My First Rides In A Class 755 Train
Today, I had my first rides in a Class 755 train. I use rides, as it was three separate timetabled journeys.
- 12:36 – Norwich to Great Yarmouth
- 13:17 – Great Yarmouth to Norwich
- 14:05 – Norwich to Lowestoft
But it was only one train!
Although, I did see at least one other train in service.
These are my observations.
The Overall Style
These are a few pictures of the outside of the train.
The train certainly looks impressive from the front, but then it has a similar profile to a Bombardier Aventra or a member of Hitachi’s Class 800 family of trains.
The open nose is reminiscent of front-engined Formula One racing cars of the 1950s, with an added sloping front to apply downforce.
I would suspect that the similarity of the trains is driven by good aerodynamic design.
If all the current Formula One cars were painted the same colour, could you tell the apart?
Trains seem to be going the same way. Only Siemens Class 700/707/717 design doesn’t seem to be rounded and smooth.
The PowerPack
The unique feature of these bi-mode trains is the diesel PowerPack in the middle of the train.
Stadler first used a PowerPack in the GTW, which I described in The Train Station At The Northern End Of The Netherlands.
- GTWs date from 1998.
- Over five hundred GTWs have been built.
- You see GTWs in several countries in Europe.
- GTWs have a maximum speed of between 115 and 140 kph.
The concept of the train with a PowerPack is certainly well-proven.
I have deliberately ridden for perhaps twenty seconds in the corridor through the PowerPack on both trains! Although I didn’t measure it with a sound meter, I’m fairly certain, that the more modern Class 755 train is better insulated against the noise of the engines.
But you would expect that with progress!
There could be another significant difference between the bi-mode Flirt and the GTW. This picture shows the connection between the PowerPack and the next car.
It looks like it could be a damper to improve the performance of the train on curves. It is not visible on this picture of a GTW PowerPack.
As an engineer, this says to me, that Stadler have taken tremendous care to make the unusual concept of the PowerPack work perfectly.
Train Power On Diesel
Consider.
- This four-car Class 755 train has installed diesel power of 1920 kW.
- At 100 mph, the train will travel a mile in thirty-six seconds.
- In that time, 19.2 kWh would be generated by the engines at full-power.
This means that a maximum power of 4.6 kWh per vehicle mile is available, when running on diesel power.
In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?, I answered the question in the title of the post.
This was my conclusion in that post.
I know this was a rather rough and ready calculation, but I can draw two conclusions.
- Trains running at 125 mph seem to need between three and five kWh per vehicle mile.
- The forty year old InterCity 125 has an efficient energy use, even if the engines are working flat out to maintain full speed.
The only explanation for the latter is that Terry Miller and his team, got the aerodynamics, dynamics and structures of the InterCity 125 almost perfect. And this was all before computer-aided-design became commonplace.
In future for the energy use of a train running at 125 mph, I shall use a figure of three kWh per vehicle mile.
These figures leave me convinced that the design of the Class 755 train can deliver enough power to sustain the train at 125 mph, when running on diesel power
Obviously, as the maximum speed in East Anglia, is only the 100 mph of the Great Eastern Main Line, they won’t be doing these speeds in the service of Greater Anglia.
I also had a quick word with a driver and one of my questions, was could the train design be good for 125 mph? He didn’t say no!
This 125 mph capability could be useful for Greater Anglia’s sister company; Abellio East Midlands Trains, where 125 mph running is possible, on some routes with and without electrification.
With respect to the Greater Anglia application, I wonder how many engines will be used on various routes? Many of the routes without electrification are almost without gradients, so I can see for large sections of the routes, some engines will just be heavy passengers.
I’ve read somewhere, that the train’s computer evens out use between engines, so I suspect, it gives the driver the power he requires, in the most efficient way possible.
Remember that these Greater Anglia Class 755 trains, are the first bi-mode Stadler Flirts to go into service, so the most efficient operating philosophy has probably not been fully developed.
Train Weight
These pictures show the plates on the train giving the details of each car.
I only photographed one side of the train and I will assume that the other two cars are similar. They won’t be exactly the same, as this intermediate car has a fully-accessible toilet.
The weight of each car is as follows.
- PowerPack – PP – 27.9 tonnes
- Intermediate Car – PTSW – 16.0 tonnes
- Driving Car – DMS2 – 27.2 tonnes
Adding these up gives a train weight of 114.3 tonnes.
Note that the formation of the train is DMS+PTS+PP+PYSW+DMS2, which means that heavier and lighter cars alternate along the train.
Train Length
The previous pictures give the length of each car is as follows.
- PowerPack – PP – 6.69 metres
- Intermediate Car – PTSW – 15.22 metres
- Driving Car – DMS2 – 20.81 metres
Adding these up gives a train length of 78.75 metres.
This is very convenient as it fits within British Rail’s traditional limit for a four-car multiple unit like a Class 319 train.
Train Width
The previous pictures give the width of each car is as follows.
- PowerPack – PP – 2.82 metres
- Intermediate Car – PTSW – 2.72 metres
- Driving Car – DMS2 – 2.72 metres
The PowerPack is wider than the other cars and it is actually wider than the 2.69 metres of the Class 170 train, that the Class 755 train will replace. However, Greater Anglia’s electric Class 321 trains also have a width of 2.82 metres.
It looks to me, that Stadler have designed the PowerPack to the largest size that the UK rail network can accept.
The other cars are narrower by ten centimetres, which is probably a compromise between fitting platforms, aerodynamics and the needs of articulation.
Seats
The previous pictures give the number of seats in each car as follows.
- PowerPack – PP – 0
- Intermediate Car – PTSW – 32
- Driving Car – DMS2 – 52
This gives a total of 168 seats. Wikipedia gives 229.
Perhaps the car without the toilet has more or Wikipedia’s figure includes standees.
Kinetic Energy Of The Train
I will use my standard calculation.
The basic train weight is 114.3 tonnes.
If each of the 229 passengers weighs 90 kg with Baggage, bikes and buggies, this gives a passenger weight of 20.34 tonnes.
This gives a total weight of 134.64 tonnes.
Using Omni’s Kinetic Energy Calculator gives these figures for the Kinetic energy.
- 60 mph – 13.5 kWh
- 100 mph – 37.4 kWh
- 125 mph – 58.4 kWh
If we are talking about the Greater Anglia C;lass 755 train, which will be limited to 100 mph, this leads me to believe, that by replacing one diesel engine with a plug compatible battery of sufficient size, the following is possible.
- On all routes, regenerative braking will be available under both diesel and electric power.
- Some shorter routes could be run on battery power, with charging using existing electrification.
- Depot and other short movements could be performed under battery power.
The South Wales Metro has already ordered tri-mode Flirts, that look like Class 755 trains.
InterCity Quality For Rural Routes
The title of this section is a quote from the Managing Director of Greater Anglia; Jamie Burles about the Class 755 trains in this article on Rail Magazine.
This is the complete paragraph.
Burles said of the Class 755s: “These will be the most reliable regional train in the UK by a country mile – they had better be. They will be InterCity quality for rural routes, and will exceed expectations.”
I shall bear that quote in mind in the next few sections.
Seats And Tables
The seats are better than some I could name.
The seats are actually on two levels, as some are over the bogies. However |Stadler seem to managed to keep the floor flat and you step-up into the seats, as you do in some seats on a London New Routemaster bus.
Seat-Back Tables
I particular liked the seat-back tables, which weren’t the usual flimsy plastic, but something a lot more solid.
They are possibly made out of aluminium or a high class engineering plastic. You’d certainly be able to put a coffee on them, without getting it dumped in your lap.
It is the sort of quality you might get on an airliner, flown by an airline with a reputation for good customer service.
Step-Free Access
Stadler are the experts, when it comes to getting between the train and the platform, without a step. As I travel around Europe, you see little gap fillers emerge from trains built by Stadler, which have now arrived in East Anglia.
There was a slight problem at Great Yarmouth with a wheelchair, but it was probably something that can be easily sorted.
Some platforms may need to be adjusted.
Big Windows
The train has been designed with large windows, that are generally aligned with the seats.
There is no excuse for windows not aligning with most of the seats, as you find on some fleets of trains.
Low Flat Floor
The train has been designed around a low, flat floor.
The floor also improves the step-free access and gives more usable height inside the train.
Litter Bins
The train has well-engineered litter bins in between the seats and in the lobbies.
This bin is in the lobby, next to a comfortable tip-up seat.
Too many trains seem to be built without bins these days and the litter just gets thrown on the floor.
Conclusion
It is certainly a better class of rural train and I think it fulfils Jamie Burles’ ambition of InterCity Quality For Rural Routes.
But then services between Cambridge, Ipswich and Norwich are as important to East Anglia, as services between Hull, Leeds and Sheffield are to Yorkshire.
They are all services that can take a substantial part of an hour, so treating passengers well, might lure them out of their cars and off crowded roads.
In My First Ride In A Class 331 Train, I wrote about Northern’s new Class 331 trains.
If I was going to give the Greater Anglia train a score of eight out of ten, I’d give the Class 331 train, no more than two out of ten.
The Heaviest Freight Train Running In The UK
This is a paragraph from an article on Railway Gazette, which is entitled World Rail Freight News Round-Up.
Genesee & Wyoming subsidiary Freightliner has successfully operated a 4 624 tonne ‘jumbo train’ of aggregates from Merehead in Somerset to Acton in London, which it described as ‘the heaviest freight train currently running in the UK’. This was a trial run ahead of Freightliner taking over the haulage contract for the Mendip Rail joint venture of Hanson UK and Aggregate Industries. As the contract envisages the movement of 8 million tonnes/year, G&W’s Bulk Commercial Director for the UK/Europe Region, David Israel said ‘it was crucial that we tested the maximum haulage capability using one of our powerful Class 70 locomotives’
That is some train for the UK!
A few figures and calculations.
- Compare the weight of 4,624 tonnes with that of a nine-car 125 mph Class 800 train, which is just 438 tonnes.
- Fully loaded with 90 Kg passengers a Class 800 train weighs 494 tonnes.
- The Class 70 locomotive that is mentioned in the paragraph has a power of 2,750 kW and a weight of 129 tonnes.
- Travelling at 125 mph, the full passenger train has an energy of 214 kWh.
- Travelling at 41 mph, the freight train has an energy of 215 kWh
The stone train at 41 mph has a similar kinetic energy to a Class 800 train at 125 mph.
Rail Passengers Can Now Get From Farnworth To London In Two And A Half Hours
The title of this post is the same as that on this article on This Is Lancashire.
It may seem to be a bit of a parochial story for those near Farnworth station in Greater Manchester, but it is a problem that sffects many rail passengers all over the UK.
From Farnworth, the quickest way to London, is not the obvious one to go to Manchester Piccadilly.
This may involve changes of trains and busy trains in the Manchester Rush Hour.
Locals find a better way, is to take a train the other way and catch a train from Wigan North Western., where the hardest thing is to decide, whether you want a coffee, as you walk across the platform to catch the London train.
The on-line timetable now has been fixed to offer this route in addition.
These computer-knows-best routes crop up everywhere.
If I want to get to Victoria station from the bus stop around the corner, the best way is to catch a 30 bus to Highbury & Isligton station. There is a walk through the everlasting road-works at the station and a long walk in a tunnel to get to the platform, but it works.
However, the recommended route is to take a 38 bus to Essex Road station and then go out of London, by one stop to Highbury & Islington station.
This route has three problems.
- There is a double-crossing of busy roads at Essex Road station.
- Essex Road station was last cleaned and given a makeover, when King George was on the throne.
- The interchange at Highbury & Islington station is not for the unfit or anybody with a baggagge, bike or buggy
Only a computer working without human help, could design such a bad route.
As at Farnworth and with me in London, local knowledge is everything.
Sorting Out Manchester’s Routes
Northern Trains may have been thinking about passengers getting to the less busy stations.
They have introduced three new services that connect the West Coast Main Line and Greater Manchester.
- Wigan North Western and Alderly Edge
- Wigan North Western and Stalybridge
- Chester and Leeds via Warrington Bank Quay, Manchester Victoria, Rochdale, Hebden Bridge, Halifax and Bradford.
The latter route is an interesting one, as not only does it offer some good journey possibilities, but it is a scenic route through the Pennines.
Just Look How The Port Of Felixstowe Has Grown
This article on Rail Engineer is entitled Felixstowe Branch Line Capacity Enhancement Goes Live.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Funded by the Strategic Freight Network, with a contribution from Hutchinson Ports UK (HP-UK), a £60.4 million investment to create a new 1.4km loop on the Felixstowe branch line in Suffolk was successfully brought into service on 29 May 2019, on time and on budget. It facilitates an increase from 33 to 47 freight train paths a day in each direction on this key artery, carrying the highest freight tonnage in the country and serving the largest container port in the UK.
High Speed Two it is not, but if you read the article, you’ll see that a substantial amount of work has been done, involving track, footbridges, level crossings and signalling.
I can remember the Port of Felixstowe, when it was a just a small basin, with the Little Ships Hotel, a couple of warehouses and the giant seaplane crane. A couple of times, I used the Harwich Ferry to cross the harbour to Harwich on the Brightlingsea.
In some ways Felixstowe has come a long way in those sixty years.
With the increase in capacity on the Felixstowe Branch Line, the rail link can handle the container traffic through the Port better!
Note this about trains between Ipswich and Felixstowe.
- 47 freight trains per day between Ipswich and Felixstowe is roughly two trains per hour (tph) in both directions.
- The current passenger service is one tph.
- In addition, there is an hourly Ipswich and Lowestoft train, which shares track between Ipswich and Westerfield Junction.
- The new Class 755 trains are faster and will have shorter dwell times than the current trains.
Between Ipswich and Westerfield, there are four tph.
- The route is double-track.
- Not all trains stop at Westerfield
- The level-crossing at Westerfield station has been improved and is now is a Manually Controlled Barrier with CCTV
- The signalling has been improved and moved to Colchester Power Signal Box.
Between Westerfield and Felixstowe, there are three tph.
- The route is single track with loops to the East of Derby Road and the West of Trimley stations.
- The level crossings have been improved and three have been converted to Manually Cntrolled Barriers.
- The signalling has been improved and moved to Colchester Power Signal Box..
It looks to my untrained eye, that these service pattern are possible.
So what will happen in the future?
In the next few sections, I talk about the future.
Could More Passenger Trains Be Run To Felixstowe And Lowestoft?
I suspect here, that the limiting factor will be platform capacity at Ipswich station.
Ipswich station will have at least four tph running between Stowmarket and Colchester (3 x London and Norwich and 1 x Peterborough and Colchester), that will use Plstform 2 at Ipswich station. I suspect that this means Lowestoft and Felixstowe trains will have to share the Bay Platform 1.
With good signalling and precision driving, I suspect that the single platform could handle 2 tph to both Felixstowe and Lowestoft.
There would only ever be one train in Platform 1 at Ipswich station, unlike now, where two trains share. The new Class 755 trains will be just too long.
Could Two tph Be Run Between Ipswich And Felixstowe?
The current timetable is as follows.
- Leaves Ipswich at XX:58 and arrives Felixstowe at XX:24
- Leaves Felixstowe at XX:28 and arrives Ipswich at XX::54
Note.
- The clock-face nature of the timetable.
- Both journeys are 26 minutes
- There is four minutes for the driver to change ends and have a break.
This service would need two trains and if there’s one thing that Abellio Greater Anglia aren’t short of, it’s three-car Cl;ass 755 trains.
If the trains had the branch to themselves, there could be a two tph service between Ipswich and Felixstowe.
But they have to share it with freight trains running at two tph.
This would mean the following.
- Five tph between Ipswich and Westerfield
- Four tph between Westerfield and Felixstowe.
As two tph between Ipswich and Felixstowe is likely to be on Greater Anglia’s wish list, I suspect the new track layout was designed with this service in mind.
Currently, there is one or two cars per hour between Ipswich and Felixstowe, but a two tph service would mean a minimum of six cars per hour or a massive increase in capacity.
Could Two tph Be Run Between Ipswich And Lowestoft?
The current timetable between Ipswich and Lowestoft stations is as follows.
- An almost clock-face hourly service in both directions.
- A journey time of just under one-and-a-half hours.
- There are nine stops on the route.
- There are several minutes for the driver to change ends and have a break.
When the new Class 755 trains are working the route, the following will apply.
- The Class 755 trains are faster and have a shorter dwell time in stations.
- There will be four London and Lowestoft services per day.
I think it is true to say, that journey times will be reduced.
I suspect that the following could be possible.
- A journey time of perhaps one hour and twenty minutes.
- Trains would leave Lowestoft at XX:07
- Trains would leave Ipswich at XX:37
This or something like it, would be an acceptable clockface timetable.
I strongly believe that an improved service will be possible between Ipswich and Lowestoft.
- I feel that two tph between Ipswich and Lowestoft might be difficult to achieve without extra works on the track.
- Extra capacity can be added by using four-car Class 755 trains on the route.
- Faster services will certainly be introduced, as the train’s faster speed and shorter dwell times will knock several minutes from the journey.
I also think, that it may be possible to introduce a second service on the Southern section of the route, which runs to perhaps Leiston or even Aldeburgh. This would give the busier Southern section of the route two tph.
So Platform 1 at Ipswich station could see the following trains.
- Two tph Ipswich and Felixstowe
- One tph Ipswich and Lowestoft
- One tph Ipswich and Leiston/Aldeburgh
I believe that timetabling of the route would not be a difficult task!
Four Trains Per Day Between Lowestoft and London
The London and Lowestoft service could be arranged as follows.
- Lowestoft station has three platforms., so one could be reserved for the London service.
- If the last service arrived back late or the first service needed to leave early, the dedicated platform could be used for overnight stabling.
- When running between Ipswich and Lowestoft it would take over, one of the Ipswich and Lowestoft paths.
- The trains will stop at all stations between Ipswich and Lowstoft, as there will be jealousy between users.
- It would call in the through platforms 2 and 3 at Ipswich station..
- The trains would make as few calls as possible South of Ipswich, as the Lowestoft train will be a fourth fast London service in the hour.
No new infrastructure would be required.
Could London And Lowestoft Services Be A Dedicated Shuttle Train?
This may have marketing advantages, as the train could have its own livery and perhaps a buffet or a catering trolley.
If you assume that the working day for a train is 0600-2400, then this means the following.
- A round trip must be performed in four and a half hours.
- A London and Lowestoft time of two hours and fifteen minutes,.
- The journey time would include the turnround time at the destination.
As Ipswich and London times of an hour are possible with a 100 mph trains, like the Class 755 train, Ipswich and Lowestoft would have to be run in a time as close to an hour as possible.
Consider.
- The only trains on the East Suffolk Line will be Class 755 trains between Ipswich and Lowestoft.
- Class 755 trains may be able to stop at stations in under a minute.
- Line speed could possibly be increased, as the route appears reasonably straight
- Some level crossings could probably be removed.
- The current average speed on the line is around 35 mph.
I also suspect that Greater Anglia have run tests with the current Class 170 trains, which are 100 mph trains to determine what times are possible.
I wouldn’t be surprised if using a single shuttle train to run the four trains per day between London and Lowestoft, is possible.
- Services could leave Lowestoft at 06:00, 10:30, 15:00 and 19:30
- Services could leave Liverpool Street at 08:15, 12:45, 17:15 and 21:45
The last service would arrive back in Lowestoft at midnight.
Tram-Trains Between Ipswich And Felixstowe
This report on the East-West Rail web site is entitled Eastern Section Prospectus and gives full details of their proposals for the Eastern section of the East-West Rail Link.
This is said in the report.
Introduction of a tram-train service on the Felixstowe branch, with doubling between Derby Road and Felixstowe and street running through
Ipswich.
It is also said, that there will be a frequency of four tph between Ipswich and Felixstowe.
It looks like the plan is to fully-double the branch line to the East of Derby Road station.
To the West of Derby Road, the line is mainly single track until it joins the East Suffolk Line close to Westerfield station.
The problem is that the single-track railway goes over the over the Spring Road Viaduct. Rebuilding the viaduct to add the second track, would be something that everybody would want to totally avoid, as how would the containers from forty-seven freight trains per day in both directions, be moved in and out of the Port of Felixstowe?
If the capacity can’t be increased, the demand will have to be reduced.
A Possible Tram-Train Proposal
The East West Rail report is proposing that the 1-2 tph passenger service between Ipswich and Felixstowe should be replaced by a four tph tram-train service.
- The tram-train service would start at Ipswich station, running as a tram.
- It would probably meander through Ipswich, serving places like Portman Road, the Town Centre< Christchurch Park, the new housing in the North, Ipswich Hospital and the Retail Parks in the East.
- If Ipswich gets a new Northern Ring Road, the tram-trains, might run on the original by-pass, that goes past Ipswich Hospital.
- It would then join the double-track section of the Felixstowe Branch Line on the Eastern outskirts of the town.
- Extra stops might be built between Ipswich and Felixstowe.
- At Felixstowe station, the tram-trains could revert to tram mode and might even go as far as the sea-front, using battery-power.
There are a lot of possibilities to give Ipswich and Felixstowe, one of the best local transport links in the world.
There will be some collateral benefits.
- Extra freight trains can probably be squeezed through.
- Ipswich Hospital will get the updated transport links, that it badly needs.
- Road traffic would be reduced.
I also believe that the tram-train could be added to the Felixstowe Branch Line without disrupting trains, freight or passengers.
Electrification
I can remember reports from the 1960s, which said that felt the Felixstowe Branch Line would be electrified.
- With a frequency of four tph, the route would surely be electrified for the tram-trains.
- It would probably be electrified at 25 KVAC, so that freight trains could take advantage.
- When street running in Ipswich and Felizstowe,, 750 VDC electrfication or battery-power could be used.
There would be no extra electrification needed to enable all freight trains going via London to be electric-hauled.
Freight Locomotives
I think it likely, that increasingly, we’ll see Class 93 locomotives and other electro diesel locomotives with a Last Mile capability taking freight trains into and out of the Port of Felixstowe.
These new breed of 110 mph locomotives will be able to take maximum-length freight trains on routes to, from and through London, but a new locomotive will be needed to take trains across East Anglia to Ely and Pryrtborough and then on to the Midlands and the Notth.
Conclusion
The Port of Felixstowe and the railways connecting it to the rest of the UK have come a long way in sixty years and they will expand more in the next decade or two!
Is Manchester Metrolink Expensive?
On my trip to Manchester earlier this week, I used contactless ticketing for two trips on the Manchester Metrolink.
- Piccadilly to Velopark
- VeloPark to New Islington
It cost me £7.40.
On the same day, I went, I took a trip to Glossop and the return cost me £4.30 with a Senior Railcard.
Were South Western Railway’s Class 707 Trains Designed By An Accountant With A Red Pen?
I’ve just travelled between Syon Lane and Dalston Junction stations.
For the first part of the journey, I was in a South Western Railway Class 707 train, until I changed to the Overground and a Class 378 train.
The Class 707 train is better noted for what it doesn’t have.
- Air-conditioning
- Two door opening buttons
- Toilets
- Padding in the seats
But it does have wi-fi!
Was it designed by an accountant with a red pen?
As they were lumbered with these uncomfortable trains by the previous franchise holders; Stagecoach, I can understand why they are being replaced with Class 701 trains.
I am actually typing this in one of London Overground’s Class 378 trains, which have air-conditioning, better seats and more door buttons!
Conclusion
I can’t say I’m sorry to see Stagecoach abandon train operating!
Bombardier Doesn’t Seem Too Disappointed On Missing Out On The Abellio East Midlands Railway Order
This article on the Derby Telegraph is entitled Derby’s Bombardier Misses Out On Big Contract To Supply Trains For The East Midlands.
This is two paragraphs from the article.
In a statement, Bombardier said: “Bombardier is clearly disappointed that we have not been selected to supply bi-mode trains for the East Midlands franchise.
“We believe we submitted a competitive bid – on technology, strength of product, deliverability and cost, and will seek formal feedback from Abellio.”
There certainly hasn’t been any published threat of legal action.
The Abellio East Midlands Railway Order From Hitachi.
The order placed was as follows.
Thirty-three five-car AT-300 trains.
- 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
- Four cars have underfloor diesel-engines.
- 125 mph running.
- 24 metre cars.
- Ability to work in pairs.
- Evolution of a Class 802 train.
- A new nose.
It is a £400 million order.
No Trains For Corby
In How Will Abellio East Midlands Railway Maximise Capacity On The Midland Main Line?, I calculated that the current timetable to Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield would need thirty-two trains.
So thirty-three trains would only be enough trains for the bi-mode services to the three Northern termini.
So it looks like Hitachi are not providing any trains for the Corby services! Surely, to have a compatible fleet from one manufacturer would be of an advantage to Abellio East Midlands Railway.
An Ideal Fleet For Corby
Trains between London and Corby take around 70-75 minutes, with a round trip taking three hours.
This means that to run a one train per hour (tph) service to Corby needs three trains and a two tph service will need six trains.
As trains go wrong and also need servicing, I would add at least one spare train, but two is probably preferable.
It would have the following characteristics.
- All electric.
- 125 mph running, as they will need to keep out of the way of the Hitachi bi-modes.
- 240 metres long.
- A passenger-friendly interior, with loys of tables.
- Energy efficient
If the last point s to be met, I and many other engineers believe that to save energy, trains must have regenerative braking to batteries on the train.
In Kinetic Energy Of A Five-Car Class 801 Train, I calculated that the kinetic energy of a Class 801 train, with every seat taken was 104.2 kWh
This calculation was performed for a half-length train, so a full electric train for London and Corby would have a kinetic energy of 208.4 kWh, if it was similar to one of Hitachi’s Class 801 train.
The reason the kinetic energy of a train is important, is teat if a train brakes from full speed and has batteries to handle the energy generated by regenerative braking, the batteries must be big enough to handle all the energy.
So a ten-car train similar in capacity and weight to a Class 801 train would need batteries capable of handling 208.4 kWh.
I’ll give a simple example.
A train similar to a Class 801, is full and running using electrification at 125 mph. It is approaching a station, where it will stop.
- The train’s computer knows the mass and velocity of the train at all times and hence the kinetic energy can be calculated.
- The train’s computer will constantly manage the train’s electricity supply, so that the batteries always have sufficient capacity to store any energy generated by braking.
- As the train brakes, the energy generated will be stored in the batteries.
- As the train moves away from the station, the train’s computer will use energy from the overhead electrification or batteries to accelerate the train.
Energy will constantly be recycled between the traction motors and the batteries.
I don’t know what battery capacity would be needed, but in my experience, perhaps between 300-400 kWh would be enough.
Any better figures, gratefully accepted.
When you consider that the battery in a Tesla car is around 60-70 kWh, I don’t think, there’ll be too much trouble putting enough battery power underneath a ten-car train.
Onward To Melton Mowbray
This page on the Department for Transport web site is an interactive map of the Abellio’s promises for East Midlands Railway.
These are mentioned for services to Oakham and Melton Mowbray.
- After electrification of the Corby route there will continue to be direct service each way between London and Oakham and Melton Mowbray once each weekday, via Corby.
- This will be operated with brand new 125mph trains when these are introduced from April 2022.
This seems to be a very acceptable minimum position.
Surely, in a real world driven by marketing and finance and more and more passengers wanting to travel regularly by train to places like London, Luton Airport and Leicester, there will come a time, when an hourly service on this route is needed.
Could a Corby service be extended to Melton Mowbray using battery power, at perhaps a slower speed of 90 mph?
Accelerating away from Corby, the train would need 108 kWh of energy to get to 90 mph with a full train.
- There would be a continuation of the electrification for perhaps a couple of hundred metres after Corby station.
- The train would probably leave Corby with a full battery, which would have been charged on the journey from London.
Once at cruising speed, the train would need energy to maintain line speed and provide hotel power.
In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?, I calculated the figure for some high-speed trains.
This was my conclusion.
In future for the energy use of a train running at 125 mph, I shall use a figure of three kWh per vehicle mile.
So I will use that figure, although I suspect the real figure could be lower.
I will also assume.
- Corby to Melton Mowbray is 26.8 miles.
- It’s a ten-car train.
- Regenerative braking is seventy percent efficient.
- The train is running at 90 mph, between Cotby and Melton Mowbray, with an energy of 108 kWh
Energy use on a round trip between Corby and Melton Mowbray, would be as follows.
- Accelerating at Corby – 108 kWh – Electrification
- Stop at Oakham – 32.4 kWh – Battery
- Corby to Melton Mowbray – 804 kWh – Battery
- Stop at Melton Mowbray – 32.4 kWh – Battery
- Stop at Oakham – 32.4 kWh – Battery
- Melton Mowbray to Corby – 804 kWh – Battery
This gives a total of 1705.2 kWh
The battery energy need gets a lot more relaxed, if there is a charging station at Melton Mowbray, as the train will start the return journey with a full battery.
Energy use from Corby to Melton Mowbray would be as follows.
- Accelerating at Corby – 108 kWh – Electrification
- Stop at Oakham – 32.4 kWh – Battery
- Corby to Melton Mowbray – 804 kWh – Battery
This gives a total of 836.4 kWh.
Energy use from Melton Mowbray to Corby would be as follows.
- Accelerating at Melton Mowbray- 108 kWh – Battery
- Stop at Oakham – 32.4 kWh – Battery
- Melton Mowbray to Corby – 804 kWh – Battery
This gives a total of 944.4 kWh.
The intriguing fact, is that if you needed a train to go out and back from Corby to Melton Mowbray, it needs a battery twice the size of one needed, if you can charge the train at Melton Mowbray., during the stop of several minutes.
Charging The Train
This page on the Furrer + Frey web site, shows a charging station..
It might also be possible to erect a short length of 25 KVAC overhead electrification. This would also help in accelerating the train to line speed.
This Google Map shows Melton Mowbray station.
It looks to be a station on a large site with more than adequate car parking and I suspect building a bay platform with charging facilities would not be the most difficult of projects.
More Efficient Trains
I also think that with good design electricity use can be reduced from my figure of 3 kWh per vehicle mile and the regenerative braking efficiency can be increased.
Obviously, the more efficient the train, the greater the range for a given size of battery.
Onward To Leicester
If the train service can be extended by the 26.8 miles between Corby and Melton Mowbray, I wonder if the electric service can be extended to Leicester.
Under current plans the Northern end of the electrification will be Market Harborough.
In Market Harborough Station – 11th July 2019, I wrote about the station after a visit. In my visit, I notices there were a lot of croaaovers to the North of the station.
As it was a new track alignment, I suspect that they were new.
So is it the interntion to turnback services at Market Harborough or are the crossovers preparation for links to stabling sidings?
It got me asking if battery-electric trains could reach Leicester.
- Leicester and Market Harborough are only fourteen miles apart.
- There are no stops in between.
- Using my three kwH per vehicle mile, this would mean that a ten car train would use 420 kWh between the two stations at 125 mph.
I certainly believe that a Northbound train passing Market Harborough with fully-charged batteries could reach Leicester, if it had an adequate battery of perhaps 700 kWh.
As at Melton Mowbray, there would probably need to be a charging station at Leicester.
The picture shows the station from the Northern bridge.
The platforms shown are the two main lines used by most trains. On the outside are two further lines and one or both could be fitted with a charging station, if that were necessary.
An Example Electric Service Between London And Leicester
If they so wanted, Abellio East Midlands Railway could run 125 mph battery-electric services between London and Leicester.
The Current Timings
The fastest rains go North in around 66-67 minutes and come South in seventy.
So a round trip would take around two and a half hours.
Five trains would be needed for a half-hourly service.
I feel it would be very feasible, if Abellio East Midlands Railway wanted to increase services between London and Leicester, then this could be done with a fleet of zero-carbon battery-electric trains, using battery power between Leicester and Market Harborough.
A Non-Stop London And Leicester Service
I wonder what would be the possible time for an electric express running non-stop between London and Leicester.
- Currently, some diesel Class 222 trains are timetabled to achieve sixty-two minutes.
- Linespeed would be 125 mph for much of the route.
- There is no reason, why the fourteen mile section without electrification North of Market Harborough couldn’t be run at 1235 mph on battery-power, once the track is upgraded to that speed.
- iIn the future, modern digital signalling, as used by Thameslink, could be applied to the whole route and higher speeds of up to 140 mph may be possible.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a battery-electric train travelling between London and Leicester in fifty minutes before 2030.
A fifty-minute service would result in a two-hour round trip and need just two trains for a frequency of two tph.
It would surely be a marketing man’s dream.
It should be noted that Abellio has form in this area and have introduced Norwich-in-Ninrty services on the slower London and Norwich route.
London And Leicester Via Corby, Oakham And Melton Mowbray
I have been very conservative in my calculations of battery size.
With real data on the terrain, the track profile, the train energy consumption, regenerative braking performance and the passengers, I do wonder, if it would be possible to run on battery power between Corby and Leicester via Oakham and Melton Mowbray.
- The distance would be 62 miles on battery power.
- Trains could serve Syston station.
- Using times of current services London and Leicester would take two hours fifteen minutes.
I suspect it would be possible, but it would be a slow service.
Would These Services Be An Application For Bombardier’s 125 mph Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries?
Could Bombardier’s relaxed reaction to not getting the main order, be because they are going to be building some of their proposed 125 mph bi-mode trains with batteries, that will be able to work the following routes?
- London and Melton Mowbray via Corby and Oakham.
- London and Leicester via Market Harborough.
But I think that the main emphasis could be on a non-stop high-speed service between London and Leicester.
I have been suspicious that there is more to Bombardier’s proposed train than they have disclosed and wrote Is Bombardier’s 125 mph Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries, A 125 mph Battery-Electric Aventra With Added Diesel Power To Extend The Range?
Since I wrote that article, my view that Bombardier’s train is a battery-electric one, with diesel power to extend the range, has hardened.
These Midland Main Line trains will run in two separate modes.
- On the Southern electrified sections, the trains will be 125 mph electric trains using batteries for regenerative braking, energy efficiency and emergency power in the case of overhead line failure..
- On the Northern sections without electrification,the trains will be battery-electric trains running at the maximum line-speed possible, which will be 125 mph on Leicester services.
There will be an optimum battery size, which will give the train the required performance.
Is there any need for any diesel engines?
Quite frankly! No! As why would you lug something around that you only need for charging the batteries and perhaps overhead supply failure?
- Batteries would only need to be charged at the Northern end of the routes. So use a chasrging station, if one is needed!
- Batteries can handle overhead supply failure, automatically.
Who needs bi-modes?
How Big Would The Batteries Need To Be?
A full train would have a kinetic energy of around 200 kWh and I said this about battery capacity for handling the energy from regenerastive braking.
I don’t know what battery capacity would be needed, but in my experience, perhaps between 300-400 kWh would be enough.
Any better figures, gratefully accepted.
To handle Corby to Melton Mowbray and back, I estimated that 1,800 kWh would be needed, but if the train had a top-up at Melton Mowbray a capacity of 1,000 kWh would be sufficient.
Pushed, I would say, that a battery capacity of 2,000 kWh would be sufficient to run both routes without a charging station, at the Northern end.
I also believe the following will happen.
- Trains will get more efficient and leighter in weight.
- Batteries will increase their energy density.
- Charging stations will charge trains faster.
- Battery costs will fall.
This would mean that larger battery capacities can be achieved without the current weight and cost penalty and the achievable range after the end of the wires will increase.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see ranges of over fifty miles in a few years, which with a charging station at the destination, means battery-electric trains could venture fifty miles from an electrified line.
A few other suggested routes.
- Ashford and Southampton
- Birmingham and Stansted Airport
- Carliswle and Newcastle
- Doncaster and Peterborough via Lincoln (CS)
- Edinburgh and Tweedbank (CS)
- London Euston and Chester
- London St. Pancras and Hastings
- London Waterloo and Salisbury (CS)
- Manchester and Sheffield (CS)
- Norwich and Nottingham (CS)
- York and Hull via Scarborough (CS)
Note.
- Stations marked (CS) would need a charging station.
- Some routes would only need 100 mph trains.
I think that a 125 mph battery train will have a big future.
Conclusion
I have a feeling that Bombardier are right to be not too disappointed.
« Previous | Next »
How Will Abellio East Midlands Railway Maximise Capacity On The Midland Main Line?
In this post, I will try and get a feel to how Abellio East Midlands Railway, will maximise capacity on the Midland Main Line.
The Current Service
There are currently two trains per hour (tph) to both Nottingham and Sheffield and one tph to Corby from London.
Ignoring the Corby service, which will be using electric trains, intermediate calls have these frequencies, from South to North.
- Bedford – One tph
- Wellingborough – One tph
- Kettering – One tph
- Market Harborough – Two tph
- Leicester – Four tph
- Loughborough – Two tph
- East Midlands Parkway – Two tph
- Long Eaton – One tph
- Beeston – One tph
- Derby – Two tph
- Chesterfield – Two tph
As the new bi-mode trains will be more modern, with probably shorter dwell times at each station, I suspect that when Abellio East Midlands Railway implement their ultimate timetable, there will be more stops, without degrading journey times.
These are fastest times.
- London and Nottingham is one hour forty minutes
- London and Sheffield is two hours
I feel that round trips to both destinations will be four hours with some speed increases and shorter station dwell times.
- The current two tph to Nottingham and Sheffield needs eight trains to each destination.
- This is a total of sixteen trains.
As each train could be two five-car trains working as a ten-car train, train numbers for the current service could be as high as thirty-two trains.
A first look seems to indicate that there .will be no overall increase in train frequency, although, as I said earlier, the performance of the new trains should allow extra station stops.
It also indicates to me, that any increases in frequency between London and Nottingham/Sheffield will need extra trains.
The Electrified High Speed Line South Of Kettering
Midland Main Line services South of Kettering are as follows.
- Two tph to London and Nottingham
- Two tph between London and Sheffield
- One tph between London and Corby.
From December 2021, there will be two tph between London and Corby.
The maximum number of services between London and Kettering on the electrified section currently envisaged is only six tph or one train every ten minutes.
As the Class 700 trains on Thameslink are capable of using digital signalling and all the new trains will also be similarly equipped, I wouldn’t be surprised that the theoretical capacity of the electrified fast lines could be higher than the proposed six tph. |Especially, when digital signalling is installed.
The number of trains in the fleet, is much more of a limit on services, than the capacity of the Midland Main Line.
If all trains were ten cars, the following numbers of trains would be needed.
- Current two tph – 32 trains
- Increase to three tph – 48 trains
- Increase to three tph – 64 trains
Are there enough passengers to fill all these trains?
Does St. Pancras Have Enough Capacity?
St. Pancras station has four platforms for Midland Main Line services.
- The platforms are long enough to take two five-car Class 222 trains,.
- They would surely accommodate a ten-car formation of the new Hitachi trains.
- Each platform can probably handle three or four tph, giving a total capacity of 12-16 tph.
As four tph to Nottingham and Sheffield and two tph to Corby is only a total of ten tph, there is enough platform capacity for several years to come.
If there is a problem, it is that the large numbers of passengers would overwhelm the stairs and escalators between the ground level of the station and the platforms.
I am certain, that just like the Eurostar platforms at St. Pancras, the Midland Main Line platforms will need better passenger access and facilities.
Will it even be enough, when up to six tph, all of which could be 240 metres long, start to arrive in December 2021?
What could be done to help solve the capacity problem at St. Pancras station in the future?
Better Access To The Midland Main Line Platforms
Consider.
- Space is limited to add extra escalators, lifts and places to wait
- St. Pancras is a Grade I Listed Building.
- As I don’t travel through the station in the Peak, the escalators seem to always be going the wrong way.
Improving the current access will be very difficult.
This Google Map shows the Northern End of the station.
Note.
- The Midland Main Line platforms are the two island platforms on the left.
- The Southeastern HighSpeed platforms are the two island platforms on the right.
- The Eurostar platforms are the three island platforms in the middle.
Could a second entrance to some of the platforms be built here?
It would be very difficult, unless the extension was future-proofed when it was built.
Underground Improvements
Getting between the Midland Main Line platforms and the Underground is an obstable course.
As a Londoner, who’s had the operation to have the Underground Map implanted in my brain, I generally go to the Midland Main Line platforms at St. Pancras by taking one of the following.
A bus from close to my house to outside the station.
- A Metropolitan Line train from Moorgate
- A Northern Line train from Angel.
- A Piccadilly Line train from Manor House
- A Victoria Line train from Highbury & Islington
The last four need a bus to get to the Underground.
I usually come back home, by spending just over a tenner on a black cab!
Crossrail 2
Crossrail 2 should improve matters, but will it ever be built?
Will The New Brent Cross Thameslink Station Allow Cross Platform Interchange Between Midland Main Line and Thameslink Services?
Consider.
- The proposed Brent Cross Thameslink will be just North of Cricklewood station.
- Midland Main Line services through the station would be six tph.
- Thameslink services through the station would be fourteen tph
- The West London Orbital Railway could be built to connect the station to High Speed Two and Heathrow
Would it take the pressure off St. Pancras?
It might do, if a cross-platform interchange could be arranged.
Could Some Midland Main Line Services Use Thameslink?
Consider.
- The obvious service to go through Thameslink would be the two tph service between Corby and St. Pancras.
- Thameslink is currently setup to handle 24 tph, but it has been designed for 30 tph.
- The Corby service will stop at Kettering, Luton and Luton Airport Parkway, to the North of London.
- It could perhaps terminate at the soon-to-be-rebuilt Gatwick Airport station in the South.
It might work!
Especially, if Kettering station were to be rebuilt to have cross-platform interchange between Corby sewrvices and the bi-mode ones going further North.
Splitting And Joining Trains
In Rock Rail Wins Again!, I gave this simple example of how the splitting and joining capability of Hitachi AT-300 trains can be used.
A ten-car train might leave St. Pancras as two five-car units running as a pair. It could split at East Midlands Parkway station and one train could go to Nottingham and the other to Derby. Coming South the two trains would join at East Midlands Parkway.
I feel that Derby, East Midlands Parkway and Leicester are ideal stations on the Midland Main Line, where services could be split and joined.
- They have at least four platforms.
- The platforms are long and straight.
The two terminals at Nottingham and Sheffield could also probably be used to enable services to serve more destinations.
Shorter trains must have advantages on some routes.
- Capacity is better matched to demand.
- Platforms may not need to be extended.
- Services can be run by a driver and a conductor.
Will Abellio East Midlands Railway use splitting and joining to increase the coverage of their services?
Great Western Railway’s Class 800, 801 and 802 trains have the capability to split and join and the operator doesn’t seem to use it. Although, they do split and join Class 387 trains.
Extended Services To And From The North And East
The ability to split and join, that could be used to extend services to the North And East.
Serving Barnsley, South Yorkshire And Leeds
Consider.
- In Sheffield Region Transport Plan 2019 – A New Station At Barnsley Dearne Valley, I talked about a proposed new station at Barnsley Dearne Valley on the route between Sheffield and Leeds.
- The Sheffield Region Transport Plan 2019, also envisages a new Midland Main Line station at Rotherham.
- This report on the Transport for the North web site, is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail.
- The report states that there will be a fast Sheffield and Leeds service at a frequency of four tph, that taqkes twenty-eight minutes.
- Currently, East Midlands services on this route take just over half-an-hour with only a stop at Wakefield Westgate.
I wonder if there are paths and need for a London and Sheffield service to split at Sheffield with, the two five-car trains going to different destinations.
- Leeds via Rotherham, Barnsley Dearne Valley and Wakefield Westgate, is one possibility.
- Could a service go to Huddersfield?
- Hull is probably too far.
One tph could terminate at Sheffield and one splitting and one tph could split and serve other destinations.
Advantages could include.
- Barnsley and Rotherham get a direct hourly service to London.
- South Yorkshire and Leeds have a direct hourly service to the East Midlands.
- Sheffield and Leeds have an hourly fast service.
I’m sure Abellio have a very workable plan to improve services North of Sheffield.
Serving Lincolnshire And Nottinghamshire
Consider.
- Splitting and joining at Nottingham may allow an increase in direct services to and from Lincoln.
- Perhaps parts of North Lincolnshire could be well-served by a fast train from Nottingham.
- Would Mansfield and Worksop benefit from a direct service from London on the Robin Hood Line, after a reverse at Nottingham.
The five-car trains give the flexibility to do the previously unthinkable.
Conclusion
There is a lot of developments that can or will happen with Midland Main Line services.
An Early Bird Catches A Train!
I needed to go to Norwich today, so I caught the 06:00 out of Liverpool Street.
It cost me just £6.60 and arrives a few minutes early!
I also bought the ticket yesterday afternoon!
The Anonymous Widower 