loaded and would agree with electrification there as well. The two cases are actually quite similar as they would both eliminate a good proportion of diesels under the wires and could both potentially unlock additional capacity.

I have seen Windermere very busy at times, although there is undoubtedly an element of seasonality there.

FWIW: (all figures from Wikipedia, roughly averaged ignoring the year when COVID clearly impacted numbers).

Kendal: C.200K	Three Oaks: c.10K but growing 1K/yr pre covid
Burneside: c.15K (but can vary a lot from year to year)	Doleham:c.3.5K
Staveley: c.40K	Winchelsea: c.9K
Windermere: c.400K	Rye: C.400K
	Appledore: c.40K
	Ham Street C.90K

Collectively, the Windermere line gets c.650K across 4 stations spanning 10 miles. Marshlink gets c.550k across 6 stations spanning just under 25 miles. Windermere has less mileage, less stations, less level crossings, more passengers and is OLE rather than 3rd rail so doesn't need substations. Given that the only thing I thought might be a problem for Windermere (local opposition) apparently doesn't exist, it really does seem to be a no-brainer.

Marshlink has a lot of end to end and through journeys as well, although Windermere is probably the quicker win.

 

[AndrewE]

On the topic of Marshlink vs Windermere, I get the feeling if people did turn their support to Marshlink, similar excuses to Windermere would pop up, and we'd be back to square 1 again.
It's always a game to spin the topic elsewhere instead of actually solving anything.

It has been said many times that if only we in the UK (probably just England) could put as much effort into achieving something as is put into objecting or obstructing it we would be in a very different position!
You do have to wonder whether there is a rump of people inside the establishment who are determined that nothing will happen to improve life rail-wise - or if it does will inflict enough collateral damage to prevent any future investment plans. I'm thinking of the massively over-specified and financially handicapped HS2, obviously!