whoshotjimmi
Well-Known Member
White Heather
Please do not get me wrong. I would like to see services on the line upgraded with LBA getting a good old whack at the integrated transport. However, any work that is to be done has to be sensible. And by sensible, I mean cost effective. And by cost effective, I mean value for money.
With regards to the 3rd rail system. The southern railway was first electrified many many years ago using private money. The method of electrification was chosen by the southern railway company. At the time, it was the most reliable source of electrical supply to the railways. This (750v DC) became the standard for the southern region. However, this type of electrical supply has many disadvantages (weather, high speed running etc) which is why British Railways went in a different direction once electrification in other parts of the country began in earnest.
For many years, the policy of DfT etc has been to electrify using, the now standard, 25kV AC overhead. Further 3rd rail is only to be employed on lines that already connect into a 3rd rail network (such as the southern region and Merseyrail). Non standard systems such as Woodhead (1500v DC) and Manchester - Bury (1200v DC) were closed as soon as was possible. What is essentially being spoken about with regards to the Harrogate line is a completely non standard system. The 3rd rail system would be wholly unique. The added cost of overhead wires in the bramhope tunnel etc would be massively overshadowed by the extra cost of converting trains to the non standard system and creating specialist equipment, depots and jobs to enable these trains to run and be serviced - not to mention the extra cost of replacing these non standard trains when, inevitably, they will be life expired. Just look at the issues faced by Merseyrail now they are trying to replace their rolling stock. The problem, in that particular case, is not the 3rd rail system but the size of the tunnels they run in. No manufacturer currently offers anything of the correct size. Nor is there any suitable rolling stock on the network to replace them. As a result, a whole new design of rolling stock will have to be built just for the one network. Very expensive, very inefficient. A classic case of short term success vs long term stability (as a Leeds fan, you should know all about this).
The people who are most behind this plan are the business people of Harrogate who need better access to the rest of the country. Unfortunately, they are not rail experts and they are not able to properly appreciate why the system they are calling for is not good for the country. It may help Harrogate in the short term, but the long term burden to the state would be huge. It is far more efficient to spend a little bit more now and give the line 25kV AC overhead and already have the remainder of the infrastructure at Leeds and a steady supply of cascaded trains from the South East. Remember, these same people are blocking the conversion of the line to light rail (and the prospect of 10 trams an hour and a link to LBA) so they can keep their one service a day to London, so they are not exactly the best people to look for when it comes to the future direction of the line. Indeed, none of the rail organisations (SRA, DfT, Network Rail etc) have put any time or money into the scheme. They are the ones in the know and, I suspect, even if a large amount of private money suddenly becomes available, have already put it to bed.
I would like to refer to the way that you have so vehemently defended terminal works at LBA and suggest that you adopt a similar approach to this particular project, namely that all work has to be done in moderation and with regards to what is available now and in the future. To build a system like this now would be like building a new terminal with airbridges at every gate when Ryanair is the only airline who show any interest in operating there - are you listening Alicante?! The product you end up with is fabulous, but completely useless.
Above all, the main problem is whether money actually exists to do anything to this line at all. I firmly believe that, with the right management and public and private sector cooperation, something can be done with the line. Broadly speaking, they are not far off coming up with an excellent product - elements of the scheme are fabulous. But until they all sit down and get sensible about it, it is as far away as British Airways basing a fleet of 747's at Yeadon.
Please do not get me wrong. I would like to see services on the line upgraded with LBA getting a good old whack at the integrated transport. However, any work that is to be done has to be sensible. And by sensible, I mean cost effective. And by cost effective, I mean value for money.
With regards to the 3rd rail system. The southern railway was first electrified many many years ago using private money. The method of electrification was chosen by the southern railway company. At the time, it was the most reliable source of electrical supply to the railways. This (750v DC) became the standard for the southern region. However, this type of electrical supply has many disadvantages (weather, high speed running etc) which is why British Railways went in a different direction once electrification in other parts of the country began in earnest.
For many years, the policy of DfT etc has been to electrify using, the now standard, 25kV AC overhead. Further 3rd rail is only to be employed on lines that already connect into a 3rd rail network (such as the southern region and Merseyrail). Non standard systems such as Woodhead (1500v DC) and Manchester - Bury (1200v DC) were closed as soon as was possible. What is essentially being spoken about with regards to the Harrogate line is a completely non standard system. The 3rd rail system would be wholly unique. The added cost of overhead wires in the bramhope tunnel etc would be massively overshadowed by the extra cost of converting trains to the non standard system and creating specialist equipment, depots and jobs to enable these trains to run and be serviced - not to mention the extra cost of replacing these non standard trains when, inevitably, they will be life expired. Just look at the issues faced by Merseyrail now they are trying to replace their rolling stock. The problem, in that particular case, is not the 3rd rail system but the size of the tunnels they run in. No manufacturer currently offers anything of the correct size. Nor is there any suitable rolling stock on the network to replace them. As a result, a whole new design of rolling stock will have to be built just for the one network. Very expensive, very inefficient. A classic case of short term success vs long term stability (as a Leeds fan, you should know all about this).
The people who are most behind this plan are the business people of Harrogate who need better access to the rest of the country. Unfortunately, they are not rail experts and they are not able to properly appreciate why the system they are calling for is not good for the country. It may help Harrogate in the short term, but the long term burden to the state would be huge. It is far more efficient to spend a little bit more now and give the line 25kV AC overhead and already have the remainder of the infrastructure at Leeds and a steady supply of cascaded trains from the South East. Remember, these same people are blocking the conversion of the line to light rail (and the prospect of 10 trams an hour and a link to LBA) so they can keep their one service a day to London, so they are not exactly the best people to look for when it comes to the future direction of the line. Indeed, none of the rail organisations (SRA, DfT, Network Rail etc) have put any time or money into the scheme. They are the ones in the know and, I suspect, even if a large amount of private money suddenly becomes available, have already put it to bed.
I would like to refer to the way that you have so vehemently defended terminal works at LBA and suggest that you adopt a similar approach to this particular project, namely that all work has to be done in moderation and with regards to what is available now and in the future. To build a system like this now would be like building a new terminal with airbridges at every gate when Ryanair is the only airline who show any interest in operating there - are you listening Alicante?! The product you end up with is fabulous, but completely useless.
Above all, the main problem is whether money actually exists to do anything to this line at all. I firmly believe that, with the right management and public and private sector cooperation, something can be done with the line. Broadly speaking, they are not far off coming up with an excellent product - elements of the scheme are fabulous. But until they all sit down and get sensible about it, it is as far away as British Airways basing a fleet of 747's at Yeadon.
Nevertheless, the fact that the council were for it, may give LBA more of a fighting change for one to be built, if someone will operate on it.
