Extending The Elizabeth Line – A Branch To The Isle Of Grain
In Elizabeth Line To Ebbsfleet Extension Could Cost £3.2 Billion, I talked about extending the Elizabeth Line to Ebbsfleet International and Gravesend stations.
In Gibb Report – Hoo Junction Depot, I talked about how Chris Gibb proposed using the former Hoo branch to create a depot for Thameslink trains.
I am a great believer in the idea, that modern railways are a great way of levelling up an area.
I have watched as Dalston and Hackney have risen as the London Overground has developed more and more frequent services through the area.
So when I wrote about the Ebbsfleet Extension to the Elizabeth Line, I asked this question.
Could The Elizabeth Line Be Extended To The Proposed Hoo Station?
The Hundred of Hoo Railway, leaves the North Kent Line about three miles to the East of Gravesend and runs across the Isle of Grain.
I wrote about the proposed reopening of the Hundred of Hoo Railway or the Hoo Branch as it is commonly known in Effort To Contain Costs For Hoo Reopening.
I then put various proposals and facts together.
It is proposed that the Elizabeth Line runs a four trains per hour (tph) service to Gravesend station.
- Gravesend station is a not very suitable station to turn nine-car Class 345 trains, that are over two hundred metres long, as it is on a cramped site.
- Government money has been pledged to build a station on the Isle of Grain to support the new housing on the island.
- According to Chris Gibb, there is space to build a depot.
So why not build a terminal station for the Elizabeth Line on the Isle of Grain?
I had these thoughts on the proposed Hoo station.
- It would be under ten kilometres from Hoo Junction, where the North Kent Line is electrified.
- A single platform could handle 4 tph, but provision for two platforms would be prudent.
- A couple of sidings could provide stabling.
- Services would join the North Kent Line at Hoo Junction.
- Services would use battery power between Hoo Junction and Hoo station.
- If charging were needed at Hoo station a short length of 25 KVAC overhead electrification would be needed.
- There is plenty of power available locally to power any electrification.
The only problem is that there would be a need for battery-electric Class 345 trains, but as Aventra trains were designed and built with battery operation in mind, this shouldn’t be too challenging.
I have a few other thoughts.
Housing By An Elizabeth Line Station
Woolwich station was built to serve a housing development and the developers even built the station box, which I wrote about in Exploring The Woolwich Station Box.
So I don’t think the developers of the housing on the Isle of Grain will be against the Elizabeth Line station.
What Would Be The Frequency To Hoo Station?
As I said, the proposed Hoo branch, could easily have a capacity of four tph.
But services to Heathrow Terminal 4, Heathrow Terminal 5, Maidenhead and Reading are all two tph. Only Abbey Wood, Paddington and Shenfield have a higher frequency.
I suspect that two tph maximises the number of passengers, as they are prepared to wait thirty minutes.
Conclusion
I can see the branch to Hoo station on the Isle of Grain, being one of these options.
- A branch to turn trains running to Gravesend.
- A short branch to level-up the Isle of Grain.
- A short branch to provide transport for new housing.
Or perhaps a mixture of some or all options.
Could we see other branches like Hoo?
GWR And Vivarail
This is an attempt to make some sense about what is happening between GWR and the assets of Vivarail.
These are some random thoughts.
Ongoing Maintenance Of Existing Trains
Currently, there are four operators in the UK, with various types of Vivarail‘s Class 230 trains.
- Great Western Railway – 1 – Infrastructure under construction for trial on the Greenford Branch.
- Island Line – 5 – In operation.
- Transport for Wales – 5 – Undergoing testing prior to entering service.
- West Midlands Trains – 3 – Withdrawn from service indefinitely in December 2022.
Note.
- West Midlands Trains withdrew the trains because of uncertainty about the servicing of the trains.
- West Midlands Trains are getting complaints about the bus replacement service.
- All operators will probably need assistance to service the trains.
- Great Western Railway and Island Line are First Group companies.
Could First Group have got in first, so they can protect their interests with a professional Vivarail train maintenance organisation?
Mark Hopwood
In Special Train Offers A Strong Case For Reopening Fawley Line, I said this.
This is another quote from the Rail Magazine article.
However, SWR’s Mark Hopwood favours a much bolder plan. “We’d have to take a decision, once we knew the line was going ahead. But my personal belief is that we should be looking for a modern environmentally-friendly train that can use third-rail electricity between Southampton and Totton and maybe operate on batteries down the branch line.”
Pressed on whether that would mean Vivarail-converted former-London Underground stock, Hopwood adds. “It could be. Or it could be a conversion of our own Class 456, which will be replaced by new rolling stock very shortly. But I don’t think this is the time to use old diesels.
Mark Hopwood is now the Managing Director of Great Western Railway and he seems to be in favour of battery-electric trains. I agree totally with his statement about old diesels.
Mark Hopwood And The Cholsey And Wallingford Branch
According to LinkedIn, Mark Hopwood is also the President at the Cholsey and Wallingford Railway
- This is a two-and-a-half mile long standard gauge heritage railway.
- It used to be a branch line, that served the town of Wallingford.
- It connects to the Great Western Main Line in a bay platform at Cholsey station.
- Wallingford station has now been demolished.
- The heritage railway uses a new site on the south side of St. Johns Road.
This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the branch line.
Note.
- Cholsey station and the Great Western Main Line is in the South-Western corner of the map.
- The current Wallingford station is in the North-Eastern corner.
- The Cholsey and Wallingford Railway is shown in yellow.
This Google Map shows Cholsey station.
Note.
- There are four through platforms for Great Western Railway services.
- Platforms 1 and 2 for the fast services are on the Western side.
- Platforms 3 and 4 for the slow services are on the Eastern side.
- Bay Platform 5 is tucked in the North-East corner of the station and is the terminus for services on the Cholsey and Wallingford Railway.
- There are only 55 parking spaces.
Is the number of parking spaces sufficient for the station, if a lot of passengers drive from Wallingford?
Could a commercial service run between Cholsey and Wallingford?
Consider.
- Wallingford is a town of nearly twelve thousand people.
- Cholsey station has two trains per hour (tph) between Paddington and Didcot Parkway stations, with extra services between Oxford and Reading stations in the Peaks.
- There is only limited parking at Cholsey station.
- Most GWR branch lines are run by an hourly service.
- I feel that two-car battery-electric train could provide one or two tph on the branch.
- Charging would probably be needed at only one end of the branch line.
- As all the through lines at Cholsey station are electrified with 25 KVAC overhead wires, I suspect that charging would be provided at that station.
A two-car battery-electric train could probably provide a commercial service on this branch, if the Cholsey and Wallingford Railway wanted a revenue stream.
First Group Services That Could Be Run By Battery-Electric Trains
These Great Western Railway and South Western Railway services might be suitable for battery-electric services.
- Newbury and Bedwyn – Newbury is electrified.
- West Ealing and Greenford – West Ealing is electrified.
- Slough and Windsor and Eton Central – Slough is electrified.
- Maidenhead and Marlow – Maidenhead is electrified.
- Twyford and Henley-on-Thames – Twyford is electrified.
- Reading and Gatwick Airport – Partially electrified.
- Reading and Redhill – Partially electrified.
- Reading and Basingstoke – Partially electrified.
- Didcot Parkway and Oxford – Didcot Parkway is electrified.
- Weston-super-Mare and Severn Beach – No electrification.
- Bristol Temple Meads and Avonmouth – No electrification.
- Bristol Temple Meads and Filton Abbey Wood – No electrification.
- Bristol Temple Meads and Portishead – Proposed – No electrification.
- Swindon and Westbury – Swindon is electrified.
- Exmouth and Paignton – No electrification.
- Exeter Central and Okehampton – No electrification.
- Exeter Central and Barnstaple – No electrification.
- Plymouth and Gunnislake – No electrification.
- Liskeard and Looe – No electrification.
- Par and Newquay – No electrification.
- Truro and Falmouth Docks – No electrification.
- St. Erth and St. Ives- No electrification.
- Romsey and Salisbury – Partially electrified.
- Southampton Central and Fawley – Proposed – Partially electrified.
Note.
- Most services are one or two tph or less.
- Reading and Basingstoke, Didcot Parkway and Oxford, Exmouth and Paignton, and Romsey and Salisbury are 2 tph.
- I have included the proposed Bristol Temple Meads and Portishead and Southampton Central and Fawley services.
- All electrification is 25 KVAC overhead except for the North Downs Line between Reading and Gatwick Airport via Redhill, and Romsey and Salisbury, which are 750 VDC third rail.
There are a total of 24 services. As each 2 tph service will need two trains and the North Downs services probably six, a rough calculation, indicates there would need to be a minimum of over thirty trains, to convert all these services to battery-electric operation.
This simple analysis makes Mark Hopwood’s enthusiasm, that I quoted earlier understandable.
The Requirement For First Group Battery-Electric Trains
Consider.
- Most of the services can accommodate three or four-car trains.
- A few services can only be run with two-car trains.
- Some services will need running with 25 KVAC overhead electrification for operation or deploying to and from the depot.
- Some services will need running with 750 VDC third-rail electrification for operation or deploying to and from the depot.
- A modern interior with or without a fully-accessible toilet is needed.
- Ability to recharge in a platform fitted with electrification or a charging system in under ten minutes.
- A reasonable cruising speed where electrification is needed for deployment.
This suggests to me, that two train types will be needed.
- A Vivarail-style two-car train for branches like West Ealing and Greenford and Southampton Central and Fawley.
- A three- or four-car dual-voltage electric multiple unit, based on something like an Alstom Aventra, a Bombardier Electrostar or a British Rail-era Class 321 train.
The Class 321 train could be ideal.
- It is a 100 mph train.
- It is a four-car train, that can be shortened to three-cars.
- Versions are available for both 25 KVAC overhead and 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
- Some have been converted to a modern Renatus interior, with a fully-accessible toilet.
- Greater Anglia have run Class 321 Renatus trains between London and Norwich.
- The Class 321 Renatus trains are fitted with a modern AC-based traction system.
- Eversholt Rail and Vivarail were working on a Class 321 BEMU, which I wrote about in Eversholt Rail And Vivarail To Develop Class 321 BEMU.
- Other operators like Northern, Scotrail and Transport for Wales might like a Class 321 BEMU.
Could First Group convert the Class 321 trains?
In What Train Is This?, I talk about a refurbishment of a GWR Class 150 train, that was one of the best I’ve seen.
I suspect that First Group could do the conversion, with a little help from their friends, like Wabtec and the ex-Vivarail employees, that they’ve hired.
Could The Class 387 Trains Be Converted To Battery-Electric Operation?
It was in February 2015, that I wrote Is The Battery Electric Multiple Unit (BEMU) A Big Innovation In Train Design?, after a ride in public service on Bombardier’s test battery-electric train based on a Class 379 train.
The Class 387 and Class 379 trains are very similar and with Vivarail’s battery and charging expertise, I believe that both Class 379 and Class 387 trains could be converted into modern four-car battery-electric trains.
- They would have a 100 mph or possibly a 110 mph operating speed, so could work routes like the Great Western Main Line amongst the thundering herds of Hitachis.
- The interiors would be suitable for longer routes like Cardiff Central and Exeter or Waterloo and Exeter via Salisbury.
- Great Western Railway have 33 Class 387 trains.
- Thirty Class 379 trains are wasting space in sidings.
I believe that with modern battery technology, these trains could have a battery range in excess of ninety miles.
This would enable services like Cardiff Central and Exeter St. Davids and Exeter St. Davids and Salisbury.
With judicious use of charging stations in stations like Bristol Temple Meads, Exeter St. Davids and Salisbury, all First Group main line services, that are not run by the Hitachi trains could be converted to battery-electric operation.
Conclusion
I believe a well-thought out plan is emerging.
GWR Takes Over Battery Train Project
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail News.
This paragraph outlines the takeover.
Great Western Railway has bought equipment from battery train manufacturer Vivarail, which went into administration in December. The purchase has included rolling stock, FastCharge systems and other items. Nine former Vivarail staff have also joined GWR, as it continues to prepare for using a battery unit on the West Ealing to Greenford branch. GWR engineering director Simon Green said: ‘There have clearly been some setbacks that mean we will need to review the existing plans and timescales, but we will continue to work with Network Rail and the Department for Transport to get the project back on track.’
This sounds a very sensible action to me.
- GWR take control of the West Ealing project.
- GWR’s sister company; South Western Railway, probably will get the support they need for the Vivarail trains on the Island Line.
- It may lead to First Group companies using more Vivarail trains on other lines.
I also suspect the deal will mean that the remains of Vivarail has more of a future and someone will buy it, to continue development.
The original press release is on the First Group web site and it is entitled Fast-Charging Battery Trial To Resume After GWR Agrees Deal To Purchase Vivarail Assets.
Partnership To Develop North American Battery Train
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.
This is the first paragraph.
A contract for the development and testing of a battery multiple-unit for the North American market based on Stadler’s Flirt Akku design for Europe has been signed by the Swiss manufacturer, Utah State University and the Advancing Sustainability through Powered Infrastructure for Roadway Electrification engineering research centre.
After my recent visit to Liverpool, after which I wrote Riding In A Train Designed To Run On Battery Power, I am certainly of the belief that Stadler know where they are going.
Reopening Of Abandoned Merseyside Railway Under Consideration
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on New Civil Engineer.
This is the sub-heading.
St Helens Borough Council is investigating the possibility of reopening part of the abandoned St Helens and Runcorn Gap railway in Merseyside.
This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the section of railway that will be reopened.
Note.
- The line runs between St. Helens Central and St. Helens Junction stations.
- St. Helens Central is in the North-West corner of the map and is marked by a blue arrow.
- St. Helens Junction station is in the South-East corner of the map.
- Both stations have two tracks and two platforms.
- St. Helens Central appears to have full disabled access,
- Both stations are electrified.
- It appears, that the route is still viable, but the track is not intact.
I have a few thoughts.
St. Helens Junction Station
This Google Map shows St. Helens Junction station.
Note.
- There are two platforms.
- Platform 1 is the Northern platform and trains go East.
- Platform 2 is the Southern platform and trains go to Liverpool Lime Street.
- There appears to be a footbridge at the Eastern end.
- Trains from the new route from St. Helens Central station would approach from and leave to the South-West.
- In a typical hour, between five and eight trains per hour (tph) go through the station in both directions on the main line.
I feel that a bay platform would need to be built at the station to handle the proposed service at St. Helens Junction station. But it would be able to handle four tph.
St. Helens Central Station
This Google Map shows St. Helens Central station.
Note.
- There are two platforms.
- Platform 1 is the Western platform and trains go to Wigan North Western.
- Platform 2 is the Eastern platform and trains go to Liverpool Lime Street.
- There appears to be a footbridge in the middle, with lifts.
- Trains from the new route from St. Helens Junction station would approach from and leave to the South-West.
- In a typical hour, between two and three tph go through the station in both directions on the main line.
It may be possible to run two tph on the route to St. Helens Junction station, by using the Southern end of Platform 2.
It would probably be able to handle two tph, by fitting in between the current services.
If a new bay platform were to be built at St. Helens Central four tph would be possible.
What Would Be The Frequency Of The Service?
Consider.
- As I said earlier, because of the current frequency of trains through St. Helens Junction station, I feel a dedicated bay platform will be needed at that station, which would probably handle four tph.
- Without building a dedicated bay platform, I doubt that St. Helens Central station could have more than two tph.
- Two tph on the new route, would fit well with the services through St. Helens Central station.
I believe that providing it gave sufficient capacity for the route, that two tph will be the frequency, as it only needs one bay platform at St. Helens Junction station to be built.
What Length Of Train Will Be Used?
As a bay platform will have to be built at St. Helens Junction station, this will probably determine the length of train.
I would build the bay platform to accept a three or four car train, as lengthening platforms is always a pain.
Looking at the map of St. Helens Junction station, I suspect that a four-car platform may be the longest possible.
What Type Of Train Should Be Used?
If you look at all the Beeching Reversal schemes, there isn’t one like this, where two electrified lines are connected by a short length of new railway, which in this case is only 3.5 km, according to the New Civil Engineer article.
Consider.
- A round trip is only 7 kilometres.
- I suspect each trip between the two stations will take no more than ten minutes.
- If the frequency is two tph, there will be plenty of time to turn a train at each end.
- All new routes opened on UK railways from now on, should have carbon-free traction.
For these reasons, I suspect that the route could be run by a battery-electric train, which is charged at one end.
Putting up a short length of overhead electrification in the new bay platform at St. Helens Junction, as the station is already electrified, would not be the most challenging of tasks.
Alternatively, the train could be charged, whilst it is waiting to return in St. Helens Central, using the existing overhead electrification.
Will There Be Any Intermediate Stations Between St. Helens Central And St. Helens Junction?
On the first map the station sites of two former stations are shown; Peasley Cross and Sutton Oak.
According to the Wikipedia entry for Sutton Oak station, there was quite an intensive service a hundred years ago.
Why shouldn’t they be rebuilt? Especially, if there are plans for housing or regeneration in the area.
Will Between St. Helens Central And St. Helens Junction Be Single Track?
This would still enable two tph, if the trains did a quick turn-round in the bay platform at St. Helens Junction.
But it would mean.
- Lower cost infrastructure.
- Simple tram-style intermediate stations.
- One train on line operation for safety.
I feel that it is highly likely the new route will be single-track.
Carr Mill Station
This map shows Merseyrail’s future plans.
Note the proposed new station at Carr Mill, which is North-East of St. Helens Central on the Liverpool and Wigan Line.
The Wikipedia entry for Carr Mill station, says this about a proposed new station.
Proposals to construct a new station to serve the expanding population have been suggested by Merseytravel but funding has yet to arrive. A new proposal to open a station was raised by Metro Mayor of the Liverpool City Region Steve Rotheram as part of his re-election plans in January 2020.
It should be noted, that a new Carr Mill station could be on the East Lancashire Road, so it might be a good place to create a Park-and-Ride station for Liverpool and St. Helens.
Perhaps if a bay platform were to be incorporated into the new Carr Mill station, it might be better to run a service between Carr Mill and St. Helens Junction.
- There would be two tph.
- Intermediate stops would be St. Helens Central, Peasley Cross and Sutton Oak.
- I estimate the distance would be about four miles of which 1.8 miles would be electrified.
- The trains would be charged on the electrified line between Carr Mill and St. Helens Central stations.
There would be no need to electrify the bay platform at St. Helens Junction
Should The Service Go All The Way To Wigan?
It must surely be a possibility to run the service between Wigan North Western and St. Helens Junction.
- There would be two tph.
- Intermediate stops would be Carr Mill, Bryn, Garswood, St. Helens Central, Peasley Cross and Sutton Oak.
- I estimate the distance would be about eleven miles of which nine miles would be electrified.
- The trains would be charged on the electrified line between Wigan North Western and St. Helens Central stations.
This would create an excellent connection to Wigan North Western for all the long distance trains to Scotland and the South.
Should The New Route Be Electrified?
Consider.
- St. Helens and Wigan North Western is a fully-electrified route.
- It is only 2.2 miles, which would probably be single track railway.
- As there is electrification at both ends of the new route, there would be no problem arranging power.
- It would remove the need for battery-electric trains.
I suspect that this is one that accountants will decide, as both battery-electric and electrification will work equally well!
What Trains Would Be Used?
If the route is electrified, any electric train of a suitable length could be used. I would argue, that the same class of train, as is used through the two St. Helens stations, should be used for operational and passenger convenience.
To maintain the operational and passenger convenience, if battery-electric trains are used, then Northern’s Class 331 trains and Merseyrail’s Class 777 trains come or will come in both electric and battery-electric versions.
Conclusion
This looks like a very sensible scheme.
Skegness Station To Benefit From A £3.3m Improvement Package
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.
I took these pictures of Skegness station, on a visit to the town in July last year, which I wrote about in A Trip To Skegness.
I feel that Skegness station would welcome some improvement.
The Rail Technology Magazine article says this about the project.
Upon completion of the project, customers will be able to utilise a number of enhanced facilities, including an improved accessible toilet with changing spaces, two new start-up offices, a community café and retail provisions. Upgrades will continue through improved access into the station for pedestrians and vehicles, offering integration with the surrounding community.
Work is hoped to start this year.
A Modern Zero-Carbon Train Service
If £3.3 million is going to be spent on Skegness station, would it not be a good idea to have better trains serving the station.
In A Trip To Skegness, I talked about updating the hourly Nottingham and Skegness service using Class 170 trains with Rolls-Royce MTU Hybrid PowerPacks.
I wonder if this route could be improved by fitting the Class 170 trains with Rolls-Royce MTU Hybrid PowerPacks?
- The hybrid technology would have a lower fuel consumption and allow electric operation in stations.
- The prototype hybrid is already working on Chiltern Railways in a Class 168 train.
- The Class 168 train is an earlier version of the Class 170 train and they are members of the Turbostar family.
- Rolls-Royce are developing versions of these hybrid transmissions, that will work with sustainable fuels.
- As we have a total of 207 Turbostar trainsets, these could be a convenient way of cutting carbon emissions on long rural lines.
- As Rolls-Royce MTU are also developing the technology, so their diesel engines can run on hydrogen, it is not outrageous to believe that they could be on a route to complete decarbonisation of this type of train.
I believe that we could see hydrogen-hybrid Class 170 trains, with a Rolls-Royce badge on the side.
But would it be possible to go the whole way using one of Stadler’s battery-electric trains?
Consider the service between Nottingham and Skegness.
- It is hourly.
- The route is run by 100 mph Class 170 trains.
- Nottingham and Grantham are 22.7 miles apart.
- Grantham and Skegness are 58.2 miles apart.
- Trains take four minutes to reverse at Grantham.
- Trains wait 20 minutes before returning at the two end stations.
- Trains reverse at Nottingham in a bay platform, which is numbered 2.
- Grantham is electrified.
- Nottingham station will be electrified in the next few years.
- Skegness station is next to the bus station in the middle of the town, so hopefully the electricity supply is robust enough to charge buses and trains.
Stadler make a train called an Akku.
- It is a member of the FLIRT family.
- It is a 100 mph train.
- I wrote Stadler FLIRT Akku Battery Train Demonstrates 185km Range, which means it could run between Nottingham and Skegness without intermediate charging.
This leads me to the conclusion that with charging systems at Nottingham and Skegness and taking a four-minute top-up at Grantham if needed, a FLIRT Akku could handle this route with ease.
Conclusion
Skegness is a town that needs leveling-up. A refurbished station and 100 mph electric trains to Grantham and London would be a good start.
Battery Train Pilot Project On Challenging’ Westerwald Routes
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.
It is only a small order for three Mireo Plus B battery-electric multiple-units from Siemens Mobility, but I feel, it is significant that engineers and managers are confident that a battery-electric multiple unit can handle a challenging route.
Riding In A Train Designed To Run On Battery Power
Today, I had my first ride in a train, that has been designed to be able to run on battery power.
- Merseyrail’s Class 777 trains run normally using third-rail electrification.
- But they are also designed to run on battery power.
- I took these pictures of the train as it went from Liverpool Central station to Kirkby station and back to Moorfields station, from where I took a train back to Liverpool Lime Street station.
I took these pictures on the route.
Note.
- Every seat has access to a power and USB socket.
- Every head-rest has leather facings.
- The end lights change from white for front, to red for back, when the train changes direction.
- Door lights are green when it is safe to enter.
- There is a lot of attention to detail in the design.
If there is a better suburban train in Europe, I’ve yet to see or ride in it.
Noise And Vibration
Consider.
- I have ridden in two trains converted to battery-electric operation and both were very quiet.
- This train was also very quiet, but it has been designed for battery operation.
- I suspect that the train is very frugal with electricity.
- I wonder, if the small battery, that is carried on the train for depot movements, is also used for regenerative braking.
- It might not be a traditional battery, but a supercapacitor, some of which are made from curved graphene.
This train certainly sets new standards in noise and vibration.
Recovering A Broken Down Battery-Electric Train
I was on a bus recently, where the brakes locked on and we had to all get off and wait to be rescued, by the next service.
To aid recovery on trains, it is usual for a broken-down train to be able to be rescued by another train of the same type.
But how do you rescue a battery electric train?
There will be two main groups of failures.
- Those where even the world’s most powerful locomotive will be unable to move the train.
- Those where a train with enough power can move the train to safety.
Let’s assume we have a four-car battery electric train.
- Trains can run for 40 miles, when starting with a full battery.
- Trains can run as pairs to provide higher capacity services or recover trains.
It is running on a ten-mile single-track branch line with a terminal station at the remote end.
It would be reasonable to assume, that the train could do two round trips before it needed a recharge.
The battery could also be said to have a capacity 160 car-miles.
Suppose a train broke down for some reason at the remote end, with a fault, that still allows the train to be moved, by towing.
- A second train can be used to remove the first train.
- It will use up 40 car-miles of energy to reach the first train.
- This leaves 120 car-miles of energy in the battery.
- When the two trains are connected, they are an eight-car train.
120 car-miles of energy in the battery, should be able to move the pair of trains fifteen miles.
I suspect that track layouts for battery-electric trains are designed with care, so that one train has enough battery capacity to rescue another.
The Stadler Data Sheet For A Class 777 IPEMU
This data sheet is now available on the Stadler web site.
These are my observations.
Battery Charging
The datasheet says this about battery charging.
While an IPEMU is running on the electrified network, the batteries can be charged from the third rail, as well as through regenerative braking.
I’m glad to see the trains have regenerative braking, which in a train with frequent stops saves electricity.
Battery Charging Time
The datasheet says this about battery charging time.
IPEMUs can be recharged in less than 15 minutes.
That time compares favourably with Hitachi’s time.
Expected Battery Life
The datasheet says this about expected battery life.
The IPEMU battery can undergo more than 10,000 charge/discharge cycles, which is about four times the lifetime of a battery used in EVs.
Stadler also give the battery a minimum expected life of eight years.
Transition Between Electrification And Battery
The datasheet says this about this important transition.
Transition between electrified and non-electrified networks without interruption, reducing travel times.
Stadler certainly do the changeover from electric to diesel smoothly on a Class 755 train.
A Comparison To Tesla
This is a paragraph in the introduction of the data sheet.
The battery/vehicle weight-ratio of a Tesla is about 25 per cent, while the ratio of the IPEMU is only about 6 per cent.
I suspect the rolling resistance, is also a lot less, than the rolling resistance of a Tesla, due to the superior properties of steel wheels on rail, as opposed to rubber tyres on road.
Battery Range
The data sheet gives the following.
- Installed battery capacity – 320 KWh
- Maximum speed (IPEMU mode) – 62 mph
- Range in battery operation – 34 miles
- Maximum demonstrated range – 84 miles
Note.
- I would assume the 55 km given for range on the datasheet is a guaranteed range.
- The maximum demonstrated range is from New Merseyrail Train Runs 135km On Battery.
- All other figures are from the datasheet.
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.
I don’t think the terrain of Merseyrail’s services are much different from the Uckfield branch, so what are the figures for the Class 777 trains on battery power?
- 55 km range – 2.353 kWh per vehicle mile
- 135 km range – 0.952 kWh per vehicle mile
The train appears to be very miserly with electricity.
But if the attention to detail in the electrical system of the train is of the standard of a Swiss watch, I don’t think they are unreasonable.
Operation With 25 kV Overhead Electrification
The datasheet says nothing about this, but the Wikipedia entry for the Class 777 train says this under Design.
Because current regulatory policy makes it unlikely that future extensions of Merseyrail’s unshielded third rail traction power supply will be approved, Class 777 units will be delivered with provision for the future installation of 25 kV 50 Hz AC overhead line traction equipment.
This is probably needed for charging at locations without third-rail electrification.
The Anonymous Widower 