Is it true that all future lines in the U.K that are to be electrified will have the overhead system?

Question

I'm told that any newly built line built in the U.K will need to have the overhead system if its to be electrified. This is because H+S will not allow any future lines to be electrified with 3rd rail as its dangerous to a degree

Answer 1

Yes it is likely that future electrified lines in the U.K. will have the overhead system. It is easier to maintain, safer and higher speeds are possible than on the 3rd rail system. However, at present there are no firm plans to electrify further lines; modern diesel trains accelerate as fast as those powered by electricity and tend to be less technically complex and more reliable in service, although of course electric trains are far less polluting, not that any British government would care about that.

Answer 2

Yes, they will be. Apart from cost considerations it will enable there to be a properly 'joined up' railway. All electrification since WW2 has been on the overhead system, except where it was extensions on the former Southern 3rd rail system - to Southampton and Bournemouth, and to the Kent Coast for example. I don't think safety has anything to do with it - if idiots want to endanger themselves they can do it equally as well with the 'overhead' as with the third rail.

Answer 3

Third rail is dangerous to a high degree to trespassers or the extreme "train surfers," with the latter being more dangerous with regard to catenary transmission of power.

There are obviously going to be more of the ill informed on the ground, so I would argue that overhead, while unsightly, is probably the safer means of electrical supply.

With either choice, cost is a factor.  I would hazard a pure guess that overhead transmission may cost less to construct and maintain.  But, when factoring in lawsuits from survivors of those who are electrocuted by third rail systems, I would again guess that overhead would be even more cost effective.

On this side of the pond, money gets railroad corporate attention, while safety is many times secondary to the bottom line.  Sad, but true...

Addendum:  I was thinking of difference in statutes between the UK and the US when I mentioned trespassing.  Here, the railroads are still liable for a portion of a law suit, under what is referred to as an "attractive nuisance."  This means, if a trespasser breaches the fence, for example, it will be argued the fence should have better.  Ridiculous, but there ya go...

Answer 4

YES, but due to "railway reasons".

1.   Overhead electrification is cheaper to install and maintain than third or fourth rail.

2.   Overhead electrification is economically more efficent than third or fourth rail.

3.   Overhead electrification overcomes the need for "dead" sections where the railway is crossed by a road or path.  ("Dead" sections are a nightmare, because if a train enters one with insufficent speed, or worse, it stops in a "dead" section, then it is stuck and has to wait for another train to pull it out.)

4.   When minor lineside maintenance, such as inspection work or leaf clearance, is undertaken on a "conventional" line, this could be done in between the passage of trains. But with third or fourth rail electrification, the power needs to be switched off on all lines, thereby disrupting the rail service.

The answers regarding trespassers on a third or fourth rail electrified railway are a red-herring. Trespassers lose their legal protection when they stray onto the railway.

David S is WRONG in his statement that there are no electrification plans at present. The Scottish Government is considering electrification of the Glasgow-Falkirk High-Edinburgh line and the new Drumgelloch-Bathgate line (with the extension into Edinburgh). Moreover, the new line currently under construction between Paisley Gilmour Street and Glasgow Airport will have overhead electification. Doubtless in the decades to come, England will wake up and improve its transport infrastructure taking Scotland as (again) the model.

Answer 5

I couldn't find anything to match this on the net but it wouldn't surprise me if it is true.