British Railway Operations

[owlsroost]

QUOTE: the situation in britain was such were br was busted up and different groups were asset stripping br components.the result being br service has suffered badly.

Chuck,

The franchisees (passenger train operating companies) in the UK can't asset strip - they don't own any of the assets - the trains, stations and depots are leased to them, the track and signalling is owned and operated by a state owned company.

Generally train services have improved (sometimes considerably) since privatisation - the big problem is that it's costing the taxpayer a lot more in subsidies.

Connex was one of the worst franchisees, which eventually resulted in it being stripped of the South Eastern franchise - so you have my sympathy.

Tony

[Tulyar15]

Some coal traffic is moved in containers - to make it easier to send it on to places that aren't rail served.

At the present I gather most of the container ports in Britain are working to full capacity. The government rejected a proposal for a second container port at Southampton but is considering a proposal for a new container port on the Thames Estuary in Essex. Other possibilities include new terminals near Glasgow or Liverpool.

As a result of Ireland also being in the EU a lot of trade between Ireland and Europe passes thru Britain. I gather Holyhead, the main ferryport for Ireland is now the second busiest port in Britain though container trains no longer run there and all the freight passing thru Holyhead goes by road - only the aluminium plant there generates any rail freight.

[Anonymous]

I will go allong with the 75 MPH top speed for coal trains, esspecially as thats the top speed of the HHA's (?) that form many of the long haul Anglo Scottish coal trains, although the 2 axle wagons do seem to be getting more use and it's not often you see a coal train with fewer than 21 4 axle wagons any more. Also on the West Coast Main Line, class 92 electric engines have recently been tried on coal trains so 75 mph means 75 mph. As for the 2 axle wagons they have been resprung so as to do 60mph loaded or empty.

[Anonymous]

i work as a conductor on the mbta south side commuter rail ops. we were formerly employees of amtrak but the contract was let out in the summer of 2003 w/the contract going to a consortium of connex bombardier and a consulting group run by a former gm at the mbta....the irony of this is that connex had their franchise to operate in britain a week before they got the contract here. they (connex) are a for profit company and are not maintaing the fleet here up to snuff. politics i guess. the situation in britain was such were br was busted up and different groups were asset stripping br components.the result being br service has suffered badly. passenger trains dont make money never had never will. the companies who are running these ops are concerned w/their bottom line. they have no business running these entities.

[owlsroost]

The original Foster Yeoman/Hanson class 59's are geared for 60 mph top speed, the later National Power (now EWS) version is geared for 75 mph - according to my stock book.

The only 'freight' we run at more than 75 mph is mail and parcels, but that uses passenger-type equipment to run up to 100 mph (and only a very small amount of that traffic still moves by train).

Even if you provided enough power and braking to run 100 mph heavy freight, the costs of fuel, maintenance and (particularly) the track damage from 25 tonne axle loads would make it a very expensive proposition.

As far as I know the hopper doors are operated automatically during unloading - the long hand lever on the 2-axle wagon operates the handbrake.

Tony

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel

The Foster Yeoman stone-trains were able to run at 100 mph

No they don't. The GM class 59 locomotives aren't geared for that kind of speed. Further more they have nowhere near the power to move a heavy stone train that fast. They are only geared for 75 mph. With the long wheelbase hoppers and a standard weight train they can run at 45 mph. loaded and 60 mph. empty. Braking is what sets the train speed. Without special brakes you can not stop a train that heavy in standard signalling overlaps.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by martin.knoepfel

The Foster Yeoman stone-trains were able to run at 100 mph

[:)] Every weekday, the *rock train* rumbles through my town with about 100 cars of big, pink rocks at about 10 mph.

[martin.knoepfel]

The Foster Yeoman stone-trains were able to run at 100 mph

[Anonymous]

They unload from hopper doors underneath - the train runs slowly through the unloading area and coal falls out onto a conveyor belt. I'm not sure whether the doors need someone to pull a handle and open them or if they're automated, though I'd guess the former.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton

These are the 2-axle coal wagons that I see mostly;
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/wagons/1-100/t355443.jpg

The newer 4 axle ones are replacing these on some routes where clearances are not so much of an issue;
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/wagons/901-1000/370xxx.jpg

In looking at the British coal wagons, the word that comes to mind is *cute* How are these unloaded?
Hugh: your signature line says you are "generally a lurker" I wish you'd post more. You're posts are interesting and appreciated.

Thanks

[Hugh Jampton]

These are the 2-axle coal wagons that I see mostly;
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/wagons/1-100/t355443.jpg

The newer 4 axle ones are replacing these on some routes where clearances are not so much of an issue;
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/wagons/901-1000/370xxx.jpg

[owlsroost]

British coal trains these days are mostly comprised of 15-20 4-axle 100 tonne (glw) hopper wagons hauled by a single 3200hp class 66 diesel. These can run up to 75mph, but I suspect they are limited to 60mph or less on secondary routes because of their 25 tonne axle loading.

I think there are still some services worked with older 2-axle 45 tonne hopper wagons - these are restricted to 60 or 45 mph.

See http://www.ews-railway.co.uk/services/services_bulk_coal.asp and http://www.freightliner.co.uk/heavyhaul/coal.asp

Freight train speed is 45-75 mph, passenger 75-125 mph (generally).

Tony

[Murphy Siding]

I'm trying to envision a British coal train. Our coal trains would have 3-4 big diesels of perhaps 10,000 to 12,000 H.P. pulling 100 or so 265,000# ( or more ) cars of coal. This must really differ from a British coal train. Are coal trains, and freight trains in general, pushed hard to run at passenger train speeds?

Thanks

[Anonymous]

Before the tunnel, there was trade, but sending rail cars was difficult due to the need to use the train ferries. There was even a "Boat Train" which used sleepers built to the UK loading gauge and travelled overnight via the ferry - passengers would depart London, be shunted onto the ferry in Dover, and land at Dunkirk (where the most recent train ferry linkspan still survives though it's now out of use and the rails have been partially tarmaced over to give access to the new road linkspan alongside it - I have a rather poor photo of it taken with a camera phone from the deck of a Norfolk Line RoRo ferry this summer if anyone is interested?). I think there were one or maybe two sailings per day of freight. Interestingly the final train ferries built for the route were designed to be multi-purpose so that they would still be useful in the event of a tunnel opening - I think the old Sea France Nord Pas de Calais (the last train ferry used on the route) is still running as a freight ferry. Specially designed rail cars were built for the ferry services - they had to be small enough to run in the UK loading gauge and usually displayed an anchor symbol on the data panel to show that they were equipped with the required tie-down points for ferry use.

We too see an increasing quantity of Chinese-made goods coming in, though I think this is mainly by ship and then either truck or train from the port rather than through the tunnel. I'd guess that continuing around Europe to the UK is cheaper than leaving the cargo in Italy and sending it on by rail, though I'm not sure of the economics of that - my main knowledge of container operations comes from watching ships whenever possible!

[Murphy Siding]

Tulyar15 : Thanks. That was very interesting. I take it that the chunnel has been helpful in building trade with continental Europe. Before the chunnel was built, did Britain do this much trading with,for example, Italy? Or. has the chunnel accelerated it?
My reference to China was about cheap consumer goods coming in containers. In the USA, we're flooded with *stuff* from China. This *stuff* makes up a lot of rail traffic.

Thanks

[beaulieu]

I knew about the stone traffic I just drew a blank when making my list [banghead]
There would be a lot more traffic through the Channel tunnel if the eastern portal was just barely in Belgium, not that they approve of Open Access, but it is easier to twist their arms.

[Tulyar15]

There is quite a bit of out bound container traffic too. After all 50% of Britain's trade is with the rest of the EU. Of the freight trains that leave Britain thru the Channel tunnel, the percentage going to each of our neighbours is roughly:-

France - 30%
Italy - 30%
Spain - 25%
others - 15%

Generally as a nation Britain imports raw materials and fuel and exports manufactured goods. In some cases car manufacturers (or rather their logistics contractors who use EWS or the other freight co's as sub-contractors) managed to get good use out of their wagons by using them to take cars made in Britain to the continent and returning with cars in the other direction. As an example, when the Chunnel first opened the wagons used to ship Rover cars to Italy from Birmingham to Turin would return from Turin to Bristol with Fiat cars - thus the only empty mileage was the 90 miles from Bristol to Birmingam to complete the triangle.

Some years ago when I lived in Hull (one of Britain's main east coast ports) I went to a talk by the harbour master. He said that in the 19th century the port developed to handle exports of coal to Russia and imports of grain from Russia. But now its the other way round!

As for goods from China, there's been talk of some passenger operators buying cheap DMU's from China but that seens to have gone off the boil. The new commuter trains for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link are being built in Japan; these will provide a 140mph commuter service from London to the Kent Coast towns of Ramsgate, Dover and Folkestone via the Channel Tunnel Rail Link and will halve journey times.

[Murphy Siding]

Is all the container traffic goods coming into Britain from China? Or, does it come from other sources as well? How about out-bound container traffic? Is there any of that to speak of?

Thanks

[owlsroost]

There is also some internal intermodal and merchandise traffic, mostly run on contract for logistics companies e.g. Daventry (about 70 miles NW of London) to the Glasgow area, but it's a very small amount in comparison to that moved by road.

There's also a fair amount of stone traffic from quarries in the East Midlands and the Peak District.

Tony

[Tulyar15]

and some timber traffic in Scotland. Rail freight is however growing .

There's also a lot of stone traffic moved from the west country to London and SE England for building projects. One of the quarry companies, Foster Yeoman, was the first company to have its own trains running on the network, albeit crewed by BR staff. They bought the first EMD locomotives to be used in Britain, the class 59's.

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed



Probably 95% of the population of Britain, excluding Northern Ireland, live in the area between the South Coast and the Scottish Central Lowlands. I would imagine that the longest "as the crow flies" line you could draw within that landmass would be about 650 miles. Probably over 99% of manufacturing and production goes on within that area too.

For internal traffic, therefore, there is no time or money incentive to develop bi-modal flows. The road network in Britain is comprehensive and, for the most part, toll-free so a trailer setting off from, say, Plymouth in the South West of the country might reach Dundee in the North East within 16 hours, which means that only two drivers would be required.


.

Given the information above, what freight DOES move consistently by rail? It sounds like more ( or most? ) freight moves by truck?.

Thanks

Coal is the biggest source of traffic, with domestic production now very small in England most of it comes from Scotland mainly the area SW of Glasgow. This gives a decent length of haul for the railways. A lot of coal is now imported, with most of the coal fired power plants not located near the ports the railways get a decent haul from this. Major ports for coal imports are at Immingham on the East Coast. Hunterston, just west of Glasgow. And Avonmouth just north of Bristol. The next biggest
source of traffic is Maritime Containers, large container ports are at Southampton on the English Channel, and Felixstowe on the North Sea. Smaller Container terminals are at Tilbury on the Thames River east of London, and at Liverpool. Other products hauled are Iron Ore, Finished Steel, Autos, Paper, China Clay, and some Chemicals and Petroleum.

[martin.knoepfel]

To be honest, one has to admit not only the French use power-approval as a method to limit open access. The German authorities are very difficult, too.

Only a few months ago, Connex, a company hauling passenger and freight trains in several European countries, wanted to run the first open-access-train in France. Members of French unions sat on the rails to prevent the trains from departing the yard. Finally, the French police carried them away. The unions argue that Connex' engineers are not sufficiently trained. However, you need an engineer's licence to run a train, and I never heard that Connex runs unsafe trains. I have often heard complaints that Connex passengers trains are not clean enough in the interior and that the rolling-stock is often old and would need being refurbished.

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Simon Reed



Probably 95% of the population of Britain, excluding Northern Ireland, live in the area between the South Coast and the Scottish Central Lowlands. I would imagine that the longest "as the crow flies" line you could draw within that landmass would be about 650 miles. Probably over 99% of manufacturing and production goes on within that area too.

For internal traffic, therefore, there is no time or money incentive to develop bi-modal flows. The road network in Britain is comprehensive and, for the most part, toll-free so a trailer setting off from, say, Plymouth in the South West of the country might reach Dundee in the North East within 16 hours, which means that only two drivers would be required.


.

Given the information above, what freight DOES move consistently by rail? It sounds like more ( or most? ) freight moves by truck?.

Thanks

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding

QUOTE: Originally posted by beaulieu

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

I think EWS have finally got the go-ahead to start an open access operation in France and class 66 diesel locos have now been cleared for operation there. In addition the class 92 elecric locos intended to pull the Euro sleeper trains are currently idle so EWS could use these too.

Yes, EWS International have their French license now, the press release is on their website. However EMD' s Class 66s are not yet approved for use in France, so EWS have leased 4 Vossloh G1206 locomotives to get things started. It is rumoured that one of these locomotives has been brought through the tunnel to conduct Driver familiarization at Dollands Moor. They can't go beyond Eurotunnel limits since they aren't cleared for Network Rail. Regarding the Class 92s it might be too difficult to get them cleared for operation on on French Rails as they cannot go beyond Eurotunnel limits for now on the French side. EWS has a surplus of Class 92s with a number of them in storage needing only minor repairs. The French make it very difficult to get power approved as a way of limiting Open Access, fortunately for Vossloh, SNCF Fret had leased a batch of the G1206 locomotives to cover a shortage of heavy trip freight locomotives pending the delivery of new locomotives from Altsom/Vossloh so they couldn't easily deny other operators from using that model. In the case of the Class 66 EMD wants the locomotive cleared for France and will provide technical and financial help to get it done.

Small question: I know that SNCF is the abbreviation for the French National Railway System, but what does Fret, at the end mean? Are the actions of the French, as described above, for the purpose of protecting their State-owned system from foreign competition?

Thanks

Absolutely! the French are very bad Europeans, they always ignore EU law when it suits them. For instance at the moment they're illegally subsidising their fisherman and as for the ban on British beef...

What Brussels needs is not more powers, but more capability to enforec existing EU legislation.

Mind you with all the riots going on in France right now perhaps its on the verge of collapse.

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding


Small question: I know that SNCF is the abbreviation for the French National Railway System, but what does Fret, at the end mean? Are the actions of the French, as described above, for the purpose of protecting their State-owned system from foreign competition?

Thanks

Fret is french for Freight. [:D][:D][:D]

[Murphy Siding]

QUOTE: Originally posted by beaulieu

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

I think EWS have finally got the go-ahead to start an open access operation in France and class 66 diesel locos have now been cleared for operation there. In addition the class 92 elecric locos intended to pull the Euro sleeper trains are currently idle so EWS could use these too.

Yes, EWS International have their French license now, the press release is on their website. However EMD' s Class 66s are not yet approved for use in France, so EWS have leased 4 Vossloh G1206 locomotives to get things started. It is rumoured that one of these locomotives has been brought through the tunnel to conduct Driver familiarization at Dollands Moor. They can't go beyond Eurotunnel limits since they aren't cleared for Network Rail. Regarding the Class 92s it might be too difficult to get them cleared for operation on on French Rails as they cannot go beyond Eurotunnel limits for now on the French side. EWS has a surplus of Class 92s with a number of them in storage needing only minor repairs. The French make it very difficult to get power approved as a way of limiting Open Access, fortunately for Vossloh, SNCF Fret had leased a batch of the G1206 locomotives to cover a shortage of heavy trip freight locomotives pending the delivery of new locomotives from Altsom/Vossloh so they couldn't easily deny other operators from using that model. In the case of the Class 66 EMD wants the locomotive cleared for France and will provide technical and financial help to get it done.

Small question: I know that SNCF is the abbreviation for the French National Railway System, but what does Fret, at the end mean? Are the actions of the French, as described above, for the purpose of protecting their State-owned system from foreign competition?

Thanks

[beaulieu]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

I think EWS have finally got the go-ahead to start an open access operation in France and class 66 diesel locos have now been cleared for operation there. In addition the class 92 elecric locos intended to pull the Euro sleeper trains are currently idle so EWS could use these too.

Yes, EWS International have their French license now, the press release is on their website. However EMD' s Class 66s are not yet approved for use in France, so EWS have leased 4 Vossloh G1206 locomotives to get things started. It is rumoured that one of these locomotives has been brought through the tunnel to conduct Driver familiarization at Dollands Moor. They can't go beyond Eurotunnel limits since they aren't cleared for Network Rail. Regarding the Class 92s it might be too difficult to get them cleared for operation on on French Rails as they cannot go beyond Eurotunnel limits for now on the French side. EWS has a surplus of Class 92s with a number of them in storage needing only minor repairs. The French make it very difficult to get power approved as a way of limiting Open Access, fortunately for Vossloh, SNCF Fret had leased a batch of the G1206 locomotives to cover a shortage of heavy trip freight locomotives pending the delivery of new locomotives from Altsom/Vossloh so they couldn't easily deny other operators from using that model. In the case of the Class 66 EMD wants the locomotive cleared for France and will provide technical and financial help to get it done.

[owlsroost]

Beaulieu explained the Eurotunnel situation quite well - I strongly suspect that what the French shareholders are after is for the French government to bail them out, but the Anglo-French treaty which provides the legal basis for the tunnel might prevent that without agreement from both sides.

Eurotunnel doesn't actually *own* the tunnel - it has a concession from the two governments to construct, operate and maintain it up to 2086.

There was no government financing of the construction, but the railways (originally BR and SNCF) pay a 'minimum usage charge' to Eurotunnel (up to November 2006) which is effectively a goverment subsidy.

Tony

[Murphy Siding]

If I'm reading this correctly, the tunnel is owned by a company with some financing/subsidizing from both countries? How would you deal with the two countries having seemingly different views on what should be done? Yikes!
Thanks

[owlsroost]

QUOTE: I have not yet heard anything about the future of the Eurostar-trainsets after completion of the high-speed-link between Folkestone and London.IMHO they are not yet at the end of their useful life and could be used to offer high-speed through-trains from Paris to places north of London.

The Eurostar trainsets will continue to provide the services - they are the only passenger trains allowed to run through the tunnel (they are only about 11 years old and are currently being refurbished I think). It also means that in the event of disruption on the new high-speed line they can still run on the 'old' routes to/from London.

The bulk of the fleet cannot run north of London, but there are a small number of (shorter, technically different) 'Regional Eurostar' trains which can. These have never been used for their intended purpose (some are currently hired to GNER for purely domestic London-Leeds services, but this will end soon), so it's these trains which would be used for any north of London - Paris services.

QUOTE: SBB Cargo's Re620 (Re 6/6) locomotives are rated at 7.8 MW and BLS Class Re 465 Bo-Bo locos are rated at 7.0 MW

Thanks for the correction - the claim is on the Eurotunnel web site, but I had a feeling it wasn't accurate (although the 7MW Eurotunnel locos appear to have very marginally more tractive effort than the Re620, so maybe this is the basis for the claim ?)

The Eurotunnel financial woes are mostly due to traffic projections being too optimistic, price competition from the ferries and the tunnel costing far more to build than the original estimates. Things are likely to come to a head when the guaranteed access payments for freight and passenger trains end sometime in 2006 (effectively a government subsidy to Eurotunnel). Eurotunnel would like to re-negotiate it's huge debt repayments but the banks basically hold most of the cards, so they may well just wait until it defaults on the debt repayments and take control anyway.

Tony