Potential Shrewsbury to Wolverhampton upgrade

[Shrop]

Late last year I started a thread suggesting that it would be worth increasing line speeds between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton. Other routes out of Shrewsbury serve Chester and North Wales, ie nowhere with any population over 100,000; Aberystwyth and Pwllheli with even smaller populations; then Cardiff and South Wales where it’s over 100 miles until you reach any large conurbations; and then Crewe/Manchester, the latter of which is the one large population centre albeit still some distance away. (I’ve not detailed the Swansea route as it serves even fewer population centres than the Cambrian coast line and doesn’t separate as a route until 20 miles from Shrewsbury).

The other route from Shrewsbury Wolverhampton (pop 240,000) is only 30 miles away, with Telford (pop. 150,000) served en route, then Birmingham at 43 miles and onwards to London. I lamented the fact that this has the SLOWEST linespeeds of the routes out of Shrewsbury, but my post received quite a lot of criticism from people who said that increasing linespeeds simply wasn’t worthwhile.

That thread has now been closed, but since an increase in linespeeds is now under active investigation as mentioned in RAIL magazine, and also in the local press (link attached), I’d like to think this is worth further comment. What does anyone think about these proposals?

£15 million plan lodged to speed up Birmingham to Shrewsbury trains

A scheme to slash journey times on a rail line through the West Midlands and Shropshire today moved a stage closer after a £15 million plan was submitted to the Government.

www.shropshirestar.com

Quote shows article in local press (Shropshire Star) which proposes line speed improvements between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton.

 

[The Planner]

It will cost more than £15 million and I bet that doesn't include the ongoing costs to keep it at that. The same issues that were there every time it was looked at before haven't gone away and all that would happen is that you leave Shrewsbury a couple of minutes later and get to Wolves at the same time and vice versa. The benefit to the stoppers is negligible. Any trains to/from the Cambrian are pretty much locked in as well. I suspect we will just run over old ground in this thread.

 

[Shrop]

It will cost more than £15 million and I bet that doesn't include the ongoing costs to keep it at that. The same issues that were there every time it was looked at before haven't gone away and all that would happen is that you leave Shrewsbury a couple of minutes later and get to Wolves at the same time and vice versa. The benefit to the stoppers is negligible. Any trains to/from the Cambrian are pretty much locked in as well. I suspect we will just run over old ground in this thread.

This begs a couple of questions, ie
1. Why are the other lines worth being faster, and
2. The track always used to cope with 90mph 50 years ago, so would it really be that hard to permit 90mph now?

 

[Fidelis]

In July Midlands Connect asked Businesses along this line to complete a survey
"Midlands Connect is currently exploring options to improve the rail service between Shrewsbury, the Black Country and Birmingham and have launched an online business survey and urging firms to ‘make their voices heard’.

"The survey builds on work released last year in Midlands Connect’s Rails to Recovery report, which also found that electrifying the route through Telford and the Black Country and extending London services to Shrewsbury could create up to £500 million of benefits for businesses and residents by making the trains hourly to London from Shrewsbury."

"Improvements to the Shrewsbury-Black County-Birmingham rail line we hope could make it easier for your staff to commute, help your company grow and give you better access to the nation’s capital through a new direct train link."

"We are urging local businesses throughout the route to complete a short survey, which will support our future strategy along this route."
"This survey will close on Monday 5th September 2022, with results to be announced soon after".

Further details see https//www.Midlands Connect | Businesses urged to have their say on Shrewsbury-Black County-Birmingham rail route

 

[The Planner]

This begs a couple of questions, ie
1. Why are the other lines worth being faster, and
2. The track always used to cope with 90mph 50 years ago, so would it really be that hard to permit 90mph now?

I know for a fact that ballast depth on bridges is an issue, and I suspect other lines is historic old route/regions and how they dealt with it. There isn't a conspiracy.

 

[Starmill]

It will cost more than £15 million and I bet that doesn't include the ongoing costs to keep it at that. The same issues that were there every time it was looked at before haven't gone away and all that would happen is that you leave Shrewsbury a couple of minutes later and get to Wolves at the same time and vice versa. The benefit to the stoppers is negligible. Any trains to/from the Cambrian are pretty much locked in as well. I suspect we will just run over old ground in this thread.

The modifications at Wellington and the modest permissible speed increases would of course be pre-requesities to electrification. That will be an early 2030s agenda item. Combined these things would take a few minutes out of the stoppers (and maybe 2 - 3 out of any classic London trains).

If 2 minutes for fast trains can be achieved between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton I would still be impressed. As with just about everything it's an incremental set of changes, the benefits of which won't be realised for many years.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The line has at least been resignalled (except at the Shrewsbury station end), so that should help.
It's about 15 years since journey times in the timetable were reduced in anticipation of a line speed increase, only to be reversed out when it didn't happen.
That doesn't suggest it was too hard a job.

 

[cle]

Wires and line speed improvements would be great for this line. It has a reasonable frequency - mix of fasts and diesel stoppers (each benefit from line speed and wires respectively) - which might allow EMU through running to Coventry, or other options. And the platform at Wolves could always add local shuttles if demand was there.

London services under wires of course. Faster journeys to Mid-Wales and up to Wrexham (having had its own line speed improvements)

 

[The Planner]

The modifications at Wellington and the modest permissible speed increases would of course be pre-requesities to electrification. That will be an early 2030s agenda item. Combined these things would take a few minutes out of the stoppers (and maybe 2 - 3 out of any classic London trains).

If 2 minutes for fast trains can be achieved between Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton I would still be impressed. As with just about everything it's an incremental set of changes, the benefits of which won't be realised for many years.

Wiring Wolves Shrewsbury isn't high up the agenda as people may think around the West Mids. Certainly not CP8 as early 2030s would be.

Wires and line speed improvements would be great for this line. It has a reasonable frequency - mix of fasts and diesel stoppers (each benefit from line speed and wires respectively) - which might allow EMU through running to Coventry, or other options. And the platform at Wolves could always add local shuttles if demand was there.

Whilst not impossible to remedy, there is no access to 6 from the north at Wolves as you are suggesting.

 

[Starmill]

Wiring Wolves Shrewsbury isn't high up the agenda as people may think around the West Mids. Certainly not CP8 as early 2030s would be.

That may be the received wisdom but I maintain that by the time the end of CP8 rolls around lines that aren't underway with decarbonisation will be dead. People will also view diesel emissions in cities as unconscionable. By then road transport will have pretty much ceased using diesel.

It's in the nature of this kind of change that it seems like nothing is happening at first, and then it comes all at once. Then people look back and can't understand how they did it the old way.

 

[The Planner]

That may be the received wisdom but I maintain that by the time the end of CP8 rolls around lines that aren't underway with decarbonisation will be dead. People will also view diesel emissions in cities as unconscionable. By then road transport will have pretty much ceased using diesel.

It's in the nature of this kind of change that it seems like nothing is happening at first, and then it comes all at once. Then people look back and can't understand how they did it the old way.

10 years is a long time for me to quote and bet you a fiver on it

 

[Starmill]

10 years is a long time for me to quote and bet you a fiver on it

It's twelve but yes.

 

[zwk500]

That may be the received wisdom but I maintain that by the time the end of CP8 rolls around lines that aren't underway with decarbonisation will be dead. People will also view diesel emissions in cities as unconscionable. By then road transport will have pretty much ceased using diesel.

It's in the nature of this kind of change that it seems like nothing is happening at first, and then it comes all at once. Then people look back and can't understand how they did it the old way.

Thing is that even today 'no diesel' doesn't automatically equal 'Electrification'. Battery trains already have ranges in the 80-100KM range, in 5 years that will likely have doubled. There is also potential for hydrogen or other alternative fuels to be part of the discussion, although they have their own problems.

 

[craigybagel]

You can get all the studies you want, or vague supportive quotes from local MPs that don't actually promise anything - but it doesn't change the simple facts. The stations are too close together for 90mph running to be of any use for stopping trains, and the paths of the faster trains are too enmeshed in other services to be able to make use of any time saved.

No conspiracy theories needed - no oppression of the people of Shropshire - just simple facts. It's lots of money to achieve next to nothing. Not unless you want to do a lot more expensive work between Wolves and New Street and along the Cambrian.

Incidentally I can well believe that it's not the easy upgrade people think it is. I drove over it today (at 70max of course) and it really is quite bumpy in places.

 

[Starmill]

Thing is that even today 'no diesel' doesn't automatically equal 'Electrification'. Battery trains already have ranges in the 80-100KM range, in 5 years that will likely have doubled. There is also potential for hydrogen or other alternative fuels to be part of the discussion, although they have their own problems.

The cost of hydrogen isn't going to come down enough for it to be anything more than a niche / novel solution.

Batteries are useful and effective, but only for slow stopping trains and regional trains up to 100 miles / hour, and fundamentally only in conjunction with expansion of electrification.

 

[Doveymain158]

I think they line could do with relaying in certain play. The heavy coal trains to ironbridge when power station has hammered the track when it was open.

 

[the sniper]

Incidentally I can well believe that it's not the easy upgrade people think it is. I drove over it today (at 70max of course) and it really is quite bumpy in places.

Give it a go at 90 and report back, it might get ironed out the faster you go.

 

[tomuk]

I'll re-post the passenger stats for the line again. I think they are good numbers for a line served by mainly one fast and one slow train an hour. Certainly better than the Rugeley line that justified an over £200m six year electrification scheme.

Station Name	1819 Entries & Exits
Shrewsbury	2,226,302
Wellington (Shropshire)	698,712
Oakengates	73,438
Telford Central	1,198,384
Shifnal	187,162
Cosford	87,414
Albrighton	101,548
Codsall	125,222
Bilbrook	133,688

 

[Starmill]

I'll re-post the passenger stats for the line again. I think they are good numbers for a line served by mainly one fast and one slow train an hour. Certainly better than the Rugeley line that justified an over £200m six year electrification scheme.

Station Name	1819 Entries & Exits
Shrewsbury	2,226,302
Wellington (Shropshire)	698,712
Oakengates	73,438
Telford Central	1,198,384
Shifnal	187,162
Cosford	87,414
Albrighton	101,548
Codsall	125,222
Bilbrook	133,688

The Rugeley enhancement was mainly about providing more capacity between Walsall and Birmingham, and an all day half-hourly service to Cannock and Hednesford without needing more units. But yes, it is a good point overall. Telford Central is a major traffic generator.

 

[The Planner]

The Rugeley enhancement was mainly about providing more capacity between Walsall and Birmingham, and an all day half-hourly service to Cannock and Hednesford without needing more units. But yes, it is a good point overall. Telford Central is a major traffic generator.

Electrification couldn't deliver that on the Chase, it also needed the line speed improvement.

 

[Starmill]

Electrification couldn't deliver that on the Chase, it also needed the line speed improvement.

Indeed and we come full circle to the point I made before.

 

[tomuk]

Telford Central is a major traffic generator.

Indeed it generates twice the passengers as the whole of the Chase Line.

Station	18/19 Entries & Exits
Bloxwich	49,186
Bloxwich North	47,238
Landywood	96,902
Cannock	208,260
Hednesford	173,906
Rugeley Town	114,660
Total	690,152

 

[The Planner]

Indeed and we come full circle to the point I made before.

Better DMUs and delivering the proposed 75mph instead of 60mph would probably have delivered the outputs.

 

[Undiscovered]

The 196s should reduce journey times, due to increased acceleration and deceleration.
In reality, you'd probably get to Wolves quicker, then wait at North junction to enter the station, negating any advantages.

That lack of a direct path into the station is always going to be a limiting factor, as you've Class 2 stoppers merging with Class 1 expresses and Class 9 Avantis. Even on time Class 1 services from Shrewsbury are regularly held at North junction for late Class 1s from Liverpool/Crewe. Then everyone is late.

 

[30907]

The track always used to cope with 90mph 50 years ago, so would it really be that hard to permit 90mph now?

IIRC there was one L/H service a day, a 47 hauling a standard 12 or 13 coach set and taking 40min with one stop (everything else was 70mph DMU).
How much 90mph running actually occurred? Very much less than would be the case if it was permitted today.

 

[tomuk]

A visualisation of the station usage around the West Midlands

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A couple of points about plans:
- The CP7 (2024-29) enhancement content is not settled yet (HLOS still in gestation).
It seems to me that Andy Street (West Mids Tory mayor) tends to get what he wants out of the Tory government.
- The faster Shrewsbury services will remain diesel worked as TfW has no plans even for bi-modes in mid/north Wales.
The route will soon be kitted out with new CAF DMUs (196/197) potentially for the next 2 decades.

 

[Shrop]

You can get all the studies you want, or vague supportive quotes from local MPs that don't actually promise anything - but it doesn't change the simple facts. The stations are too close together for 90mph running to be of any use for stopping trains

The arguments can be presented in various ways, you've chosen one way. The stations on the Shrewsbury-Crewe line are very similarly spaced, but trains run on that line at 90mph. And both routes have all stations stoppers as well as faster trains.

Incidentally I can well believe that it's not the easy upgrade people think it is. I drove over it today (at 70max of course) and it really is quite bumpy in places.

The line may be bumpy in places now, but it was very smooth 50 years ago, this is simply inadequate maintenance.

Look at this another way. I'm not particularly advocating 90mph in order to save just a couple of minutes along the route, that's a matter for those who are presently advocating the linespeed upgrade. My point is that today's trains are far more capable of reaching 90mph than the loco hauled trains of the 1970s were, so why not permit trains to do it just because they can easily do so, which not least addresses the appalling advert for slow trains where the A5 runs parallel and almost all cars over take them, seeing as rail speed limits are rigidly enforced whereas road speed limits on the A5 here never are?

If the route is bumpy this is a routine maintenance matter, not something that requires crazy figures and arguments about upgrading. The route should never have been 70mph in the first place, our rail group back in the 1990s was advised that this was an arbitrary downgrade due to signalling, but this was since upgraded (many years ago now), except that the higher linespeed was never reinstated.

The 196s should reduce journey times, due to increased acceleration and deceleration.
In reality, you'd probably get to Wolves quicker, then wait at North junction to enter the station, negating any advantages.

This is a very negative perception. You could equally say that if the train had arrived just a minute or two earlier due to the upgrade, it would be in time to be pathed ahead of conflicting movements.

I know for a fact that ballast depth on bridges is an issue, and I suspect other lines is historic old route/regions and how they dealt with it. There isn't a conspiracy.

There isn't a conspiracy? Hmm, those who used this route regularly in the 1970s could easily cite that fact that Wolverhampton staff ALWAYS took more than the booked 9 minutes to change locos there, which was almost invariably due to their completely unhurried approach. Or downright lazy, as observed by many on the trains at the time.

I could also cite many other conspiracy theories, such as the fares on Shrewsbury - London trains being over twice that of services to London from Hereford and Chester, as a means of deterring passengers prior to the withdrawal of through trains in 1992. There was a published article in one of the nationally available rail magazines about this in around 2011.

 

[The Planner]

Look at this another way. I'm not particularly advocating 90mph in order to save just a couple of minutes along the route, that's a matter for those who are presently advocating the linespeed upgrade. My point is that today's trains are far more capable of reaching 90mph than the loco hauled trains of the 1970s were, so why not permit trains to do it just because they can easily do so, which not least addresses the appalling advert for slow trains where the A5 runs parallel and almost all cars over take them, seeing as rail speed limits are rigidly enforced whereas road speed limits on the A5 here never are?

If you go down that route, the WCML and ECML should be 140mph and every piece of the XC and GW network should be 125mph or higher.

 

[NI 271]

The stations on the Shrewsbury-Crewe line are very similarly spaced, but trains run on that line at 90mph. And both routes have all stations stoppers as well as faster trains.

I don't agree with the bit in bold. Oakengates and Telford are about a mile apart. Cosford and Albrighton around a mile and a half. Codsall and Bilbrook about ¾ mile. The closest pairs of stations on the Shrewsbury - Crewe line are Yorton/Wem/Prees (around 3 miles-ish between each), followed by Wrenbury and Nantwich (circa 4½ miles). That will definitely make a big difference in the speeds a stopper will be able to attain between them. There's also a ten mile signal section between Prees and Wrenbury, which limits how close trains can travel and means 90mph running isn't going to be compromised by a slower train ahead (although I suppose it's not unheard of - albeit unusual - for one train to need to wait for another to clear that section). Apples and oranges for me, although I don't have any dog in this fight.