The Ways First Group, Hitachi, Hyperdrive Innovation and Turntide Technologies Can Enable Electric Trains To Run Between Basingstoke And Exeter
Who Are Turntide Technologies?
The Wikipedia entry for the company starts with this paragraph.
Turntide Technologies is a US-based business that makes intelligent, sustainable motor systems. Turntide applies its Technology for Sustainable Operations across buildings, agriculture, and transportation segments. It maintains operations in the USA, Canada, the United Kingdom, and India.
These three paragraphs from the Technology section of the Wikipedia entry outline their technology.
Turntide’s core product is its Technology for Sustainable Operations, a cloud-based open platform that monitors and automates building and vehicle systems. The platform is powered by its Smart Motor System, a connected hardware-software machine built around a high rotor pole switched reluctance motor.
Southern California Edison utility certified in 2018 that the V01 Smart Motor System reduced energy consumption by 23%-57% compared with a standard AC induction motor, and 11% compared with an induction motor controlled by a variable frequency drive.
In 2019, National Renewable Energy Laboratory certified that Turntide’s motor reduced energy consumption in refrigerator condenser fans by 29%-71%.
Note.
- Turntide’s efficiencies, which appear to have been verified by reputable organisations, if they can be reproduced in traction systems for battery-powered transport could improve range substantially.
- There are also other more efficient electric motors being developed.
- I wrote about Norfolk-based advanced traction motor company; Equipmake in Equipmake Hybrid To Battery Powered LT11.
- Motors like these, are the engineer’s cure for range anxiety.
I have to ask, if Hitachi (, and Stadler) are using more efficient motors to stretch the range of their battery-electric trains.
Initially, Hitachi asked Hyperdrive Innovation to design battery packs for Class 802 and other similar trains.
These three posts give some details about the battery project involving the two companies.
- Hitachi And Eversholt Rail To Develop GWR Intercity Battery Hybrid Train – Offering Fuel Savings Of More Than 20%
- Hitachi Rail And Angel Trains To Create Intercity Battery Hybrid Train On TransPennine Express
- More On Batteries On Class 802 Trains
Consider.
- In June 2021, Turntide acquired Hyperdrive Innovation.
- So did this effectively invite Turntide to the project?
- According to the Internet, Hitachi are one of the largest manufacturers of electric motors.
- Turntide are very-well funded by the likes of Bill Gates, Robert Downey Junior and some big funds.
Has there been some intense design meetings, which have been beneficial to all parties?
In my experience, these groupings don’t often work out how they should!
But this relationship seems to be doing fine.
One of Hitachi’s managers from the battery-train project even appears in the video on Turntide’s home page.
Electrifying Basingstoke And Exeter
Consider these facts about the route.
- Basingstoke and Salisbury is 35.8 miles.
- Salisbury and Exeter is 88.5 miles.
- Basingstoke and Exeter is 124.3 miles.
- There is no electrification.
- There are 14 stops between Salisbury and Exeter.
- There are 4 stops between Basingstoke and Salisbury.
- Trains are up to nine car Class 159 trains.
- Average speeds are not much better than 50 mph.
- Maximum speeds vary between 75 and 90 mph.
To get an estimate of how much energy, a Basingstoke and Exeter train will use, I’ll start with a figure from How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 Or 100 mph?.
At 125 mph, a Class 801 train has a usage figure of 3.42 kWh per vehicle mile.
As drag is proportional to the square of the speed, which gives
- At 100 mph, a Class 801 train has a usage figure of 2.19 kWh per vehicle mile.
- At 80 mph, a Class 801 train has a usage figure of 1.40 kWh per vehicle mile.
For this calculation I’ll take the 80 mph figure of 1.40 kWh per vehicle mile.
Assuming a five-car train travelling between Basingstoke and Exeter, which is 124.3 miles gives a figure of 870 kWh.
But this is only one use of energy on the train.
- Every time, the train accelerates it will need power, but it will charge itself using regenerative braking.
- An all-electric Class 803 train has a mass of 228.5 tonnes and carries 400 passengers.
- If I assume that each passenger is 80 Kg including baggage, bikes and buggies, that gives a mass of 32 tonnes or a total mass of 260.5 tonnes.
- Putting these figures into Omni’s Kinetic Energy calculator gives a figure of 46.3 kWh at 80 mph.
As there are eighteen stops along the route and at each stop it could lose up to twenty percent of its energy, this means that the eighteen stops will cost 166.7 KWh.
Adding this to the 870 KWh it takes to maintain speed, it looks like a trip between Basingstoke and Exeter will take 1036.7 kWh.
Could this be a 200 kWh battery in each coach?
Obviously, this is only a rough calculation and with the better figures Hitachi would have, I would suspect much better answers.
But I do believe that it would be possible to run between Basingstoke and Exeter on battery power, if the train was efficient.
Charging The Train
The train would be charged on the third-rail electrification between Waterloo and Basingstoke.
But what would happen at Exeter?
The trains could be bi-modes like Hitachi’s Class 395 trains for Southeastern,
One of Vivarail’s third-rail charging systems, that First Group, acquired from the Receiver of Vivarail could be used.
Getting The Order Right
Would between Basingstoke and Exeter, be a sensible route to convert to battery-electric trains early, as it would release a useful fleet of diesel trains, that might be able to fill in for a couple of years by replacing the Castles!
The Hook Landslip
This page on the South Western Railway web site is called Landslip Near Hook.
This is the operator’s explanation about what happened and their solution.
Over the weekend of Saturday 14 and Sunday 15 January, heavy rain caused part of a railway embankment to collapse between Hook and Winchfield stations on the South West Main Line, which connects London Waterloo with Basingstoke.
The landslip took place on a very busy part of our route. On a normal weekday morning, around 13 trains per hour run through this section, with services between London Waterloo and Basingstoke, Exeter St Davids, Portsmouth Harbour (via Eastleigh), Salisbury, Southampton Central, Winchester and Weymouth.
The landslip left a 44-metre stretch of track suspended in mid-air and only one of the four tracks available for trains to run on. This severely restricted the number of services we could run between Basingstoke and Woking.
Initial repairs by Network Rail on Saturday 21 and Sunday 22 increased the number of trains that we could run to six per hour, however they were still unable to call at Hook from the direction of London.
Network Rail intend to fully complete their repairs by Friday 24 February, and restore services to Hook in the direction of Basingstoke from Monday 13 February.
To do this, engineers will require more access to the railway between Farnborough and Basingstoke overnight. Normally the last service to run between these stations is at around 0100, but to give engineers the time they need, services will now have to end by 2220.
I passes the site today and took these pictures.
Note.
- Network Rail had to build quite a long roadway to access the site.
- Judging by the site full of portacabins, there were a lot of people working on the site.
- There was even someone working on a Sunday.
- The information board was in the subway at Basingstoke station.
- The pictures would have better, if the sun had been in a different direction.
Network Rail have to manage a lot of embankments like this.
Extending The Elizabeth Line – London Crosslink
In the Wikipedia entry for the London Crosslink, this is the introduction.
London Crosslink was a passenger train service operated by Anglia Railways between Norwich and Basingstoke, using the North London Line to bypass central London. Class 170 Turbostar diesel multiple units were used, and the service operated between 22 May 2000 and 28 September 2002, supported by funding from the Strategic Rail Authority through its Rail Passenger Partnership fund.
As it was discontinued and it doesn’t seem to be sadly missed, I’m not advocating its reinstatement, but just looking how it might be run after the full opening of the Elizabeth Line.
But surely, there were good reasons, why the service was run in the first place and there might be a need in the future.
These are some characteristics of the service.
- There were about half-a-dozen services in both directions every day.
- At its full length it ran between Norwich and Basingstoke.
- Stops included Diss, Stowmarket, Ipswich, Colchester, Witham, Chelmsford, Ingatestone, Romford, Stratford, Highbury & Islington, Camden Road, West Hampstead, Brentford, Feltham, Staines, Woking and Farnborough (Main).
- Each service seemed to have a different stopping pattern.
- The timetable wasn’t very regular.
- The route wasn’t fully electrified.
It appears that it may have been a difficult service to timetable.
A London Crosslink Based On The Elizabeth Line
Consider.
- The route between Norwich and Stratford is possible and is fully-electrified.
- Trains could use the Central Tunnel of the Elizabeth Line between Stratford and Paddington.
- There is no connection between the Central Tunnel and Brentford, Feltham, Staines, Woking and Farnborough (Main).
I suspect that the service would go to Basingstoke via Reading.
An alternative route might be serve Heathrow Terminal 5 and then connect to the Windsor and Staines Line.
Note.
- In Extending The Elizabeth Line – Connecting Great Eastern Main Line Services To The Central Tunnel, I showed that I thought it was possible for Great Eastern Main Line service to use the Central Tunnel of the Elizabeth Line.
- Reading and Basingstoke is not electrified.
Would it be worthwhile?
Extending The Elizabeth Line – High Speed Trains On The Elizabeth Line
This may seem rather fanciful, but could it be the way to maximise the use of the Elizabeth Line?
- I feel that the Elizabeth Line will eventually serve other destinations like Basingstoke, Beaulieu, Oxford, Southend and Swindon.
- The capacity of the Elizabeth Line will grow to over thirty trains per hour (tph) under control of digital signalling.
These are a few thoughts.
The Design Of The Trains
As any train would have to be compatible with the platform-edge doors in the central tunnel of the Elizabeth Line, the trains would have to be dimensionally identical to the current Class 345 trains.
- Nine cars
- Possibility of lengthening to ten cars.
- 204.73 metres long.
- 6 sets of doors per carriage
- Ability to run under full digital signalling.
They would be designed for a higher speed of at least 110 or 125 mph, to enable running on the fast lines of these routes.
- East Coast Main Line
- Great Western Main Line
- Midland Main Line
- West Coast Main Line
They would also be able to run at 100 mph on the Chiltern Main Line, the Great Eastern Main Line and the North Kent Line.
The faster running would ease scheduling of the trains.
Extra facilities could include.
- Toilets
- Tables
- A third-rail capability for running in Kent.
Effectively, it would be a Class 345 train with more features and considerably more grunt.
Note that in A High Speed Train With An IPEMU-Capability, I started the post with the following.
Bombardier were reported by Ian Walmsley in the April 2016 Edition of Modern Railways, to be developing Aventra, with a 125 mph capability.
Bombardier have also told me, that all Aventras will be wired so they could be fitted with on-board energy storage.
Could it be that the design of a Class 345 train could be modified to run at higher speeds? I wouldn’t be surprised.
Oxford To Southend Victoria
This could be a typical route.
- Between Oxford and Paddington, it would follow a route similar to the GWR’s Oxford service with stops at just Reading and Slough.
- At Paddington the train would take the Central Tunnel of the Elizabeth Line and travel under London, at the same speed as the other trains.
- It would emerge at Stratford and move to the Great Eastern Main Line.
- It would probably stop at Stratford, Romford, Shenfield and all stations to Southend Victoria.
Note.
- Digital signalling would enforce the precise timekeeping needed.
- Much of the Oxford and Paddington section would be up to speeds of at least 125 mph.
- Times in the Central Tunnel of the Elizabeth Line would be identical to the current Class 345 trains.
- Much of the Stratford and Southend section would be up to speeds of at least 100 mph.
I estimate that total time would be a few minutes under two hours.
Connecting To The Central Tunnel Of The Elizabeth Line At Royal Oak
I discuss this in Extending The Elizabeth Line – Connecting Great Western Main Line Services To The Central Tunnel.
Connecting To The Central Tunnel Of The Elizabeth Line At Stratford
I discuss this in Extending The Elizabeth Line – Connecting Great Eastern Main Line Services To The Central Tunnel.
Connecting To The Central Tunnel Of The Elizabeth Line At Abbey Wood
This map from cartometro.com shows the track layout at Abbey Wood.
Note.
- The Elizabeth Line is shown in purple.
- The North Kent Line is shown in black.
- The North Kent Line platform to London is the Southernmost platform and is numbered 1.
- The North Kent Line platform from London is the other Southern platform and is numbered 2.
- The Elizabeth Line platforms are numbered 3 and 4.
- Platform 4 is the Northernmost platform.
At present the Elizabeth Line service to Abbey Wood station is twelve tph, with each platform handling six tph.
This picture shows trains in both Platform 3 and 4 looking towards the station buildings.
Note.
- Platform 3 is on the right.
- Platform 4 is on the left.
In Elizabeth Line To Ebbsfleet Extension Could Cost £3.2 Billion, I talk about this proposal as described in this article on Ian Visits.
One of the key features of Crossrail To Ebbsfleet (C2E) project is that instead of all trains terminating at Abbey Wood, trains will terminate as follows.
- Abbey Wood – 4 tph
- Northfleet – 4 tph
- Gravesend – 4 tph
This will mean that 8 tph would pass through Abbey Wood station.
- Platform 4 could certainly handle the four that terminated on the Elizabeth Line.
- Platform 3 would need to handle eight tph in both directions or sixteen tph to fulfil the proposed C2E service.
- This would be one train every 225 seconds.
I believe that digital signalling could handle this easily and safely.
I am fairly sure that the track layout at Abbey Wood allows eight tph to go both ways between the North Kent Line and the Elizabeth Line Central Tunnel.
The Maximum Capacity At Abbey Wood Station
Because of the current track layout at Abbey Wood, I believe that without track modifications, Abbey Wood station will not be able to handle more than 12 tph.
Thameslink
These proposed trains would also be compatible with Thameslink, as this route has no platform edge doors.
No platform extensions would be needed, as the Class 345 trains are shorter than the 12-car Class 700 trains.
If they were 125 mph trains, then this would ease timetabling on the East Coast Main Line, as the trains could mix it with the expresses on the fast lines.
Could These High Speed Trains For The Elizabeth Line Have A Cruising Speed Of 140 mph?
It is likely, when full authority digital ERTMS signalling is installed on main lines out of London, that 140 mph will be possible on some at least these routes.
- East Coast Main Line
- Great Western Main Line
- Midland Main Line
- West Coast Main Line
The extra speed would maximise capacity.
Bi-Modes Offered To Solve Waterloo-Exeter Constraints
The title of this post is the same as an article by Richard Clinnick in Issue 912 of Rail Magazine.
The article is in turn based on this Continuous Modular Strategic Planning document from Network Rail, which is entitled West of England Line Study 2020.
The document is probably best described, as a document, that will need a lot of digestion for a full reading, but it does provide the reasons for what is said by Richard Clinnick.
The Need For Bi-Mode Trains
This is the a slightly edited version of the start of the Rail Magazine article.
Bi-mode trains should be ordered as part of a scheme to improve the service offered on the West of England route between London Waterloo and Exeter St, Davids, according to Network Rail.
In their extensive study, NR explains that additional capacity could be achieved on the route not only through infrastructure improvements, but also through lengthening some services.
The Network Rail report says.
This cannot be achieved using the current rolling stock fleet currently in operation; which are coming to end of life. Therefore, in the medium term, the opportunity to introduce new,
potentially bi-mode, rolling stock capable of achieving faster journey times and providing more capacity should be considered.
The report also suggests that electric, battery and hydrogen are mentioned as possible power.
South Western Railway’s Short Term Solution
In the short term, South Western Railway (SWR) have reorganised the service to meet short term objectives, which are described fully in the Network Rail report, but can be summed up as follows.
- There is a need for a capacity increase between London Waterloo and Basingstoke and Salisbury.
- There is a need for a capacity increase between Axminster and Exeter St. Davids.
SWR’s solution has probably been strongly driven by the needs of COVID-19, which means that a greater amount of space must be provided for each occupied seat. In the last couple of weeks, I’ve made six journeys in SWR’s Class 159 trains and like most other travellers, I’ve had four seats to myself. The trains may be thirty years old, but like most British Rail trains of that era, they keep giving valuable service.
For most of the day, SWR seem to offer the following solution.
- Nine-car formations of Class 159 trains work between London Waterloo and Salisbury stations at a frequency of two trains per hour (tph)
- Six-car formations of Class 159 trains work between Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids stations, at a frequency of one train per two hours (tp2h)
- Passengers use a one-way system at Salisbury to walk between the two trains.
Yesterday, I took SWR’s trains between Clapham Junction and Yeovil Junction stations to observe the working of the route and take a few pictures.
My Observations
These are my observations.
Salisbury Station
This Google Map shows Salisbury station and the nearby Salisbury Depot.
These are some pictures I took at the station.
Note that the train in the platform is a nine-car formation which is 207 metres long. I would estimate that the platforms are around 220-240 metres long.
Yeovil Junction Station
This Google Map shows Yeovil Junction station.
These are some pictures I took at the station.
Note that the two trains in the platforms are six-car formations which are 138 metres long. I would estimate that the platforms are around 140-50 metres long.
Replacement Of The Current Class 159 Trains With Bi-Mode Trains
Consider the following train lengths and capacities.
- A nine-car formation of Class 159 trains – 207 metres – 588 seats
- A six-car formation of Class 159 trains – 138 metres – 392 seats
- A nine-car Class 802 train – 234 metres – 647 seats
- A five-car Class 802 train – 130 metres – 326 seats
- A pair of five-car Class 802 trains – 260 metres – 652 seats
The figures for Class 802 trains are taken from the trains that are in service for Great Western Railway (GWR).
The following timings should also be noted.
- London Waterloo and Salisbury – One hour and thirty minutes
- Turnback time at Salisbury – Up to thirty minutes
- Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids – Two hours and six minutes
- Turnback time at Exeter St. Davids – Trains appear to go to Exeter New Yard for refuelling.
- Wait at Yeovil Junction – Fourteen minutes
Note.
- The wait at Yeovil Junction station is so that trains can fit in with the large lengths of single-track on the West of England Main Line.
- The need to refuel the diesel trains would appear to be a major constraint on running more services on the route.
- Both legs of the journey have convenient times of one-and-a-half and two hours respectively.
Overall, I think the timings are helpful.
Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train
Hitachi have recently released details of their new Battery Regional train, which are summarised in this Hitachi infographic.
They have also signed an agreement with Hyperdrive Innovation to develop battery packs for their Class 80x trains, as I wrote about in Hyperdrive Innovation And Hitachi Rail To Develop Battery Tech For Trains.
Looking at the length and capacity table, I displayed earlier, it would appear there are several ways to run the service between London Waterloo and Exeter St. Davids using Regional Battery Trains.
- Run nine-car trains between London Waterloo and Exeter St. Davids
- Run five-car trains between London Waterloo and Exeter St. Davids
- Run nine-car trains between London Waterloo and Salisbury and five-car trains between Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids
- Run a pair of five-car trains between London Waterloo and Salisbury and a single five-car train between Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids, with selective splitting and joining at Salisbury.
Alternatively, the route could be electrified. But that has a few obstacles and disadvantages.
- Would the various jobsworths allow this substantial length of third-rail electrification?
- Would there be serious objections to using overhead electrification?
- Would the travellers on the route, be prepared for all the disruption?
- There is also the excessive cost of electrification.
I also believe, that only limited small infrastructure improvements would be needed to replace the current diesel trains with battery electric bi-mode trains like the Regional Battery Trains.
Regional Battery Trains Between London Waterloo And Salisbury
Consider.
- London Waterloo and Salisbury stations are 83.5 miles apart.
- The fifty miles between London Waterloo and Worting Junction is fully electrified.
- Only the 33.5 miles between Salisbury and Worting Junction are not electrified.
- In the infographic, Hitachi are claiming a 90 kilometre or 56 mile battery range and a static charging time of between 10-15 minutes.
It would certainly appear, that if a train from London passed Worting Junction with full batteries, it would reach Salisbury. Also a train leaving Salisbury with full batteries would certainly reach Worting Junction and the electrification.
There would be three ways of charging the Regional Battery Trains at Salisbury.
- Fit a number of charging stations on the platforms.
- Install 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
- Install 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
I prefer Option 3 in a station like Salisbury.
- It would be easy to install and British Rail probably drew up detailed plans several times, when full third-rail electrification was under consideration.
- The trains will be fitted with third-rail shoes to access the third-rail electrification on the way to London.
- Because of the depot, there’s probably a good power supply.
- For increased safety, modern electrical design, could mean that power was only switched on when a train is connected.
As trains currently wait for some time in Salisbury, it would be likely, that trains would leave the station with a full battery.
Regional Battery Trains Between London Salisbury And Exeter St Davids
Consider.
- Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids stations are 88.5 miles apart.
- There is no electrification.
- Yeovil Junction station is approximately half way and is 49.5 miles from Exeter St. Davids and 39 miles from Salisbury.
- Typically, trains wait at Yeovil Junction station for up to fourteen minutes, to get through the single-track sections.
I believe that a similar method of charging to that at Salisbury could be used at Yeovil Junction.
There would also need to be charging at Exeter St. Davids station.
This Google Map shows Exeter St. Davids station.
Services from London Waterloo and Salisbury currently turnback at Exeter St. Davids station in the following manner.
- They arrive from the track running to the station from the South East.
- They unload passengers in Platform 1 which is the long platform on the East side of the station.
- It seems that they then continue through the station to New Yard, where they refuel and do other things, that Class 159 trains do after a long journey.
- At the appropriate time, they return to Platform 1, where they load up with passengers and leave by the way they arrived.
If a charging system or electrification, were to be added to Platform 1, the trains would be able to fill up in the station.
- Currently, it appears that the Class 159 trains take over an our to do this complicated manoeuvre.
- Hitachi are quoting a charging time of 10-15 minutes for their Regional Battery Train.
Could valuable minutes be saved, that would enable a more passenger-friendly timetable?
Charging Regional Battery Trains At Yeovil Junction Station
Currently, the timetable is arranged like this.
- The Salisbury to Exeter St. Davids train and the Exeter St. Davids to Salisbury trains pass at Yeovil Junction station.
- Both trains wait in the station for nearly fifteen minutes, which is an adequate time to fully-charge the batteries.
The picture shows the two trains in the platform together.
Currently, the timetable would seem to be ideal for battery electric train operation between Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids stations.
A Possible Timetable Between London Waterloo And Exeter St. Davids
It did occur to me, that South Western Railway might be running a timetable, that could possibly be designed for Regional Battery Trains.
- A nine-car formation between London Waterloo and Salisbury could be replaced with a nine-car or a pair of five-car Regional Battery Trains.
- A six-car Salisbury and Exeter St. Davids could be replaced by a five-car Regional Battery Train.
- Trains could pass at Gillingham station between Salisbury and Yeovil Junction, as it is a two-platform station about half-way.
- Trains could pass at Honiton station between Yeovil Junction and Exeter St. Davids, as it is a two-platform station about half-way.
I think if it was needed, that two tph would be possible not only between London Waterloo and Salisbury, but also between London Waterloo and Exeter St. Davids.
I also think that the following detailed service pattern would be possible.
- A pair of five-car Regional Battery Trains would leave London Waterloo at a frequency of two tph.
- The front train would be for passengers for all stations between London Waterloo and Exeter St. Davids.
- The rear train would only be for passengers for all stations between London Waterloo and Salisbury.
- On arrival at Salisbury, both trains would charge their batteries.
- When the batteries were fully-charged, the two trains would split.
- The front train would continue on its journey to Exeter St. Davids, leaving the rear train in the platform.
- The Exeter St. Davids to London Waterloo service would arrive at Salisbury and join to the train in the platform.
- The pair of trains would then run to London Waterloo.
This service pattern has the big advantage that passengers travelling between a station East of Salisbury and one to the West of Salisbury, will not have to change trains
- All stations on the line also get a two tph service.
- Services would be the same or better on the whole route, to the pre-COVID-19 timetable.
- There would be extra capacity between London and Basingstoke.
CrossCountry’s Bournemouth And Manchester Piccadilly Service
Whilst I was at Basingstoke station yesterday one of CrossCountry‘s services between Bournemouth and Manchester Piccadilly came through, so I took these pictures.
It was a long formation of Class 220 trains.
Could This Service Be Replaced By Hitachi Regional Battery Trains?
This Hitachi infographic gives the specification of the Hitachi Regional Battery Train.
I feel that in most condition, the range on battery power can be up to 56 miles.
I can break the Bournemouth and Manchester Piccadilly route into a series of legs.
- Bournemouth and Basingstoke – 60 miles – 750 VDC third-rail electrification
- Basingstoke and Reading – 15.5 miles – No electrification
- Reading and Didcot North Junction – 18 miles – 25 KVAC overhead electrification
- Didcot North Junction and Oxford – 10 miles – No electrification
- Oxford and Banbury – 22 miles – No electrification
- Banbury and Leamington Spa – 20 miles – No electrification
- Leamington Spa and Coventry – 10 miles – No electrification
- Coventry and Manchester Piccadilly – 101 miles – 25 KVAC overhead electrification
Note.
- 63 % of the route is electrified.
- The short 15.5 mile gap in the electrification between Basingstoke and Reading should be an easy route for running on battery power.
- But the 62 mile gap between Didcot North Junction and Coventry might well be too far.
The train would also need to be able to work with both types of UK electrification.
If some way could be found to bridge the 62 mile gap reliably, Hitachi’s Regional Battery Trains could work CrossCountry’s service between Bournemouth and Manchester Piccadilly.
Bridging The Gap
These methods could possibly be used to bridge the gap.
A Larger Battery On The Train
If you look at images of MTU’s Hybrid PowerPack, they appear to show a basic engine module with extra battery modules connected to it.
Will Hitachi and their battery-partner; Hyperdrive Innovation use a similar approach, where extra batteries can be plugged in as required?
This modular approach must offer advantages.
- Battery size can be tailored to routes.
- Batteries can be changed quickly.
The train’s software would know what batteries were fitted and could manage them efficiently.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train able to handle a gap only six miles longer than the specification.
Battery And Train Development
As Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train develops, the following should happen.
- Useable battery capacity will increase.
- The train will use less electricity.
- Actions like regenerative braking will improve and recover more electricity.
- Driving and train operating strategies will improve.
These and other factors will improve the range of the train on batteries.
A Charging Station At Banbury Station
If some form of Fast Charge system were to be installed at Banbury station, this would enable a train stopping at Banbury to take on enough power to reliably reach Oxford or Coventry depending, on their final destination.
This method may add a few minutes to the trip, but it should work well.
Electrification Of A Section Of The Chiltern Main Line
This could be an elegant solution.
I have just flown my helicopter between Bicester North and Warwick Parkway stations and these are my observations.
- The Chiltern Main Line appears to be fairly straight and has received a top class Network Rail makeover in the last couple of decades.
- There are a couple of tunnels, but most of the bridges are new.
- Network Rail have done a lot of work on this route to create a hundred mph main line.
- It might be possible to increase the operating speed, by a few mph.
- The signalling also appears modern.
My untrained eye, says that it won’t be too challenging to electrify between say Bicester North station or Aynho Junction in the South and Leamington Spa or Warwick Parkway stations in the North. I would think, that the degree of difficulty would be about the same, as the recently electrified section of the Midland Main Line between Bedford and Corby stations.
The thirty-eight miles of electrification between Bicester North and Warwick Parkway stations would mean.
- The electrification is only eight-and-a-half miles longer than Bedford and Corby.
- There could be journey time savings.
- As all trains stop at two stations out of Banbury, Leamington Spa, Warwick and Warwick Parkway, all pantograph actions could be performed in stations, if that was thought to be preferable.
- Trains would be able to leave the electrification with full batteries.
- The electrification may enable some freight trains to be hauled between Didcot and Coventry or Birmingham using battery electric locomotives.
Distances of relevance from the ends of the electrification include.
- London Marylebone and Bicester North stations – 55 miles
- London Marylebone and Aynho junction – 64 miles
- Didcot North and Aynho junctions – 28 miles
- Leamington Spa and Coventry stations – 10 miles
- Leamington Spa and Birmingham Snow Hill stations – 23 miles
- Leamington Spa and Stratford-upon-Avon stations – 15 miles
- Warwick Parkway and Birmingham New Street stations – 20 miles
- Warwick Parkway and Birmingham Snow Hill stations – 20 miles
- Warwick Parkway and Kidderminster – 40 miles
- Warwick Parkway and Stratford-upon-Avon stations – 12 miles
These figures mean that the following services would be possible using Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train.
- Chiltern Railways – London Marylebone and Birmingham Moor Street
- Chiltern Railways – London Marylebone and Birmingham Snow Hill
- Chiltern Railways – London Marylebone and Kidderminster
- Chiltern Railways – London Marylebone and Stratford-upon-Avon
- CrossCountry – Bournemouth and Manchester Piccadilly
- CrossCountry – Southampton Central and Newcastle
- Midlands Connect – Oxford and Birmingham More Street – See Birmingham Airport Connectivity.
Other services like Leicester and Oxford via Coventry may also be possible.
As I see it, the great advantage of this electrification on the Chiltern Main Line is that is decarbonises two routes with the same thirty-eight miles of electrification.
Conclusion
CrossCountry’s Bournemouth And Manchester Piccadilly service could be run very efficiently with Hitachi’s proposed Regional Battery Train.
My preferred method to cross the electrification gap between Didcot North junction and Coventry station would be to electrify a section of the Chiltern Main Line.
- The electrification would be less than forty miles.
- I doubt it would be a challenging project.
- It would also allow Hitachi’s proposed trains to work Chiltern Main Line routes between London Marylebone and Birmingham.
I am fairly certain, that all passenger services through Banbury would be fully electric.
Beeching Reversal – Unlocking Capacity And Services Through Bramley (Hants)
This is one of the Beeching Reversal projects that the Government and Network Rail are proposing to reverse some of the Beeching cuts.
Bramley Station
Bramley (Hants) station is on the Reading-Basingstoke Line, which is 15.5 miles long.
- The line is double-track.
- Bramley station is the nearest one to Basingstoke station.
- The two stations are about five miles apart.
- The basic local service is two trains per hour (tph), with trains taking a few minutes under half-an-hour.
- The speed limit is listed in Wikipedia at 75 mph and my Class 165 train was travelling at about 60 mph on both journeys between Basingstoke and Bramley stations.
This Google Map shows Bramley station.
Note the level crossing, just to the North of the station.
These are some pictures, that I took, whilst I spent about thirty minutes at Bramley station.
Note
- In the thirty minutes, I was at the station, two long freight trains and three passenger trains came through.
- The level crossing barriers were going up and down like a whore’s drawers.
- Each level crossing closure resulted in long queues at the barriers.
It reminded me how bad the level crossing at Brimsdown station used to be in the Peak in 1966, when I crossed it twice every day to go to and from work at Enfield Rolling Mills. At least I was on two wheels and it gave me a break from pedalling!
There is more on the problems of the level crossing on this article on the Bramley Parish Council web site, which is entitled Living With Our Level Crossing.
Current Future Plans For the Reading-Basingstoke Line
The Wikipedia entry for the Reading-Basingstoke Line has a Future section, where this is said.
The railway is listed with Network Rail as part of route 13, the Great Western main line, and was due to be electrified with 25 kV overhead wiring by 2017 as part of the modernisation of the main line.[8] In July 2007, plans were agreed to build a station in Reading south of Southcote Junction in the Green Park business park, serving the southern suburbs of Reading and also the Madejski Stadium. Construction of Reading Green Park railway station was expected to be completed in 2010; the plans were suspended in 2011, but were reinstated in 2013. It is now set to open by the end of 2020[9], with electrification along the line at a later date.
It is my view, that the new Reading Green Park station will probably mean that four tph between Reading and Basingstoke stations will be needed. especially if a second new station were to be built at Chineham.
But four tph would probably be impossible, without improving the traffic of both rail and road through Bramley.
Solving The Level Crossing Problem
Ideally, the level crossing should be closed and the road diverted or put on a bridge,
If you look at a wider map of the area, building a by-pass to enable road traffic to avoid the crossing will be difficult if not impossible.
But this is not an untypical problem on rail networks and not just in the UK.
I suspect that with precise train control using digital ERTMS signalling, trains and level crossing closures can be timed to improve traffic on both road and rail.
Consider.
- If trains crossed on the level crossing and they were under precise control, this would reduce the number of level crossing closures per hour.
- If the line speed was higher and the trains ran faster, this should ease timetabling, as there could be more train paths per hour.
- Faster accelerating electric trains would save time too, by shortening station dwell times.
- A third track might be laid in places.
- The signalling could possibly drive the train or tell the driver exactly what speed to travel, so trains passed on the crossing or in the station.
As Network Rail and their contractors roll-out ERTMS, they’ll discover better and more intelligent ways to deploy the system.
Electric Trains Would Help
Electric trains accelerate faster and if they use regenerative braking to batteries, this cuts station dwell times.
But powering them by electrification would mean the connecting lines between the Reading and Basingstoke Lines and the nearest electrified lines would also have to be electrified. This would make the scheme excessively expensive.
But Battery Electric Trains Could Be Better!
I believe that battery electric trains, would be a more-than-viable alternative.
- You still get the performance advantages of electric trains.
- With charging at just one end of the route, a battery electric train could run a round trip on battery power.
The big advantage, would be that the only new electrification infrastructure needed would be to charge the trains.
Charging Battery Electric Trains At Reading Station
Reading is a fully electrified station and the shuttle trains to and from Basingstoke station, appear to use Platform 2.
This Google Map shows electrification gantries over Platforms 1, 2 and 3 at Reading station.
Note.
- The route between Reading station and Southcote junction, where the Basingstoke and Newbury routes divide, may be under two miles, but it is fully electrified.
- Trains take three minutes to travel between Reading station and Southcote junction.
- Trains wait for up to twenty minutes in the platform at Reading station.
It would appear that trains get enough time at Reading to fully charge the batteries.
Charging Battery Electric Trains At Basingstoke Station
The shuttle trains between Reading and Basingstoke stations, appear to use Platform 5 in Basingstoke station.
This Google Map shows Platform 5 at Basingstoke station.
Platform 5 is towards the top of the map and contains a two-car train.
These pictures show the platform.
Note.
- There would appear to be space on the North side of Platform 5 to install another platform, if one should be needed.
- It appears from the Google Map, that Platform 5 could take a four-car train.
- The platform is wide and spacious for passengers.
- I suspect a Fast Charge system of some sort could be installed in this platform.
As at Reading, trains can take around twenty minutes to turn back at Basingstoke, which would be ideal for a battery charge.
What Trains Could Work The Shuttle?
After South Western Railway‘s interim Managing Director; Mark Hopwood’s comments, that led me to write Converting Class 456 Trains Into Two-Car Battery Electric Trains, these trains must be a possibility.
I also think, that as both South Western Railway and Great Western Railway are both First Group companies, there won’t be too much argument about who supplies the trains for the shuttle.
CrossCountry Trains Between Reading And Basingstoke
CrossCountry will need to replace their Class 220 trains with electric or bi-mode trains soon, to meet the dates for decarbonisation.
The prime candidate must be a dual-voltage version of Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train, which could easily work the 15.5 miles between Reading and Basingstoke on battery power, after charging up on the electrification at both ends.
The trains could also be easily fitted with the ERTMS signalling equipment that will be required to go smoothly along the line.
Freight Trains Between Reading And Basingstoke
We might see this section of the UK rail network, electrified for freight, but as it would require lots of connecting electrification, I think it is more likely that freight locomotives will be powered by an alternative fuel like hydrogen or bio-diesel. This would cut electrification needs, but still reduce carbon emissions.
Freight locomotives are already being fitted with the required ERTMS signalling equipment.
Conclusion
I am absolutely sure, that there’s a technological solution in there, that can increase the number of trains through Bramley.
But diverting the road traffic and clossing the level crossing would appear to be difficult.
The Anonymous Widower 