Tesco Joins Climate Group’s EV100 Campaign To Electrify Its Fleet Of 5,500 Vehocles
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Post and Parcel.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Tesco today joined a group of now 27 big corporates publicly calling on the UK Government to target 100% zero emission car and van sales from 2030. The Government is currently revising its plans.
As Tesco say or used to say. “Every Little Helps!”
Norsk e-Fuel Planning Europe’s First Commercial Plant for Hydrogen-Based RAF
The title of this post, is the same as that, of this article on Renewable Energy Magazine.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Norske e-Fuel AS, the new European industry consortium headquartered in Oslo, has plans to industrialize Power-to-Liquid technology (PtL) in Norway for the European Market. The new state-of-the-art project will allow the conversion of Norway’s extensive renewable electricity resources into renewable fuels.
This paragraph explains the process.
Using a single step co-electrolysis process, the innovative technologies of Sunfire and Climeworks convert renewable electricity, water and CO2 captured from ambient air and unavoidable CO2 sources into syngas. Renewable fuels, such as jet fuel, are then produced through further processing and refining. The certified end products can be used directly in existing infrastructures.
Note.
- Climeworks is a company that captures carbon from the atmosphere.
- It is a very different process to that used by Altalto, which I wrote about in Grant Shapps Announcement On Friday, Altalto use household, industrial and woody waste as a starting point.
- However both processes use syngas, as an intermediate.
Wikipedia describes syngas as a fuel gas mixture consisting primarily of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and very often some carbon dioxide.
ZEROe – Towards The World’s First Zero-Emission Commercial Aircraft
The title of this post, is the same as that of this Press Release from Airbus.
This is the introductory paragraph.
At Airbus, we have the ambition to develop the world’s first zero-emission commercial aircraft by 2035. Hydrogen propulsion will help us to deliver on this ambition. Our ZEROe concept aircraft enable us to explore a variety of configurations and hydrogen technologies that will shape the development of our future zero-emission aircraft.
Overall, the Press Release discloses a lot and gives details of three different aircraft, which are shown in this Airbus infographic.
Discover the three zero-emission concept aircraft known as ZEROe in this infographic. These turbofan, turboprop, and blended-wing-body configurations are all hydrogen hybrid aircraft.
I have some thoughts that apply to all three concepts.
Hydrogen Hybrid Power
The Press Release says this about the propulsion systems for the three aircraft.
All three ZEROe concepts are hydrogen hybrid aircraft. They are powered by hydrogen combustion through modified gas-turbine engines. Liquid hydrogen is used as fuel for combustion with oxygen.
In addition, hydrogen fuel cells create electrical power that complements the gas turbine, resulting in a highly efficient hybrid-electric propulsion system. All of these technologies are complementary, and the benefits are additive.
There is a Wikipedia entry which is entitled Hydrogen Fuel, where this is said.
Once produced, hydrogen can be used in much the same way as natural gas – it can be delivered to fuel cells to generate electricity and heat, used in a combined cycle gas turbine to produce larger quantities of centrally produced electricity or burned to run a combustion engine; all methods producing no carbon or methane emissions.
It looks like the aircraft will be powered by engines that are not too different to the current engines in today’s aircraft.
This must be a big advantage, in that much of the research done to improve the current gas-turbine powered by aviation fuel will apply.
Liquid Hydrogen
It appears all three aircraft will use liquid hydrogen.
Liquid Hydrogen Storage
I believe the major uses for hydrogen will be aircraft, buses, cars, rail locomotives and multiple units and heavy trucks.
All will need efficient storage of the hydrogen.
Some applications, will use it in liquid form, as it is a more dense form, but it will need to be kept cold.
As aviation will probably be the most demanding application, will it drive the storage technology?
Oxygen
This will be atmospheric oxygen, which is used by any combustion engine.
Fuel Cells
Will the fuel cells be used to provide power for the plane’s systems, rather than to power the aircraft?
Most airlines do this with an auxiliary power unit or APU, which is just a small gas-turbine engine with a generator. The A 320 family use one made by Pratt & Whitney, which is described on this page of their web site. It is the third one on the page and is called a APS3200. This is said about its function.
Pratt & Whitney APS3200 is the Airbus baseline APU of choice for the Airbus A320 family of aircraft. It is designed to meet performance and environmental requirements for modern day, single-aisle aircraft. The APU comprises a single-shaft, fixedspeed, high-pressure ratio core driving a load compressor that provides bleed air for cabin conditioning and main engine starting, concurrent with 90kVA of electrical power.
The APU is usually located in the tail.
In the ZEROe family will there be a fuel-cell powered compressor to provide bleed air for cabin airconditioning and main engine starting?
Slippery Aerodynamics
Airbus seem to be the masters of slippery aerodynamics, which will help make the planes very fuel efficient.
Lightweight Composite Structures
Like the latest Airbus airliners, these planes will be made from lightweight composite structures and I wouldn’t be surprised to see weight saving in other parts of the aircraft.
Carbon Emissions And Pollution
There will be no carbon dioxide produced, as where’s the carbon in the fuel?
But there could be small amounts of the oxides of nitrogen produced, by the combustion, as nitrogen will be present from the air.
Noise
As the aircraft are powered by gas-turbine engines, there will be some noise.
The Mathematics Of Hydrogen-Powered Aviation
The mathematics for these three aircraft must say, that the designs are feasible.
Otherwise Airbus wouldn’t have published a detailed Press Release, only for it to be torn to pieces.
Pressures Driving Aviation In The Next Ten Years
Aviation will change in the text ten years and it will be driven by various competing forces.
Environmental Issues
Pollution, Carbon Emissions and Noise will be the big environmental issues.
Hydrogen will go a long way to reducing the first two issues, but progress with noise will generally be made by better engineering.
COVID-19 And Future Pandemics
These could have a bigger effect, as to make flying safe in these troubled times, passengers will need to be given more space.
But I do wonder, if there is an administrative solution, backed up, by innovative engineering.
Could a very quick test for COVID-19, that would stop infected passengers boarding, coupled with high quality automatic cleaning and air purification, ensure that passengers didn’t get infected?
Entry Into Service
Airbus are quoting 2035 in the Press Release and this YouTube video.
Is that ambitious?
Thoughts On The Three Designs
My thoughts on the three designs, follow in the next three sections.
The ZEROe Turboprop
This is Airbus’s summary of the design for the ZEROe Turboprop.
Two hybrid hydrogen turboprop engines, which drive the six bladed propellers, provide thrust. The liquid hydrogen storage and distribution system is located behind the rear pressure bulkhead.
This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.
It certainly is a layout that has been used successfully, by many conventionally-powered aircraft in the past. The De Havilland Canada Dash 8 and ATR 72 are still in production.
The Turboprop Engines
If you look at the Lockheed-Martin C 130J Super Hercules, you will see it is powered by four Rolls-Royce AE 2100D3 turboprop engines, that drive 6-bladed Dowty R391 composite constant-speed fully-feathering reversible-pitch propellers.
These Rolls-Royce engines are a development of an Allison design, but they also form the heart of Rolls-Royce’s 2.5 MW Generator, that I wrote about in Our Sustainability Journey. The generator was developed for use in Airbus’s electric flight research program.
I wouldn’t be surprised to find the following.
- , The propulsion system for this aircraft is under test with hydrogen at Derby and Toulouse.
- Dowty are testing propellers suitable for the aircraft.
- Serious research is ongoing to store enough liquid hydrogen in a small tank that fits the design.
Why develop something new, when Rolls-Royce, Dowty and Lockheed have done all the basic design and testing?
The Fuselage
This screen capture taken from the video, shows the front view of the plane.
From clues in the picture, I estimate that the fuselage diameter is around four metres. Which is not surprising, as the Airbus A320 has a height of 4.14 metres and a with of 3.95 metres.
So is the ZEROe Turboprop based on a shortened Airbus A 320 fuselage?
As the aircraft has a capacity of less than a hundred passengers and an Airbus A320 has six-abreast seating, could the aircraft have sixteen rows of seats.
With the seat pitch of an Airbus A 320, which is 81 centimetres, this means just under thirteen metres for the passengers.
The Technical Challenge
I don’t feel there are any great technical challenges in building this aircraft.
- The engines appear to be conventional and could even have been more-or-less fully developed.
- The fuselage could be a development of an existing design.
- The wings and tail-plane are not large and given the company’s experience with large composite structures, they shouldn’t be too challenging.
- The hydrogen storage and distributing system will have to be designed, but as hydrogen is being used in increasing numbers of applications, I doubt the expertise will be difficult to find.
- The avionics and other important systems could probably be borrowed from other Airbus products.
Given that the much larger and more complicated Airbus A380 was launched in 2000 and first flew in 2005, I think that a prototype of this aircraft could fly around the middle of this decade.
The Market Segment
It may seem small at less than a hundred seats, but it does have a range of greater than a 1000 nautical miles or 1150 miles.
Consider.
- It compares closely in passenger capacity, speed and range, with the De Havilland Canada Dash 8/400 and the ATR 72/600.
- The ATR 72 is part produced by Airbus.
- The aircraft is forty percent slower than an Airbus A 320.
- It is a genuine zero-carbon aircraft.
- It looks like it could be designed to have a Short-Takeoff-And Landing (STOL) capability.
On the other hand, a lot of busy routes, like London and Edinburgh and Berlin and Munich are less than or around 400 miles.
These short routes are being challenged aggressively by the rail industry, as over this sort of distance, which typically takes four hours by train, rail has enough advantages, that passengers may choose not to fly.
Examples of cities with a range of between 400 and 1000 miles from London include.
- Berlin – 571 miles
- Cork – 354 miles
- Inverness – 445 miles
- Lisbon – 991 miles
- Madrid – 781 miles
- Palma – 835 miles
- Rome – 893 miles
- Stockholm – 892 miles
- Warsaw – 900 miles
This aircraft would appear to be sized as an aircraft, that can fly further than passengers are happy to travel by train. But because of its cruising speed, the routes, where it will be viable would probably be limited in duration.
But important routes to, from and between secondary locations, like those that used to be flown by FlyBe, would surely be naturals for this aircraft.
It looks to be an aircraft that could have a big future.
The ZEROe Turbofan
This is Airbus’s summary of the design.
Two hybrid hydrogen turbofan engines provide thrust. The liquid hydrogen storage and distribution system is located behind the rear pressure bulkhead.
This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.
This screen capture taken from the video, shows the front view of the plane.
The aircraft doesn’t look very different different to an Airbus A320 and appears to be fairly conventional. It does appear to have the characteristic tall winglets of the A 320 neo.
The Turbofan Engines
These would be standard turbofan engines modified to run on hydrogen, fuelled from a liquid hydrogen tank behind the rear pressure bulkhead of the fuselage.
If you want to learn more about gas turbine engines and hydrogen, read this article on the General Electric web site, which is entitled The Hydrogen Generation: These Gas Turbines Can Run On The Most Abundant Element In the Universe,
Range And Performance
I will compare range, performance and capacity with the latest Airbus A 320.
ZEROe Turbofan
- Range – 2300 miles
- Cruising Speed – Mach 0.78
- Capacity – < 200 passengers
Airbus A 320
- Range – 3800 miles
- Cruising Speed – Mach 0.82
- Capacity – 190 passengers
There is not too much difference, except that the A 320 has a longer range.
The Cockpits Of The ZEROe Turboprop And The ZEROe Turbofan
This gallery puts the two cockpit images together.
Are they by any chance related?
Could the controls and avionics in both aircraft be the same?
A quick look says that like the Boeing 757 and 767, the two planes have a lot in common, which may enable a pilot trained on one aircraft to fly the other, with only minimal extra instruction.
And would it be a simple process to upgrade a pilot from an A 320 to a ZEROe Turbofan?
The Fuselages Of The ZEROe Turboprop And The ZEROe Turbofan
I estimated earlier that the fuselage of the Turboprop was based on the cross-section of the A320.
Looking at the pair of front views, I wouldn’t be surprised to find, that both aircraft are based on an updated A 320 fuselage design.
Passengers and flightcrew would certainly feel at home in the ZEROe Turbofan, if internally, it was the same size, layout and equipment as a standard A 320 or more likely an A 320 neo.
The Market Segment
These are my thoughts of the marketing objectives of the ZEROe Turbofan.
- The cruising speed and the number of passengers are surprisingly close, so has this aircraft been designed as an A 320 or Boeing 737 replacement?
- I suspect too, that it has been designed to be used at any airport, that could handle an Airbus A 320 or Boeing 737.
- It would be able to fly point-to-point flights between most pairs of European or North American cities.
It would certainly fit the zero-carbon shorter range airliner market!
In fact it would more than fit the market, it would define it!
The ZEROe Blended-Wing Body
This is Airbus’s summary of the design.
The exceptionally wide interior opens up multiple options for hydrogen storage and distribution. Here, the liquid hydrogen storage tanks are stored underneath the wings. Two hybrid hydrogen turbofan engines provide thrust.
This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.
This aircraft is proposed to have the same performance and capacity as the ZEROe Turbofan, which includes a 2000 nautical mile plus range.
The only other aircraft with a similar shape is the Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit or Stealth Bomber. This is not a fast aircraft, but it is able to fly at an altitude of 50,000 ft, which compares to the 60,000 ft of Concorde and the 43,000 ft of an Airbus A 380.
I wonder, if the blended-wing body is designed to fly very high at around the 60,000 ft, which was Concorde territory.
It would only be doing 515 mph and would be well below the speed of sound.
So what is the point on going so high?
The air is very thin and there is a lot less drag.
It is also worth reading Wikipedia on the design of flying wings.
It might be possible to fly much further than 2000 nautical miles. After all Airbus did put in a plus sign!
Is this aircraft the long-distance aircraft of the three?
Extending The Range
I do wonder, if the engines in these aircraft could be capable of running on both hydrogen and aviation biofuel.
As the ZEROe Turboprop and the ZEROe Turbofan planes have empty wings, which in a conventional aircraft would hold fuel, could the space be used to hold aviation biofuel to extend the range?
Certification Of The Planes
The ZEROe Turboprop and ZEROe Turbofan are aircraft, where a lot of the design will already have been proven in previous aircraft, so will probably be much less onerous to approve, than the blended-wing body design.
Conclusion
It looks to me, that Airbus have designed three aircraft to cover the airline market.
I also feel that as the ZEROe Turboprop and ZEROe Turbofan, appear to have conventional airframes, that they could be delivered before 2035.
If I’m right, that the blended-wing body is a high flyer, it will be a ride to experience, travelling at that height all the way to New York.
Next Stop Hydrogen For New Rail Project
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Business Green.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Three British companies unite to develop new hydrogen fuelling infrastructure that could soon allow for the roll out of zero emission trains on the UK rail network.
Some points from the article.
- The three companies involved are Fuel Cell Systems Ltd, tpgroup, and Vanguard Sustainable Transport Solutions.
- Their initial focus will be on the rail industry.
It looks to be a good start to provide much-needed infrastructure.
Top 1% Emit Double The Carbon Of Poorest 50%
The title of this post is the same as that of this article in today’s copy of The Times.
This is the introductory paragraphs.
The richest 1 per cent of people globally cause more than double the carbon emissions of the three billion who make up the poorest 50 per cent, a report says.
This inequality should be addressed with taxes on frequent flyers, SUVs and luxury items such as private jets and super yachts, according to Oxfam, which has written a report with the Stockholm Environment Institute, a not-for-profit research body.
It is an article well-worth a read.
But as I am not a frequent flyer and don’t own an SUV, private jet or super yacht, I doubt I’ll suffer if the report’s recommendations are implemented.
Composite Footbridge Under Development
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Network Rail has become a Tier 1 member of the National Composites Centre as part of the Futura project to develop a composite footbridge based on a concept designed by Marks Barfield Architects and COWI.
This picture shows the concept.
Network Rail seem to spend a lot of time and money on footbridge designs.
There was the Network Rail/RIBA Footbridge Design Competition, which resulted in this winning design.
I wrote Winner Announced In The Network Rail Footbridge Design Ideas Competition in April 2019.
All now seems to be very quiet on this footbridge design.
Are Network Rail engineers members of the Institute of Meetings Engineers?
I was first introduced to the existence of this august body around 1971.
I am very Marxist (Groucho tendency) on the subject of clubs and institutes and would never join any, that would have me as a member.
Let’s Get Busy!
Both these bridges can be fitted into many stations, by the following sequence of simple operations.
- Create a level space on either side of the tracks.
- Add any necessary services like an electricity supply for lift and lighting and any necessary drainage.
- Lift the bridge into place from a spcial train with a crane.
- Connect any electrical supply for lifts and test.
These types of bridges can surely be installed quickly in scores of locations.
In Garforth Station To Go Step-Free, I discuss how such a bridge could be installed quickly at Garforth station.
This is surely, the sort of project we need to stimulate the economy after we give the covids, the proverbial boot.
East Coast Main Line Northern Power Supply Works Funded
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.
This is the introductory paragraph.
As part of its £1·2bn East Coast Upgrade programme, Network Rail has awarded a £216·2m contract to the Rail Electrification Alliance for the long-awaited strengthening of the 25 kV 50 Hz traction power supplies on the northern section of the East Coast Main Line between Doncaster and Edinburgh.
It is much-needed. if the planned extra electric services are to be run on the route.
These could include.
- East Coast Train‘s new London and Edinburgh service.
- Extra TransPennine Express services and some services converting from diesel traction.
- Extra LNER services to Middlesbrough and other destinations.
- Conversion of Grand Central services to electric or bi-mode traction.
Will Freightliner use some of its new fleet of thirteen Class 90 locomotives on the route?
Will News Of The Upgrade Bring Forth Train And Locomotive Orders?
I wonder if this could happen.
Freight operators need to decarbonise, but surely there’s a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation on the East Coast Main Line, as there’s no point in ordering electric locomotives for the route, until you have a date, from when they can be used.
Conclusion
This upgrade will have some very good xonsequences.
Geo-located Advertising
I took this picture on the TransPennine Express service from Cleethorpes to Doncaster.
We were approaching Habrough station at the time, and I’d just seen an advert on the screen for Habrough Taxis.
It must have been displayed because of the location of the train. Very useful for everybody!
Tory London Mayoral Candidate Wants Sponsorship Deals For Tube Station Names To Raise TfL Cash
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the Telegraph.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Underground stations could be renamed under plans put forward by the Conservative London mayoral candidate for a £100 million a year sponsorship deal to bolster investment in the capital’s public transport network.
I think it could be an idea worth pursuing, as due to Sadiq Khan’s bribe of a fare freeze to get elected Transport for London’s finances are in a terrible state.
The article says, that Dubai, Madrid and New York already use similar ideas to raise money.
Remember, London already has one station, where name was changed for a local business; Gillespie Road station was renamed Arsenal in 1932.
Let’s Be Creative!
I also think, if we are creative, we could make the stations much more passenger-friendly, with respect to services nearby.
Imagine a board, with Alight Here For at the top and slots for local shops and businesses below. Each slotted-in advert would be a perhaps a foot wide and four inches high, saying something like. “Boots 100 metres” or “Costa Here!”
Gatwick Rail Service Could Link Far Reaches Of The South East
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Surrey Live.
Despite being reported on Surrey Live and the fact that Gatwick is in Sussex, the plan has been proposed by Kent County Council’s Rail Project Manager.
The plan would extend the existing Great Western railway line – which runs from Reading to Gatwick via Redhill – to mid and east Kent.
The article suggests the service could go between Reading and Canterbury West stations.
This table sums up the connectivity.
- Reading – West and South West England, Wales, Oxford, Hereford and Worcester and the West Midlands – Future – East West Rail
- Guildford – Portsmouth Direct Line
- Dorking – Mole Valley Line
- Redhill – Brighton Main Line
- Gatwick Airport – Brighton Main Line
- Tonbridge – South Eastern Main Line
- Ashford International – Amsterdam, Brussels and Paris – Future – Bordeaux, Cologne, Frankfurt and Geneva
I have a few thoughts.
The Terminal Stations
The suitability of the two proposed terminals can be summed up.
- Reading has been designed as a terminal station, with five bay platforms, three of which can be used by Gatwick services.
- Canterbury West has not been designed as a terminal station and has no bay platforms.
Perhaps Ashford International station would be a better Eastern terminal?
- It has Eurostar services.
- Trains can terminate in Platform 1 and go to Tonbridge.
- It has lots of car parking.
Dover Priority and Ramsgate could also be possibilities as they have terminal platforms.
Connecting At Gatwick Airport
It looks like a combined service might get complicated in the Redhill/Gatwick area.
- Trains between Reading and Gatwick go via Redhill station, where they reverse.
- There is no direct route between Tonbridge and Gatwick, so trains will probably have to reverse at Redhill, to go between Tonbridge and Gatwick.
Would a service between Reading and Ashford, that reversed twice at Redhill and once at Gatwick, be rather tricky to operate? Or even unpopular with passengers?
This Google Map shows Redhill station and the lines leading South from the station.
Note.
- Redhill station at the top of the map.
- The Brighton Main Line running North-South in the middle of the map.
- The North Downs Line to Guildford and Reading curving West from the station.
- The Redhill and Tonbridge Line to Tonbridge and Ashford leaving the map in the South-East corner.
I suspect that adding extra tracks in a very crowded area will be very difficult.
What Do The Timings Show?
A quick calculation, which is based on current timings, can give a journey time for between Ashford and Gatwick Airport.
- Ashford and Tonbridge – Southeastern timing – 38 minutes
- Tonbridge and Redhill – Southern timing – 35 minutes
- Reverse at Redhill – GWR timing – 4 minutes
- Redhill and Gatwick – GWR timing – 8 minutes
This gives a total of eighty-five minutes.
- Google says that you can drive it in sixty-three minutes.
- If you took the train today, between Ashford International and Gatwick Airport stations, the fastest rail journey is around 110 minutes with a change at St. Pancras International.
It does look though that a faster train between Kent and Gatwick Airport could be competitive, as going via London certainly isn’t!
Could Simplification And Automation Provide A Solution?
Consider.
- The Ashford International and Tonbridge timing, that I have used includes five stops.
- The Tonbridge and Redhill timing, that I have used includes five stops.
- How much time would be saved by only stopping at Tonbridge between Ashford International and Gatwick?
- Could automation handle a fast reverse at Redhill, where passengers couldn’t board or leave the train?
- Would a driver in each cab, allow the reverses to be done faster?
Trains going between Reading and Ashford International, would call at the following stations between Guildford and Tonbridge.
- Dorking Deepdene
- Reigate
- Redhill
- Gatwick Airport
- Redhill – A quick Touch-And-Go.
- Tonbridge
- Paddock Wood
If two minutes a stop could be saved at each of the nine omitted stops and at each reverse, this would save twenty minutes East of Gatwick, which would give the following timings.
- Gatwick and Tonbridge – 27 minutes
- Gatwick and Ashford International – 65 minutes
Timings would be compatible with driving.
West of Gatwick, the service would be as the current GWR service.
- After arriving at Gatwick from Ashford, the train would reverse.
- En route it would reverse at Redhill, to continue to Reading.
Passengers wanting to go between say Tonbridge and Redhill, would use this reverse at Redhill to join and leave the train.
It would be an unusual way to operate a train service, but I feel it could be made to work, especially with the right automation and/or a second driver.
Trains For The Service
The service can be split into various legs between Ashford and Reading.
- Ashford and Tonbridge – Electrified – 26.5 miles – 38 minutes
- Tonbridge and Redhill – Electrified – 20 miles – 35 minutes
- Redhill and Gatwick – Electrified – 7 miles – 8 minutes
- Gatwick and Redhill – Electrified – 7 miles – 8 minutes
- Redhill and Reigate – Electrified – 2 miles – 4 minutes
- Reigate and Shalford Junction – Not Electrified – 17 miles – 20 minutes
- Shalford Junction and North Camp – Electrified – 9 miles – 11 minutes
- North Camp and Wokingham – Not Electrified – 11 miles – 14 minutes
- Wokingham and Reading – Electrified – 7 miles and 9 minutes
Note.
- Ashford, Tonbridge, Redhill, Gatwick, Guildford, Wokingham and Reading are all fully-electrified main line stations.
- Most of the route and the two ends are electrified.
- All electrification is 750 VDC third rail.
- All sections without electrification are less than twenty miles.
This route would surely be ideal for a battery electric train.
As both the Heathrow and Gatwick Express services are run using Class 387 trains and the Stansted Express has used Class 379 trains for the last few years, similar trains to these might be an ideal choice, if they could be fitted with battery power and the ability to use 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
The facts seem to be on the side of this service.
- There are spare Class 387 trains and some more will be released by c2c in the next few years.
- Greater Anglia will be replacing their Class 379 trains with new Class 745 trains.
- A Class 379 train was used to test the concept of battery electric trains.
- Both class of trains could be fitted with third-rail gear.
Either of these trains could be used for the service.
As they are 100 or 110 mph trains with good acceleration, they might even save a few minutes on the journey.
Infrastructure Changes
I suspect they could be minimal, once it was worked out how to handle the three reverses in the Gatwick and Redhill area.
Conclusion
I think it would be a feasible plan to run an Ashford and Reading service via Gatwick.
I would also decarbonise the route at the same time, as it must be one of the easiest routes in the country to run using battery electric trains.
- There is electrification at both ends and in the middle.
- The longest stretch of track without electrification is just seventeen miles.
- All charging could be done using existing electrification.
- There are platforms at both ends, where trains can get a full charge.
- There are trains available, that are suitable for conversion to battery trains for the route.
- No extra infrastructure would be needed.
- Battery electric trains would allow extension of the route to Oxford in the West.
How many extra passengers would be persuaded to take the train to Gatwick, by the novelty of a battery electric Aurport Express?
Marketing men and women would love the last point!
The Anonymous Widower 