c2c’s Class 387/3 Trains On Test At Crewe
I took these pictures of two Class 387 trains destined for c2c at Crrwe, as my train passed through on the way to Liverpool.
They were numbered 387301 and 387302 and their destination boards said they were going to Wembley Central.
Now that would make an interesting route for c2c!
Why Number The Trains As Class 387/3?
Seriously, though, I’m curious why the c2c trains are numbered as Class 387/3 trains, whereas the trains for Great Western Railway are all numbered as Class 387/1 trains.
This is said in Wikipedia about these trains.
In April 2016, c2c announced that it would operate six of the 20 additional units ordered by Porterbrook until a fleet of 68 new carriages are delivered in 2019.
So as they are a short term fleet, that will do the rounds of various operators, who are short of trains, perhaps starting a new group of numbers is good for housekeeping purposes at Bombardier?
On the other hand if c2c and its customers and staff like the new trains and c2c see that an all-Electrostar fleet has advantages for operational reasons, perhaps the extra 68 new carriages will be Class 387/3 trains.
After all, the highest number for a Class 387/1 is 387174, which only allows for another 25 trains in the sequence, before the numbers interfere with the Class 387/2 numbers.
Which all points to sensible housekeeping, as there is nothing on the Internet, to say there is any differences between the Class 387/1 and Class 387/3 trains.
Could The Class 387/3 Trains Have Batteries?
There are several well-publicised reasons for adding batteries to an electric multiple unit.
- Handling regenerative braking.
- Depots and stabling sidings without overhead wires.
- Train recovery in case of overhead power failure.
- Remote train start-up, ready for the driver.
- Extending routes over lines without electrification.
Note.
- The current Class 357 trains and all Class 387 trains have regenerative braking, so c2c routes can obviously handle it.
- c2c’s depot at Barking is crowded, but would they want the expense of building a second depot anyway.
- Train recovery could be very valuable, especially if a whole fleet was fitted.
- Remote train start-up is available for Aventras and I’ve met a couple of drivers, who would love it!
c2c likes to take a strong green stand as this page on their web site shows.
So the main serious reason we have left is route development.
An Innovative Scheme For A Rail Link To Glasgow Airport
This article on Renfrewshire 24 is entitled New Option Could See Glasgow Airport Rail Link Run From Relocated Glasgow St. James Station.
The new option, which is proposed by Junction 29 (Scotland) Ltd, would relocate Paisley St. James Street station nearer to the airport and it would be connected to the airport using a PRT system similar to that used at Terminal 5 at Heathrow.
This Google Map shows the area.
Note.
- Junction 29 of the M8 is the mass of spaghetti in the upper middle of the map, with the Inverclyde Line passing to the South-west of the junction.
- Paisley St. James station is towards the bottom of the map.
- Junction 29 (Scotland) Ltd. own the block of land to the West of the railway and the new station would be built in this area, where the PRT system would connect to the Airport.
I think it could be a feasible plan and these are my thoughts.
A Proven System
Wikipedia says this about the PRT System at Heathrow.
Construction of the guideway was completed in October 2008. The line is largely elevated, but includes a ground level section where the route passes under the approach to the airport’s northern runway. Following various trials, including some using airport staff as test passengers, the line opened to the public in May 2011 as a passenger trial. Subsequently it was made fully operational and the bus service between the business car park and Terminal 5 was discontinued. The pods use 50% less energy than a bus. They run 22 hours a day. Unlike all UK road and rail traffic, which drives on the left, the PRT system drives on the right. As of May 2013 the system passed the 600,000th passenger milestone.
The interesting thing, is that it runs under the runway approach, so it must have a fairly small footprint.
I actually think that using this system has other advantages.
- It could go on a roundabout route between the station and the Airport, serving car parks and other important places.
- It could serve the car parks, which are also proposed for the site.
- It could bring those with movement difficulties to the station for the Park-and-Ride to Paisley and Glasgow.
- It is very much a proven system.
- The tram-train alternative works in many places in the world, but the concept seems to cause Network Rail indegestion.
- The PRT System is independent of the railway.
But in my view the system’s biggest advantage is that it could have a serious wow factor for children of all ages.
Cost
The cost of the PRT option is quoted at £70-£80m, as opposed to £144m for the tram-train alternative.
Journey Times
Journey times to the airport will certainly be competitive, but I think the wow factor will encourage passengers to use it, whether they come by train or car to the station.
Why Would You Want To Close The Existing Station?
I would not close the existing Paisley St. James station for these reasons.
- It serves Paisley Town centre and St. Mirren Football Club.
- Closing it could be a hassle.
- Extra stations are never a bad thing.
- Modern trains stop and start again at a station very quickly.
- The new station could be called Glasgow Airport to avoid confusion.
But then there may be better reasons to close it.
Train Frequency
There needs to be at least four trains per hour (tph) to Paisley Gilmour Street and Glasgow.
If not more, as the frequency of the PRT system will annoy passengers waiting for the trains.
I also think that a turnback facility should be provided, so that a posh Airport shuttle train could work a 2 tph limited-stop service to Glasgow Central.
If Glasgow got its act together, the posh train could also serve Edinburgh.
Construction
It is stated in the Renfrewshire 24 article, that the new station and the PRT system could be built in twelve months alongside the existing network.
As all the land is owned by the Airport, Junction 29 and Network Rail, this must help, unless they find newts.
They could even lift a lot of the design of some of the other new stations like Kirkstall Forge.
Future Development
I’m sure Junction 29 (Scotland) Ltd. have got some good plans for the rest of their site.
Conclusion
Go for it! Glasgow has been procrastinating for far too long!
I think we’ll see a lot of systems like this around the world!
The system is described here in Wikipedia.
It’s British by the way and was developed in Cardiff and Bristol.
Behind London’s Contactless Ticketing
I have just read this article on London Reconnections, which is entitled Don’t Fear the Beeper: Bus Hopper Tickets and the Future of Oyster.
It is fascinating stuff and a lot consists of an interview with Shashi Verma, TfL’s Director of Technology and Customer Experience.
One thing that surprised me is that Oyster and Contactless have separate back-ends, but the two will be combined in 2018.
So I think we’ll see lots of new features coming in after 2018.
As many of these will improve the customer experience, isn’t Sadiq a lucky Mayor, as he’ll get the credit rather than the geek who had the idea and did the coding.
This is said in the article about the Bus Hopper
This isn’t to say, of course, that the Hopper was an entirely new idea.
“[It] is something we have wanted to do for years and years.” Verma confirms. “But we haven’t wanted to do in the way that some politicians have wanted it to be done.”
So it was there all along.
How many other things will be possible, when the back offices are combined?
Use With Railcards
According to this page on the TfL web site, railcards don’t work with contactless cards.
I would suspect that one feature after 2018, would be that if you create an account for contactless or Oyster and add a railcard to the account, your fares will be adjusted accordingly.
The system could also handle the very popular Two Together Railcard. You’d just register two accounts for each traveller with the same railcard, then if they’re both used within say five minutes for the same journey, the back office applies the discount.
Use With Freedom Pass
Once the back offices are combined, the Freedom Pass could be made to work in two ways.
As now!
Or it is registered in your TfL account along with your contactless card and the back office would charge you an appropriate fare.
So if say I wanted to go to Gatwick Airport or anywhere in the Oystercard area, I just tap in and out with my contactless bank card and the back office charges be the £3, I would be charged if I went to East Croydon using my Freedom Pass and left the station before coming back in using contactless to get a train to the Airport.
If such a method was possible, I would certainly use it, as quite a few of the journeys I do are just outside the Freedom Pass area, but still within the Oystercard area.
It would then mean that I would only have to carry one card in my pocket.
The Outer London Freedom Pass
Say you live in one of the administrative districts that ring London. I’ll use Epping Forest as an example.
Because of your age or circumstances, you are entitled to a bus pass, but you get no free travel on trains or the Underground.
If your local authority decided to have a Freedom Pass scheme for all travel in the district, you would get any train or tube travel between stations in the local authority or to the boundary of the area, free.
In the case of Epping Forest, you’d get the outer reaches of the Central Line.
So if you were travelling from Theydon Bois to Liverpool Street, you’d only get charged for the tube between Woodford or Grange Hill and Liverpool Street.
You would create a contactless/Oyster account on TfL and add your bus pass and/or railcard to the account.
The back office would do the rest and you’d travel all over the Oystercard area using your contactless card.
I think that some local authorities could look at this concept seriously to encourage card holders to shop locally.
Stations Could Allow Freedom Passes Outside Zone 6
I’ll take Greenhithe for Bluewater station as an example.
The clue is in the station name.
Suppose that the Shopping Centre felt it would get a lot more business from Freedom Pass holders if it were to be in Zone 6, would it pay for the cost of tickets for Freedom Pass holders to attract them to their relaxed shopping experience.
It should be noted that there are already stations outside Zone 6, like Watford High Street and Shenfield stations, that allow Freedom Passes provided you use the London Overground or TfL Rail.
Other possibilities include.
- Gravesend by an extended Crossrail.
- Gatwick Airport
- Watford Vicarage Road
- Windsor
Who knows, which local authorities, events and attractions would find subsidising travel worthwhile.
Imagine for instance Winter-only Off Peak use of a Freedom Pass to say Brighton or Southend.
Conclusion
Travel in London is going to get even more interesting.
I look forward to the day, when I have a single card in my pocket!
A Walk Around White Hart Lane Station
I took these pictures as I walked around the area between White Hart Lane station and Tottenham Hotspur‘s White Hart Lane stadium.
Looking at the station, I come to a few conclusions.
- It certainly isn’t fit for serving a 61,000-seater football stadium.
- The access to the platforms with staircases and no lifts or escalators is terrible and not much better than it was when I used it regularly in the early 1960s.
- The platforms look like, they might be able to handle a twelve-car train.
- The platforms are on top of what looks to be a solid well-built viaduct.
- Walking away from White Hart Lane towards the South, there would appear to be few important buildings alongside the viaduct.
I think this all leads to a unique situation you don’t often find in the rebuilding of a station. It would appear that if you clear the land on both sides of the railway along Penshurst Road and Love Lane, you can create a station that encloses the railway and gives access underneath. A similar situation was exploited at Haggerston and Hoxton stations to create very passenger-friendly stations.
This visualisation from the Architects Journal shows the station from the East.
I’ll repeat my nearest picture.
I think that it looks good.
Note that the rightmost arch, which is partially hidden in the second picture, is the rightmost arch in the visualisation.
If you look at the other pictures in the Architects Journal, it would appear that the two staircases go up in two sections to the platforms, in a similar way to they do in several of the Overeground’s rebuilt stations.
At least in common with London’s two other big club grounds at Arsenal and West Ham, White Hart Lane is served by several Underground and rail stations.
This station certainly, looks like it will handle its share.
I think there could be controversy, as there have been reports that Tottenham Hotspur would like to sell naming rights to the stadium and possibly the station, as other clubs have.
Renaming the stadium would probably not be controversial, but renaming the station could well be. It will certainly be expensive, as Transport for London would have to change a large quantity of maps.
As someone, who supports Ipswich, I don’t care.
Oxford Now Wants Silent Track
Network Rail must rue the day they agreed to extend the Chiltern Line to Oxford, as the locals have done everything they can to tell Network Rail, that they don’t want the new railway. I wrote about it in July 2015, in Network Rail’s Problems In Oxford.
This article in the Oxford Mail was published yesterday. This title is.
City council bosses to force Network Rail to install Silent Track on another stretch of North Oxford railway.
Which is a good precis of the article.
So what is silent track?
This article on Railway Technology is entitled Tata Steel’s SilentTrack to reduce noise levels at London Blackfriars station.
It gives a sensible explanation.
I know something about noise and vibration and feel very strongly that we should do what we can to minimise noise, where it causes problems.
Noise from a railway comes from several sources.
- The track
- Diesel locomotives and multiple units.
- Pantographs on electric locomotives and multiple units.
- Freight wagons.
All contribute to a various degree.
In my view, the worst noise comes from diesel locomotives like the noisy and smelly Class 66 locomotives and there is not much point on spending millions on silent track and then allowing these to run through sensitive areas.
The sooner lines like this one through North Oxford are electrified the better.
West Ealing Station – 12th October 2016
I took these pictures at West Ealing station.
It looks like the new bay platform 5 is ready, but little progress seems to have made on the new station building.
There’s still no information, as to when the service on the Greenford Branch, becomes a four trains per hour (tph) shuttle.
What we do know is that this page on the Crossrail web site has some nice images of the station, that will rise behind the hoardings.
Wikpedia says that initial services on Crossrail will be.
- 4tph Abbey Wood to Heathrow Terminal 4
- 2tph Shenfield to Reading
- 2tph Shenfield to Maidenhead
There will also be another 2 tph running between Abbey Wood and West Drayton in the Peak.
All this in addition to other Great Western Railway services running to and from Paddington.
Services On The Greenford Branch
Passengers on the Greenford Branch will have to change to get to and from Paddington and I suspect some will moan.
But for many passengers from Greenford to the West End, the City or Canary Wharf, they will have an easier journey with just one change at West Ealing.
Consider.
- The Greenford Branch shuttle frequency of 4 tph fits well with the Crossrail and Paddington services.
- I suspect that every shuttle arriving from Greenford will arrive so that passengers for London can just walk across the platform and get a train to Central London.
- The maximum wait for a Crossrail train to Liverpool Street will be seven and a half minutes all day.
- If passengers need to cross between the shuttle platform and the Westbound Crossrail platform there will be a bridge with stairs and a lift.
These are the timings before and after Crossrail opens between Greenford and Liverpool Street.
- Currently, using the Metropolitan Line across Central London – 66 minutes
- Crossrail and the shuttle – 31 minutes plus how long it takes to change trains at West Ealing.
Greenford to Canary Wharf gives these timings.
- Currently, changing to the Underground at Paddington – 75 minutes
- Crossrail and the shuttle – 37 minutes plus how long it takes to change trains at West Ealing.
And these timings apply between Greenford and Heathrow Terminal 4.
- Currently, changing at Ealing Broadway – 54 minutes
- Crossrail and the shuttle – 28 minutes plus how long it takes to change trains at West Ealing.
I suspect that each 4 tph shuttle will be timed to arrive at West Ealing, so that someone with a child in a buggy and a heavy case has time to cross the line using the bridge and the lifts.
Trains On The Greenford Branch
The Greenford Branch is not electrified and there seem to be no plans to electify the whole line.
But if you look at the pictures, that I took yesterday, you’ll see the foundations for the gantries are there to electrify the bay platform 5 .
Initially, the shuttle will have to be run by something like the current Class 165 trains.
Simple mathematics says that to provide a four tph shuttle two trains will be needed.
There would be no major infrastructure changes, as the line is mainly double-track, so the trains could probably pass easily. But there might need to be an additional crossover to allow trains to run on the correct line.
But these trains have their problems, which were illustrated yesterday, when a fit young lady with a toddler in a buggy didn’t board the train as fast as she would have done at a typical Overground station with a modern Class 378 train.
As Crossrail will be run to a tight schedule, I doubt that TfL want serious loading delays with wheelchairs, buggies and heavy luggage.
So this means that modern trains must be provided on the Greenford Branch.
There has been a lot of speculation on the Internet, that the Greenford Branch, like the Romford to Upminster Line in the East of the capital, should become part of the London Overground.
This might be a sensible idea, especially as London Overground from 2018 will have some spare modern weheelchair-friendly Class 172 trains,, once the Gospel Oak to Barking Line is fully electrified and running new electric Class 710 trains.
On the other hand, the fleet of eight Class 172 trains, will probably be very much in demand by other train operating companies, as with a change of seats, they’d be ideal for many routes outside of London.
As Baldrick would say, there is a cunning plan, that could be enabled.
The platforms at West Ealing station are all being made step-free for the two types of trains that will use them; Crossrail’s 345s and GWR’s 387s.
This applies to all of the Western Crossrail stations and looking at the bay platform 5 at West Ealing, that has been built to the standard height.
So this would mean that GWR’s 387s would be able to use the platform, once it is electrified, which looks like is happening.
But these trains wouldn’t be able to use the branch, unless it was electrified.
However, London Overground’s new Class 710 trains, would also fit the bay platform.
The Class 710 train, like Crossrail’s 345 are members of Bombardier’s new Aventra family of trains.
As Bombardier demonstrated battery trains in public service nearly two years ago, there has been speculation that Aventras will have a battery capability to do journeys away from the overhead wires.
This is the best information so far!
This article in Global Rail News from 2011, which is entitled Bombardier’s AVENTRA – A new era in train performance, gives some details of the Aventra’s electrical systems. This is said.
AVENTRA can run on both 25kV AC and 750V DC power – the high-efficiency transformers being another area where a heavier component was chosen because, in the long term, it’s cheaper to run. Pairs of cars will run off a common power bus with a converter on one car powering both. The other car can be fitted with power storage devices such as super-capacitors or Lithium-Iron batteries if required.
Bombardier have confirmed the wiring for onboard power storage to me.
Consider use of Class 710 .
- The length of the Greenford Branch is just 4.3 km., so out and back from West Ealing should be within the typical 50 km. range quoted for battery trains.
- The batteries could be used to handle regenerative braking at the various stops to save electricity.
- There would be no need to put up any overhead wires on the branch.
- The Class 710 trains are four-car trains, so would be sufficient capacity for the medium future.
- The Class 710 trains are optimised to call at stations in the shortest time possible. So could we see a faster service on the branch?
- The Class 710 trains are friendly to wheelchairs, buggies and heavy luggage.
- The Class 710 train would just look like a mini-Crossrail train.
- Bombardier would love to have a live demonstration of their battery technology on a line close to Heathrow Airport.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see London Overground taking over the Greenford Branch and using Class 710 trains running on batteries on the route.
Now There’s A Thing!
I made a mistake in an Internet search and found there’s an actor called Donald Tripe.
He must be having an interesting time in the run-up to the US Presidential Election
Austrian Railways To Run More Sleeper Trains
This article on Global Rail News is entitled ÖBB to expand night train services.
This is said.
Austria’s ÖBB is working with Deutsche Bahn (DB) to take over several night train routes following the German operator’s decision to drop the services.
From December 11, ÖBB will add six routes to its Nightjet network, including services with car and motorbike transport.
I do find it rather surprising that little Austria is prepared to provide a service that the mighty Germany won’t!
I’ve never travelled on a long distance Austrian train, but perhaps like the Swiss, they try to give the passengers what they want, rather than as Deutsche Bahn do and give the passengers the minimum they can get away with.
The Austrians will take over six routes and spend €45million on new coaches.
The route I like is Venice to Munich, as it might be a sensible way to come back from Venice and save a night in a hotel in Venice.
This will be a move to watch.
If it is successful, I think that there’ll be other night services.
A Big Step For Rail Baltica
This article on Railway Gazette is entitled Rail Baltica procurement agreement signed.
Rail Baltica is a large project to create a standard gauge railway from Tallinn in Estonia to Bialiystok in Poland via Riga in Latvia and Kaunus in Lithuania.
One extra part of the plan is to build a rail tunnel between Helsinki and Tallinn, to connect Finland to the European railway network.
This Google Map shows the Gulf of Finland.
The Gulf Of Finland
Helsinki and Taillinn are in the West on the North and South coasts respectively, with St. Petersburg in the East.
I would think, that a Taillinn to Helsinki Tunnel, would be feasible, but at probably sixty kilometres it would be the longest undersea tunnel in the world.
Now that the various parties have agreed to proceed, we might see some progress on building the main route from Tailinn to Bialystok, which hopefully will be finished in 2025.
Brexit – Signalling Implications For The UK
The title of this post is that of an article on Rail Engineer.
It looks at how rail signalling will be affected by Brexit.
It is an article worth reading.
Remember that signalling is the instructions that keeps a railway functioning, just like the operating system does on your computer.
The article starts like this.
With Britain on a course to leave the EU, how might the plans for signalling (control and communications) be affected? In short, nobody really knows, but a number of factors might now change the policy that had existed hitherto. Not having to comply with EU rules on interoperability, the non-inclusion of TEN routes and the advertising of large contracts in the European Journal might all lead to a different (or modified) approach.
So will it lead to different approach?
I don’t know either, but if you read the article we have gone a long way to creating a signalling system, that is some way along the path to meeting the ultimate EU aims.
ERTMS
The article says this about ERTMS or \European Rail Transport Management System.
ERTMS, and its constituent parts of ETCS and GSM-R, has been a corner stone of European signalling policy for over two decades. Both have taken far too long to come to maturity, with ETCS Level 2 just about at a stable level and GSM-R, whilst rolled out throughout the UK, facing an obsolescence crisis within the next ten years.
ETCS or European Train Control System is not fully deployed, but in the UK, we have made some progress.
- The Cambrian Line has been equipped as a learning exercise.
- Significant testing has been performed on the Hertford Loop Line
- ETCS is being installed and has been tested in the central core of Thameslink.
- Crossrail will be using ETCS.
- ETCS is being implemented on the Southern part of the East Coast Main Line.
GSM-R is the communication system from train to signallers.
Looking at this , shows that although the UK fully implemented a GSM-R network by January 2016, not many countries have got as far as the UK.
Surely, you need decent communications to run an efficient and safe railway.
I think it is true to say we’ve not been idle.
The article talks about alternatives and shows a few cases where an alternative approach has been taken.
- Norwich-Ely and Crewe-Shrewsbury have been resignalled using a modular system.
- Scotland has decided to go its own way in the Far North.
- The article talks about CBTC or Commuincations-Based Train Control, which is used on several systems around the world including London’s Jubilee and Northern Lines.
The article also says this about CBTC
The endless committees to discuss and agree how the standards will be implemented do not get in the way. Whilst not suitable for main line usage (at least in the foreseeable future), there could be suburban routes around cities (for example Merseyrail) that could benefit from CBTC deployment.
Could CBTC be a practical system without the bureaucracy?
But these alternatives all smell of pragmatism, where the best system is chosen for a particular line.
But we have one great advantage in that we have imnplemented a comprehensive digital network covering the whole network.
This is no Internet of Things, but an Internet of Trains.
Software
As a computer programmer, I couldn’t leave this out of the signalling recipe.
You can bet your house, that somewhere there are programmers devising solutions to get round our problems.
And they will!
Conclusion
I can’t believe that other industries are not giving the same opportunities to the disruptive innovators of the UK.
Brexit might be good for us, in a surprising way!
Nothing to do with politics or immigration and all to do with innovation!
The Anonymous Widower 