Bombardier Introduces Talent 3 Battery-Operated Train
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on InsideEVs.
This picture of the train is from Bombardier’s web site.
This is said.
Bombardier recently presented the Talent 3, which according to the press release, is the first of its kind to enter passenger operation in Europe in over 60 years.
The first prototype has a range of 40 km (25 miles), but the second one scheduled for 2019 will go 100 km (62 miles) on a single charge.
There’s even a nifty little video.
All the features and benefits of the train are detailed.
- Bridging gaps in electrification.
- Modular batteries, so more can be added to increase range.
- Regenerative braking to save energy.
- Lower infrastructure costs.
- Electric instead of diesel trains under city centres.
- Low noise.
- No CO2 emissions.
- Low cost of ownership.
But this is all about a Talent 3 train, that is designed to a Continental loading gauge. Wikipedia says this about the design.
The Talent 3 is based on the earlier Talent and Talent 2 designs, with a wider carbody, larger doors, and a lower floor to increase capacity and improve passenger flow at station stops. Depending on the intended service pattern, the Talent 3 can be specified with either a 160 kilometres per hour (99 mph) or 200 kilometres per hour (120 mph) top speed. Talent 3 trainsets can vary in length based on customer requirements—ÖBB ordered six-car sets with a passenger capacity of 300, while Vlexx ordered three-car sets that carry up to 160 passengers.
The picture and the video look like a three-car train.
How Large Are The Batteries On A Talent 3?
What do we know about the train?
- It appears to have three cars.
- According to this page on the Bombardier web site, the train has four batteries.
- I estimate that according to weights in Wikipedia, a three-car Talent weighs 86.5 tonnes
- A three-car Talent 3 can carry 160 passengers.
My calculation is as follows.
- 160 passengers at 90 Kg each with baggage, bikes and buggies weigh 14.4 tonnes.
- I’ll assume each battery weighs a tonne.
- This gives a total train weight of 104.9 tonnes.
At a speed of 160 kph, the Omni Kinetic Energy Calculator gives a kinetic energy of 28.8 kWh.
So four batteries of 25 kWh each would be sufficient to handle the regenerative braking energy.
What about the UK?
Bombardier’s equivalent product for the UK is the Aventra, which unlike the Talent 3 is a substantially all-new design, although it does use proven technology from previous trains.
It has also received six orders for a total of over 400 trains.
I have always thought, that after the successful BEMU trial with a Bombardier Class 379 train, that batteries will become an important part of rail technology and they will feature in the design of the Aventra.
You may think, that looking at the video, that we’ll have trouble with the UK’s small loading gauge putting the batteries on the roof of the train, but the actual size of batteries is not large and they can go underneath.
I sometimes wonder, If the reason for the delay of the Class 710 trains, is that when they are successfully running, Bombardier will finally come clean in the UK, about how batteries are used on the Aventra. You wouldn’t want the trains to be unreliable, so they are making sure that all systems, including the important batteries are 100 % reliable.
In Don’t Mention Electrification!, I state why I believe that the Barking Riverside Extension of the Gospel Oak to Barking Line could be built without electrification.
So I’m fairly certain that the Class 710 trains are designed to run this section of the route on battery power.
Cost Studies Could See Electrification Comback
The title of this post is the same as that of an article by Roger Ford in the September 2018 Edition of Modern Railways
There are now two studies into the cost of railway electrification.
- The Department of Transport has commissioned Professor Andrew McNaughton.
- The Railway Industry Association have launched an Electrification Cost Challenge.
Both arudies expected to be completed in October.
The article gives some examples of electrification costs per single track kilometre (stkm).
- A sustained rolling program – £1million/stkm
- Great Western Main Line – £3million/stkm
- Northern England – Below £2million/stkm.
- Cumbernauld-Springburn – £1.2million/stkm
- East Coast Main Line – £500,000/stkm (At current prices)
The article finishes with these words.
£1million/stkm would be a feasible target.
That the Department for Transport has commissioned the independent review suggests electrification could still be on the agenda.
Roger is very much a respected commentator and his conclusions are more likely to be spot on, than wide of the mark.
Does Running Electric Trains On A Route Count As Electrification?
I ask this question deliberately, as over the last few years several schemes have been proposed to electrify perhaps two miles of line to a new development or city or town centre.
The Midland Metro is being extended to Wolverhampton station by building a tram line, that will be run using battery power on the existing trams.
Another example of this type of line is the extension of the Gospel Oak to Barking Line to Barking Riverside. After reading all the documentation, I have found that electric trains are mentioned several times, but electrification is not. As Bombardier Aventras probably can run on battery power, does this mean that the extension will be built without wires?
There are also some electrified branch lines, where the overhead electrification is unadulterated crap.
Could we see the electrification on these branches removed to save on replacement and maintenance costs and the trains replaced by battery trains charged on the electrified main lines?
Recent Developments
I think various developments of recent years will help in the containing of electrification costs.
Batteries On Trains
It is my belief that batteries on trains could revolutionise the approach to electrification.
In my view, batteries are the only way to handle regenerative braking, which cuts energy costs.
This means, that if no trains using a route, return their braking energy through the electrification, then costs are saved by using simpler transformers.
Adequate battery capacity also gives other advantages.
- Bombardier are fitting remote wake-up to Aventras. I wrote about this in Do Bombardier Aventras Have Remote Wake-Up?
- Depots and sidings can be built with only limited electrification.
- Hitachi use batteries charged by regenerative braking to provide hotel power for Class 800 trains.
- Batteries are a simple way of moving trains in a Last Mile application on perhaps a short branch line.
- Battery power can be used to rescue a train, when the electrification fails.
Reports exist of Alstom, Bombardier, CAF, Hitachi, Siemens and Stadler using or researching the use of batteries in trains.
Hydrogen Power
I am becoming more enthusiastic about hydrogen power, which is primarily being developed by Alstom.
- The UK could produce a lot of hydrogen easily from electrolysis of either brine to produce chlorine or water to produce hydrogen and oxygen.
- Wind power would be a convenient way to provide the electricity needed.
- Alstom are starting a project at Widnes to convert redundant Class 321 trains to hydrogen power.
A hydrogen powered Class 321 train would appear to be a powerful concept.
- The trains will still be able to run on electrification.
- The trains are pollution-free.
- The trains make extensive use of batteries.
- Alstom quote ranges of several hundred kilometres.
- It would appear that the trains will still be capable of 100 mph after conversion.
- Class 321 trains can be updated with quality interiors.
I believe these trains could find a solid market extending electrified routes.
Porterbrook’s Class 769 Trains
The Class 769 trains have been a long time coming, but companies have ordered 35 of these bi-mode upgrades of Class 319 trains.
- They will be capable of 100 mph on electricity
- They will be capable of 90 mph-plus on diesel
- They will be able to use 25 KVAC overhead or 750 VDC third rail electrification.
- They have been designed with a powerful hill-climbing capability.
Looking at the orders,some need the hill-climbing capability and GWR’s proposal to use the trains on the dual-voltage Reading-Gatwick route is a sensible one.
Bombardier’s 125 mph Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries
I think that this train and others like it will be the future for many rail routes in the UK and around the world.
I will use the Midland Main Line as an example of the use of this type of train.
In a few years time, this important route will have the following characteristics.
- A high proportion of 125 mph running.
- Electrification between St. Pancras and Kettering/Corby
- Possibly, electrification between Sheffield and Clay Cross courtesy of High Speed Two.
Full electrification would be difficult as part of the route is through a World Heritage Site.
But Bombardier’s train would swap power source intelligently as it powered its way along at 125 mph.
Stadler’s Electric/Diesel/Battery Hybrid Train
This version of Greater Anglia’s Class 755 train, has been ordered for the South Wales Metro.
It can run on the following power sources.
- 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
- Onboard diesel generators.
- Batteries
An intelligent control system will select the best power source.
With a central power pack between passenger cars, the design of this train is slightly quirky.
- It is a 100 mph train with lots of acceleration.
- I’m sure it could be equipped for 750 VDC electrification.
- The power pack can be configured for different operators and types of routes.
- Stadler are quite happy to sell small fleets of trains into niche markets.
- It is a member of the successful Flirt family of trains, which are selling all over the world.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see more of these trains sold to the UK.
Hitachi’s Class 800 Trains and Class 802 Trains
Hitachi’s Class 800 trains are already running on the Great Western Railway.
- They have an operating speed of 125 mph on both electricity and diesel.
- TransPennine Express have ordered nineteen Class 802 trains.
- Hull Trains have ordered five Class 802 trains.
I have gone from London to Swansea and back in a day in Class 800 trains and they the new trains seem to be perfirming well.
They will get even better, as electrification is extended to Cardiff.
100/125 mph Bi-Mode Trains
In the previous sub-sections I have talked about four new bi-mode trains, that can run using electrification and under their own power.
- Class 321 Hydrogen
- Porterbrook’s Class 769 Train
- High Speed Bi-Mode Aventra
- Tri-Mode Stadler Flirt
- Hitachi’s Class 800 Trains and Class 802 Trains
The designs are different, but they have common features.
- An operating speed of at least 100 mph on electrified lines.
- 90 mph-plus operating speed, when independently powered.
- An out-and-back range of at least 200 miles away from electrification.
- Proven designs from large families of trains.
Only one new route for these trains has been fully disclosed and that is Greater Anglia’s new Liverpool Street-Lowestoft service.
- There will be three round trips a day between Lowestoft and London, using Class 755 trains.
- North of Ipswich, diesel power will be used.
- South of Ipswich, electric power will be used and trains will join the 100 mph queues to and from London.
- Extra trains North of Ipswich, will use additional Class 755 trains, shuttling up and down the East Suffolk Line.
As the Class 755 trains and the express Class 745 trains on London-Ipswich-Norwich services will share the same team of drivers, it is an efficient use of bi-mode trains to extend an electric network.
Several of the proposed electrification schemes in the UK in addition to allowing electric trains, will also open up new routes for bi-mode and tri-mode trains.
- Stirling to Perth electrification would allow bi-mode trains to run between Glasgow and Aberdeen via Dundee.
- Leeds to York electrification would improve TransPennine bi-mode performance and allow electric trains access to Neville Hill TMD from the East Coast Main Line.
- Sheffield to Clay Closs electrification for High Speed Two would also improve bi-mode performance on the Midland Main Line.
I think it should be born in mind, that the rolling out of the Class 800 trains all over the GWR, seems to have generated few bad reports, after a few initial problems.
In Thoughts On The Introduction Of Class 800 Trains On The Great Western Railway, I came to this conclusion.
There’s nothing much wrong operationally or passenger-wise with the Class 800 trains, that will not be put right by minor adjustments in the next couple of years.
So perhaps extending an electric network with quality bi-mode trains works well.
Used creatively bi-mode trains will increase the return on the money invested in electrification.
Tram-Trains
I first saw tram-trains in Kassel in 2015 and I wrote about them in The Trams And Tram-Trains Of Kassel.
We are now embracing this technology in a trial in Sheffield using new Class 399 tram-trains.
I believe that, the UK is fertile territory for this technology.
- KeolisAmey Wales haven’t waited for the results of the Sheffield trial and have already ordered thirty-six tram-trains with batteries for the South Wales Metro.
- It also looks as if the West Midlands are planning to use the technology on an extension of the Midland Metro to Brierley Hill.
- Glasgow are investigating a tram-train route to Glasgow Airport.
Although Network Rail and the Department for Transport seem to be only lukewarm on the technology, it does appear that local interests are much more enthusiastic.
In my view, the South Wales Metro is going to be a game changer, as it uses existing tracks, virtually standard tram-trains, electric/diesel/battery trains and a modicum of street running to transform a city’s transport system.
Intelligent Pantographs
I have read that the electro-diesel Class 88 locomotive can change between electric and diesel modes at line speed.
As a Control Engineer, I don’t believe it would be an impossible problem for a train powered by a mixture of 25 KVAC overhead electrification and diesel, battery, hydrogen or some other fuel to raise and lower a pantograph efficiently, to take advantage of any overhead wires that exist.
The raising and lowering could even be GPS controlled and totally automatic, with the driver just monitoring.
Ingenious Electrification Techniques
In Novel Solution Cuts Cardiff Bridge Wiring Cost, I wrote about how two simple techniques; an insulating coating and surge arresters, saved about ten million pounds, by avoiding a bridge reconstruction.
How much can be saved on electrification schemes by using simple and proven techniques like these?
Better Surveying And Site Information
A lot of the UK’s railways are like long Victorian buildings.
If you’ve ever tried to renovate a cottage that was built around the middle of the nineteenth century, you will understand the following.
- It is unlikely you will have any accurate plans.
- Some of the construction will be very good, but other parts will be downright shoddy.
- You have no idea of the quality of the foundations.
- If the building is Listed you’ll have a whole new level of bureaucracy to deal with.
Now scale your problems up to say a ten mile stretch of rail line, that needs to be electrified.
Instead of dealing with a cottage-sized plot, you may now be dealing with the following.
- A double track railway with four train per hour (tph) in both directions.
- A site that is several miles long.
- Access to the work-site could be difficult.
So just surveying what has to be done and making sure you have details on any unforeseen underground structures like sewers, gas and water mains and old mine workings, can be a major undertaking.
Reading local newspaper reports on the Gospel Oak to Barking electrification, you get the impression the following happened.
- Various overhead gantries were built to the wrong size.
- A sewer was found, that had been missed by surveyors.
- It was wrongly thought that the bridge at Crouch Hill station had sufficient clearance for the electrification. So much more work had to be done.
At least there weren’t any mine workings in East London, but as you can imagine these are a major problem in areas in the North.
Surely, nearly twenty years into the 21st century, we can avoid problems like these.
Discontinuous Electrification
Low bridges and and other structures crossing the tracks, can be a big and expensive problem, when it comes to electrifying railway lines.
In the proposed electrification of the lines for the South Wales Metro, look at these statistics.
- A total of 172 km. of track will be electrified.
- Fifty-six structures were identified as needing to be raised.
The cost savings of eliminating some of this bridge raising would not be small.
In the July 2018 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article entitled KeolisAmey Wins Welsh Franchise.
This is said about the electrification on the South Wales Metro.
KeolisAmey has opted to use continuous overhead line equipment but discontinuous power on the Core Valley Lnes (CVL), meaning isolated OLE will be installed under bridges. On reaching a permanently earthed section, trains will automatically switch from 25 KVAC overhead to on-board battery supply, but the pantograph will remain in contact with the overhead cable, ready to collect power after the section. The company believes this method of reducing costly and disruptive engineering works could revive the business cases of cancelled electrification schemes. Hopes of having money left over for other schemes rest partly on this choice of technology.
In the final design, KeolisAmey have been able to use this discontinuous power solution at all but one of the fifty-six structures.
These structures will be checked and refurbished as required, but they would be unlikely to need lengthy closures, which would disrupt traffic, cyclists and walkers.
Each structure would need a bespoke structure to create a rail or wire on which the pantograph, would ride from one side of the structure to the other. But installing these would be a task of a much smaller magnitude.
There must be a lot of scope for both cost and time savings.
I think in the future, when it comes to electrifying existing lines, I think we’ll increasing see, this type of discontinuous electrification used to avoid rebuilding a structurally-sound bridge or structure.
I also think, that experience will give engineers a more extensive library of solutions.
Hopefully, costs could be driven downwards, instead of spiralling upwards!
Complimentary Design Of Trains And New Electrified Routes
In recent years two major electric rail projects have been planned, which have gone much further than the old philosophy of just putting up wires and a adding fleet of new trains.
I believe that the Crossrail Class 345 trains and the tunnel under London were designed to be complimentary to each other to improve operation and safety and cut operating costs.
But the interesting project is the South Wales Metro, where discontinuous electrification and battery power have been used to design, what should be a world-class metro at an affordable cost.
Too many electrification schemes have been designed by dull people, who don’t appreciate the developments that are happening.
Conclusion On Recent Developments
UK railways are doing better on electrification than many think.
Possible Developments
These are ideas I’ve seen talked about or are my own speculation.
Intelligent Discontinuous Third Rail Electrification
New third rail electrification is not installed much these days, due to perceived safety problems.
I have seen it proposed by respected commentators, that third rail electrification could play a part in the charging of train batteries.
Discontinuous third-rail electrification is already used extensively, at places like level crossings and where a safe route is needed for staff to cross the line.
But it is done in a crude manner, where the contact shoes on the train run up and down the sloping ends of the third rail.
As a time-expired Control Engineer, I’m fairly sure that a much better, safer system can be designed.
On the South Wales Metro, where discontinuous overhead electrification is to be used, battery power will be used to bridge the gaps.
Supposing trains on a third-rail electrified route, were fitted with batteries that gave the train a range of say two kilometres. This would give sufficient range to recover a train, where the power failed to a safe evacuation point.
The range on battery power would mean that there could be substantial gaps between sections of electrification, which would be sized to maximise safety, operational efficiency and minimise energy use.
Each section of electrification would only be switched on, when a train was present.
Train drivers could also have an emergency system to cut the power in a particular section, if they saw anything untoward, such as graffiti artists on the line.
Third Rail Electrification In Stations
I have seen it proposed by respected commentators, that third rail electrification could play a part in the charging of train batteries.
When you consider that trains often spend fifteen or twenty minutes at a terminal station, it could make it easier to run electric or bi-mode trains with batteries on branch lines.
The rail would normally be switched off and would only be switched on, when a train was above and connected to the rail.
As a time-expired Control Engineer, I’m fairly sure that a safe system can be designed.
Third Rail Electrification On Viaducts
To some overhead electrification gantries on top of a high viaduct are an unnecessary eyesore.
So why not use third-rail electrification, on top of viaducts like these?
Trains would need to be able to swap efficiently and reliably between modes.
Gravity-Assisted Electrification
For a country with no really high mountains, we have quite a few railways, that have the following characteristics.
- Heavily-used commuter routes.
- Double-track
- A height difference of perhaps two hundred metres.
These are a few examples.
- Cardiff Queen Street to Aberdare, Merthy Tydfil, Rhymney and Treherbert
- Exeter to Barnstaple
- Glasgow Central to East Kilbride
- Manchester to Buxton
All are in areas, where putting up overhead gantries may be challenging and opposed by some campaigners.
As an example consider the Manchester to Buxton route.
- The height difference is 220 metres.
- One of Northern’s Class 319 trains weighs 140.3 tonnes.
- These trains have a capacity of around 320 passengers.
- If each passenger weighs 90 Kg with baggage, bikes and buggies, this gives a train weight of 167.3 tonnes.
These figures mean that just over 100 kWh of electricity would be needed to raise the train to Buxton.
Coming down the hill, a full train would convert the height and weight into kinetic energy, which would need to be absorbed by the brakes. Only small amounts of new energy would need to be applied to nudge the train onto the hill towards Manchester.
The brakes on trains working these routes must take a severe hammering.
Supposing, we take a modern train with these characteristics.
- Four cars.
- Electric traction.
- 200 kWh of battery capacity to handle regenerative braking.
Such a train would not be a difficult design and I suspect that Bombardier may already have designed an Aventra with these characteristics.
Only the uphill line would be electrified and operation would be as follows.
- Climbing to Buxton, the train would use power from the electrification.
- On the climb, the train could also use some battery power for efficiency reasons.
- The train would arrive at Buxton with enough power left in the batteries to provide hotel power in the stop at Buxton and nudge the train down the hill.
- On the descent, regenerative braking would be used to slow the train, with the energy created being stored in the batteries.
- On the level run to Manchester, battery power could be used, rather than electrification power to increase efficiency.
How efficient would that be, with respect to the use of electricity?
I would also investigate the use of intelligent third-rail electrification, to minimise visual impact and the need to raise any bridges or structures over the line.
Gravity is free and reliable, so why not use it?
We don’t know the full
Conclusion On Possible Developments
Without taking great risks, there are lots of ideas out there that will help to electrify routes in an affordable manner.
Conclusion
I very much feel we’ll be seeing more electrification in the next few years.
Battery Trains On The Uckfield Branch
The Uckfield Branch is not electrified and it only gets an hourly service to London Bridge.
However a few years ago, all platforms on the line were extended, so that twelve-car trains could run services.
I have always felt that this service was ideal for running using battery trains.
- Trains would run between London Bridge and Hurst Green using the third rail electrification.
- The batteries would be charged between London Bridge and Hurst Green stations.
- South of Hurst Green, the train would run on battery power.
- Top-up charging could be provided during the eleven minute turnround at Uckfield station.
These are distances and times between stations South of Hurst Green.
- Hurst Green – Edenbridge Town – 4.33 miles – 6.98 km. – 6 mins – 7 mins
- Edenbridge Town – Hever – 1.75 miles – 2.81 km – 4 mins – 4 mins
- Hever – Cowden – 2 miles – 3.21 km. – 4 mins – 5 mins
- Cowden – Ashurst – 2.77 miles – 4.47 km. – 4 mins – 4 mins
- Ashurst – Eridge – 2.31 miles – 3.72 km. – 6 mins – 6 mins
- Eridge – Crowborough – 3.74 miles – 6.01 km. – 6 mins – 6 mins
- Crowborough – Buxted – 4.71 miles – 7.58 km – 7 mins – 7 mins
- Buxted – Uckfield – 2.25 miles – 3.62 km – 6 mins – 4 mins
Note.
- The first time is Southbound and the second is Northbound.
- I only calculated distances to two decimal places.
It appears the route has a generally 70 mph operating speed.
What Is The Performance Of The Current Class 171 Trains?
Class 171 trains have the following characteristics.
- 100 mph operating speed
- Acceleration of 0.5 m per second²
- A weight of 90.41 tonnes.
- Seating for 109 passengers.
- On my trip today, the train rarely exceeded 50 mph.
What Would Be The Performance Of A Battery Train?
I will assume that the battery train is something like a Class 701 train fitted with batteries.
- Ten cars
- 100 mph operating speed
- Acceleration of 1.0 m per second² (taken from Class 345 train)
- A weight of 364.9 tonnes. (An estimate based on data from Weight And Dimensions Of A Class 345 Train.
- Based on the Class 345 train, I would reckon the train would have at least eight motored cars.
- I would put a battery in each motored car.
- Capacity of 546 seated and 673 standing passengers.
I will use this information to calculate the energy of the train.
Assuming each passenger with all their baggage is 90 kg., this gives a passenger weight of 109.71 tonnes
This gives a total train weight of 474.61 tonnes.
Calculating the kinetic energy for various speeds gives.
- 30 mph – 11.8 kWh
- 40 mph – 21 kWh
- 50 mph -30.9 kWh
- 70 mph – 64.5 kWh
- 80 mph – 84.3 kWh
- 90 mph – 106.7 kWh
- 100 mph – 131.7 kWh
Even the highest energy figure, which is way above the operating speed of the line could be handled under regenerative braking by a convenient size of battery.
How Would A Battery Train Operate?
This Google Map shows Hurst Green station and Hurst Green Junction, where the Uckfield and East Grinstead branches split.
As the East Grinstead branch is electrified, after stopping at Hurst Green station, a train for Uckfield station will have something like two to three hundred metres of electrified track to accelerate it to the operating speed.
At present the operating speed appears to be 70 mph, but if it were higher, the train would enter the section of track without electrification, with more energy.
As it is, the train would probably be entering the branch with batteries, that had been fully-charged on the way from London.
The electrification would have been used like a catapult to impart maximum energy to the train.
At each stop, the following would happen.
- Regenerative braking will convert the train’s kinetic energy into electricity, which will be stored in the batteries.
- Battery power would then accelerate the train after each stop.
As regenerative braking is not 100% efficient, there would be a loss of perhaps fifteen percent of kinetic energy at each stop.
So gradually as the train progresses to Uckfield and back, the battery charge will be depleted.
There are seven stations between Hurst Green and Uckfield,so that means that fifteen stops will have to be made before the train returns to the electrification at Hurst Green.
If the train was operating at 70 mph, the kinetic energy would be 64.5 kWh and the losses in the regenerative braking at fifteen stations would be 64.5 *0.15 *15 or 145.57 kWh.
I will assume each battery train has eight 50 kWh batteries, as Bombardier have a 50 kWh PRIMOVE battery that would be suitable.
So if the train entered the Uckfield branch with 400 kWh in the batteries and 64.5 kWh in the train, it would be carrying 464.5 kWh, that could be used to power the train.
As I said, 145.57 kWh would be lost in braking, so that would leave 318.93 kWh to take a ten car train, a distance of 46 miles.
This works out at a figure of 0.7 kWh per car per mile for the journey.
In an article in the October 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled Celling England By The Pound, Ian Walmsley says this in relation to trains running on the Uckfield Branch, which is not very challenging.
A modern EMU needs between 3 and 5 kWh per vehicle mile for this sort of service.
So it looks like running a battery train on the route could be impossible, as there is a large difference between 0.7 and 3.
Let’s see what the mathematics say for various ideas.
Put A 50 kWh battery In Each Car
The larger battery capacity would mean the train will enter the branch carrying 564.5 kWh, that could be used to power the train.
Thus after deducting the regeneration losses of 145.57 kWh, this would leave 418.93 kWh to run the 460 vehicle miles.
This works out at a figure of 0.9 kWh per car per mile for the journey.
Improve The Efficiency Of The Regenerative Braking
Suppose that the energy lost at each stop can be reduced from fifteen to ten percent, how much difference would that make?
If the train was operating at 70 mph, the kinetic energy would be 64.5 kWh and the losses in the regenerative braking would now be 64.5 *0.10 *15 or 96.75 kWh.
Using the 500 kWh battery would mean the train will enter the branch carrying 564.5 kWh, that could be used to power the train.
Thus after deducting the regeneration losses of 96.75 kWh would leave 467.75 kWh to run the 460 vehicle miles.
This works out at a figure of 1 kWh per car per mile for the journey.
Charge the Train At Uckfield
Trains take eleven minutes to turn round at Uckfield station.
So how much power could be put into the batteries in that time?
But the Aventra isn’t a normal train.
Crossrail’s Class 345 trains have the following formation.
DMS+PMS+MS1+MS3+TS(W)+MS3+MS2+PMS+DMS
Note that it is symmetrical with two PMS cars, which have pantographs and the heavy electrical gear.
I suspect that the trains are two half trains with a degree of independent systems, so that if there are problems in the Crossrail tunnel, the train doesn’t get trapped.
I wonder if Thameslink’s Class 700 trains are the same?
So will South Western Railway’s third rail Class 701 trains be similarly designed, so that they can bridge gaps in the third rail electrification. If the third-rail shoes were in the second and ninth cars, they would be around 160 metres apart.
So perhaps a charging point based on third rail technology could be a double one, with a connection to each half-train.
This picture shows the exceedingly long platform at Uckfield station.
It could certainly accommodate a double third rail-based charging system.
- It would be on the far-side from the platform.
- It would only be activated with a train the platform and connected.
- It could be designed to have no serious safety problems.
The eleven minute charge would be equivalent to one of twenty-two minutes.
There must surely be the option to adjust the timetable, so that trains spend a few minutes longer at Uckfield and a few less at London Bridge, where charging isn’t necessary, as they charge the batteries all the way to and from Hurst Green.
Aventra Trains Have A Low Energy Mode
A few months ago, I was on a Crossrail train and I got talking to one of the driver/trainers.
I asked him what happens, if the power fails in the Crossrail tunnel.
He told me, that the driver switches systems off to reduce power requirements and switches to emergency power to move the train to a safe place to evacuate passengers.
Suppose though, when the train is running on batteries, power-hungry systems like air-conditioning were turned to a low energy mode. With judicious switching and innovation in design, I suspect that energy use can be lowered when running on batteries and raised when running on electrification to compensate.
Suppose, it was a very hot summer’s day.
The air-conditioning would be cooling the train from London Bridge to Hurst Green, getting more than adequate power from the electrification.
At Hurst Green, the train would be just the right temperature and the air-conditioning would be switched to eco-mode.
The train would be well-insulated and this would help maintain the cool environment, until the electrification was regained.
What about a cold day in the winter?
This post is entitled Aventras Have Underfloor Heating. On a cold day will this act a bit like a storage heating and keep the train warm if the power fails?
As I said I don’t think an Aventra is a normal train and although some of this is my deductions, we should be prepared for surprises as more of these trains start running on the UK’s railways.
Will Battery Trains Be Slower?
Much of the battery running on this route will be short hops of a few miles and minutes between stations.
The longest section will be between Crowborough and Buxted stations, which is 4.71 miles and currently takes seven minutes in both directions.
Both the Class 171 trains and the battery trains, will operate each section in the same way.
- Accelerate to the line speed, as fast as possible.
- Run at line speed for a measured distance.
- Slow down and apply braking to stop precisely in the next station.
As the battery train has 1 metre per sec² acceleration, as opposed to 0.5 metre per sec² of the diesel train, the battery train will get to line speed faster
Regenerative braking will also be smoother and possibly greater, than the brakes on the diesel train.
I am fairly sure, that a well-designed battery train will save a few minutes on each leg from Hurst Green to Uckfield.
These time savings could be used to extend the charging time at Uckfield
Conclusion
Running services on the Uckfield branch using battery-powered trains is a feasible proposition.
But these trains must have the following features.
- Regenerative braking to the trains batteries.
- A design where batteries are central to the traction system, not an afterthought.
- The ability to minimise power use for onboard systems.
But above all, the trains must have energy efficient systems.
Bombardier obviously have better figures and information than I do, so I think we should be prepared for surprises.
How Long Will A Class 345 Train Take To Go Between Two Stations Ten Kilometres Apart?
A Class 345 train has the following characteristics.
- Maximum speed of 145 kph.
- Acceleration of 1 m per second²
Using Omni’s Acceleration Calculator, I can calculate that, the train can accelerate up to full speed in 40 seconds.
Using the formula v²=u²+2as, this means that the train takes around 811 metres to get to 145 kph.
With regenerative braking, I suspect that a deceleration of the same order can be assumed.
So will it take 811 metres to stop from speed? I’ll use this figure until someone corrects me.
If the train is doing a start-stop over ten kilometres, then it will travel 8.4 kilometres at maximum speed, which will take about 3.5 minutes.
This means that the start-stop time will be 4.7 minutes.
Now I’ll look at a real example using a similar Greater Anglia Class 720 train.
These are 160 kph trains and typically work on the Great Eastern and West Anglia Main Lines with a similar operating speed.
The train will take 44.4 seconds to accelerate to operating speed and this will take 985.7 metres.
The distance between Tottenham Hale and Cheshunt stations is 12894.8 metres.
So the full speed distance could be 10923.4 metres. This will take 4.09 minutes at 160 kph.
So the start-stop time will be 5.5 minutes.
Currently, the fastest train on this route I can find takes 10 minutes.
I suspect that somewhere in this, the time at the station will complicate matters, but I do think that the fast acceleration and deceleration of the new trains will contribute to faster schedules.
And it’s not just Aventras that have this fast acceleration!
This is an extract for the Wikipedia entry for a Stadler Flirt.
Acceleration also varies between 0.8 and 1.2 m/s2 (2.6 and 3.9 ft/s2)
If you’re worried about the G forces, this is taken from the Wikipedia entry for London Underground’s 2009 Stock for the Victoria Line.
They have a higher top speed of 80 km/h (50 mph), a faster maximum acceleration of 1.3 m/s2(4.3 ft/s2), a normal service deceleration of 1.14 m/s2 (3.7 ft/s2), and an emergency brake deceleration of 1.4 m/s2 (4.6 ft/s2).
These accelerate even faster and are used for over 200.000 million journeys a year.
To put in an example from motoring, a Mini Cooper S has a 0-60 mph time of 7.4 seconds, which is an acceleration of 3.62 m/s2
Conclusions
Possibly the most important thing to reduce journey times on a rail journey, is to make sure that the operating speed is as high as possible and trains running on the route must be capable of running at that speed.
Obviously, trains do the short journey in three sections.
- They accelerate as fast as they can to the operating speed.
- They cruise at the line speed.
- They decelerate and brake, so they stop in the right place in the next station.
Dear Old Vicky has been doing this under computer control since, the line opened in the 1960s.
I gave an example from Merseyrail in Slow Trains Outside The South-East.
I said this.
The new Stadler Flirt trains are promised to save nine minutes between Southport and Hunts Cross stations, because they are better designed for passenger entrance and exit with faster speed and better braking and acceleration.
There is a corollary to all this.
So long as you have the energy on a train for fast acceleration, whether it is battery, diesel, electrification or hydrogen, it doesn’t matter for a faster service.
So alternatives to electrification are just as good!
The Battery Trains Are Coming
Every month seems to bring more information about trains where batteries are an important part of the propulsion system of the train.
So what are the various manufacturers offering?
Alstom
Alstom’s Coradia iLint train is hydrogen powered and as this video shows, batteries are an important part of the design of the train, which can probably be considered a hydrogen/battery hybrid train.
As I wrote in Germany Approves Alstom’s Hydrogen Train For Passenger Service, these trains will be entering service in late summer in Germany.
In the UK, Alstom are to convert some of the hundred-plus fleet of Class 321 trains, to running on hydrogen power.
I set out my thoughts on this in Thoughts On A Hydrogen-Powered Class 321 Train.
These were my conclusions.
- The Class 321 train will make a good hydrogen-powered train.
- Alstom would not have looked at converting a thirty-year-old train to hydrogen power, if they thought it would be less than good.
- British Rail’s design of a 750 VDC bus makes a lot of the engineering easier and enables the train to be tailored for world-wide markets, with different electrification systems and voltages.
- Having two different hydrogen-powered trains will give Alstom a better place in an emerging market.
I suspect in a few years time, if these two hydrogen projects are successful, Alstom will design and manufacture, a whole family of hydrogen-powered trains, with different gauges, capacities and operating speeds.
Bombardier
Unlike Alstom, who seem to be telling the world what they are doing with hybrid hydrogen/battery trains, Bombardier are playing their cards close to their chest.
In early 2015, I rode on Bombardier’s Class 379 Battery-Electric Multiple Unit demonstrator between Manningtree and Harwich.
It destroyed my scepticism about battery-electric trains.
Since then, the following has happened.
Class 345 Trains Have Entered Service
Class 345 trains have entered service on Crossrail routes to the East and West of London.
Until denied by Bombardier, I believe that these trains from Bombardier’s new Aventra family use batteries for the following purposes.
- Storing and reuseing the energy generated by regenerative braking.
- Providing an emergency power source, should the main electricity supply fail.
- Allowing depots and stabling sidings without electrification.
The trains should also make Crossrail and the other routes on which they run, more electrically efficient.
Five More Fleets Of Aventras
Bombardier have sold five more fleets of Aventras.
Could electrical efficiency because of clever use of batteries be a reason?
A 125 Mph Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries Has Been Launched
This article in Rail Magazine is entitled Bombardier Bi-Mode Aventra Could Feature Battery Power.
A few points from the article.
- Development has already started.
- Battery power could be used for Last-Mile applications.
- The bi-mode would have a maximum speed of 125 mph under both electric and diesel power.
- The trains will be built at Derby.
- Bombardier’s spokesman said that the ambience will be better, than other bi-modes.
- Export of trains is a possibility.
In Mathematics Of A Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries, I analyse the train in detail.
This was my conclusion.
I am rapidly coming to the conclusion, that a 125 mph bi-mode train is a practical proposition.
- It would need a controllable hydrogen or diesel power-pack, that could deliver up to 200 kW
- Only one power-pack would be needed for a five-car train.
- For a five-car train, a battery capacity of 300 kWh would probably be sufficient.
From my past professional experience, I know that a computer model can be built, that would show the best onboard generator and battery sizes, and possibly a better operating strategy, for both individual routes and train operating companies.
Obviously, Bombardier have better data and more sophisticated calculations than I do.
My calculation might be wrong, but it’s in the right area.
Voyager Battery Upgrade
This use of batteries by Bombardier was a total surprise.
In the July 2018 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article entitled Bi-Mode Aventra Details Revealed.
A lot of the article takes the form of reporting an interview with Des McKeon, who is Bombardier’s Commercial |Director and Global Head of Regional and Intercity.
This is a paragraph.
He also confirmed Bombardier is examining the option of fitting batteries to Voyager DEMUs for use in stations.
I discuss what Bombardier might be doing in Have Bombardier Got A Cunning Plan For Voyagers?.
I feel the simplest use for batteries on these trains would be to store the energy generated by regenerative braking in batteries, from where it would be used for the train’s hotel power!
This would reduce the need for the engines to be running in stations.
Conclusion
I think Bombardier have been thinking very hard about how you design a train with batteries.
CAF
CAF have fitted several of their trams with batteries and this system will be used on the Midland Metro, to create new routes without catenary.
But they only seem to have an on-off order for trains fitted with batteries for Auckland.in New Zealand.
The order seems to be on hold.
Given that CAF, have a reputation for research and development and they have used batteries in trams, I can’t believe that they are not looking seriously at how to use batteries in their train designs.
Hitachi
On page 79 of the January 2018 Edition of Modern Railways, Nick Hughes, who is the Sales Director of Hitachi Rail Europe outlines how the manufacturer is embracing the development of battery technology.
He is remarkably open.
I wrote Hitachi’s Thoughts On Battery Trains, after reading what he said.
Hitachi certainly have working battery trains in Japan and use batteries on Class 800 trains to capture the energy generated by regenerative braking. On these trains, it appears to be used for hotel power.
Siemens
Siemens have now merged with Alstom and they are also developing a hydrogen-powered train.
I wrote about this train in Siemens Joins The Hydrogen-Powered Train Club.
As with Alstom, I suspect this train will be using batteries.
Siemens have also won the order for the New Tube For London.
I wrote about this in Thoughts On The New Tube For London.
In the Future Upgrades section of the Wikipedia entry for the Piccadilly Line, this is said.
Siemens publicised an outline design featuring air-conditioning and battery power to enable the train to run on to the next station if third and fourth rail power were lost. It would have a lower floor and 11% higher passenger capacity than the present tube stock. There would be a weight saving of 30 tonnes, and the trains would be 17% more energy-efficient with air-conditioning included, or 30% more energy-efficient without it
I would suspect, the batteries are also used to handle the energy from regenerative braking
Stadler
Stadler have developed a bi-mode Flirt, which has been ordered by Greater Anglia as the Class 755 train.
They have now sold a diesel/electric/battery tri-mode to KeolisAmey Wales, which from the visualisations look like the trains are closely related to the Class 755 trains.
Stadler are also delivering Class 777 trains to Merseyrail. Wikipedia says this.
In May 2018, it was announced the sixth Class 777 unit to be delivered will be fitted with batteries for a trial.
So it looks like two major fleets of trains for the UK from Stadler will have batteries.
There is also the Stadler Wink, which has been sold to Arriva Nederland.
Wikipedia says this about the design.
It has an aluminium carbody that can be customized in length by the customer, and can be powered by either diesel or electric powertrains with supplemental on board batteries. Arriva units will be delivered with Deutz diesel engines and batteries charged by regenerative braking; the engines are planned to be replaced by additional batteries once electrification is installed over part of their route.
Stadler seem to be putting a lot of effort into batteries.
Vivarail
Vivarail’s Class 230 train started as a diesel-electric and they have now sold a battery version to KeolisAmey Wales, which should be in service in May 2019.
Conclusion
All train manufacturers seem to be applying battery technology to their trains.
The main purpose seems to be to recycle the energy generated by regenerative braking.
Some trains like Alstom’s hydrogen trains, Bombardier’s Aventras and Stadler’s tri-mode Flirt, use the energy for traction, whilst others like Hitachi’s Class 800 trins, use the energy for hotel power.
If a researcher or company comes up with a better battery, they will certainly get a return for their efforts in the rail industry.
Routes For Bombardier’s 125 Mph Bi-Mode Aventra
This article in Rail Magazine, is entitled Bombardier Bi-Mode Aventra To Feature Battery Power.
A few points from the article.
- Development has already started.
- Battery power could be used for Last-Mile applications.
- The bi-mode would have a maximum speed of 125 mph under both electric and diesel power.
- The trains will be built at Derby.
- Bombardier’s spokesman said that the ambience will be better, than other bi-modes.
- Export of trains is a possibility.
Bombardier’s spokesman also said, that they have offered the train to three new franchises. East Midlands, West Coast Partnership and CrossCountry.
These are my thoughts on these franchises.
Bi-Mode And Pure Electric
I’m pretty certain that if you want to create a 125 mph bi-mode train, you start with a 125 mph electric train, if you want a high degree of commonality between the two trains.
Hitachi have a whole family of Class 800 trains, each of which has a different specification for the diesel power. Even the pure-electric Class 801 trains, has one diesel engine for emergencies.
An electric train with batteries could be very efficient, if the batteries were used to handle regenerative braking and boost the trains, where more power is required.
East Midlands
It is no surprise that Bombardier are talking to the groups, that are bidding to become the new franchise holder for the East Nidlands, when it is awarded in April 2019.
They wouldn’t want to see another company’s product roaring past the factory.
The proposed bi-mode Aventra will probably have been designed very much with the Midland Main Line in mind.
- The Midland Main Line will be electrified from St. Pancras to Kettering and Corby.
- Will the fast lines be electrified to Glendon Junction, where the Corby Branch joins the Midland Main Line?
- The route between St. Pancras and Glendon Junction is being upgraded to four tracks, with as much 125 mph running as possible.
- The non-stop nature of Midland Main Line services South of Kettering could be significant.
- North of Kettering, there is currently no electrification.
- The development of Toton station for HS2 is being accelerated and there could be an island of electrification here, by the mid-2020s.
- If HS2 shares the Midland Main Line corridor between Toton and Sheffield, this section could be electrified by the late-2020s.
Over the next decade, there will be more electrification and a greater proportion of the route, where 125 mph running will be possible.
There has been a bit of controversy, that the number of stops the franchise will make at Bedford and Luton is being reduced after May this year.
The reason given is that it will enable faster services to Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield.
North To Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield
Consider a bi-mode train with batteries going North.
- Between St. Pancras and Kettering, it will be at 125 mph for as long as possible.
- The train will also ensure that at Kettering, it has the batteries brim full, sfter charging from the electrification.
- After a stop at Kettering station, if the electrification reached to Glendon Junction, the acceleration would all be electrically-powered.
- Whether it stopped at Kettering or not, the train would pass Glendon Junction at line speed with full batteries.
It’s almost as if the electrification is being used as a catapult to speed the train North.
South From Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield
Being as electrically efficient coming South would be a lot more difficult.
- I suspect that train batteries will be charged at Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield, so they start their journey South with full batteries.
- Using a full battery and assistance from the onboard generator, trains would be accelerated away from the terminii.
- The trains computer would select automatically, whether to use battery or onboard generator power and would harvest all the power from regenerative braking.
- At each stop on the journey, energy would be lost, as regenerative braking systems do not are only between seventy and ninety percent efficient.
- Once at Glendon Junction, the train would raise the pantograph and switch to getting power from the overhead wires.
It’s all about a well-programmed computer on the train, which knows the route, the timetable and battery state so it can switch power sources appropriately.
Electrification
On the other hand, electrification around Toton could make everything easier and more efficient.
With electrification, every little helps.
- Modern trains can raise and lower pantographs, quickly and automatically.
- Faster journeys.
- Lower carbon emissions.
- Less noise and vibration from diesel generators.
Everyone’s a winner.
Oakham To Kettering
The Oakham-Kettering Line to Corby station is being electrified, double-tracked and I suspect speed limits will be raised.
Speed limits are also being raised and track improvements are being done, South of Glendon Junction.
Currently, services take seventy minutes. With the 125 mph Aventras on the route, they will not need to use the onboard generator, but surely the journey time could be reduced to under an hour, which would attract passengers and need less trains to run a two trains per hour (tph) service.
The Oakham Problem
Oakham station is in the middle of the town, as this Google Map shows.
The Department for transport would like to see more services to the town and the next station of Melton Mowbray.
But the line through the station is busy with freight trains and there is a level crossing in the middle of the town.
125 mph bi-mode trains, won’t help with the problem of Oakham.
Joining And Splitting Of Trains
There is also the possibility of joining and splitting trains.
Hitachi’s Class 800 trains can do this and I’m sure bi-mode Aventras will be able to do this automatically.
There is only four platforms available for trains on the Midland Main Line at St. Pancras and regularly two trains occupy one platform.
The ability to run a pair of bi-mode trains, that joined and split could be a great asset.
Liverpool To Norwich
This long route is an important one for those, who live near its stations. It is usually served by one or two Class 158 trains, which are often very crowded.
The route is partially electrified.
- Liverpool to Hunts Cross
- Manchester Oxford Road to Stockport
- Grantham to Peterborough
- Around Ely
- Around Norwich
So there should be plenty of places to raise the pantograph and charge the batteries.
It is a typical long-distance route for the UK and I’m sure it would benefit from 125 mph bi-mode Aventras.
West Coast Partnership
Bids for the West Coast Partnership, which will run services on the West Coast Main Line and HS2, will be submitted by July 2018. The winning bidder will be announced in May 2019 and take over services two months later.
A modern 125 mph bi-mode would be an ideal replacement for the current twenty Class 221 trains, that work on the West Coast Main Line.
These Class 221 trains are.
- Diesel powered.
- Five-cars long.
- Built in 2001-2002 by Bombardier.
- 125 mph capable.
- Some services are run by splitting and joining trains.
But most importantly, most services are run substantially under wires.
New 125 mph bi-mode trains would certainly improve services.
- Several of the current services operated by Class 221 trains, would become electric ones.
- How much faster would they be able to run a service between London Euston and Holyhead?
- They would also be able to run new services to places like Barrow. Blackburn and Huddersfield.
- Five cars could be a convenient train size for the operator.
But above all, they would offer a better passenger experience, with less noise and vibration from the diesel engines.
The longest section of running using onboard power of a bi-mode Aventra will be along the North Wales Coast Line to Holyhead.
- The line has an 90 mph operating speed.
- The line is 85 miles long.
- The gradients won’t be too challenging, as the line runs along the coast.
- Services stop up to half-a-dozen times on the route.
- From London to Crewe is electrified.
- The section between Crewe and Chester may be electrified.
It looks to be an ideal route for a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra.
As the route appears to not be as challenging as the Midland Main Line, could this route, be the ideal test route for a hydrogen fuel-cell powered Aventra.
West Coast Partnership may well have plans to use 125 mph bi-mode trains as feeder services for HS2’s hubs at Birmingham and Crewe.
I could certainly see West Coast Partnership ordering a mixed fleet of 125 mph Aventras, some of which would be bi-modes and some pure electric.
CrossCountry
CrossCountry has a diverse portfolio of routes, which have every characteristic possible.
- Some are lines with a 125 mph operating speed.
- Some are electrified with 25 KVAC overhead wires.
- Some are electrified with 750 VDC third-rail.
- Some are not electrified.
A bi-mode train with these characteristics would fit well.
- 125 mph capability on both electric and diesel power.
- Battery power for short branch lines.
- Modern passenger facilities.
- Five-cars.
- Ability to work in pairs.
They could actually go for a homogeneous fleet, if they felt so inclined.
That would be a substantial fleet of upwards of fifty five-car trains.
The new CrossCountry franchise will be awarded in August 2019 and start in December 2019.
Other Routes
If the 125 bi-mode Aventra with batteries is built, there could be other routes.
Borders Railway
Why would you run a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra on the 90 mph Borders Railway?
- The Borders Railway will be extended to Carlisle, which will mean, that both ends will be electrified for a few miles.
- This will mean that bi-mode trains with batteries could charge their batteries at both ends of the line.
- If traffic increases, extra cars can be added.
- The trains would be able to use the West Coast Main Line to link the Lake District to Edinburgh.
- They could be given a tourism-friendly interior, to go with the large windows common to all Aventras.
The trains would help to develop tourism in the South of Scotland and the North of England.
East West Rail
The East West Rail between Oxford and Cambridge is going to built without electrification.
- But that doesn’t mean that it should be built with an operating speed in the region of 90 mph!
- The legendary InterCity 125s have been running on lines without electrification at 125 mph since the late 1970s, so it isn’t an unknown practice.
So if the line were to be built for high speed across some of the flattest parts of England, why not unleash the 125 mph bi-mode Aventras?
They could serve Ipswich, Norwich and Yarmouth in the East using their onboard generators.
They could serve Bournemouth, Bristol, Reading and Southampton, if the trains had a dual-voltage capability.
They could use electrification at Bedford, Bletchley, Cambridge and Reading to charge the batteries.
Settle-Carlisle Line
Surely, if the 125 mph bi-mode Aventras are suitable for the Borders Railway, then it should be able to work the Settle-Carlisle Line.
- Both ends of the line are electrified, so batteries could be charged.
- The line needs more and better services.
But the main reason, is that there will be a high-class scenic route between Edinburgh and Leeds.
I estimate that a London to Edinburgh service via Leeds, Settle, Carlisle and the Borders Railway would take six and a half hours, using a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra.
Some tourists love that sort of trip.
Waterloo To Exeter
The West of England Line has the following characteristics.
- It runs between Basingstoke and Exeter.
- It is a hundred and twenty miles long.
- It has a 90 mph operating speed.
- The line is not electrified.
- It is connected to the electrified South Western Main Line to Waterloo.
- The route is electrified between Waterloo and Basingstoke.
- Direct trains take three hours twenty-three minutes between Waterloo and Exeter, with fourteen stops between Basingstoke and Exeter.
- The trains used on the route are twenty-five year-old Class 159 trains.
Would a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra improve the passenger service between Waterloo and Exeter?
- The Aventras are built for fast dwell times at stations, so there could be time saving with all those stops.
- The Aventras could use the third-rail electrification between Waterloo and Basingstoke.
- There may be places, where the operating speed can be increased and the faster Aventras would take advantage.
- The trains could have a passenger-friendly interior and features designed for the route.
The real benefits for South Western Railway and their passengers would come, if the trains could do Waterloo to Exeter in three hours.
Routes For A Pure-Electric Version
There are several routes in the UK, where the following apply.
- Some long-distance trains are run by 125 mph trains.
- The route is fully- or substantially-electrified.
- A proportion of the route allows 125 mph running.
- Sections of the route is only double-track.
Routes satisfying the criteria include.
- The West Coast Main Line
- The East Coast Main Line
- The Great Western Main Line
- The Midland Main Line
On these routes, I believe it would be advantageous, if all passenger trains were capable of operating at 125 mph.
This is cause if all trains were running at 125 mph, they could be more closely spaced, thus increasing capacity.
Digital signalling would probably be needed.
There are several train services,, that use the electrified 125 mph sections of these routes.
Birmingham/Liverpool/Manchester To Edinburgh/Glasgow
TransPennine Express, are replacing their current Siemens 110 mph Class 350 trains on this service, with new CAF 125 mph Class 397 trains.
Euston To The West Midlands, Liverpool And Preston
West Midland Trains are replacing some of their current Siemens 110 mph Class 350 trains with new Aventras.
Information is scarce at the moment, but could some of these new Aventras be 125 mph units for working on the West Coast Main Line?
Leeds/York To Edinbugh
TransPennine Express run trains on this route.
St. Panvras To Corby
The Corby Branch is being upgraded.
- Double-track
- 125 mph running
- Electrification
The section of the Midland Main Line between St. Pancras and Glendon Junction is also being upgraded to allow as much 125 mph running as possible.
If 125 mph bi-mode trains are to be used from St. Pancras to Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield, then surely, it would be logical to use a pure-electric version of the train between St. Pancras and Corby?
Various documents and web pages say, that the St. Pancras to Corby services are going to be worked by 110 mph Class 387 trains. Surely, faster 125 mph trains, which had been designed for the route would be better for passengers and the train operating company.
From my experience of scheduling, the section of the Midland Main Line between St. Pancras and Bedford, must be a nightmare to timetable successfully.
- There are two train operating companies using the route, who go a hundred miles in different directions.
- The Class 700 trains used by Thameslink are only 100 mph trains, so probably can’t use the fast lines too often, as if they do, they’ll delay the expresses..
- Regular passengers object to any change in stopping patterns or journey times.
- Passengers liked to get on express services at Bedford, but they now don’t stop.
- Passengers don’t like the Class 700 trains.
- Luton Airport wants more services.
My experience, says that something radical must be done.
Consider.
- Plans are for two tph between St. Pancras and Corby.
- How many passengers would complain if they ended up in the St. Pancras Thameslink platforms, rather than the high-level ones? They’re both equally badly connected to the Underground, buses and taxis.
- There will be four tph between Bedford and London all day on Thameslink, with an extra four tph in the Peak.
- Some or all of these services will call at both Luton and Gatwick Airports.
- Looking at the two semi-fast services. which both run at tw trph, they seem to stop virtually everywhere.
I think it would be possible for the two tph St. Pancras to Corby services to become express services between Corby, Gatwick Airport and Brighton.
- The services would only stop at Kettering, Bedford, Luton, Luton Airport Parkway, St. Albans, West Hampstead Thameslink, St. Pancras Thameslink, Farringdon, City Thameslink, Blackfriars, London Bridge and East Croydon.
- The services would use the 125 mph fast lines North of St. Pancras, as much as possible.
- Corby services would always call at St. Pancras Thameslink.
- The trains would be designed for both Airport services and long-distance commuting.
- The trains would be maximum length.
Obviously, this is my rough idea, but something like it might satisfy the stakeholders, more than what is proposed.
I think there are also other services, which are fully electrified, which could be upgraded, so that they would be suitable for or need 125 mph electric trains.
Kings Cross To King’s Lynn
I wrote about this route in Call For ETCS On King’s Lynn Route.
Portsmouth Direct Line
Under Topography Of The Line in the Wikipedia enter for the Portsmouth Direct Line, this is said.
The central part of the route, from Guildford to Havant, runs through relatively thinly populated country. The line was designed on the “undulating principle”; that is, successive relatively steep gradients were accepted to reduce construction cost. In the days of steam operation this made the route difficult for enginemen.
But with.
- A second man in the cab, in the shape of the train’s computer, juggling the power.
- Regenerative braking to the batteries saving energy for reuse when needed.
- Bags of grunt from the traction motors.
The pure electric version of the 125 mph Aventra might just have the beating of the topography.
South Western Railway plan to introduce an older train from Litchurch Lane in Derby on this route, in the shape of the last of the Mark 3s, the Class 442 train or the Wessex Electrics, which were built in the 1980s.
It will be interesting to see how a 125 mph pure electric Aventra compares to something made in the same works, thirty years earlier.
Waterloo To Southampton, Bournemouth and Weymouth
The South Western Main Line goes to Southampton Central, Bournemouth and Weymouth.
- It is a 100 mph line
- It is fully-electrified.
Would a 125 mph pure-electric Aventra be able to put the hammer down?
I’m sure Network Rail can improve the line to a maximum safe line-speed.
Conclusion
If Bombardier build a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra with batteries, there is a large market. Especially, if there is a sibling, which is pure electric.
Bombardier Bi-Mode Aventra To Feature Battery Power
The title of this post is the same as this article in Rail Magazine.
A few points from the article.
- Development has already started.
- Battery power could be used for Last-Mile applications.
- The bi-mode would have a maximum speed of 125 mph under both electric and diesel power.
- The trains will be built at Derby.
- Bombardier’s spokesman said that the ambience will be better, than other bi-modes.
- Export of trains is a possibility.
Bombardier’s spokesman also said, that they have offered the train to three new franchises. East Midlands, West Coast Partnership and CrossCountry.
In some ways, I am not surprised about what is said in this article.
Another article on Christian Wolmar’s web site, is entitled Bombardier’s Survival Was The Right Kind Of Politics.
This is said.
Bombardier is not resting on its laurels. Interestingly, the company has been watching the problems over electrification and the fact that more of Hitachi’s new trains will now be bi-mode because the wires have not been put up in time. McKeon has a team looking at whether Bombardier will go into the bi-mode market: ‘The Hitachi bi-mode trains can only go 110 mph when using diesel. Based on Aventra designs, we could build one that went 125 mph. This would help Network Rail as it would not have to electrify everywhere.’ He cites East Midlands, CrossCountry and Wales as potential users of this technology.
The article was published in February 2017 and mentions, 125 mph on diesel and two of the companies in the recent article.
The Design Of The Trains
My thoughts are as follows.
The Starting Point
I’m pretty certain that if you wanmt to create a 125 mph bi-mode train, you start with a 125 mph electric train, if you want a high degree of commonality between the two trains.
Bombardier haven’t yet built any of their Aventras for West Midland Trains, but as they will use the West Coast Main Line extensively, will they be 125 mph trains and not 110 mph trains, as is said in Wikipedia?
Aventras And Battery Power
I will believe until Bombardier say I’m wrong, that Crossrail’s Class 345 trains, which are Aventras, use batteries for the following purposes.
- To handle regenerative braking.
- To limp the train out of the tunnel or to the next station or safe exit point, if there should be a catastrophic power failure.
- To lessen the amount of electricity fed to the trains in the tunnels.
- To allow features like remote wake-up, which need a train to have some form of power at all times.
- To move trains in sidings and depots without having live electrification.
- To run passenger features, when the power fails.
Effectively, the Class 345 trains have electricity as a main power source and batteries for energy storage and a secondary or emergency power source.
I talked to one of their staff, who was training drivers on Crossrail’s Aventras. The conversation went something like this.
- Me: “What happens, when the Russians hack the power supply?”
- Driver-Trainer: “We switch the train to emergency power!”
- Me: “You mean batteries?”
- Driver-Trainer: (Pause, then something like) “Might be!”
Can anybody think of another way to have emergency power on the train?
Electric Traction, Regenerative Braking and Batteries
Bi-mode trains and Alstom’s hydrogen-powered Coradia iLint are electrically powered at all times.
This means that under electric, diesel or hydrogen power, the traction motors can generate electricity to brake the train.
On an electric train, this electricity is returned through the overhead wire or third rail to power other nearby trains. This electricity could also be stored in an onboard battery, just as it is in a hybrid or battery-electric vehicle.
Driving A Bi-Mode Train With Batteries
The bi-mode Aventra could have electricity from one of four power sources.
- 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
- 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
- An onboard electricity generator powered by diesel fuel or hydrogen.
- Batteries
So will the driver need to keep switching power sources?
I am a Control Engineer by training and optimising the best power to use is a typical problem for someone with my training and experience.
The train’s computer would take all the information about the route, timetable, signal settings, battery charge level, train loading, weather and other factors and drive the train automatically, with the driver monitoring everything thoroughly.
Aircraft have been flown in a similar fashion for decades.
I look in detail, at the mathematics of a bi-mode Aventra with batteries in Mathematics Of A Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries.
I came to the following conclusions.
I am rapidly coming to the conclusion, that a 125 mph bi-mode train is a practical proposition.
- It would need a controllable hydrogen or diesel power-pack, that could deliver up to 200 kW
- Only one power-pack would be needed for a five-car train.
- For a five-car train a battery capacity of 300 kWh would probably be sufficent.
From my past professional experience, I know that a computer model can be built, that would show the best onboard generator and battery sizes, and possibly a better operating strategy, for both individual routes and train operating companies.
Obviously, Bombardier have better data and more sophisticated calculations than I do.
Note, that everything I proposed, is well within the scope of modern engineering, so other companies like CAF and Stadler, who are actively involved in rail application of battery technology, could join the party.
This picture is a visualisation of a Stadler Class 755 train, which they are building for Greater Anglia.
Note the smaller third car, which contains the diesel engine of this hybrid train. Is there room for batteries as well?
I can’t find any information on the web about the power train of the Class 755 train, but this article in the Railway Gazette, describes another Stadler bi-mode Flirt, that Stadler are building for Italy.
This is said.
The units will be rated at 2 600 kW with a maximum speed of 160 km/h when operating from 3 kV DC electrification, and 700 kW with a maximum speed of 140 km/h when powered by the two Stage IIIB compliant Deutz TCD 16.0 V8 diesel engines.
There is provision to add up to two more cars if required to meet an increase in ridership. Two more engines could be added, or the diesel module removed if only electric operation is needed.
Note.
- The Deutz diesel engines are rated at 520 kW.
- As 700 kW is the power of the train, I suspect each engine generator creates 350 kW of power.
- 160 km/h would be ideal for the Great Eastern Main Line
- 140 km/h would be more than adequate for roaming around East Anglia
I suspect that if batteries were used on this train, that the engines would be smaller.
We will see in May 2019, when the trains enter service.
Diesel Or Hydrogen Generator
Electricity generation using a diesel generator and electricity generator from a hydrogen fuel cell, each have their own advantages.
- Diesel fuel has a higher energy density than hydrogen
- Diesel engines create a lot of noise and vibration and emit carbon dioxide, noxious gases and particulates.
- Hydrogen fuel cells can be silent and only emit water and steam.
- Ballard who are a Canadian company and a leading manufacturer of hydrogen fuel-cells, manufacture one for use in rail applications which has an output of 100 kW, that weighs 385 Kg.
- MTU make the diesel engine for a Class 800 train, which has an output of over 600 kW, that weighs 5000 Kg.
- Hydrogen storage is probably heavier and more complicated than diesel storage.
- Both generators can be fitted into convenient rectangular power packs.
I would envisage that in the future, hydrogen electricity generators will get more efficient, lighter in weight and smaller in size for a given power output.
I don’t think it is unreasonable to believe, that within a reasonable number of years, hydrogen generators and their hydrogen storage tank, will be comparable in weight and size to current diesel generators and fuel tanks.
Accelerating A Bi-Mode Train With Batteries
The major use of electricity on a 125 mph train, will be in accelerating the train up to line speed. The energy needed will be.
- Proportional to the mass of the train. This is why your car accelerates better, when it’s just you in the car and you don’t have your overweight mother-in-law in the back.
- Proportional to the square of the velocity.
I have calculated that a five-car bi-mode Aventra, carrying 430 passengers and travelling at 125 mph, will have a kinetic energy of 91.9 kWh.
Obviously, using electricity from electrification is the best way to accelerate a train.
- Electricity from electrification is probably cheaper and more convenient, than that from an onboard electricity generator.
- If diesel is not used to power the train, there is no noise and vibration from an onboard diesel generator.
- A route with a lot of running on onboard fuel, means more fuel has to be carried.
Using electricity stored in batteries on the train, is also a good way to accelerate a train, but the batteries must have enough charge.
The onboard electricity generator will be used, when there is no electrification and the power stored in the batteries is approaching a low level.
|When Bombardier’s spokesman says, that the ambience will be good, control of the train’s power sources has a lot to do with it.
Could he have been hinting at hydrogen, as hydrogen fuel cells do not have high noise and vibration levels?
Cruising A Bi-Mode Train With Batteries
Newton’s First Law states.
Every body continues in its state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless impressed forces act on it.
If you have a train on a railway track moving at a constant speed, the following forces are acting to slow the train.
- Aerodynamic forces, particularly on the front of the train.
- Rolling friction of the steel wheel on a steel rail.
- Bends and gradients in the track.
- Speed limits and signals.
So the driver and his control system will have to feed in power to maintain the vrequired spreed.
I have sat on the platform at Stratford, whilst an Aventra has gone past at speed. I wrote about it in Class 345 Trains Really Are Quiet!
This was my conclusion.
Bombardier have applied world class aviation aerodynamics to these trains. Particularly in the areas of body shape, door design, car-to-car interfaces, bogies and pantographs.
Remember too, that low noise means less wasted energy and greater energy efficiency.
In addition steel wheel on steel rails is a very efficient way of moving heavy weights. Bombardier have a reputation for good running gear.
Once a train has reached its cruising speed, appropriate amounts of power will be fed to the train to maintain speed.
But compared to the power needed to accelerate the train, they could be quite small.
For small amounts of power away from electrification, the control system will use battery power if it is available and can be used.
The onboard electricity generator would only be switched in, when larger amounts of power are needed or the battery power is low.
Slowing A Bi-Mode Train With Batteries
The regenerative braking will always be used, with the energy being stored in the batteries, if there is free capacity.
Imagine the following.
- A bi-mode making a stop at Leicester station on the Midland Main Line.
- It is doing 100 mph before the stop on the main line.
- It will be doing 100 mph after the stop on the main line.
The energy of the train after Leicester will be roughly the same as before, unless the mass of the train has changed, by perhaps a large number of passengers leaving or joining the train.
Let’s assume that the energy at 100 mph in the train is X kWh
- When the train brakes for Leicester this energy will be transferred to the train’s batteries, if there is capacity.
- On accelerating the train, it will need to acquire X kWh. It couldn’t get all of this from the batteries, as for various reasons the overall efficiency of this sort of system is about seventy to ninety percent.
- The onboard electricity generator will have to supply a proportion of the energy to get the train back up to 100 mph.
But in a diesel train it will have to supply all the energy to get back to 100 mph.
Where Would I Put The Batteries?
Aventras seem to have a lot of powered-bogies, so to keep cable runs short to minimise losses and maximise the efficiency of the regenerative braking, I would put a battery in each car of the train.
This would also distribute the weight evenly.
Where Would I Put The Electricity Generators?
Diesel engines always seem to be noisy, when they are installed under the floor of a train. I’ve travelled a lot in Bombardier’s Turbostars and although they are better than the previous generation, they are still not perfect.
I’ve also travelled in the cab of a Class 43 locomotive, with a 2,250 hp diesel engine close behind me. It was very well insulated and not very noisy.
As I said earlier, the most intensive use of the onboard generators will come in accelerating a train to operating speed, where no electrification or battery power is available. There is only so much you can do with insulation!
Stadler, who are building the Class 755 train for Greater Anglia, have opted to put a short diesel generator car in the middle of the train.
This was an earlier train, where Stadler used the technique.
There are reports in Wikipedia, that the ride wasn’t good, but I’m sure Stadler has cracked it for their new 100 mph bi-mode trains.
Creating a bi-mode by adding an extra motor car into the middle of an electric train could be a serious way to go.
- The dynamics are probably better understood now
- A powerful diesel engine could be fitted.
- Batteries could be added.
- Insulating passengers and staff from the noise and vibration would surely be easier.
- There could be a passage through the car, to allow passengers and staff to circulate.
In an ideal world, a four-car electric train could be changed into a five-car bi-mode train, by adding the motor car and updating the train software.
In Mathematics Of A Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries, I came to the conclusion, that if the batteries are used in conjunction with the power-pack, that a single power-pack of about 200 kW could be sufficient to power the train. This would be smaller and lighter in weight, which would probably mean it could be tucked away under the floor and well-insulated to keep noise and vibration from passengers and staff.
In 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-ion batteries if required.
This was published six years ago, so I suspect Bombardier have refined the concept.
So could it be that Bombardier have designed a secondary power car, that can be fitted with a battery and a diesel engine of appropriate size?
- Using a diesel engine with batteries means that a smaller engine can be used.
- The diesel engine could also be replaced with a 200 kW hydrogen fuel cell.
I won’t speculate, but Bombardier have a very serious idea. And it’s all down to the mathematics.
What Would Be The Length Of A 125 Mph Bi-Mode Aventra?
Long distance Aventras, like those for Greater Anglia and West Midlands Trains, seem to be five and ten car trains.
This would fit well with the offerngs from other companies, so I suspect five- and ten-cars will be the standard lengths.
Could There Be A Bi-Mode Aventra for Commuter Routes?
The London Overground has ordered a fleet of four-car Class 710 trains.
The Gospel Oak to Barking Line is being extended to a new Barking Riverside station.
In an article in the October 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled Celling England By The Pound, Ian Walmsley says this in relation to trains running on the Uckfield Branch, which probably has a terrain not much different to the lines to London.
A modern EMU needs between 3 and 5 kWh per vehicle mile for this sort of service.
The new extension is about a mile, so this would need 20 kWh each way.
This could easily be done with a battery, but supposing a small diesel engine was also fitted under the floor. Would anybody notice the same 138 kW Cummins ISBe diesel engine that is used in a New Routemaster hybrid bus?
I doubt it.
It is a revealing to calculate the kinetic energy of a fully-loaded Class 710 train. I estimate that it under 50 kWh, if it was travelling at 90 mph, which would rarely be achieved on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
Could Bombardier Be Serious About Exporting Bi-Mode Aventras?
In my opinion, the Aventra is a good train an it seems to sell well in its electric form to train operating companies in the UK.
But would it sell well in overseas markets like the United States and Canada, India and Australia?
They obviously know better than I do, so we should take their statements at face value.
The Prospective Customers
The Rail Magazine article mentions three prospective customers.
I deal with them and other possiblilities in Routes For Bombardier’s 125 Mph Bi-Mode Aventra.
This was my conclusion.
If Bombardier build a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra with batteries, there is a large market.
It looks like the company has done a lot of research.
Conclusion
Bombardier are designing a serious train.
What Is The Operating Speed Of Class 710 Trains?
So far, five classes of Aventra trains have been allocated TOPS numbers and their own Wikipedia pages.
- Crossrail – Class 345 trains – 145 kph
- London Overground – Class 710 trains – Speed not disclosed
- Greater Anglia – Class 720 trains – 160 kph
- South Western Railway – Class 701 trains – 160 kph
- c2c – Class 711 trains – 160 kph
The other orders for West Midlands Trains are given as 145 kph for the Cross-City Line and 180 kph for longer distance trains, in Wikipedia.
Looking at these speeds, I think that the operating speed of the Class 710 trains, must either be the 145 kph of the Crossrail trains or the 160 kph of the suburban trains.
But it has not been disclosed.
As probably most Aventras use similar running gear and electrical and control systems, I wouldn’t be surprised that maximum operating speed, is just a setting in the train’s control computer.
London Overground’s Aventra Routes
Timings on London Overground’s routes, that will be run by Class 710 trains are as follows.
- Euston – Watford Junction – 47 minutes – 15 stops
- Liverpool Street – Cheshunt – 39 minutes – 15 stops
- Liverpool Street – Chingford – 27 minutes – 6 stops
- Liverpool Street – Enfield Town – 33 minutes – 13 stops
Comparing the new Class 710 trains to the current Class 315 and Class 317 and Class 378 trains, there are or may be performance differences.
- Class 315 and Class 378 are slower trains with a 121 kph operating speed.
- Class 317 trains have an operating speed of 161 kph.
- Dwell times mat be less on the new trains compared to some or all of the existing types.
So how will these differences effect the various routes?
Euston – Watford Junction
There seems to be long turnrounds on this service and I’m fairly certain faster trains could run this service more efficiently, which may mean that the same number of trains could run at a frequency of four trains per hour (tph).
Liverpool Street – Cheshunt
This service is based on a six minute turnround and I suspect could be run more efficiently, if a faster train could get each way in under thirty minutes.
Liverpool Street – Chingford
It looks like this four tph service is run pretty efficiently, but there is a ten minute turnround at Chingford.
Liverpool Street – Enfield Town
The Liverpool Street to Enfield Town service waits nineteen minutes before returning, so small savings in dwell times and a faster train, might allow a two tph service to be setup, where trains depart on the half-hour, using just two trains.
Four tph, which is planned to start on this route in 2019, would need just four trains.
Summery Of London Overground Routes
Faster trains with shorter dwell times will certainly improve the timings and frequency of London Overground’s services, that they intend to run with Class 710 trains.
I’m pretty certain, that they will enable the following.
- Four tph – Euston to Watford Junction
- Four tph – Liverpool Street to Enfield Town
They will also improve timings on Liverpool Street to Cheshunt.
Conclusion
But what will be the operating speed of the Class 710 trains?
I said it will be somewhere between 145 kph (90 mph) and 160 kph (100 mph)
Consider.
- I think that 145 kph, will be able to handle the two planned increased frequencies of four tph.
- 145 kph is identical to the Crossrail trains.
- 160 kph is identical to the Greater Anglia trains.
- 160 kph seems to be the speed of siburban Aventras.
It’s a difficult one to call!
