Tony Berkley
Government argues that the start of two years of gauge enhancement work from Southampton to the West Midlands to allow 9ft 6ins containers to be carried on standard flat wagons (W10 gauge) is a major milestone in the creation of a network capable of carrying these containers, not only from major ports to inland destinations, but also within the UK.
Such containers are now the world standard; few, if any, smaller ones are still being built, so, if the UK rail network is to be able to provide services for this market, it has to create a network to allow goods to be carried on standard wagons.
Some lower wagons are being developed and will hopefully start being trialled soon. Although their capital and operating costs are still unknown, given the forecast growth in this market there will be plenty of demand for these where gauge enhancement cannot economically be created.
For Southampton to the West Coast, the main route is via Basingstoke, Reading, Oxford, and Leamington Spa, then connecting via Coventry and Birmingham to the major terminals in the West Midlands and to the WCML, which is already en-hanced to this W10 gauge.
However, freight also needs the ability to operate 24/7; customers are not very happy to be told that ‘Basingstoke is closed, so we cannot carry your containers tonight’.
Alternative routes for gauge enhancement via Salisbury are being evaluated, as are the full gauge enhancement of the East Coast main line to Edinburgh and Glasgow, a connection from the West Midlands to Doncaster, and from East Coast ports such as Tees, Tyne and Humber. The latter are particularly im-portant to enable the large number of swap-bodies of the same height to be
carried by rail. This will hopefully be the start of a network of W10 routes, which can not only serve many more origins and destinations, but also provide diversionary – albeit longer – routes for such traffic.
The big gap at present in this network is the route from the Channel Tunnel to London. The Network Rail lines are not gauge-enhanced and, although HS1 is built to continental gauge and connects to the W10 LTS and NLL lines at Barking and North of St Pancras International, there are still economic and some technical barriers to freight using HS1.
We welcome the agreement between HS1 and DB Schenker that HS1 will support the modifications required to all Class 92 locos needing to operate over the HS1 infrastructure, thanks in part to Marco Polo funding secured by DB Schenker. It is also good that an interim track access agreement has been reached to enable freight to operate on HS1 from early 2010. However, there is still little progress with HS1 and its owner, the UK Government, complying with the First Railway Package, which requires the access charge for freight to be set at short-run marginal cost. HS1 has not so far demonstrated what it thinks this should be, or provided any justification for an uplift, so the proposed charge remains at some six times that which the ORR has set for the Network Rail lines.
Of course, NR has been required by the ORR to make efficiency savings and the reduced rate for freight is partly as a result of this. Sadly, the ORR has no such powers in respect of HS1, where the Government is both owner and regulator and, clever to the end, some time ago awarded the operations and maintenance contract for 80 years on a cost-plus basis.
Government argues that it needs the money, but setting high charges in a competitive market place (there are the equivalent of around 200 trains-worth of trucks going up the M20 each day, compared with four to six freight trains) does not necessarily mean higher revenues. So, alongside making an official complaint to the European Commission for non-compliance with the terms of the First Railway Package for HS1, we are concerned that the right lessons are learned when it comes to the possibility of freight on HS2.
By the time HS2 is built, there will no doubt be high-speed mail and parcels trains as part of a European network of services on high-speed lines. Clearly these should use any high-speed line in the UK. It may well be that by this time there will be an increasing trend for more conventional, but still relatively lightweight freight which travels at speeds of 120 or 140 kph and could usefully use HS2.
Of course, the real need for high-speed lines is to relieve capacity on existing lines. For example, our RFG/FTA traffic forecasts show a shortfall of around 200 freight train paths a day on the WCML by 2030 and similar, although smaller, shortfalls on other lines. Moving some passenger trains off the WCML should help this process. Whether it will be sufficient is debatable – and that is why we would support any future line being designed to enable additional tracks in locations where demand is particularly high.
Reader Comments:
Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.
The rail freight industry should look at what is happening on the roads.
Road trailers are now increasingly based upon very small diameter wheels and are extremely high at no extra taxation even though they do not pay their full cost.
Road wear and tear is in the main damage caused by heavy lorries. This damage increases as the fouth power of the axle load (at least) and is exacerbated by traction being applied normally through a single axle. No account is taken of the increase damage caused by using increasingly smaller diameter wheels, increase in tyre pressures nor use of 'jockey axles on the trailer and tractor unit. To picture this imagine applying all these factors to a rail locomotive and you can bet Ian Coucher would be asking for extra payments.
Yet on the roads the D(a)fT (them again) are trying to sneak 80t lorries almost twice as long as the current monsters onto the roads. Yes youve guessed it Network Rail will be paying to strengthen bridges in effect EWS, DRS, and passengers will pay for assetts which benefit their competitiors.
PS some 2two decades ago I wrote to the Trasport Department requesting information on the 'Bridgeguard' scheme the y denied any knowledge of such a scheme. A couple of years ago Network Rail strengthened the bridge in Bilston Lane (Willenhall) and guess what Bridgeguard was included in the construction board. Perhaps it was just a coincidence.
H. T. Harvey, Birmingham, UK
Excellent article. The prices the current government think rail freight users are willing to pay is ridiculous. It is far and above the main factor keeping freight off the railways. I know several companies well suited to transfer their logistical operations to rail and actually really want to, they just can't justify the current freight prices.
However I am worried that the situation will get immeasurably WORSE under a conservative government. Letting the railways fall to the dogs whilst promising to "look at" building a new high speed line umpteen years into the future (i.e. so no money has to be committed for many years to come) is extremely deceptive.
The public need to start demanding better rail service from the government!
Mark, Birmingham, UK