David Marsh
2004-04-22 13:26:08 UTC
[Text interleaved/in conversation order: read to end for all comments]
begin quote from Mike D in uk.railway
about: East Coast eletrication - Cost effective? (longish)
Yorkshire PTEs it is/are that run electric services into Leeds.
Presumably, had the ECML not been electrified, these services wouldn't
have been electrified either, so this is a useful knock-on effect.
wires, and those who make the decisions have decided that it's easier to
stick to one diesel loco throughout than switch locos, unfortunately.
At least electrification gives the scope for electric freight services,
though, for example, if there were more freight services going through
the Channel Tunnel.
And, until recently, there were the mail train services.
Edinburgh, see above.
Don't forget that ECML electrification also allowed electric train
services (and through ECML services) from Glasgow to Edinburgh for the
first time.
Isn't it also the case that there are very few local services "along"
the ECML north of NSE-land and that the local services tend to go across
it, or only share the tracks for relatively short distances? I'm sure
that, in time, more 'gaps' between electric lines will be filled in, and
further extensions made.
on what was even before a good service. I'm sure there were noticeable
increases in passenger numbers. And the ability to avoid the decaying
WCML for journeys south from Glasgow was also _very_ welcome to me.
judged. Think of the environmental effects as well.
Are there significant stretches of the ECML where track improvements
could be made, which would make any significant difference, without
essentially having to build a whole new HSL (which I doubt you'd get much
of for the electrification costs)?
Morpeth, parts of the route between Berwick and Edinburgh, and the dreadful
curves at Carstairs Junction. I was under the impression that down south
the line had originally been built to a very high specification (ok, so
the approaches to Newcastle and York are very sharp, but all trains stop
there, so it's not a problem!).
A better option, I feel, would either be to change locos where needed
(which tends to be at main interchange stations where trains stop for
several minutes anyway, I'm sure with care this could be done quite
quickly), or perhaps have dual-power locos which would run on electric
under the wires, with a smaller diesel engine (and smaller fuel tank)
for the unwired section.
that eventually it was decided not to allow higher speed running, even
with the modified signals? (And I'm not sure particularly significant
speed increases could be gained without building stretches of HSL anyway?)
At worst, electric trains restrict the pollution to a few power station
sites, where as much effort as possible can be put into cleaning up
emissions. At best, the trains are hydro-powered; somewhere in the
middle, in reality there is a significant amount of nuclear-power..
You may also be aware of the concept of "peak oil" where we are likely
to soon be approaching the stage where the level of oil reserves that
can be easily tapped is soon likely to peak, and will then tail off.
When this will occur is debatable, but oil is most definitely not a
long-term (100 years+) solution, so I'll be glad of my electric trains
in the future!
improvements, lost most of the table seats and the restaurant cars :-(
Even after the WCML upgrade is completed, ECML wins for me!
begin quote from Mike D in uk.railway
about: East Coast eletrication - Cost effective? (longish)
I travel the part of the ECML fairly regularly, usually starting journeys
from Thirsk or Northallerton, and I have been wondering, has the
electrification of the ECML (i.e. north of Peterborough) delivered value for
money. Ignoring arguments about subsidy, profits and privatisation, at the
end of the day we all pay, either through taxes or fares, so my thoughts
are-
The only electric trains that I see are GNER ones, and they still run a few
Diesel HST's
There are also EMU services operated by ScotRail and whichever(s) of thefrom Thirsk or Northallerton, and I have been wondering, has the
electrification of the ECML (i.e. north of Peterborough) delivered value for
money. Ignoring arguments about subsidy, profits and privatisation, at the
end of the day we all pay, either through taxes or fares, so my thoughts
are-
The only electric trains that I see are GNER ones, and they still run a few
Diesel HST's
Yorkshire PTEs it is/are that run electric services into Leeds.
Presumably, had the ECML not been electrified, these services wouldn't
have been electrified either, so this is a useful knock-on effect.
All the freight trains that I have seen are diesel hauled, there may a few
electric ones but there cant be many
The difficulty is that many freight destinations are away from theelectric ones but there cant be many
wires, and those who make the decisions have decided that it's easier to
stick to one diesel loco throughout than switch locos, unfortunately.
At least electrification gives the scope for electric freight services,
though, for example, if there were more freight services going through
the Channel Tunnel.
And, until recently, there were the mail train services.
Apart from Leeds area all Local services are diesel.
And Edinburgh - North Berwick, and Glasgow - Motherwell - Carstairs -Edinburgh, see above.
Don't forget that ECML electrification also allowed electric train
services (and through ECML services) from Glasgow to Edinburgh for the
first time.
Isn't it also the case that there are very few local services "along"
the ECML north of NSE-land and that the local services tend to go across
it, or only share the tracks for relatively short distances? I'm sure
that, in time, more 'gaps' between electric lines will be filled in, and
further extensions made.
I know there were plans for cross channel trains from our area but these
appear to have been scrapped, so really the only beneficiary of the
investment is the ECML service to London, and journey times going South dont
appear to have improved since HST days, although there does seem to have
been a small improvement northwards.
When the IC225s were new they were seen as a very good thing, improvingappear to have been scrapped, so really the only beneficiary of the
investment is the ECML service to London, and journey times going South dont
appear to have improved since HST days, although there does seem to have
been a small improvement northwards.
on what was even before a good service. I'm sure there were noticeable
increases in passenger numbers. And the ability to avoid the decaying
WCML for journeys south from Glasgow was also _very_ welcome to me.
So with hindsight did the investment in electrification deliver value for
money? I emphasize HINDSIGHT, so I am not trying to apportion blame....
I reckon so. Value for money is not the only thing on which it should bemoney? I emphasize HINDSIGHT, so I am not trying to apportion blame....
judged. Think of the environmental effects as well.
Or put another way if the same amount of money had been spent on track and
signal improvements, and a 'Son of HST' built instead of the current
electric units what sort of a railway would we have today?,
Interesting thought.signal improvements, and a 'Son of HST' built instead of the current
electric units what sort of a railway would we have today?,
Are there significant stretches of the ECML where track improvements
could be made, which would make any significant difference, without
essentially having to build a whole new HSL (which I doubt you'd get much
of for the electrification costs)?
Obviously track and signal improvements would have benefited all routes (and
Passing loops or track doubling on the way out from Edinburgh towards Dunbar
and other at places so that local services dont get in the way of expresses.
That could still be done now, if needed. Is it needed, though?Passing loops or track doubling on the way out from Edinburgh towards Dunbar
and other at places so that local services dont get in the way of expresses.
Possible major diversion of some of the 'twisty' bits where line speeds are
low.
Are there _many_ of those? The only significant ones I can think of are atlow.
Morpeth, parts of the route between Berwick and Edinburgh, and the dreadful
curves at Carstairs Junction. I was under the impression that down south
the line had originally been built to a very high specification (ok, so
the approaches to Newcastle and York are very sharp, but all trains stop
there, so it's not a problem!).
More flexible service on the ECML route as diesel trains can go anywhere.
We already have those diesel trains where they are needed.A better option, I feel, would either be to change locos where needed
(which tends to be at main interchange stations where trains stop for
several minutes anyway, I'm sure with care this could be done quite
quickly), or perhaps have dual-power locos which would run on electric
under the wires, with a smaller diesel engine (and smaller fuel tank)
for the unwired section.
Signal improvements to allow higher speeds/more trains.
Was that not originally part of the ECML upgrade? My understanding isthat eventually it was decided not to allow higher speed running, even
with the modified signals? (And I'm not sure particularly significant
speed increases could be gained without building stretches of HSL anyway?)
But on the 'debit' side how much more would a fleet of diesel trains cost to
run?
Don't forget the environmental costs.run?
At worst, electric trains restrict the pollution to a few power station
sites, where as much effort as possible can be put into cleaning up
emissions. At best, the trains are hydro-powered; somewhere in the
middle, in reality there is a significant amount of nuclear-power..
You may also be aware of the concept of "peak oil" where we are likely
to soon be approaching the stage where the level of oil reserves that
can be easily tapped is soon likely to peak, and will then tail off.
When this will occur is debatable, but oil is most definitely not a
long-term (100 years+) solution, so I'll be glad of my electric trains
in the future!
Also how does this reflect on the modernisation of WCML?
Cost a fortune, went way over budget and schedule, barely resulted in anyimprovements, lost most of the table seats and the restaurant cars :-(
Even after the WCML upgrade is completed, ECML wins for me!
--
David Marsh, <reply-to-email is valid at time of writing> |
Edinburgh, Scotland. [en, fr, (de)] | http://web.viewport.co.uk/ |
David Marsh, <reply-to-email is valid at time of writing> |
Edinburgh, Scotland. [en, fr, (de)] | http://web.viewport.co.uk/ |
Please help me by correcting any errors in my foreign language posts!<
Please trim & interleave quotes otherwise your posts will not be read<
Please trim & interleave quotes otherwise your posts will not be read<