Rock Rail Wins Again!
This article on the Railway Gazette, is entitled Abellio Orders East Midlands Inter-City Fleet.
The order can be summarised as follows.
- The trains will be Hitachi AT-300 trains
- There will be thirty-three bi-mode trains of five cars.
- The trains will be 125 mph capable.
- Unlike the similar Class 802 trains, the trains will have 24 metre long cars, instead of 26 metres.
- They will have a slightly modified nose profile.
- The new trains will have an extra diesel engine.
- The new trains will cost a total of £400 million.
A few of my thoughts.
I shall constantly refer to an earlier post called Vere Promises East Midlands Bi-Modes In 2022.
Cost Of The Trains
In the earlier post, I calculated that the five five-car AT-300 all-electric trains, ordered by First Group for London and Edinburgh services cost four million pounds per car.
Thirty-three trains at this four million pounds per car, works out at £660 million, which is sixty-five percent higher than the price Abellio is quoted as paying.
Abellio are actually paying just £2.42 million per car or forty percent less than First Group.
So are Abellio buying a cut price special?
As Abellio East Midlands Railway will be competing up against LNER’s Azumas on some journeys, I can’t see that running a second class train would be a sound commercial decision.
I am left to the conclusion, that Abellio have got a very good deal from Hitachi.
What Diesel Power Is Used?
In a five-car Class 802 train, there are three MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engines, each of 700 kW , which gives a total power of 2,100 kW.
If the Abellio train needs this power, with four diesel engines, each must have 525 kW.
Not sure yet, but this could save a couple of tonnes in weight.
I doubt that Hitachi are dissatisfied with the performance of the MTU diesel engines in the current Class 800, 801 and 802 trains, as there are no media reports of any ongoing problems. So I feel that they could go with the same supplier for the trains for Abellio East Midlands Railway.
If you type “Class 800 regenerative braking” into Google, you will find this document on the Hitachi Rail web site, which is entitled Development of Class 800/801 High-speed Rolling Stock for UK Intercity Express Programme.
The only mention of the R-word is in this paragraph.
An RGS-compliant integrated on-train data recorder (OTDR) and juridical recording unit (JRU), and an EN-compliant energy
meter to record energy consumption and regeneration are fitted to the train.
If you search for brake in the document, you find this paragraph.
In addition to the GU, other components installed under the floor of drive cars include the traction converter, fuel tank, fire protection system, and brake system.
Note that GU stands for generator unit.
The document provides this schematic of the traction system.
Note BC which is described as battery charger.
Braking energy doesn’t appear to be re-used to power the train, but to provide hotel power for the train.
I talk about this in more detail in Do Class 800/801/802 Trains Use Batteries For Regenerative Braking?.
In my view, it is an outdated design compared to some of those seen in the latest road vehicles and trains from other manufacturers.
This is a sentence from the Railway Gazette article.
According to Hitachi, the EMR units will be an ‘evolution’ of the AT300 design supplied to other UK operators, with 24 m long vehicles rather than 26 m, and a slightly modified nose profile.
So does that evolution include regenerative braking to batteries on the train?
This could have advantages.
- improved acceleration and smoother braking
- Less electricity and diesel consumption.
- No running of diesel engines in stations.
I’m only speculating, but could the batteries or supercapacitors be under the car without a diesel engine? A balanced design might make this the middle car of the train
There must also be the possibility, that instead of using MTU diesel engines, the trains use MTU Hybrid PowerPacks.
Why shouldn’t Hitachi get their respected supplier to do as much of the hard work as possible?
Train Length
A five-car Class 222 train, which work the Midland Main Line now, consists of two 23.85 metre and three 22.82 metre cars. So it is 116.16 metres long.
The article says the cars in the new trains will be 24 metres long,, so a new train will be 120.0 metres long or 3.84 metres longer.
This will probably mean that there will be no need for costly and disruptive platform lengthening at a couple of stations.
Capacity
Abellio have stated that passengers like having a table and that they will be offering a catering service
So will we see most seats having a table?
Chiltern have proved it’s a philosophy that works for all stakeholders!
This means that capacity comparisons with the current trains will be difficult, as you’re comparing apples with oranges.
Hopefully, we’ll get more details soon!
Splitting And Joining
I would assume the new trains will have the ability to split and join an route like the other Hitachi trains.
This could be very useful in organising trains in the limited number of paths South of Kettering.
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.
A Nose Job
I’m intrigued by the phrase “slightly different nose profile” in the extract I quoted earlier.
Have Hitachi’s champion origamists found a way of designing a train which can split and join with both an aerodynamic nose and a corridor connection?
After their experience with the Class 385 train and its curved windows, I suspect Hitachi have learned a lot. Could for instance one end of the five-car train have a Class 800-style nose and the other an improved Class 385-style front end?
Trains would mate blunt-to-blunt, so the Southern train would always point towards London and the Northern train would always point towards Sheffield.
I used to have a friend, who learned origami skills at Hiroshima in the 1950s, whilst doing National Service in the Army.
I don’t think my proposal is impossible, but I’ll admit it’s unusual!
- The blunt end might have a pair of doors, each with a flat window, thus giving the driver an uninterrupted view, when driving from that end.
- When the trains connected the doors would open and swing forward. The gang way would unfold probably from under the cab The driver’s desk would probably fold away, as the two cabs wouldn’t be needed in a ten-car train.
- Connect and disconnect would be totally automatic.
Effectively, two five-car trains would convert into a ten-car train.
The Number Of Trains
In my earlier post, I estimated that Abellio East Midlands Railway would buy 140 bi-mode carriages.
This works out as 35 trains, as against the thirty-three actually ordered.
This is close enough to say, that these new trains are only for main line services and will not be used on the electric services to Corby, which I estimate will be another seven 240 metre-long electric trains
A Complete Fleet Renewal
This is a paragraph from the Railway Gazette article.
Abellio UK Managing Director Dominic Booth said the new trains would ‘form the centrepiece of our ambitious plans for a complete replacement of all the trains on the East Midlands Railway’, representing ‘a more than £600m investment to really improve the region’s railway’.
When Abellio say renewal, they mean renewal.
So will Bombardier or another manufacturer receive a consolation prize of the seven high-capacity 240 metre long electric trains for the St. Pancras and Corby service?
A version of the Abellio part-owned, West Midlands Trains‘s, Class 730 train, would surely do just fine.
The Role Of Rock Rail
The trains will be leased from Rock Rail.
The Rock Rail web site gives this insight.
Rock Rail’s game changing approach to rolling stock funding has:
- Enabled long term institutional investors to invest directly into a new sector.
- Driven better value for government, operators and passengers.
- Extended the market for infrastructure finance.
Rock Rail works closely with the franchise train operators and manufactures to ensure a collaborative approach to design, manufacture and acceptance of the new state of the art trains on time and to budget as well as to manage the long-term residual value and releasing risks.
It’s obviously an approach that has worked, as they have been behind three rolling stock deals at they have funded trains for Moorgate services, Greater Anglia and South Western Railway in recent months.
The Abellio East Midlands Railway makes that a fourth major fleet.
Take a few minutes to explore their web site.
Rock Rail say their backers are institutional investors. So who are these faceless institutions with deep pockets.
I have seen Standard Life Aberdeen mentioned in connection with Rock Rail. This Scottish company has £670 billion of funds under management and it is the second largest such company in Europe.
Companies like these need secure long term investments, that last thirty to forty years, so that pension and insurance funds can be invested safely to perhaps see us through retirement. I know that some of my pension is invested in a product from Standard Life Aberdeen, so perhaps I might ultimately own a couple of threads in a seat cover on a train!
As the Government now insists everybody has a pension, there is more money looking for a safe mattress!
Rock Rail allows this money to be used to purchase new trains.
Rock Rail seem to be bringing together train operators, train manufacturers and money to give train operators, their staff and passengers what they want. I seem to remember that Abellio did a lot of research in East Anglia about the train service that is needed.
Conclusion
Abellio have made a very conservative decision to buy trains from Hitachi, but after my experiences of riding in Class 800, 801 and 802 trains in the last few months, it is a decision, that will satisfy everyone’s needs.
Unless of course, Hitachi make a horrendous mess of the new trains!
But the four fleets, they have introduced into the UK, have only suffered initial teething troubles and don’t seem to have any long term problems.
There are some small design faults, which hopefully will be sorted in the new trains.
- Step-free access between train and platform.
- The carriage of bicycles and other large luggage.
The second will be more difficult to solve as passengers seem to bring more and more with them every year.
Eurostar Is Overflowing
I took this picture on Sunday night at around seven in the evening.
I’d just walked through the entrance and the queues were long and overflowing round the corner.
I do think there’ll come a time in a few years, when Eurostar will have to rebuild substantially to handle the increasing numbers of passengers.
West Hampstead Station – 29th July 2019
West Hampstead station opened almost fully to the public yesterday.
The only things, that need finishing are the lifts and some small works.
The new station building has an almost 1930s feel about it as if it is inspired by some of the classic stations like Oakwood.
I do like the ziggurat-style steps to the overbridge. This has allowed a wide staircase, that is frilly-shielded from heavy weather, at a busy interchange station
Manchester’s Contactless Ticketing
In Manchester yesterday, I used their new contactless ticketing.
The system appeared to be working well, but I do have reservations.
Use On The Trains
I went up to Glossop on the train. As both Glossop and Manchester Piccadilly stations have tiket barriers, why can’t I use contactless ticketing on that type of journey?
Consider.
All of the barriers I saw, were the same as London’s, so they can also read contactless bank cards.
Not all stations in London have ticket barriers. You’re just expected to touch in and touch out, as you do with Manchester’s system.
Surely, the software can and will be extended!
Damage To The Terminal
Two of the four terminals I looked at were damaged; possibly by a sledgehammer or a Size 10-boot.
Are they robust enough.
Instructions For Users
I didn’t see any posters, describing how to use the system in English.
Surely, as Manchester, is receiving a lot more visitors, comprehensive instructions in several languages.
Terminal Design
I came across a couple of first time users, who were both locals and they weren’t sure, where to put their card.
I’d be interested to know, why they didn’t use London’s design of terminal.
I’ve only ever seen a technician fixing one broken terminal in London.
No Staff
I didn’t see any staff! The stop under Piccadilly had no staff there to help visitors.
What About Those With Poor Vision?
I have a friend, who is registered blind and has a guide dog. But he can see a bit and has no trouble using contactless in London, especially as the dog leads him to wide gates.
Would my friend cope in Manchester?
Conclusion
It’s a good start, but some details haven’t been properly thought through!
At least, I won’t need to buy a ticket in Manchester again, unless I’m using a train.
They Don’t Make Very Good Boats
This was a tweet from Greater Manchester Police Traffic, during the recent floods.
The driver of this Lamorghini lost control on standing water and took out a section of before making off on foot prior to police arrival.
A very expensve mistake. They don’t make very good boats!!
Nearly 400 people are talking about it.
Manchester Metrolink To Gorton And Glossop
The Wikipedia entry for the Manchester Metrolink doesn’t say much about Glossop, except that one of the original lines would have taken over the Glossop Line to Gorton, Glossop and Hadfield stations.
In Manchester Metrolink Extensions In A Sentence, I quoted this sentence from the Manchester Evening News.
It includes tram extensions to Port Salford, Middleton and Stalybridge, plus ‘tram trains’ to Hale, Warrington, Gorton and Glossop.
How would tram-trains from Gorton and Glossop join the current Metrolink network at Piccadilly station?
Consider.
- Glossop Line trains use the low-numbered platforms on the Northern side of Manchester Piccadilly station.
- Some plans have shown High Speed Two platforms on the save side of Piccadilly station.
Look at this Google Map of the Northern side of the station.
Note.
- Two trams crossing the green space to the North of the station.
- The area between the tram lines and the tracks going into Piccadilly station, appears to be mainly car parking and low-grade buildings.
- The tracks leading to Gorton and Glossop are on the Northern side of Piccadilly station.
These are a few pictures of the area.to the North of the station.
I feel it would be very feasible for tram-trains to connect the Glossop Line and the tram station underneath the main station.
In fact there would be no reason, why tram-trains shouldn’t continue to serve Manchester Piccadilly train station.
High Speed Two
High Speed Two’s terminals in Manchester is in a state of foux at the moment, so it might be preferable to just replace all Glossop Line services with tram-trains and use Manchester Piccadilly tram station.
Updating The Glossop Line
The Glossop Line is electrified with 25 KVAC overhead wires, which looks to be one of the systems in worst condition in the UK along with the Crouch Valley Line in Essex.
It would probably need replacing, as the rust weevils holding it up, must be getting very tired.
To say that some stations look like they’ve seen better times, is an understatement.
Class 399 Tram-Trains For Manchester
Transport for Greater Manchester are serious about tram-trains and I believe that their usefullness to the City could be explored by running the existing service between Manchester Piccadilly and Glossop using a small fleet.
Conclusion
Extending the Manchester Metrolink to Gorton and Glossop using tram-trains appears to be very feasible.
In my view, it would have made a good trial route to prove the concept of tram-trains in the UK.
Manchester Metrolink Extensions In A Sentence
This article on the Manchester Evening News, sums up the extensions to the Manchester Metrolink like this.
It includes tram extensions to Port Salford, Middleton and Stalybridge, plus ‘tram trains’ to Hale, Warrington, Gorton and Glossop.
We all need more pithy sentences like this. Me included!
Could A Battery- Or Hydrogen-Powered Freight Locomotive Borrow A Feature Of A Steam Locomotive?
Look at these pictures of the steam locomotive; Oliver Cromwell at Kings Cross station.
Unlike a diesel or electric locomotive, most powerful steam locomotives have a tender behind, to carry all the coal and water.
The Hydrogen Tank Problem
One of the problems with hydrogen trains for the UK’s small loading gauge is that it is difficult to find a place for the hydrogen tank.
The picture is a visualisation of the proposed Alstom Breeze conversion of a Class 321 train.
- There is a large hydrogen tank between the driving compartment and the passengers.
- The passenger capacity has been substantially reduced.
- The train will have a range of several hundred miles on a full load of hydrogen.
The Alstom Breeze may or may not be a success, but it does illustrate the problem of where to put the large hydrogen tank needed.
In fact the problem is worse than the location and size of the hydrogen tank, as the hydrogen fuel cells and the batteries are also sizeable components.
An Ideal Freight Locomotive
The Class 88 locomotive, which has recently been introduced into the UK, is a successful modern locomotive with these power sources.
- 4 MW using overhead 25 KVAC overhead electrication.
- 0.7 MW using an onboard diesel engine.
Stadler are now developing the Class 93 locomotive, which adds batteries to the power mix.
The ubiquitous Class 66 locomotive has a power of nearly 2.5 MW.
But as everybody knows, Class 66 locomotives come with a lot of noise, pollution, smell and a substantial carbon footprint.
To my mind, an ideal locomotive must be able to handle these freight tasks.
- An intermodal freight train between Felixstowe and Manchester.
- An intermodal freight train between Southampton and Leeds.
- A work train for Network Rail
- A stone train between the Mendips and London.
The latter is probably the most challenging, as West of Newbury, there is no electrification.
I also think, that locomotives must be able to run for two hours or perhaps three, on an independent power source.
- Independent power sources could be battery, diesel, hydrogen, or a hybrid design
- This would enable bridging the many significant electrification gaps on major freight routes.
I feel that an ideal locomotive would need to meet the following.
- 4 MW when running on a line electrified with either 25 KVAC overhead or 750 VDC third-rail.
- 4 MW for two hours, when running on an independent power source.
- Ability to change from electric to independent power source at speed.
- 110 mph operating speed.
This would preferably be without diesel.
Electric-Only Version
Even running without the independent power source, this locomotive should be able to haul a heavy intermodal freight train between London and Glasgow on the fully-electrified West Coast Main Line.
I regularly see freight trains pass along the North London Line, that could be electric-hauled, but there is a polluting Class 66 on the front.
Is this because there is a shortage of quality electric locomotives? Or electric locomotives with a Last Mile capability, that can handle the routes that need it?
If we have to use pairs of fifty-year-old Class 86 locomotives, then I suspect there are not enough electric freight locomotives.
Batteries For Last Mile Operation
Stadler have shown, in the design of the Class 88 locomotive, that in a 4 MW electric locomotive, there is still space to fit a heavy diesel engine.
I wonder how much battery capacity could be installed in a UK-sized 4 MW electric locomotive, based on Stadler’s UK Light design.
Would it be enough to give the locomotive a useful Last Mile capability?
In Thoughts On A Battery Electric Class 88 Locomotive On TransPennine Routes, I estimated that a Class 88 locomotive could replace the diesel engine with a battery with a battery capacity of between 700 kWh and 1 MWh.
This would give about fifteen minutes at full power.
Would this be a useful range?
Probably not for heavy freight services, if you consider that a freight train leaving the Port of Felixstowe takes half-an-hour to reach the electrification at Ipswich.
But it would certainly be enough power to bring the heaviest freight train out of Felixstowe Port to Trimley.
If the Felixstowe Branch Line were to be at least partially electrified, then I’m sure a Class 88 locomotive with a battery instead of the diesel engine could bring the heaviest train to the Great Eastern Main Line.
- Electrifying between Trimley and the Great Eastern Main Line should be reasonably easy, as much of the route has recently been rebuilt.
- Electrifying Felixstowe Port would be very disruptive to the operation of the port.
- Cranes and overhead wires don’t mix!
I wonder how many services to and from Felixstowe could be handled by an electric locomotive with a Last Five Miles-capability, if the Great Eastern Main Line electrification was extended a few miles along the Felixstowe Branch Line.
As an aside here, how many of the ports and freight interchanges are accessible to within perhaps five miles by electric haulage?
I believe that if we are going to decarbonise UK railways by 2040, then we should create electrified routes to within a few miles of all ports and freight interchanges.
Batteries For Traction
If batteries are to provide 4 MW power for two hours, they will need to have a capacity of 8 MWh.
In Thoughts On A Battery Electric Class 88 Locomotive On TransPennine Routes, I said this.
Traction batteries seem to have an energy/weight ratio of about 0.1kWh/Kg, which is increasing with time, as battery technology improves.
This means that a one tonne battery holds about 100 kWh.
So to hold 8 MWh or 8,000 kWh, there would be a need to be an 80 tonne battery using today’s technology.
A Stadler Class 88 locomotive weighs 86 tonnes and has a 21.5 tonne axle load, so the battery would almost double the weight of the locomotive.
So to carry this amount of battery power, the batteries must be carried in a second vehicle, just like some steam locomotives have a tender.
But suppose Stadler developed another version of their UK Light locomotive, which was a four-axle locomotive that held the largest battery possible in the standard body.
- It would effectively be a large battery locomotive.
- It would share a lot of components with the Class 88 locomotive or preferably the faster Class 93 locomotive, which is capable of 110 mph.
- It would have cabs on both ends.
- It might have a traction power of perhaps 2-2.5 MW on the battery.
- It would have a pantograph for charging the battery if required and running under electrification.
- It might be fitted with third rail equipment.
It could work independently or electrically-connected to the proposed 4 MW electric locomotive.
I obviously don’t know all the practicalities and economics of designing such a pair of locomotives, but I do believe that the mathematics say that a 4 MW electric locomotive can be paired with a locomotive that has a large battery.
- It would have 4 MW, when running on electrified lines.
- It would have up to 4 MW, when running on battery power for at least an hour.
- ,It could use battery-power to bridge the gaps in the UK’s electrification network and for Last Mile operation.
A very formidable zero-carbon locomotive-pair could be possible.
The battery locomotive could also work independently as a 2 MW battery-electric locomotive.
Hydrogen Power
I don’t see why a 4 MW electric locomotive , probably with up to 1,000 kWh of batteries couldn’t be paired with a second vehicle, that contained a hydrogen tank, a hydrogen fuel-cell.and some more batteries.
It’s all a question of design and mathematics.
It should also be noted, that over time the following will happen.
- Hydrogen tanks will be able to store hydrogen at a greater pressure.
- Fuel cells will have a higher power to weight ratio.
- Batteries will have a higher power storage density.
These improvements will all help to make a viable hydrogen-powered generator or locomotive possible.
I also feel that the same hydrogen technology could be used to create a hydrogen-powered locomotive with this specfication.
- Ability to use 25 KVAC overhead or 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
- 2 MW on electrification.
- 1.5 MW on hydrogen/battery power.
- 100 mph capability.
- Regenerative braking to batteries.
- Ability to pull a rake of five or six coaches.
This could be a very useful lower-powered locomotive.
What About The Extra Length?
A Class 66 locomotive is 21.4 metres long and a Class 68 locomotive is 20.3 metres long. Network Rail is moving towards a maximum freight train length of 775 metres, so it would appear that another twenty metre long vehicle wouldn’t be large in the grand scheme of things.
Conclusion
My instinct says to be that it would be possible to design a family of locomotives or an electric locomotive with a second vehicle containing batteries or a hydrogen-powered electricity generator, that could haul freight trains on some of the partially-electrified routes in the UK.
Stanmore Tube Station To Convert Car Park Into Flats
The title of this post is the same as this article on Ian Visits.
Solar Panel Pilot For Aldershot
The title of this post is the same as that of an article in the August 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.
This is the two paragraphs.
Solar panels are to be installed on derelict land near Aldershot station as part of an experiment into whether renewable energy can be used to power trains.
A total of 135 discrete solar panels are being installed and are expected to go live in August. The Riding Subnbeams ‘First Light’ demonstrator project is a collaboration between climate change charity 10:10, Community Energy South and Network Rail, alongside a consortium of specialist consultants and university departments.
I wrote about the company and its ideas in Solar Power Could Make Up “Significant Share” Of Railway’s Energy Demand, which I posted in December 2017.
I won’t repeat myself, but I will say that since I wrote the original article, a compatible development has happened.
In Vivarail Unveils Fast Charging System For Class 230 Battery Trains, I wrote about Vivarail’s charging system for battery trains, which uses battery-to-battery power transfer to charge batteries on trains, through standard third-rail technology.
I do feel that the 10:10 and Vivarail ought to be talking, as I feel that between them, they could come up with some good joint ideas.
The Anonymous Widower 