Reader Comments:

Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.

• Geoff Kerr, Todmorden

  The DfT needs to ask railfreight operators if they are interested in using electric traction. Currently there is little interest. either because of the traction change that is needed to operate off the electrified network or because of the higher access charges they pay to use electric locos.
  
  If operators continue to be wedded to diesels, much of the planned work could end up being a white elephant.

• Paul, Cumbria

  I am sure if the Government had a nnounced that every single line in the country would be electrified during the next control period someone (probably with a beard) would have found something to whinge about!

• Chris Reynell, Longstock, Hampshire.

  If rail passengers have to pay for rail upgrades, does this mean road users will pay for their infrastructure too?
  
  Certainly not! "Motorists" are highly privileged and subsidised; especially when it comes to elections.
  
  "Motorists", unlike people who have to use cars for travel, are generally right wing males who have scant regard for other road users (eg cyclists and horse riders), safe speeds or the environment. They think they actually pay the full costs of highways. In their dreams!!
  
  As soon "motorists" are not pampered to by the political parties, we might move towards integrated and sustainable transport.

• Tony Pearce, Reading

  I can't see anywhere that 25k is being extended from Basingstoke to Southampton. Surely Class 92 dual voltage locomotives could be used between the North 25k and the Souths 3rd rail. Do the 92s still have this dual voltage capacity ?

• T Price, Bestwood Village

  An afterthought, further to my previous post,
  Is there any reason why the, now redundant, overhead line equipment on the closed Edwalton test track, couldn't be "re-cycled" and used on the Matlock branch as a low cost solution to electrifying it?

• Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex

  Since my earlier comment I have watched recording of Justine Greenings announcement and it seems that she thinks it is TFL (i.e Mayor Boris) responsibility to electrify Barking to Gospel Oak line despite it being a strategic freight route.
  
  Perhaps its tiem we called in Ken Livingstone to bang their heads together!!
  
  

• anonymous, Midlands

  If rail passengers have to pay for rail upgrades, does this mean road users will pay for their infrastructure too?

• T Price, Bestwood Village

  Re Paul, Flitwick's post,
  The line from Melton to Nottingham is already electrified for the most part. The Pendolino's were tested up there. It just needs reopening.
  
  I note that neither the Erewash Valley, Manton or Beighton diversions are included in the MML scheme. This could cause problems with diversions unless the units are bi-mode or a few "Thunderbird" loco's are aquired.

• Lee Worthington, Manchester

  I agree with Stephen Rowlands comments regarding re-opening of the Woodhead route. This route was already electrified so would need minimal if any work to create clearances for 25kv AC electification. It would also allow a direct, shorter and presumably faster route between Manchester and Sheffield to the Hope Valley route which could be used for local services and freight. It would also provide a competing route to the WCML or at the very least a comparable alternative diversion route. Remember MML services from Manchester to St Pancras during the WCML upgrade? Surely electrified services via the MML would provide true competition to Virgins monopoly on Manchester-London services? The route would also connect Manchester Airport with the East Midlands and Luton airports, provide direct connections to the south coast and cross-platform connections to Eurostar services. The business case already seems plausable!

• Richard, Colchester

  @Grahm Kohl - i don't think you should interpret this decision so negatively. It's obvious that you would wire the busiest part of the GWML first. This doesn't preclude some in-fill wiring at a later date e.g. Plymouth/Exeter to Bristol/Birmingham or via Taunton to Newbury.

• Matthew Erskine, Sunderland

  How can this all be achieved without government investment? I don't believe that the money for this can be generated within the ral industry itself, as Greening suggests. I'm not holding my breath waiting for any of this to happen.

• Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex

  All these big schemes but no mention of Gospel Oak to Barking a scheme which is both long overdue and with the new Thameshaven port vital to cope with the goods trains it will generate.
  
  However, the news re Electrification to Southampton if done using "5KV overhead must be seen as the beginning of the end of the 3rd rail in Southern territory and will hopefully be followed by 25KV electrification of South West Trains route to Exeter which would free up DMUs for use elsewhere.
  
  As for talk of £9 billion of investment well given that £5 billion is carried forward then the real figure for this CP is still less at £4 billion!! Shame no one asked why new investment will be less than the amount carried forward!
  
  But given how comment about investment no starting for 2 years were heard it shows how press and media and even shadow minister!!! dont understand how Network Rail operates on the old Soviet 5 year plan system (with trains replacing tractors!) and that investment is happening right here right now!!!
  
  MML is importent but cross-country links between ECML/MML and WCML will be needed if we are to get a network effect that freight trains will need before they can invest in electric locomotives!!
  
  With the merger of FCC and Southern perhaps conversion of the Brighton line to 25KV will be next on the list?

• Philip Russell, Carlisle

  Its all very welcome news but i agree with Mr Price that we should be also be looking at electrifying the likes of the Matlock Lincoln, Windermere branches etc ,surely its better to spend money on this rather than replacing an allready electrified perfectly workable 3rd rail system between Basingstoke and Southampton.

• Claydon William, Norwich, Norfolk

  This is good news, but the bad news; (as usual); is the price tag to the good old taxpayer,
  
  We all pay much more for electrification, when projects are let individually. It would be much more cost productive to have two 'factory' trains, with groups of design and engineering staff on 20 year contracts to electrify the entire network; ala Switzerland.
  
  Just get on with it.......

• Paul, Flitwick

  Mr Klotz, you appear to me to be able to find a cloud for every silver lining. Reopening and electrification of the Varsity line will give Woburn Sands direct trains to Oxford, more trains to Bedford and direct trains to Milton Keynes Central. I would have thought that would give a massive boost to Woburn Sands rather than kill it off. I used to live in Mitcham and the full barrier Level Crossing at Eastfields Station has eight trains to London over it during the peak hour between 8AM and 9AM (with similar number the other way) and no one is claiming Mitcham is cut in two. Had the line been closed instead of modernised then that would have killed Woburn Sands.
  
  Mr Kohl. Noted. With a cardinal electric freight route to Southampton, the logical thing to do would be to electrifiy the line to Salisbury as that route via the chord east of Salisbury is a diversionary freight route for it. It would then be logical to electrify and redouble and upgrade the line onto Exeter and make this the principal London to Exeter route. This could be partly paid for by economies from singling and downgrading the almost stationless duplicate route between Bedwyn and Taunton. A residual semi fast Paddington to Exeter service could run over it, perhaps also serving (re)opened stations at Devizes Parkway, Somerton, Langport, Wellington and Cullompton. Similarly an all weather route between Exeter and Plymouth via Okehapmton could be reopened and electrified, as the GWR line could never be electrified past the sea wall as seawater and electricity do not mix. The ex GWR route could be retained as double track to Paignton and singled between Newton Abbot and Plymouth, with a semi fast Exeter - Plymouth service also serving reopened stations at Mutley, Plympton & South Brent.
  
  Mr Faircloth, I agree, electrification to Moorthorpe has to be a given. Electrification to Doncaster could be tricky if Rotherham Central already has 750v dc for trams. It would appear that reopening Masborough so that electric trains can stop there would be needed. Similarly, electrification of the Corby loop would be essential as that forms part of the freight route and in any sensible world the line from Melton Mowbray to Nottingham would also be reopened and Electrified.

• Stephen Rowland, Leeds

  Does This mean that The Woodhead Tunnel may be reopen to so Electric train can run to London from Manchester it just silly that a Tunnel built in the early 50's is just sat there. Then should have NEVER closed it down

• David Chatterton, Winchester

  Re: David Faircloth's comment about the possibility of 25kV overhead power between Basingstoke and Southampton, recent gauge enhancement work in the Winchester area involved the replacement of several bridges. As well as accommodating the larger containers, the design brief was to include clearance for overhead lines.
  
  Since one route from Southampton through Basingstoke and Reading to the Midlands involves the link between Basingstoke and Reading used by the DEMU Cross-Country trains from Bournemouth to Manchester or Newcastle, perhaps we can look forwards to EMUs in future even though they might be dual voltage as an interim.

• JFJF, Leeds

  Electrification to Selby will allow the proposed 'loop' East Coast services through Leeds via Colton Jnc (saving on reversing at Leeds) to become a possibility - presume this will appear in the new franchise. It could fast become a bottleneck with increased TPE frequency between Leeds and Micklefield.
  
  Electrification to Hull for TPE (and Hull Trains if routed via Colton Jnc) must be under consideration for a later phase of works - A relatively low-cost option as no tunnels on that route and a wide alignment as much of the route was originally 4-tracked, giving plenty of room for engineering access.

• Martin Hill, Dorset

  I understand that electrification from Bristol to Exeter and Plymouth is to be considered in the next phase.

• T Price, Bestwood Village

  This is tremendous news for the Midland Mainline and long overdue.
  Not wishing to put a dampener on things already, but my concern is that no local schemes are included, even the short Matlock branch.
  By the time the scheme is completed, many of the current Sprinter class of units will be nearing the end of their lives and i am also led to believe that the 153's will have to go as they cannot be made DDA complient?
  Surely this opportunity should be used to wire up a few local lines in the area, Ambergate to Matlock, Derby to Stoke and Nottingham to Lincoln are all easy projects that could be done at the same time, thus enabling the replacement of a significant number of DMU's that will be life expired when the power is finally turned on.
  I read recently that Network Rail were looking at a low cost solution for electrifying branch lines. Ambergate to Matlock would be the ideal line for a trial of this to prove the concept.

• Henry Klotz, Woburn Sands

  The electrification of the East West Rail link will kill of towns like Woburn Sands, which are to the South of Milton Keynes. The MKC Core Strategy totally ignored the EWR project. With no underpasses of flyovers planned to the South of Milton Keynes it will leave these areas seperated from the rest of the city ,with crippling congestion as the old fashioned barrier crossing will be down so often. Bridle paths and fottpaths across the old rural line will now close. Many town centre shope in Woburn Sands will now close due to the horrendous traffic issues the EWR will bring. Although I suspect more dynamic towns that embrace the EWR like Cambridge will prosper.

• phil, Watford

  I cannot see how The improvements to northern services cannot include re-enstating the Colne to Skipton line to give an alternative cross pennine route and improved services to Leeds Bradford Preston Blackburn and Manchester.

• David Faircloth, Derby

  Looking at the detail on the DfT's website, it seems to me that the "Electric Spine" has some gaps; surely, the Midland main line electrification needs to be extended north of Sheffield to Moorthorpe, and from Swinton to Doncaster for this concept to make sense? As part of this concept, electrification of the "old road" from Chesterfield to Rotherham and the Erewash Valley line would also help.
  
  Interesting to see that 25kv AC overhead is to be installed between Basingstoke and Southampton; this is described as an "enhancement" - does that mean it will become dual-system or will the third rail be removed, I wonder?
  
  And the most interesting aspect of the HLOS? A use for the Bletchley flyover - at last! It must be ever so happy - its only waited 50 years for someone to love it !!!!!

• Graham Kohl, EXETER

  How can they say investment in every region of the country, as per usual the South West of England gains nothing. As far as this crap government is concerned as does the current franchise holder, the so called Great Western route ends at Bristol