The 159s have been fantastic for SWR, and Salisbury TMD have done a superb job keeping them going, hopefully Salisbury keeps a role in the future for whatever fleet comes next
As someone who lives on the this line the 158s and 159s are extremely comfortable the only problems is they can be very packed because they are 3 and 2 cars long. If they were to be replaced would love to see 4 or 5 car trains. Would also love to a SWR staddler flirt.
Full electrification will always be the most cost-effective and reliable long-term solution. Unfortunately, we haven't had a government in generations which has realised the benefit of large-scale infrastructure investment and this doesn't seem likely to change anytime soon.
Congratulations on the maintenance of the diesel multiple units at Salisbury. They have become more reliable than they were when they were first introduced, and you would not guess how old they are if you did not know. They are very comfortable and have large windows well-placed in relation to the seats (as long as you go in standard class). There was a proposal to electrify the Uckfield line about 25 years ago, at the time when the operators felt the need to replace the 1950s Southern Region diesel-electric multiple units. Quotes were obtained from several engineering companies and they were all ridiculously high, not out of keeping with the cost of building a completely new railway rather than installing third rails on an existing one. The operators abandoned the idea of electrification and ordered new diesel multiple units.
People want double track not this, it’s all good but with the constant dwelling in loops due to a now over congested route double track is far more important. Even with the 158/9 fleet less hold ups at signals to allow for late running train will be far more fuel efficient.
@@EM-yk1dw yeah, the government and industry really dislike 3rd Rail and the DfT won’t authorise any expansion of it, except for TfL. Not for the South or for Merseyrail.
@@EM-yk1dw Not only is 3rd rail unsafe for any animal or human who goes near it but probably the main reason the authorities don't like it is the energy inefficiency and the unreliability in cold weather ref. icing over of the contact surface. 25 kV OLE means less energy losses, reliability in cold weather plus the bonus of being well out of the way for safety. Notwithstanding OLE is less reliable than 3rd rail in being more fragile and is far more expensive to install. P.S. I'm amazed that 3rd rail at ground level was ever allowed, just on safety grounds alone although the contact underneath method used by some Metro systems is safer and presumably less liable to icing over of the contact surface in Winter.
Careful what you wish for. The 158/159s (pre SWR refurbishment), are some of the most comfortable trains in the country. Electric ones are sadly going to come equipped with ironing board seats as is the modern trend across most of the world.
@@kristinajendesen7111this is what I was thinking, no where else in the country have I felt seats this comfy. God forbid we get those ironing board seats from the latest trains.
Seems a pragmatic solution, let's hope it's deemed cost-effective and goes ahead. I would say the 158/9's are still fairly comfortable but they do need a bit of an interior refresh just from general wear and tear. From a customer point of view it would be nice to have a refreshments trolley on these services and the ones down to Weymouth, 3+ hour journeys where if you haven't planned ahead you can't get so much as a bottle of water. Even an on-board vending machine would do!
British Rail invented the solution to this problem nearly sixty years ago, and used it on the Waterloo - Weymouth route. The 21st century version would have battery versions of the Class 33 diesels, and the Basingstoke - Salisbury section should be 3rd rail electric.
The issue of ‘smart third rail’ is electrification is actually very very clever and something surely to be taken forward. On a route like the Salisbury and through to Exeter is where electric passenger trains are not at a huge frequency (maybe 2tph) so having the juice off for the majority of the time really is reducing risk massively. Could a train based activation system work where its passage turns on the electricity in advance of actually traversing that section.
A train based activation system is the only way it's going to work. To be safe it should only be live under the actual train - some tram systems manage to do this. But that means the sections have to be quite small - at most half the length of the shortest train, and that's going to make it much more expensive than regular third rail. Probably so much so that overhead power would be cheaper. The more sensible approach would be bottom contact 3rd rail. I wonder if there's a way with equipping the train with both.
Another interesting interview. Clear plans seem to have been made which hopefully will lead to a great improvement in the line. Let's hope the future is brighter for a line which seems to suffer a lot. Pity no plan for more double track though! Good stuff Richard.
My first thought about converting Desiros to run on "The Mule" was that the potential benefit of using a 'standard' platform across the network could be track/platformu utilisation? I does seem ludicrous that there are services running to and from a major London terminus formed of only THREE coaches. In the previous era of operation Waterloo-Salisbury services were operated by a push/pull Class 33/1 and 4-TC stock (an unpowered version of the SR EMUs). A number of these workings included portions of the train for destinations on the third rail network, operated by an EMU. Back 30-40 years ago there was no physical barrier between diesel and electric traction working in multiple. I appreciate that at the time the surplus of an order by Regional Railways for Sprinter Express DMUs yielded a fantastic business opportunity for NSE, and the Class 159 has served well. Hopefully this time around operational efficiency will be a consideration?
The battery/third rail plan sounds pragmatic and positive, however I do have a concern that Desiros and Aventras are not particularly well suited to a long distance line because they're designed as commuter trains. The most appropriate stock to retrofit would be 444s, but that would mean reducing the number of them on the Portsmouth/Weymouth routes, which is not ideal for those customers. I get that we don't want to waste good trains, but my fear is that those on the WOE route will end up with a worse passenger experience until the next order of trains comes in. Probably the best solution would be to convert a small number of 444s as a testbed along with some 159s, and then when the 444s get to the end of life, replace them with properly suited long-distance stock. I don't think 701s would be a good move for such long routes.
passenger experience on the Weymouth line is poor enough. Way down on what it was in SWT times. Heating doesn't seem to work on the 444's on that line in winter. One train an hour on busy sundays in the summer (often with non-functioning toilets) and no catering since covid (with no plans for return) on journeys that can be 3 hours+. Often the 444 only connects to a 4 car 450 at Bournemouth too, to make a 9 car set into London.
Back in 2000 when I was driving at Salisbury, Brian Souter/Stagecoach offered to redouble most of the line, up the line speed to 100mph where feasible and introduce Meridian style units. It would have been a fantastic service. The then Labour government, including the then Secretary of State for Transport, Lord John (I would never accept a peerage) Prescott, turned it down. Just before SWT were bidding to retain the franchise in 2017, I sent Brian Souter my artwork and a suggestion for a bi-mode unit that would run on the juice from Waterloo to Basingstoke and be charged at stations en route going West. Based on a Meridian unit with a more streamlined front. It would be interesting to know if it may have swung the franchise decision for them if they had gone with it due to the 'Green' frenzy at the time. When their time comes I hope that an unrefurbished 159 (the ones still in the SWT colour scheme), will be saved. Sadly the NRM were not interested in preserving a Pig - the fastest 3rd rail unit in the world. Something else I drove but I still prefer 159s especially over Disastros.
@@physiocrat7143 40yrs is around the maximum lifespan for a train on the mainline. But I think emissions are the reason here , even though I thought they were running them on chip fat. A result of that experiment was that they were only running them from Basingstoke for a while , which might stop the neighbors at Waterloo complaining , whoever they are. Me I think it helps you aurally find a Salisbury train at least .
If they ever re-open the Maldon-Witham branch line, then that is one that's definitely ripe for battery train technology, as is the current Marks Tey to Sudbury. In fact I'd go further.... Maldon to Stansted Airport via a newly built high level platform at Witham. Battery operation between Maldon and Witham, OLE on existing systems between Witham and Braintree, and battery again between Braintree and Stansted.
The 159s are vestibule stock and provide a decent enough level of comfort. A commuter train such as the 450 has two sets of doors within the saloon for rapid boarding etc., making the feel very different (and currently has 3+2 seating!). On a journey of over three hours, that reduction in the level of comfort, noise and refinement is clearly not acceptable. The Class 444s are closer to a like-for-like change but they are not being proposed in this plan (why not?). The plan shows imagination and flexibility and the diesels need to go, but if driven purely by cost then it will diminish the service further. Oh and while I'm commenting, we need some catering back on this line - my coffee does not last me over three hours from Exeter to London!
@@mdhazeldine Thanks for that. In fact, looking at the article in Rail issue 120 they have ruled out the Class 444s as not having enough space for the batteries (sob!). In that article they specifically identified either the Class 450 or the Class 701 as the candidates, so true suburban stock in place of regional express stock. Oh dear.
Yeovil to Waterloo is about 2h30. That’s a long time in suburban stock with little or no facility to work on the train. The 159s are great. They are comfortable and, within the limits of the single track sections and the failure of SWR to maintain a sensible stock of replacement engines do a great job. Here’s hoping for something equally comfortable in the future…
Surely it would make more sense to use the additional 701s to replace the class 450s and then order more bi-mode diesels for the WOE route. Running suburban stock from London to Exeter is a massive downgrade.
I can see electrification from Basingstoke to Salisbury happening and from Southampton Central to Salisbury but I don’t think it will ever happen. Not to mention plans to electrify the Chiltern Main Line from London Marylebone to Aylesbury, Princes Risborough, Banbury and to Oxford. With electrification from Didcot Parkway to Oxford that Class 800 and Class 387s would operate AC 25kv OHL to Oxford from London Paddington. And electrification on the Uckfield line and Marshlink line with DC 750v 3rd Rail.
Would work in hand as units could charge batteries while they travel over the existing sections of 3rd rail. 3rd rail should be fitted in Salisbury Station most definitely
We need fast runnning trains on the larger lines, which includes the line to Exeter. We need trains accelerating rapidly. We need a system robust to delays of one train, and with a high capacity. We need comfortable trains, that are also comfortable to drive. We need a network safe for people working on the track, or having to cross the track. Taking all of this into account, some of the proposed intermediate solutions proposed will only give intermediate, or lets rather call them mediocre results. I believe that it will be necessary to first create a backbone of fully overhead- electrifying the mainline from London to Exeter. Third rail is a legacy product, not to be extended. Battery operations are for short stretches.
I do wonder if another benefit of implementing traction batteries on existing 3rd rail EMUs may allow for a reduced peak load while on the (quite power limited) 3rd rail network, thereby potentially allowing for fewer or smaller substations to be used on new / renewed sections.
It can use some battery power when accelerating and thereby reduce the load. But if you have intermittent power then the power drain is surely higher as it must both power the train and charge the battery.
@@Talon5516-tx3ih True but surely if you link the power delivery to the charging system you can avoid it trying to charge while accelerating? Far from the most complex thing.
@@iman2341 That's not what I meant. On acceleration it draws power from the battery to lessen the load and/or accelerate faster - which is also good. But at cruising speed the train must draw more power than a simple electric train as it has to recharge. Compared to a fully electrified railway the power drain would be more peaky - i.e. it could be that several trains are charging and so the load is higher, but then it drops to zero as they're all running on battery. But I guess the acceleration phase is always going to require the most energy so that may be irrelevant. Also as batteries are not 100% efficient the partially electrified setup will require more energy overall. Interesting though. A couple of times I've been in the Siemens Mireo B trains in SW Germany and of course as a passenger you notice absolutely nothing different when it's running on battery. It's just an electric train.
Maybe electrify from Basingstoke to Salisbury and from Southampton Central to Salisbury with DC 750v 3rd Rail. And from Reading to Basingstoke with DC 750v 3rd rail to Reading Green Park & AC 25kv OHL from Reading Green Park to Reading.
Third rail all the way from Basingstoke through Reading connecting to the Waterloo line. Provides an alternative route when embankment slides occur between Basingstoke and Woking.
In my opinion the 25kv overhead system is the only way forward. The West of England line should be treated as a mainline instead of some sleepy branch line.
@@GooseWaffethere are areas when OHLE and 3rd rail coexist. I believe the main issue is immunisation of signalling systems. I'd like to hear more precise detail before dismissing this proposal out of hand. @andrewhotston983 Given the proposal is a 3rd rail version of what James Drumm's units on the Irish GSR did, just under a century ago, decrying a 1967 solution on grounds of it's age would be a bit rich ... but I would point out that the driving imperative in this case IS decarbonisation. The GSR used a solution much as seen with new EV buses fitted with overhead connectors.
The AC 25kv OHL should have been extended to Reading Green Park with a bay platform built for the Class 387 to terminate at Reading Green Park from Reading.
Great programme as always, but I seriously wonder about the safety of new sections of third rail being switched off. I am very concerned about kids trying it to see if it is live, especially in areas where they have never had third rail electrification and therefore have not grown up with the dangers. I can see the merits of energising only when needed but I wonder if this will lead to more accidents not less. John
Neil's got a great case and they have thought through this in a real business-like way in terms of getting the best return on investment. My fear is when it comes back under state control the dead hand of bureaucracy will kill it by a thousand cuts. A politician will take a random decision that you can't have the money for this, you can have some of the money for that, this one will need to be reviewed again . . . and the whole great plan will fall apart in spite of this really thorough ground-work.
Yes, the Waterloo to Exeter route is very often a nightmare of overcrowding. Yes, the 158/9 units are excellent trains and more comfortable and roomy than many more modern units. I would have thought that redeploying the HST Castle sets on the Salisbury line (when GWR finishes with them) would be a good bet - they offer more capacity than the 15x units and Salisbury depot already has diesel expertise. The idea of running battery driven trains from Basingstoke to Salisbury might be eco-friendly - but given that the line is mostly used by people travelling right through from London to Exeter with appreciable amounts of luggage, forcing every traveller to change at Salisbury (when at the moment about 50% of the trains run right through without a change) is not very passenger friendly.
I though about this too. Just remove one of the generators similar to what ScotRail did and they'll happily sit at 100mph with just the one MTU unit - maybe even have a battery installed as a replacement in one of the driving end cars instead. Or do what Chiltern did the some Mk3s. Possibly fit batteries under the DVT.
@EM-yk1dw Quite, they are very much life expired and it's nor really economically viable to keep them going. Plus why should they be replacing old trains with much older ones?
We tend to go West rather than East, although I note how the trains get nearer to WAT they fill and the last one we caught at CLJ for SHE (nine car) was already full and standing. Catching the late afternoon trains from EXD they are jammed by the time we leave EXC but by AXM there are far fewer on board. (Lots of students) Living near YVJ we get a good look at the trains (I need to stay in more, away from the rest of humanity I think!) and tbh most trains are not that busy at this point. The conclusion I draw is that most people do not go from WAT-EXD! (Don't let a politician near that statement as the conclusion that could be drawn is that so few tickets are sold for that journey, the line needs to be closed! )
'Most users go all the way from WAT - EXD?' is that correct? Judging by my observations the trains as they pass us (half-way SAL-EXD) are not necessarily that busy and we never have trouble getting a seat.
How many accidents happen on the third rail where death is by electrocution, at the moment? Have we any stats and how many miles of third rail are there?
I lived in the 3rd rail electrification area of the south of UK for six years 1957 to 1963. I never heard of any accidents, deaths or near misses with the 750v rail. Subsequently, although living overseas since then, I have kept in touch with the railways of the UK through Rail Magazine. The only case was a girl who crossed the line at Bournemouth station about two or three years back, and was badly injured, but servived.She was then turned into a hero by the press and others instead of accepting that someone 15 years of age should have known it was dangerous. When I was 10, I knew the dangers of electricity! Third rail deaths, must be very low in UK from way back until the present time, so what is going on here. I can never fathom out the authorities reluctance to extend 3rd rail where it is obvious it would improve the whole system. I have never heard of any problems at Merseyrail either!
Surely the fantastic class 755 Bi-Mode is the perfect option for the West of England Line? Run third rail from Waterloo to Worton Junction before running diesel down to Exeter.
@rogerphelps9939 You could do that with a 755 however or variant which can eventually lose the diesel power generator cars once electrification is complete
@@rogerphelps9939 Which knowing SWR means they want "cheap" solutions. I.e we've got too many 701s so where can we shove them to keep the DFT happy. The arterios are completely sub standard for a route like London to Exeter.
Me I was wondering why you couldn't sacrifice some seats in the 455s for a couple of motor/generators or a motor and rack of batteries . Coupled with some sound deadening around the compressors and you might forget the 'new' bimodes are even older than what they replace . ( I did Wimbledon to Guildford on on once and felt a bit deafened so maybe just use them for Reading -Salisbury an the Southampton circle .)
@@GreenSignals Except ... Oh no they're gone . Big pile of batteries it is then . Hold on, Stadler FLIRTs, class 799s, both have Diesel genpacks . And batteries can go in later , I just don't want to give Musk the money right now.
We're right by the SAL-EXD line (SHE-YVJ) and the timing generally is pretty good. I like the 159's and find them comfortable and overall I'd 'mark' them highly. Coming 'up' is the pain as I would wager 5/1 that we'd get stuck at Pinhoe for several minutes. The joys of single line... As for the decarbonising, frankly I'm going to be in trouble for this, but IMHO it's complete BS. Great Britain has 0.85% of the world's population. I think anyone can work out the result of the decarbonisation as a percentage of the world's output. However, I now read that carbon makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere - is that correct?
You have a lot of learning to do as regards global warming. It may well be true that GB has less than 1% of the world's population and only a small proportion of the total CO2 emissions but that is certainly not an excuse to do nothing. If everyone took your attitude civilisation would be doomed. As far as CO2 being just 0.04% of the atmosphere here is an experiment to try: take a litre of water and add 0.4 grams of strong food dye. Mix well. What do you notice? If that does not get you thinking along the right lines I suggest you ingest 50 or so paracetamol tablets, much less than 0.04% of your body mass. You may well not be able to report back, ever. The point is that CO2 is a very powerful greenhouse gas that works in tandem with water vapour to raise the Earth's temperature well above the -20 degrees C or so that it would be without it. The problem is that too much of it is incompatible with human civilisation as we know it.
@@rogerphelps9939 Interesting Roger. I'm happy to be convinced that I'm wrong. I'd like to know, however, just what China and India are doing to reduce their carbon.
All interesting stuff, especially for those of us on lines like the Uckfield Line - which has diesels running on electrified lines between Hurst Green and London Bridge. I believe they have looked at adding batteries to the class 377s. Uckfield being within battery range of Hurst Green (just apparently). It’s rumoured the issue they found was running the new hybrid in multiples wasn’t going to work. Not sure why. Incidentally there appears to be an assumption that today’s lower passenger numbers is going to remain for ever. Is that actually the case?
An alternative might be to add a hydrogen powered electric generator car in the middle. I have seen trial units being tested , maybe that would be a good way by just adding it in the middle of your excess stock.
It’s specific to SWR because their model was so reliant on 9-5 south west London to central communing. With 3 day working now standard, SWR over passenger figures are down by around 35 percent from pre Covid. Overall industry I believe is about recovered now.
Long distance, business travel, and weekend travel are all around 110% of before covid, shorter commutes are close to levels before covid, but longer commutes, e.g. Guildford or Basingstoke to London are down as most of these kinds of jobs have moved to 3days in office, 2 at home, so down around 35% as others have said, this gives an overall average of 95% or so
@@jamesnichols5163 They've reduced the Weymouth to London line down to 1 (slow) train an hour on Sundays in the summer when it's packed with tourists coming back from the beach. Absolutely ridiculous. It's full by the time it's got to Dorchester and people are standing in the aisles even when it's extended to 10 carriages (if you're lucky) at Bournemouth.
OLE would be the most effective solution and way cheaper in the long run. Third rail is NOT inherently unsafe. DC repels, after all! The cheapest solution, in the short term, would be to run the EMU to Basingstoke with loco haulage onwards. There we are: sorted (for now).
We need the Exeter St Davids London to London Waterloo route upgrade with modern type inter city trains and catering needs restoration on the Exeter St Davids London Paddington Waterloo and London Waterloo to Weymouth and Portsmouth Harbour
That would be massively expensive and you'd have to do very large chunks of the network all at once. If you're going to go down that route, you might as well switch to OHLE.
I will miss the 455s on SWR. Much better designed inside than the Desiros with their power point intruding on your leg room. Also never known one break down.
Ever since the 60's, London to Exeter through Taunton was 'the way to go', but if you have to, Salisbury is possible, but are you sure you want to? That thinking seems stuck in a lot of minds and once a fleet of every half hour Class 800's running on dual track are funded, the 'Cinderella' line will never get to the Ball!
I use to use this route to get to London, from Exeter when i was at University there. The only reason you use this line from Exeter all the way to London, is because it's cheaper (especially as you can use your network card on it). If the main GWR was cheaper you'd defintely just use that.
There is an elephant in the room that never seems to be acknowledged. Rail is already a very green transport option, even if it uses a diesel engine - compared to road. My fear is that by focusing too much on rail decarbonisation, we run the risk of adding extra cost, making rail less attractive and pushing traffic onto the roads. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Of course where opportunities arise, why not, but only if the costs are marginal. A much bigger carbon reduction would be achieved just by encouraging even a relatively small modal shift from road to rail, even if it's diesel powered. Those in charge seem incapable of seeing the bigger picture.
I think intermittent electrification is one of the worst ideas to come out of the rail industry for many decades. It introduces a huge number of additional modes of failure, rendering rail services even less resilient than they are now.
This makes me sad. Appreciate Neil has to deal with the current political and financial climate but this shows a complete lack of ambition. If we’re serious about decarbonisation we need to plan for huge modal shift towards rail and other public transport/ active travel solutions. What now seems like a rural branch line could be transformed into a significant regional connection. 25KV AC is in my opinion the only sensible mid to long term solution. It makes no sense to cart around tonnes of batteries with a limited life expectancy. IIUC source materials for batteries are limited too so better to save them for applications which are difficult to electrify in other ways such as rural buses and cars/ taxis. Funds saved from the cancellation of the ridiculous Stonehenge Tunnel could be put towards an upgrade of this line as well more local transport schemes. Electrification teams could work on this route and then move onto the line via Taunton or vice versa. A rolling programme of electrification will reduce unit costs and maintain skills. Sorry for the rant. Thanks Green Signals people. Love your work.
The 159 units are vastly superior to any newer stock, including the dreadful Hitachis on the competing GW route. Unless there is incipient metal fatigue, they need only to be re-engined, or converted to EMUs or battery or locomotive powered sets. The main difficulty with the route is shortage of passing spaces west of Salisbury; surely this should get priority? It is time to drop the decarbonisation fad. Railways account for 0.7% of carbon emissions. It isn't even worth thinking about.
Supposedly there very much is cracking problems with the 158/159's and has been from new. Very much garden shed engineering, though they are nice trains. You can only patch something up so much and their probably near their design life.
@dglcomputers1498 I am not surprised. Aluminium bodyshells are a mistake. I suspect the new Hitachi trains will even not last out their design live. I was in 800 series trains last week - the whole bodyshell shakes like a jelly, which is exactly how to induce metal fatigue on aluminum. The line to Exeter needs to be operated the same way as Waterloo to Weymouth when electrification was only as far as Bournemouth. A new generation of stock is needed, with correct design parameters. The 800 series are all wrong, and we need to go for stainless steel bodyshells which have a 60 year life. Replacement of the the 158/159 fleet is an opportunity to break the trend where each generation of trains is worse than what they replace.
They won''t. New battery chemistries make the possibility of spontaneous combustion extremely remote. Even now the incidence of electric car fires is something like 50 times less than in equivalent fossil fuelled cars and in future it will be even lower.
@@GooseWaffe Diesel is VERY difficult to ignite and relatively easy to extinguish. A battery fire is effectively impossible to extinguish, and is FAR more intense.
I still enjoy travelling on the SWT class 158/159’s they are still the most comfortable trains to travel on. They may be a bit noisy but I would rather have that than something like a 166 or a Flying Cucumber on the GWR network…
2 questions. could the 159 move over to TFW to match the 158's? instead of scrapping them keep them and scrap the 150's why do you always use gwr when talking about the battery trains but not the already in service 231's tfw?
I understand there are places where the 158'/9s can't go, I believe a mixture of dwell times and bits overhanging. Plus 150"s are better suited to stop start routes given their door and interior layout.
nice hear the RSSB has reversed their tone on 3rd rail, it seemed rather silly that operators were content to sit on their cost+ mode of operation and just let commuters eat the cost of diesel rather than use cost effective modes of electrification. 3rd rail is safe if you're used to it. yes it has risks, but what doesn't? burning diesel has massive risks in the future as climate change continues to hammer the country with increasingly severe storms
But surely this guy isn't ultimately responsible for anything to do with track, electrification, trees etc - he's simply the liaison with Network Rail. And who's to say SWR will even be holding the contract in a few years.
@@GooseWaffe Considering the first thing Labour did when they got into power was to scrap the Restoring Your Railway scheme, can you really see them giving GBR the budget needed to continue projects like this?
7:00 this is honestly utterly stupid and full of lies. What do you mean traveling is still at pre pandemic levels?? Every time I went to Waterloo it’s always rush hour 24/7 shouldn’t you be using those trains (aka the 450) to strength 8 car trains to 12 then?? And what do you mean using batteries on 450?? Do you know how long between stations the line is. 3 hours is no joke and even if you charge a battery at every station it won’t reach enough. This is more like a cheap way to do so and it’s not funny SWR. Typical first group 🙄😒 🤦♂️. At this point just order bi-mode trains that can run 3rd rails and diesel. Or here is a better option. Modify 450 to have AC and do OHLE from baskingtoke to Exeter. Battery for motive power on such a long line is not an ideal plan and we should just get trains. Make the cab control and all to be similar to the 158/159 and there you go it’s pretty much no new fleet once you fully replace the 158/159. It’s not that hard. SWR have the money.
Please don't replace the 158/9's. They are far more comfortable and reliable than new trains, with their awful seats, harsh lighting, noise and poor ride qualities. The TfW CAF's are a joke, they creak and rattle, the bogies chatter and clank, just awful. Likewise the Hitachi 800 series on GWR, just miserable on a long journey.
Ive never understood why a lot of our trains are completly flat/vertical at the front and rear, we've known for how many years that aero dynamics play an important role in efficiency for how many hundreds of years now? It'd be like trying to run a marathon holding a door up in front of you😂🤦♂️😂
Talking specifically about the 158/159, it's because they have gangways at the end of the trains allowing you to pass from one unit to another when they are coupled up. For trains like the 701, 707 etc which are new trains with no gangways, i have not a clue. A guess is that the trains operate on generally low speed lines (under 100mph) and so the additional cost to change the design of the train to something like the 395 or 800 series is more than what would be saved in efficency in the long term. As explained by Maverick Hunter Daniel, Gangways at the ends of trains have ups and downs. Postbox syndrome and being able to move between units.
Catenary is far more sustainable and straight forward than battery electric. Look farther to the future. Don't get caught up in innovation being the most logical solution. Train use is going to become much more prevalent. Personal motor vehicles (cars/SUVs) will be phased out as they cannot actually be produced with zero carbon emissions, meaning medium and long distance travel will try solely on rail.
So everyone is going to have their own personal railroad station outside their house? Ban personal road vehicles and you no longer have a functioning society, and definitely not one that could support a rail network.
I think you'll find batteries become much more simple than OLE (catenary) and much, much cheaper and quicker to install. No one wants unsightly wires all over the place, especially not in rural areas. Batteries with islands of power in stations makes absolute sense for rural lines where the journeys aren't long. Mainlines should be OLE where possible.
Installing catenaries is expensive (especially due to our history and failure to run with a rolling programme over the last 30 years), and on a line that is mostly only used by 1 train per hour, the cost is high for the gain - and especially when one of the barriers to rolling out electrification faster is a lack of staff and physical resources, a line like WOE is hard to prioritise over other lines that are used more intensively. Discontinuous third rail with batteries is probably the most cost-effective way to decarbonise this line within the timeframe needed before the current fleet needs to be replaced.
@@andrewhotston983 Sound's crazy right? Would it surprise you to know that prior to WW2 most households in Britain and the USA did not have a car. Ask an old person if their parents lived in a functional society and the answer is yes, society worked before everyone drove cars. Buses and trains moved people pre-suburbanization, and now we can rebuild our suburbs to have tram and light rail access. Micromobility (most familiar to people witnessing post WW2 Europe and Japan) included bicycles, motorized bicycles, and tiny bubble/microcars to journey shorter distances, and now we do have even more viable very sustainable electrified micromobility. You only have to look two decades ago to China to see a very functional society operating largely without cars. The physics of Climate Crisis aren't going to bargain with us and grant us permission to kick the problem down the road for another generation or two, nor is society going to starve to death so that we can expend rapidly shrinking carbon emissions on motor cars, ICE or EV. We'll have a massive job decarbonizing all aspects of our modern life, and you've just not been paying close attention or haven't been well informed by leadership about the big changes coming. And before you try to rationalize eternal car use with the argument that people don't want to or can't all ride bicycles, again, our opinions on the privilege to operate cars isn't cogent. So we're going to have to step up and retain mobility with sustainable means that don't require massive amounts of emissions to produce and operate. I can travel 50 miles easily on a $2000 e-bike, but since that takes a long time, more likely I'll prefer to travel 2-10 miles by bike and ride a train for the balance of longer trips. People with disabilities can and do ride recumbent tadpole e-trikes. I'm not saying this won't require a great deal of compromise. It will. But Climate Crisis is comparable to a World War that we know will not end for generations. We certainly can't slash our emissions to zero perpetually building battery electric cars/SUVs that currently require 17-39 tons CO2e emissions just to build. BTW, Britain is already in a much better position than many countries including the USA. But we're not anywhere close to having legitimate plans for zero carbon emissions living.
@@andrewhotston983'Railroad' - Must be American. We have a more integrated transport network in Europe. Buses do need to be brought back to remote locations and subsidised in many cases and if possible old lines reopened. Where the trackbeds have been built upon they could run tram-trains that go into the road for short sections. At one point in the UK you couldn't walk more than about 5 miles without tripping over a railway line. Many were closed over the years, especially industrial lines such as those to the collieries but the most devastating closures were from 1964 onwards.
Has anything been said on what the situation is with regards to the CDL situation with WCR and their MK1's and early MK2 coaches as it's almost breaking point now.
The 159s have been fantastic for SWR, and Salisbury TMD have done a superb job keeping them going, hopefully Salisbury keeps a role in the future for whatever fleet comes next
As someone who lives on the this line the 158s and 159s are extremely comfortable the only problems is they can be very packed because they are 3 and 2 cars long. If they were to be replaced would love to see 4 or 5 car trains. Would also love to a SWR staddler flirt.
enjoy them before they are repalced with trains containing ironong board seats.
@ yeah praying for some half decent seats.
Horrible seats seem standard on new trains.
@@VoyagerDanielCapacity over comfort is the modern way of things. It’s such a shame.
@@christopherhood9241 exactly
Full electrification will always be the most cost-effective and reliable long-term solution. Unfortunately, we haven't had a government in generations which has realised the benefit of large-scale infrastructure investment and this doesn't seem likely to change anytime soon.
Congratulations on the maintenance of the diesel multiple units at Salisbury. They have become more reliable than they were when they were first introduced, and you would not guess how old they are if you did not know. They are very comfortable and have large windows well-placed in relation to the seats (as long as you go in standard class).
There was a proposal to electrify the Uckfield line about 25 years ago, at the time when the operators felt the need to replace the 1950s Southern Region diesel-electric multiple units. Quotes were obtained from several engineering companies and they were all ridiculously high, not out of keeping with the cost of building a completely new railway rather than installing third rails on an existing one. The operators abandoned the idea of electrification and ordered new diesel multiple units.
..... though despite perennial unreliability on the Brighton / Coastways mainline, the 8 miles twixt Uckfield and Lewes remains missing.
In my experience the loos don't work very well.
People want double track not this, it’s all good but with the constant dwelling in loops due to a now over congested route double track is far more important.
Even with the 158/9 fleet less hold ups at signals to allow for late running train will be far more fuel efficient.
While they're waiting in the loops they could plug the trains in to top up the batteries!
@@377king The plan is ridiculous, I agree double track it again and 3rd rail it, are they saying the existing dc system is unsafe?
@@EM-yk1dw yeah, the government and industry really dislike 3rd Rail and the DfT won’t authorise any expansion of it, except for TfL. Not for the South or for Merseyrail.
@@EM-yk1dw Not only is 3rd rail unsafe for any animal or human who goes near it but probably the main reason the authorities don't like it is the energy inefficiency and the unreliability in cold weather ref. icing over of the contact surface. 25 kV OLE means less energy losses, reliability in cold weather plus the bonus of being well out of the way for safety. Notwithstanding OLE is less reliable than 3rd rail in being more fragile and is far more expensive to install.
P.S. I'm amazed that 3rd rail at ground level was ever allowed, just on safety grounds alone although the contact underneath method used by some Metro systems is safer and presumably less liable to icing over of the contact surface in Winter.
@ Yes you raise good points here, pros and cons with both systems.
Love these interviews, Insightful and informative as always!
Thanks Adam
V interesting as a user of the west of England line from Salisbury it will be nice to have some form of an electric train in the next few years.
Careful what you wish for. The 158/159s (pre SWR refurbishment), are some of the most comfortable trains in the country. Electric ones are sadly going to come equipped with ironing board seats as is the modern trend across most of the world.
@@kristinajendesen7111 oh ok that’s a bit sad.
@@kristinajendesen7111701’s aren’t terrible to be honest
@@kristinajendesen7111this is what I was thinking, no where else in the country have I felt seats this comfy. God forbid we get those ironing board seats from the latest trains.
Seems a pragmatic solution, let's hope it's deemed cost-effective and goes ahead. I would say the 158/9's are still fairly comfortable but they do need a bit of an interior refresh just from general wear and tear. From a customer point of view it would be nice to have a refreshments trolley on these services and the ones down to Weymouth, 3+ hour journeys where if you haven't planned ahead you can't get so much as a bottle of water. Even an on-board vending machine would do!
British Rail invented the solution to this problem nearly sixty years ago, and used it on the Waterloo - Weymouth route. The 21st century version would have battery versions of the Class 33 diesels, and the Basingstoke - Salisbury section should be 3rd rail electric.
An updated version of the Gatwick Express with class 73"s would be nice on the Exeter run.
The issue of ‘smart third rail’ is electrification is actually very very clever and something surely to be taken forward. On a route like the Salisbury and through to Exeter is where electric passenger trains are not at a huge frequency (maybe 2tph) so having the juice off for the majority of the time really is reducing risk massively. Could a train based activation system work where its passage turns on the electricity in advance of actually traversing that section.
A train based activation system is the only way it's going to work. To be safe it should only be live under the actual train - some tram systems manage to do this. But that means the sections have to be quite small - at most half the length of the shortest train, and that's going to make it much more expensive than regular third rail. Probably so much so that overhead power would be cheaper.
The more sensible approach would be bottom contact 3rd rail. I wonder if there's a way with equipping the train with both.
@@Talon5516-tx3ih yeah I've been on metro systems with bottom contact, seems a no-brainer really.
The partial third rail/battery solution might also be applicable to the North Downs line (Reading-Gatwick).
The 3rd gaps should be done there isn’t much needed
Yes, my mind immediately went to that.
Another interesting interview. Clear plans seem to have been made which hopefully will lead to a great improvement in the line. Let's hope the future is brighter for a line which seems to suffer a lot. Pity no plan for more double track though! Good stuff Richard.
Thanks Allan. Appreciate the kind words as ever.
My first thought about converting Desiros to run on "The Mule" was that the potential benefit of using a 'standard' platform across the network could be track/platformu utilisation? I does seem ludicrous that there are services running to and from a major London terminus formed of only THREE coaches.
In the previous era of operation Waterloo-Salisbury services were operated by a push/pull Class 33/1 and 4-TC stock (an unpowered version of the SR EMUs). A number of these workings included portions of the train for destinations on the third rail network, operated by an EMU. Back 30-40 years ago there was no physical barrier between diesel and electric traction working in multiple.
I appreciate that at the time the surplus of an order by Regional Railways for Sprinter Express DMUs yielded a fantastic business opportunity for NSE, and the Class 159 has served well. Hopefully this time around operational efficiency will be a consideration?
The battery/third rail plan sounds pragmatic and positive, however I do have a concern that Desiros and Aventras are not particularly well suited to a long distance line because they're designed as commuter trains. The most appropriate stock to retrofit would be 444s, but that would mean reducing the number of them on the Portsmouth/Weymouth routes, which is not ideal for those customers. I get that we don't want to waste good trains, but my fear is that those on the WOE route will end up with a worse passenger experience until the next order of trains comes in. Probably the best solution would be to convert a small number of 444s as a testbed along with some 159s, and then when the 444s get to the end of life, replace them with properly suited long-distance stock. I don't think 701s would be a good move for such long routes.
Some good points that hopefully will be taken into account.
passenger experience on the Weymouth line is poor enough. Way down on what it was in SWT times. Heating doesn't seem to work on the 444's on that line in winter. One train an hour on busy sundays in the summer (often with non-functioning toilets) and no catering since covid (with no plans for return) on journeys that can be 3 hours+. Often the 444 only connects to a 4 car 450 at Bournemouth too, to make a 9 car set into London.
Salisbury - Exeter needs probably doubling trains are delayed daily due to the unacceptable infrastructure on a key diversionary route.
I recall an insider telling me after he'd been to numerous meetings that the plan is to have that done by 2049. Total crystal ball gazing.
Back in 2000 when I was driving at Salisbury, Brian Souter/Stagecoach offered to redouble most of the line, up the line speed to 100mph where feasible and introduce Meridian style units. It would have been a fantastic service. The then Labour government, including the then Secretary of State for Transport, Lord John (I would never accept a peerage) Prescott, turned it down.
Just before SWT were bidding to retain the franchise in 2017, I sent Brian Souter my artwork and a suggestion for a bi-mode unit that would run on the juice from Waterloo to Basingstoke and be charged at stations en route going West. Based on a Meridian unit with a more streamlined front.
It would be interesting to know if it may have swung the franchise decision for them if they had gone with it due to the 'Green' frenzy at the time.
When their time comes I hope that an unrefurbished 159 (the ones still in the SWT colour scheme), will be saved. Sadly the NRM were not interested in preserving a Pig - the fastest 3rd rail unit in the world. Something else I drove but I still prefer 159s especially over Disastros.
Would love to know what really happened with the 442's, the whole debacle seems very odd
Still drive the old 159s each day at work from salisbury and love them and it will be a shame to see them go.
Why do the 159 need to be replaced? Are they suffering from incipient metal fatigue?
@@pgf289 Yeah that was a shame .
@@physiocrat7143 40yrs is around the maximum lifespan for a train on the mainline. But I think emissions are the reason here , even though I thought they were running them on chip fat. A result of that experiment was that they were only running them from Basingstoke for a while , which might stop the neighbors at Waterloo complaining , whoever they are. Me I think it helps you aurally find a Salisbury train at least .
If they ever re-open the Maldon-Witham branch line, then that is one that's definitely ripe for battery train technology, as is the current Marks Tey to Sudbury. In fact I'd go further.... Maldon to Stansted Airport via a newly built high level platform at Witham. Battery operation between Maldon and Witham, OLE on existing systems between Witham and Braintree, and battery again between Braintree and Stansted.
I would set your expectations of that ever happening at an appropriate level (i.e. NIL)
The 159s are vestibule stock and provide a decent enough level of comfort. A commuter train such as the 450 has two sets of doors within the saloon for rapid boarding etc., making the feel very different (and currently has 3+2 seating!). On a journey of over three hours, that reduction in the level of comfort, noise and refinement is clearly not acceptable. The Class 444s are closer to a like-for-like change but they are not being proposed in this plan (why not?). The plan shows imagination and flexibility and the diesels need to go, but if driven purely by cost then it will diminish the service further. Oh and while I'm commenting, we need some catering back on this line - my coffee does not last me over three hours from Exeter to London!
He didn't actually rule out 444s. He said "Desiros or Aventras"
@@mdhazeldine Thanks for that. In fact, looking at the article in Rail issue 120 they have ruled out the Class 444s as not having enough space for the batteries (sob!). In that article they specifically identified either the Class 450 or the Class 701 as the candidates, so true suburban stock in place of regional express stock. Oh dear.
Yeovil to Waterloo is about 2h30. That’s a long time in suburban stock with little or no facility to work on the train. The 159s are great. They are comfortable and, within the limits of the single track sections and the failure of SWR to maintain a sensible stock of replacement engines do a great job. Here’s hoping for something equally comfortable in the future…
Surely it would make more sense to use the additional 701s to replace the class 450s and then order more bi-mode diesels for the WOE route. Running suburban stock from London to Exeter is a massive downgrade.
I can see electrification from Basingstoke to Salisbury happening and from Southampton Central to Salisbury but I don’t think it will ever happen. Not to mention plans to electrify the Chiltern Main Line from London Marylebone to Aylesbury, Princes Risborough, Banbury and to Oxford.
With electrification from Didcot Parkway to Oxford that Class 800 and Class 387s would operate AC 25kv OHL to Oxford from London Paddington. And electrification on the Uckfield line and Marshlink line with DC 750v 3rd Rail.
Far too sensible!
No mention of Salisbury-Romsey-Eastleigh/Redbridge which is normally 158/8s.
Would work in hand as units could charge batteries while they travel over the existing sections of 3rd rail. 3rd rail should be fitted in Salisbury Station most definitely
I was wondering this exact thing
We need fast runnning trains on the larger lines, which includes the line to Exeter. We need trains accelerating rapidly. We need a system robust to delays of one train, and with a high capacity. We need comfortable trains, that are also comfortable to drive. We need a network safe for people working on the track, or having to cross the track.
Taking all of this into account, some of the proposed intermediate solutions proposed will only give intermediate, or lets rather call them mediocre results. I believe that it will be necessary to first create a backbone of fully overhead- electrifying the mainline from London to Exeter.
Third rail is a legacy product, not to be extended. Battery operations are for short stretches.
I do wonder if another benefit of implementing traction batteries on existing 3rd rail EMUs may allow for a reduced peak load while on the (quite power limited) 3rd rail network, thereby potentially allowing for fewer or smaller substations to be used on new / renewed sections.
It can use some battery power when accelerating and thereby reduce the load. But if you have intermittent power then the power drain is surely higher as it must both power the train and charge the battery.
@@Talon5516-tx3ih True but surely if you link the power delivery to the charging system you can avoid it trying to charge while accelerating? Far from the most complex thing.
@@iman2341 That's not what I meant. On acceleration it draws power from the battery to lessen the load and/or accelerate faster - which is also good. But at cruising speed the train must draw more power than a simple electric train as it has to recharge. Compared to a fully electrified railway the power drain would be more peaky - i.e. it could be that several trains are charging and so the load is higher, but then it drops to zero as they're all running on battery. But I guess the acceleration phase is always going to require the most energy so that may be irrelevant. Also as batteries are not 100% efficient the partially electrified setup will require more energy overall.
Interesting though. A couple of times I've been in the Siemens Mireo B trains in SW Germany and of course as a passenger you notice absolutely nothing different when it's running on battery. It's just an electric train.
Maybe electrify from Basingstoke to Salisbury and from Southampton Central to Salisbury with DC 750v 3rd Rail. And from Reading to Basingstoke with DC 750v 3rd rail to Reading Green Park & AC 25kv OHL from Reading Green Park to Reading.
Third rail all the way from Basingstoke through Reading connecting to the Waterloo line. Provides an alternative route when embankment slides occur between Basingstoke and Woking.
In my opinion the 25kv overhead system is the only way forward. The West of England line should be treated as a mainline instead of some sleepy branch line.
Or just do what they did with Waterloo - Weymouth, and use diesel locos and trailer units.
Incompatible with the rest of the South Western network.
Also if you were listening it’s expensive and not viable for lower traffic lines
@@GooseWaffethere are areas when OHLE and 3rd rail coexist. I believe the main issue is immunisation of signalling systems.
I'd like to hear more precise detail before dismissing this proposal out of hand.
@andrewhotston983 Given the proposal is a 3rd rail version of what James Drumm's units on the Irish GSR did, just under a century ago, decrying a 1967 solution on grounds of it's age would be a bit rich ... but I would point out that the driving imperative in this case IS decarbonisation.
The GSR used a solution much as seen with new EV buses fitted with overhead connectors.
Most definitely. More dualling needed too.
The AC 25kv OHL should have been extended to Reading Green Park with a bay platform built for the Class 387 to terminate at Reading Green Park from Reading.
They could solve the issue of lower demand for their trunk services very easily; drop the prices!
The West of England Line is often very busy. It has been pretty crowded the last few times I have used it.
Lower demand where?
It’s also extremely reasonably priced, hence how busy it is
It’s cheaper to go via Salisbury to Exeter than to go with GWR.
Great programme as always, but I seriously wonder about the safety of new sections of third rail being switched off. I am very concerned about kids trying it to see if it is live, especially in areas where they have never had third rail electrification and therefore have not grown up with the dangers. I can see the merits of energising only when needed but I wonder if this will lead to more accidents not less. John
I agree. Turning it on and off clouds the issue. To add another system is potentially another fault waiting to happen.
Well, let's wait and see the full risk assessment and then we can form a view.
Are kids really that dumb?
Neil's got a great case and they have thought through this in a real business-like way in terms of getting the best return on investment. My fear is when it comes back under state control the dead hand of bureaucracy will kill it by a thousand cuts. A politician will take a random decision that you can't have the money for this, you can have some of the money for that, this one will need to be reviewed again . . . and the whole great plan will fall apart in spite of this really thorough ground-work.
Been mooted for Southern as well, Uckfield to Hurst Green and Ashford to Hastings (unless OHLE gets extended to Hastings for HS1)
Yes, the Waterloo to Exeter route is very often a nightmare of overcrowding. Yes, the 158/9 units are excellent trains and more comfortable and roomy than many more modern units. I would have thought that redeploying the HST Castle sets on the Salisbury line (when GWR finishes with them) would be a good bet - they offer more capacity than the 15x units and Salisbury depot already has diesel expertise. The idea of running battery driven trains from Basingstoke to Salisbury might be eco-friendly - but given that the line is mostly used by people travelling right through from London to Exeter with appreciable amounts of luggage, forcing every traveller to change at Salisbury (when at the moment about 50% of the trains run right through without a change) is not very passenger friendly.
I though about this too. Just remove one of the generators similar to what ScotRail did and they'll happily sit at 100mph with just the one MTU unit - maybe even have a battery installed as a replacement in one of the driving end cars instead. Or do what Chiltern did the some Mk3s. Possibly fit batteries under the DVT.
HSTs are old and need to be gone.
@EM-yk1dw Quite, they are very much life expired and it's nor really economically viable to keep them going. Plus why should they be replacing old trains with much older ones?
We tend to go West rather than East, although I note how the trains get nearer to WAT they fill and the last one we caught at CLJ for SHE (nine car) was already full and standing. Catching the late afternoon trains from EXD they are jammed by the time we leave EXC but by AXM there are far fewer on board. (Lots of students) Living near YVJ we get a good look at the trains (I need to stay in more, away from the rest of humanity I think!) and tbh most trains are not that busy at this point. The conclusion I draw is that most people do not go from WAT-EXD! (Don't let a politician near that statement as the conclusion that could be drawn is that so few tickets are sold for that journey, the line needs to be closed! )
'Most users go all the way from WAT - EXD?' is that correct? Judging by my observations the trains as they pass us (half-way SAL-EXD) are not necessarily that busy and we never have trouble getting a seat.
How many accidents happen on the third rail where death is by electrocution, at the moment? Have we any stats and how many miles of third rail are there?
Stop asking relevant questions.
I lived in the 3rd rail electrification area of the south of UK for six years 1957 to 1963. I never heard of any accidents, deaths or near misses with the 750v rail.
Subsequently, although living overseas since then, I have kept in touch with the railways of the UK through Rail Magazine. The only case was a girl who crossed the line at Bournemouth station about two or three years back, and was badly injured, but servived.She was then turned into a hero by the press and others instead of accepting that someone 15 years of age should have known it was dangerous. When I was 10, I knew the dangers of electricity!
Third rail deaths, must be very low in UK from way back until the present time, so what is going on here. I can never fathom out the authorities reluctance to extend 3rd rail where it is obvious it would improve the whole system. I have never heard of any problems at Merseyrail either!
@@physiocrat7143 Haha! Thanks, that made me chuckle.
The class 175 are up for grabs I believe?
Are they not heading to GWR or was that just one of those rumours?
Surely the fantastic class 755 Bi-Mode is the perfect option for the West of England Line? Run third rail from Waterloo to Worton Junction before running diesel down to Exeter.
The whole point of the exercise is to get rid of fossil fuel altogether. No diesel.
@rogerphelps9939 You could do that with a 755 however or variant which can eventually lose the diesel power generator cars once electrification is complete
@@rogerphelps9939 Which knowing SWR means they want "cheap" solutions. I.e we've got too many 701s so where can we shove them to keep the DFT happy. The arterios are completely sub standard for a route like London to Exeter.
Dreadful track bashers and the seats on plinths are a hazard.
@rogerphelps9939
In other words, borderline pointless, Railways are responsible for 0.7% of carbon emissions.
Bi-mode of third rail plus Diesel electric must have been thought of unless there's problems with the concept
Third rail sparks quite a lot, and the fuel tanks are under the train!
@@andrewhotston983fair point, the bi-modes in this area are 25kv overhead and seperate 'power car' (in middle of train) containg engines etc
Me I was wondering why you couldn't sacrifice some seats in the 455s for a couple of motor/generators or a motor and rack of batteries . Coupled with some sound deadening around the compressors and you might forget the 'new' bimodes are even older than what they replace . ( I did Wimbledon to Guildford on on once and felt a bit deafened so maybe just use them for Reading -Salisbury an the Southampton circle .)
No-one is going to install a diesel generator (new) on anything, let alone an EMU.
@@GreenSignals Except ... Oh no they're gone . Big pile of batteries it is then .
Hold on, Stadler FLIRTs, class 799s, both have Diesel genpacks . And batteries can go in later , I just don't want to give Musk the money right now.
We're right by the SAL-EXD line (SHE-YVJ) and the timing generally is pretty good. I like the 159's and find them comfortable and overall I'd 'mark' them highly. Coming 'up' is the pain as I would wager 5/1 that we'd get stuck at Pinhoe for several minutes. The joys of single line...
As for the decarbonising, frankly I'm going to be in trouble for this, but IMHO it's complete BS. Great Britain has 0.85% of the world's population. I think anyone can work out the result of the decarbonisation as a percentage of the world's output. However, I now read that carbon makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere - is that correct?
I agree - decarbonising is all cost and no benefit.
You have a lot of learning to do as regards global warming. It may well be true that GB has less than 1% of the world's population and only a small proportion of the total CO2 emissions but that is certainly not an excuse to do nothing. If everyone took your attitude civilisation would be doomed. As far as CO2 being just 0.04% of the atmosphere here is an experiment to try: take a litre of water and add 0.4 grams of strong food dye. Mix well. What do you notice? If that does not get you thinking along the right lines I suggest you ingest 50 or so paracetamol tablets, much less than 0.04% of your body mass. You may well not be able to report back, ever. The point is that CO2 is a very powerful greenhouse gas that works in tandem with water vapour to raise the Earth's temperature well above the -20 degrees C or so that it would be without it. The problem is that too much of it is incompatible with human civilisation as we know it.
@rogerphelps9939 We haven't "done nothing", though. We've wrecked our entire economy and energy security!
@@rogerphelps9939 Interesting Roger. I'm happy to be convinced that I'm wrong. I'd like to know, however, just what China and India are doing to reduce their carbon.
@@Beatlefan67 Google is your etc
All interesting stuff, especially for those of us on lines like the Uckfield Line - which has diesels running on electrified lines between Hurst Green and London Bridge.
I believe they have looked at adding batteries to the class 377s. Uckfield being within battery range of Hurst Green (just apparently). It’s rumoured the issue they found was running the new hybrid in multiples wasn’t going to work. Not sure why.
Incidentally there appears to be an assumption that today’s lower passenger numbers is going to remain for ever. Is that actually the case?
Class 450s with batteries going to exeter? I want to see that!
And Class 444 😂
@@Andrewjg_89hands off our 444's!
Maybe make some more 484s but three coaches or longer like 484/1
An alternative might be to add a hydrogen powered electric generator car in the middle. I have seen trial units being tested , maybe that would be a good way by just adding it in the middle of your excess stock.
Batteries belong in the scrapyard.
There is no alternative to Diesel-Electric currently but eventually alternative fuels will replace Diesel.
Pre-Covid capacity? Is rail not recovered by now?
It’s global Japan is similar
It’s specific to SWR because their model was so reliant on 9-5 south west London to central communing. With 3 day working now standard, SWR over passenger figures are down by around 35 percent from pre Covid. Overall industry I believe is about recovered now.
From my experience on crowded West of England Line trains, especially the 3 coach ones, I would say that it has.
Long distance, business travel, and weekend travel are all around 110% of before covid, shorter commutes are close to levels before covid, but longer commutes, e.g. Guildford or Basingstoke to London are down as most of these kinds of jobs have moved to 3days in office, 2 at home, so down around 35% as others have said, this gives an overall average of 95% or so
@@jamesnichols5163 They've reduced the Weymouth to London line down to 1 (slow) train an hour on Sundays in the summer when it's packed with tourists coming back from the beach. Absolutely ridiculous. It's full by the time it's got to Dorchester and people are standing in the aisles even when it's extended to 10 carriages (if you're lucky) at Bournemouth.
158s and 159s being retired meanwhile northern puts me on a 150 or a 156 if im lucky everyday to university
The cost of this, 15 seperate third rails section of 80 kilometers in total will cost a fortune, there is now way NR will pay for this.
It needs mps and councils support western Gateway Transport Board and Peninsula Transport Board support
OLE would be the most effective solution and way cheaper in the long run. Third rail is NOT inherently unsafe. DC repels, after all! The cheapest solution, in the short term, would be to run the EMU to Basingstoke with loco haulage onwards. There we are: sorted (for now).
Add a loco at Basingstoke? Right.
I fear you are being either whimsically nostalgic or just plain naughty!
The route needs an upgrade
We need the Exeter St Davids London to London Waterloo route upgrade with modern type inter city trains and catering needs restoration on the Exeter St Davids London Paddington Waterloo and London Waterloo to Weymouth and Portsmouth Harbour
Wilton Parkway needs to reopen
GWR still uses class 165,166,158,150,57,43,MK3. those are all old BREL trains
How about converting the 3rd rail network to bottom contact, would solve the safety issue?
What exactly is the safety issue?
@@physiocrat7143the general public
That would be massively expensive and you'd have to do very large chunks of the network all at once. If you're going to go down that route, you might as well switch to OHLE.
I will miss the 455s on SWR. Much better designed inside than the Desiros with their power point intruding on your leg room. Also never known one break down.
Same mate, as much as I don't want 701s replacing them sadly unless we get one into preservation then this is the last full year of the 455s...
I never broke down with a slammer in all my time that I worked with them, guard and driver, about 14 years at Bournemouth.
Ever since the 60's, London to Exeter through Taunton was 'the way to go', but if you have to, Salisbury is possible, but are you sure you want to? That thinking seems stuck in a lot of minds and once a fleet of every half hour Class 800's running on dual track are funded, the 'Cinderella' line will never get to the Ball!
I use to use this route to get to London, from Exeter when i was at University there. The only reason you use this line from Exeter all the way to London, is because it's cheaper (especially as you can use your network card on it). If the main GWR was cheaper you'd defintely just use that.
There is an elephant in the room that never seems to be acknowledged. Rail is already a very green transport option, even if it uses a diesel engine - compared to road. My fear is that by focusing too much on rail decarbonisation, we run the risk of adding extra cost, making rail less attractive and pushing traffic onto the roads. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Of course where opportunities arise, why not, but only if the costs are marginal. A much bigger carbon reduction would be achieved just by encouraging even a relatively small modal shift from road to rail, even if it's diesel powered. Those in charge seem incapable of seeing the bigger picture.
Just bring back locomotives. Swap out the milk floats locos with steam traction at Basingstoke. Ok a diseasel but I can dream.
I think intermittent electrification is one of the worst ideas to come out of the rail industry for many decades. It introduces a huge number of additional modes of failure, rendering rail services even less resilient than they are now.
This makes me sad. Appreciate Neil has to deal with the current political and financial climate but this shows a complete lack of ambition. If we’re serious about decarbonisation we need to plan for huge modal shift towards rail and other public transport/ active travel solutions. What now seems like a rural branch line could be transformed into a significant regional connection. 25KV AC is in my opinion the only sensible mid to long term solution. It makes no sense to cart around tonnes of batteries with a limited life expectancy. IIUC source materials for batteries are limited too so better to save them for applications which are difficult to electrify in other ways such as rural buses and cars/ taxis.
Funds saved from the cancellation of the ridiculous Stonehenge Tunnel could be put towards an upgrade of this line as well more local transport schemes. Electrification teams could work on this route and then move onto the line via Taunton or vice versa. A rolling programme of electrification will reduce unit costs and maintain skills.
Sorry for the rant.
Thanks Green Signals people. Love your work.
Install OHLE and make the service unreliable. Routes with light traffic are not worth electrifying.
I think we'd all like to see what you've described but it's not a pragmatic option sadly
Cheers and thanks for your kind words and SuperThanks. It is very much appreciated.
Why not ask other operators of catering on the route to provide a service not just SS P
Europe electrify lines without any fuss why is it such a fiasco here?
Lack of catering on the routes abig issue for passengers
The 159 units are vastly superior to any newer stock, including the dreadful Hitachis on the competing GW route. Unless there is incipient metal fatigue, they need only to be re-engined, or converted to EMUs or battery or locomotive powered sets.
The main difficulty with the route is shortage of passing spaces west of Salisbury; surely this should get priority?
It is time to drop the decarbonisation fad. Railways account for 0.7% of carbon emissions. It isn't even worth thinking about.
Supposedly there very much is cracking problems with the 158/159's and has been from new. Very much garden shed engineering, though they are nice trains.
You can only patch something up so much and their probably near their design life.
@dglcomputers1498
I am not surprised. Aluminium bodyshells are a mistake. I suspect the new Hitachi trains will even not last out their design live. I was in 800 series trains last week - the whole bodyshell shakes like a jelly, which is exactly how to induce metal fatigue on aluminum.
The line to Exeter needs to be operated the same way as Waterloo to Weymouth when electrification was only as far as Bournemouth.
A new generation of stock is needed, with correct design parameters. The 800 series are all wrong, and we need to go for stainless steel bodyshells which have a 60 year life.
Replacement of the the 158/159 fleet is an opportunity to break the trend where each generation of trains is worse than what they replace.
Carbon dioxide is the gas of life, without it there is no life.
I agree. I also believe that gas, oil along with coal was natures creation to provide humans with energy to run our lives and keep us warm.
I wonder how long it will be until one of these on-board train batteries ignites, with spectacular and potentially fatal consequences?
Like the diesel trains that ignite also!
@@GooseWaffe We've only had one 159 go up slightly in their 35years. Pre-heater in Clapham yard. Didn't do much damage though.
They won''t. New battery chemistries make the possibility of spontaneous combustion extremely remote. Even now the incidence of electric car fires is something like 50 times less than in equivalent fossil fuelled cars and in future it will be even lower.
@@GooseWaffe Diesel is VERY difficult to ignite and relatively easy to extinguish. A battery fire is effectively impossible to extinguish, and is FAR more intense.
@@kristinajendesen7111 free bonfire!
Class 159s are "venerable". What does that make me???
I'm a heritage human.
I still enjoy travelling on the SWT class 158/159’s they are still the most comfortable trains to travel on. They may be a bit noisy but I would rather have that than something like a 166 or a Flying Cucumber on the GWR network…
2 questions.
could the 159 move over to TFW to match the 158's? instead of scrapping them keep them and scrap the 150's
why do you always use gwr when talking about the battery trains but not the already in service 231's tfw?
I understand there are places where the 158'/9s can't go, I believe a mixture of dwell times and bits overhanging. Plus 150"s are better suited to stop start routes given their door and interior layout.
nice hear the RSSB has reversed their tone on 3rd rail, it seemed rather silly that operators were content to sit on their cost+ mode of operation and just let commuters eat the cost of diesel rather than use cost effective modes of electrification. 3rd rail is safe if you're used to it. yes it has risks, but what doesn't? burning diesel has massive risks in the future as climate change continues to hammer the country with increasingly severe storms
But surely this guy isn't ultimately responsible for anything to do with track, electrification, trees etc - he's simply the liaison with Network Rail. And who's to say SWR will even be holding the contract in a few years.
I take it you didn’t watch the whole video including the part where they mentioned working with TfL so when GBR takes over the project continues?
@@GooseWaffe Considering the first thing Labour did when they got into power was to scrap the Restoring Your Railway scheme, can you really see them giving GBR the budget needed to continue projects like this?
@@TigerTailsTV oh absolutely not but nice to dream 😂
This will not happen, no way at all.
7:00 this is honestly utterly stupid and full of lies. What do you mean traveling is still at pre pandemic levels?? Every time I went to Waterloo it’s always rush hour 24/7 shouldn’t you be using those trains (aka the 450) to strength 8 car trains to 12 then??
And what do you mean using batteries on 450?? Do you know how long between stations the line is. 3 hours is no joke and even if you charge a battery at every station it won’t reach enough. This is more like a cheap way to do so and it’s not funny SWR. Typical first group 🙄😒 🤦♂️.
At this point just order bi-mode trains that can run 3rd rails and diesel. Or here is a better option. Modify 450 to have AC and do OHLE from baskingtoke to Exeter.
Battery for motive power on such a long line is not an ideal plan and we should just get trains. Make the cab control and all to be similar to the 158/159 and there you go it’s pretty much no new fleet once you fully replace the 158/159. It’s not that hard. SWR have the money.
Please don't replace the 158/9's. They are far more comfortable and reliable than new trains, with their awful seats, harsh lighting, noise and poor ride qualities. The TfW CAF's are a joke, they creak and rattle, the bogies chatter and clank, just awful. Likewise the Hitachi 800 series on GWR, just miserable on a long journey.
I fear that are approaching life expiry. They may look ok superficially but......
Here in the US. Third rail go ahead we need more population control
Ive never understood why a lot of our trains are completly flat/vertical at the front and rear, we've known for how many years that aero dynamics play an important role in efficiency for how many hundreds of years now? It'd be like trying to run a marathon holding a door up in front of you😂🤦♂️😂
Talking specifically about the 158/159, it's because they have gangways at the end of the trains allowing you to pass from one unit to another when they are coupled up.
For trains like the 701, 707 etc which are new trains with no gangways, i have not a clue. A guess is that the trains operate on generally low speed lines (under 100mph) and so the additional cost to change the design of the train to something like the 395 or 800 series is more than what would be saved in efficency in the long term.
As explained by Maverick Hunter Daniel, Gangways at the ends of trains have ups and downs. Postbox syndrome and being able to move between units.
Catenary is far more sustainable and straight forward than battery electric. Look farther to the future. Don't get caught up in innovation being the most logical solution. Train use is going to become much more prevalent. Personal motor vehicles (cars/SUVs) will be phased out as they cannot actually be produced with zero carbon emissions, meaning medium and long distance travel will try solely on rail.
So everyone is going to have their own personal railroad station outside their house?
Ban personal road vehicles and you no longer have a functioning society, and definitely not one that could support a rail network.
I think you'll find batteries become much more simple than OLE (catenary) and much, much cheaper and quicker to install. No one wants unsightly wires all over the place, especially not in rural areas. Batteries with islands of power in stations makes absolute sense for rural lines where the journeys aren't long. Mainlines should be OLE where possible.
Installing catenaries is expensive (especially due to our history and failure to run with a rolling programme over the last 30 years), and on a line that is mostly only used by 1 train per hour, the cost is high for the gain - and especially when one of the barriers to rolling out electrification faster is a lack of staff and physical resources, a line like WOE is hard to prioritise over other lines that are used more intensively. Discontinuous third rail with batteries is probably the most cost-effective way to decarbonise this line within the timeframe needed before the current fleet needs to be replaced.
@@andrewhotston983 Sound's crazy right? Would it surprise you to know that prior to WW2 most households in Britain and the USA did not have a car. Ask an old person if their parents lived in a functional society and the answer is yes, society worked before everyone drove cars. Buses and trains moved people pre-suburbanization, and now we can rebuild our suburbs to have tram and light rail access. Micromobility (most familiar to people witnessing post WW2 Europe and Japan) included bicycles, motorized bicycles, and tiny bubble/microcars to journey shorter distances, and now we do have even more viable very sustainable electrified micromobility. You only have to look two decades ago to China to see a very functional society operating largely without cars. The physics of Climate Crisis aren't going to bargain with us and grant us permission to kick the problem down the road for another generation or two, nor is society going to starve to death so that we can expend rapidly shrinking carbon emissions on motor cars, ICE or EV. We'll have a massive job decarbonizing all aspects of our modern life, and you've just not been paying close attention or haven't been well informed by leadership about the big changes coming.
And before you try to rationalize eternal car use with the argument that people don't want to or can't all ride bicycles, again, our opinions on the privilege to operate cars isn't cogent. So we're going to have to step up and retain mobility with sustainable means that don't require massive amounts of emissions to produce and operate. I can travel 50 miles easily on a $2000 e-bike, but since that takes a long time, more likely I'll prefer to travel 2-10 miles by bike and ride a train for the balance of longer trips. People with disabilities can and do ride recumbent tadpole e-trikes. I'm not saying this won't require a great deal of compromise. It will. But Climate Crisis is comparable to a World War that we know will not end for generations. We certainly can't slash our emissions to zero perpetually building battery electric cars/SUVs that currently require 17-39 tons CO2e emissions just to build.
BTW, Britain is already in a much better position than many countries including the USA. But we're not anywhere close to having legitimate plans for zero carbon emissions living.
@@andrewhotston983'Railroad' - Must be American. We have a more integrated transport network in Europe. Buses do need to be brought back to remote locations and subsidised in many cases and if possible old lines reopened. Where the trackbeds have been built upon they could run tram-trains that go into the road for short sections.
At one point in the UK you couldn't walk more than about 5 miles without tripping over a railway line. Many were closed over the years, especially industrial lines such as those to the collieries but the most devastating closures were from 1964 onwards.
Has anything been said on what the situation is with regards to the CDL situation with WCR and their MK1's and early MK2 coaches as it's almost breaking point now.