Battery Answer To Schleswig-Holstein’s Diesel Replacement Question
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette International.
It is a good explanation of why there is so much interest in battery-powered trains.
This paragraph from the article, describes how the trains will operate in Schleswig-Holstein.
They will have range of 150 km under optimal conditions, although the longest non-electrified route they will operate on is around 80 km. The batteries will be recharged from the existing 15 kV 16·7 Hz overhead electrification at Kiel, Neumünster, Flensburg, Lübeck and Lüneburg stations and on the Osterrönfeld – Jübek line. Charging facilities will also be provided in other locations, and there will be some extensions to the existing overhead power supply.
Consider.
- These trains can run on routes of up to eighty kilometres or around fifty miles.
- Greater Anglia and Transport for Wales will be running the UK versions of the Stadler Flirts, that will be used in Schleswig-Holstein.
- Transport for Wales will also be running a tri-mode Flirt with electric, diesel and battery power.
- The Continental loading gauge, probably allows more batteries than the smaller UK loading gauge.
I think it could be reasonable to assume, that a UK-sized battery-electric Stadler Flirt could have a range of forty miles on batteries.
These could be possible routes for Greater Anglia.
- Norwich and Sheringham – 30 miles
- Norwich and Lowestoft – 23.5 miles
- Norwich and Great Yarmouth – 18 miles
- Ipswich and Felixstowe – 16 miles
- Colchester Town and Sudbury – 20 miles
In addition some partially-electrified routes have gaps less than forty miles. Think Cambridge and Ipswich!
I would not be surprised to see battery trains, quietly gliding around East Anglia.
Would they attract passengers and tourists?
Perhaps Germany and Stadler will give us the Schleswig-Holstein Answer, which will be much more interesting than the Schleswig-Holstein Question.
Economics Of Battery Trains
The article also has this quote from the CEO of Stadler Germany about the economics of battery trains.
It makes us very proud that with the battery-powered Flirt we have not only managed to find an ecological and innovative solution, but have also enabled a clear economic improvement. If we consider the average life of a rail vehicle of around 30 years, battery-operated vehicles are more cost-effective than diesel’.
I think it can also be said, that battery technology will improve continuously in the next thirty years and we should see a corresponding improvement in range and performance.
You don’t get that with diesel.
Hydrogen Or Battery Power?
I would think that Alstom are not happy about this order for battery-powered trains.
- Only a hundred kilometres or so to the West, they are supplying Alstom Coradia iLint trains for a similar network.
- These trains are working well.
- They have teamed up with Linde to supply the hydrogen.
I wouldn’t have been surprised if Schleswig-Holstein had chosen hydrogen trains.
So why did Schleswig-Holstein, choose battery rather than hydrogen trains?
- Provided, the driver or a computer, raises and lowers the pantograph appropriately, there is no difference between an electric train and its battery-electric sibling.
- Systems to charge battery trains can be installed anywhere, there is an electricity supply.
- The electricity supply could be local wind or solar.
- Charging battery trains could be automatic and require no more action from the driver, than checking everything is as it should be and perhaps pushing a button or two. On a bleak miserable day, the driver would remain in the warm and comfortable cab.
- Hydrogen would need to be loaded on the train at a depot or another place with the necessary safety clearance.
- The iLint seats 160 and the Flirt Akku seats 124, so I suspect capacity isn’t much of a problem.
- The Flirt Akku is a train designed for battery-electric operation, whereas the iLint is a modified diesel train, with a noisy and harsh mechanical transmission. It’s like comparing Class 710 trains, with their predecessors on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line; the Class 172 trains.
- I suspect most Germans have talked to a relative or older person, who remembers the Hindenburg.
There is probably little to choose between the two trains, but I believe that the operation of the hydrogen-powered train will be more complicated.
I also don’t know the cost of each train.
As I said earlier, Stadler claim long-term ownership of battery-powered trains is more economic than diesel. Does the same apply to battery against hydrogen power.
Conclusion
I believe we’ll see lots more battery trains.
Mathematics Of A Stadler Flirt Akku Battery Train
In Stadler Receives First Flirt Akku Battery Train Order, I quoted this from as that of this article in Railway Gazette International.
Schleswig-Holstein transport authority NAH.SH has selected Stadler to supply 55 Flirt Akku battery multiple-units to operate regional services and provide 30 years of maintenance.
This is a substantial order for a large number of trains and many years of maintenance, and would appear to be structured similarly to deals in East Anglia, Glasgow and Liverpool in the UK.
Does The Train Have A Central Power-Pack Car?
Is the Flirt Akku, similar to Greater Anglia’s Class 755 trains and other of the companies products, in that it has a central power-pack car?
This picture shows a Class 755 train at Norwich.
Note that this four-car train has four full-size cars and a shorter one, that doesn’t appear to have any doors or proper windows.
This is the power-pack car, which in these trains has the following properties.
- The power-pack car is 6.69 metres long.
- The power-pack car is identical in both the four-car and three-car versions of the Class 755 trains.
- The four-car trains have four diesel engines.
- The three-car trains have two diesel engines.
The number of engines possible, leads me to believe there are four slots for engines in the power-pack car.
Transport for Wales have ordered a number of Flirts, which are similar to those in use by Greater Anglia, but they are tri-mode trains, that can run on overhead 25 KVAC electrification, diesel or battery power.
I speculate that they have one diesel engine and three batteries in the four slots.
This is a picture of the Flirt Akku.
I have enlarged the image and it would appear that the trains do not have a central power-pack car, but they do seem to have a lot of electrical gubbins on the roof.
This video shows the Class 755 train being tested at Diss.
It looks to have a much smoother roof line.
Could this indicate that the batteries on the Akku are placed on the roof of the train, as there is certainly a lot of equipment up there?
Importance Of Battery Range: Stadler’s FLIRT BMU For Greater Anglia
The title of this post is the same as a sub-section of this article on Railway News, which is entitled Stadler Presents New FLIRT Akku For The First Time.
This is said.
By contrast, Stadler recently unveiled its bi-mode (electric-diesel) FLIRT for Greater Anglia (U.K.) at InnoTrans 2018. When asked why Greater Anglia went for a diesel-electric option rather than a battery-electric option to bridge the non-electrified gaps in the network, Railway-News was told that the non-electrified distances in the U.K. are currently too great for battery-operated trains to cope with. As battery technology improves, this will hopefully change, making diesel and the need for electrification obsolete
Does this infer the following?
- Greater Anglia would have preferred to use battery-electric trains.
- It is possible to swap the diesel engines in the power-pack for battery modules.
- It could be possible to swap a diesel generator for a hydrogen fuel cell.
Option three might be difficult, as you need somewhere to put the hydrogen tank within the limited UK loading gauge.
Conclusion
I think it is highly likely that as battery technology improves and Stadler are able to package it better for the Class 755 trains, that Greater Anglia will change some of their Class 755 trains to battery-electric operation.
Scottish Government Is Considering Plans To Electrify The Borders Railway
The title of this post is the same as that of this article in The Scotsman.
These reasons are given for the electrification, of the Borders Railway.
- Electric trains would shorten journey times.
- New Class 385 trains would be more reliable than the current elderly diesel trains.
- It would be an easy line to electrify, as the line was built so that overhead electrification could be added without any gauge enhancement.
I would add a few reasons of my own.
- The route is already electrified as far as Newcraighall station. This would probably ease the grid connection to the new electrification.
- I believe that electrification of a new railway, where everything is known an well-documented has a higher change of being delivered on time and on budget.
- Running Class 385 trains may also produce operating and maintenance savings.
- The Class 385 trains are serviced at the convenient Millerhill Depot.
- Electrification might help running trains across Edinburgh.
If and when the Borders Railway is extended to Carlisle, there could be very good reasons to electrify the whole route.
I will answer a few questions.
How Much Time Would a Class 385 Train Save?
Currently, trains between Edinburgh and Tweedbank currently take fifty-five minutes with seven stops.
The Class 385 trains will probably save a few minutes at each stop, so this will make the journey time a bit shorter and turnround at each end of the route will be more relaxed.
How Long Is The Section Without Electrification Of The Borders Railway?
The distance between Newcraighall and Tweedbank stations is 30.75 miles.
How Challenging Is The Borders Railway?
It is not the easiest of routes, but it is not the most difficult either. It also has a high summit.
The current diesel trains don’t seem to be working that hard, when I’ve used the railway.
Would Electrification Be Difficult?
If I look at electrification projects over the last few years in the UK, they have been delayed and suffered cost increases because of the following.
- Difficulty of raising bridges over the route.
- Connecting to the electricity grid.
- Surprises like unexpected sewers and mine workings, when installing the electrification.
Hopefully, as the Borders Railway is new railway, that is already partially electrified, this will not be a difficult electrification.
Could the Current Route Be Served By A Battery-Electric Train?
This is the big question, as it were possible, then the current Borders Railway may not need to be electrified.
In Hitachi Plans To Run ScotRail Class 385 EMUs Beyond The Wires, I talked about Class 385 trains with batteries, that #Hitachi are proposing.
Hitachi have said this.
- It would be straightforward to add batteries to give a range of twenty miles on batteries.
- Sixty miles would be possible but more difficult.
I believe that a safety-first way to run a battery-electric Class 385 train on the Borders Railway would be to do the following.
- Procure a sin-fleet of Class 385 trains, with a range of forty miles on onboard batteries.
- The trains would handle regenerative braking to the onboard batteries.
- A charging station would be provided at Tweedbank station.
The only new infrastructure would be the charging station, which I believe should be based on Vivarail’s design, which I wrote about in Vivarail Unveils Fast Charging System For Class 230 Battery Trains
- Currently, trains take just under ten minutes to turn round at Tweedbank station, which would be time enough to charge the battery.
- Vivarail’s system is fully automatic, after the driver stops the train over a length of third-rail electrified track, which is only live, when a train is connected.
Hitachi would need to fit third-rail shoes to the trains, but then they could use the design from their Class 395 trains.
Conclusion
There is currently no need to electrify the Borders Railway, if Hitachi can do the following.
- Fit batteries to a Class 385 train, to give a range of forty miles.
- Design a fast charging system and install it at Tweedbank station.
I also believe that if and when the Borders Railway is extended to Carlisle, that there could be a strong case for electrification of the whole route.
Running battery-electric Class 385 trains on the Borders Railway would be a project with a lot of winners.
- Hitachi would have a scenic demonstration route, close to a major well-connected international city.
- The Borders would get a better and more environmentally – friendly train service to Edinburgh.
- Scotrail would have a higher proportion of one class of electric trains.
But the biggest advantage could be the possibility of terminating Borders Railway services on the other side of Edinburgh, at perhaps Stirling or Dunblane.
Chester To Liverpool Via Runcorn
This new service between Chester and Liverpool Lime Street stations via Runcorn station and the Halton Curve, started a couple of weeks ago.
I took these pictures of the journey.
Note.
- The service was busy, as everybody seemed to be going to Liverpool to prepare for the evening’s match.
- The Class 150 train kept up a good speed, which indicates that Network Rail didn’t cut quality on the link.
- Runcorn is about the halfway point of the journey.
- The route is electrified between Runcorn and Liverpool Lime Street stations.
- The Class 150 train was a bit tired.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a hybrid train working this route.
- Transport for Wales have ordered some electro-diesel Class 769 trains.
- Alstom are converting Class 321 trains into hydrogen-powered Class 321 Breeze trains at nearby Widnes.
- Porterbrook are converting Class 350 trains into Battery/FLEX trains.
- Hitachi are talking to ScotRail about Class 385 trains with batteries.
- I’m also sure Bombardier have a battery-electric Aventra.
Operation would be as follows.
- All these trains work be capable of 100 mph using 25 KVAC overhead electrification between Liverpool Lime Street and Runcorn stations.
- Power changeover would be at Runcorn station.
- Between Runcorn to Chester stations is only about fourteen miles.. This will be well within battery range in a few years.
Transport for Wales will be obtaining trains from a crowded market.
More Halton Curve Services
Under Planned Improvements in the Wikipedia entry for Transport for Wales, this is said.
Introduction of a new hourly Liverpool to Llandudno and Shrewsbury service, and a new two-hourly Liverpool to Cardiff Central service from December 2022.
Adding these to the current hourly service, this would mean that two trains per hour (tph) would normally run between Liverpool Lime Street and Chester stations, with three trains in every alternate hour.
I think that, there would be a marketing advantage in running hybrid trains on these routes. Hydrogen would be ideal, as these would not need recharging like battery trains after a long trip.
To go through the single-track Halton Curve appears to take trains about five minutes, so up to eight tph could probably be feasible, which would mean four tph between Liverpool and Chester via Runcorn in both directions.
If Trains for Wales are going to compete with the Merseyrail electric services, they need a four tph frequency in both directions.
Flexible Ticketing
Currently, if you want to buy a ticket between the Chester and Liverpool Lime Street, you have to buy an appropriate ticket for your chosen route.
Surely, tourists and others might like to do the out and back journeys by a different route.
If London Underground and some train companies can share ticketing, then surely Merseyrail and other train companies can do the same.
Conclusion
This new service will be surprisingly well-used and needs an iconic hybrid train.
- Diesel is not appropriate for the long term, although in Northern Connect Between Chester And Leeds To Start In May, I did report a rumour that Class 769 trains might be running between Chester and Leeds.
- Hydrogen is non-polluting and has a longer range, that could make services between Liverpool and Holyhead possible.
- Battery will probably need a charging infrastructure.
My money is on hydrogen power.
What Is The Kinetic Energy Of A Class 710 Train?
I finally got a good look at a Class 710 train at Gospel Oak station this morning.
The picture shows the plate on the end of a DMS car.
- The weight of the train is 157.8 tonnes. Note that the four-car Class 378 trains weigh 172.1 tonnes.
- 700 passengers at 90 Kg each with baggage, bikes and buggies would be 63 tonnes.
- That would be a total weight of 220.8 tonnes.
- The operating speed is shown as 75 mph., which is the same as the Class 315 train, that many Class 710 trains will replace.
Using the Omni Kinetic Energy Calculator gives a kinetic energy of 34.5 kWh.
For completeness these are the figures for different speeds.
- 50 mph – 15.3 kWh
- 60 mph – 22.1 kWh
- 90 mph – 49.4 kWh – Operating speed of a Crossrail Class 345 train.
- 100 mph – 61.3 kWh – Operating speed of many electric multiple units.
Note that the amount of energy is proportional to the square of the speed.
What Do The Kinetic Energy Figures Show?
These are a few of my thoughts.
What Is Regenerative Braking?
A full Class 710 is travelling along at 75 mph, ihas 34.5 kWh of kinetic energy. Whenit needs to stop at a station, this energy has to be dissipated.
With normal friction brakes, the energy will be converted into heat and wasted.
But with regenerative braking, the traction motors are used in reverse to generate electricity.
This electricity is generally handled in one of three ways.
- It is passed through resistors on the roof of the train and turned into heat and wasted.
- It is fed back into the electrification and used by nearby trains. This needs special transformers feeding the electrification.
- It is stored in a battery or other energy storage device on the train.
The last method is the most efficient, as the stored energy can be used to help restart the train and regain line speed.
Can The Lea Valley Lines Electrification Handle Regenerative Braking?
This question must be asked, as if the lines can’t then running trains with batteries could be the best way to handle regenerative braking and improve efficiency and reduce the electricity bill.
It should be noted, that the Chingford and Enfield Town routes are not shared with any other trains, so running Class 710 trains on these routes may have advatages in the maintenance of the electrification, if the trains handle the regenerative braking.
On the Cheshunt route, there are also some Greater Anglia services, but these will generally be run by Class 720 trains, which are also Aventras.
On the other hand, the electrification on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line has probably been installed to handle the reverse currents.
Do Class 710 Trains Have Regenerative Braking?
Search the Internet for “Class 710 train regenerative braking” and you find little in addition to my ramblings.
But other Aventras, like Crossrail’s Class 345 trains have been stated to have regenerative braking.
I also repeated my views in an article in Rail Magazine, which I described in I’ve Been Published In Rail Magazine.
No-one has told me that they disagree with my views and I was talking rubbish!
So I will assume that Class 710 trains do have regenerative braking!
The Aventra’s Electrical Systems
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 eight years ago, so I suspect Bombardier have refined the concept.
But even in 2011, Bombardier were thinking about energy storage on the train.
How Much Storage Would A Class 710 Train Need?
As I said earlier, I train would need sufficient energy storage to store the kinetic energy of a train.
As my calculations show that a full train travelling at the maximum speed of 75 mph, then the energy storage for this version of a Class 710 train must be able to store at least 34.5 kWh, at all times.
The size of the on board energy storage could be around 40-50 kWh, which is readily available in a lithium ion battery, that has been designed for transport use.
Where Would The Energy Storage Be Placed?
The extract above says that two cars hold the electrical systems.
These pictures show the pantograph car and driver car next to it.
Note that underneath the pantograph car is a transformer.
So are these, the pair of cars, the extract describes? They certainly could be!
This is a selection of pictures of the underneath of the driver car.
Note.
- There are two large boxes with latches under both driver cars.
- Next to these boxes is a smaller box. At the pantograph end of the train, it is open and looks like a cooling system for the two boxes
- At the other end of the train, the smaller box appears to have a blanking plate, so perhaps the boxes are empty.
The only sensible use I can think of for the boxesis to store the batteries or capacitors.
I
I would estimate that each of the four large boxes.
- Is about a metre wide.
- Is about 0.3 metres high.
- Is sized to fit within the 2.7 metre width of the train. Perhaps 2.5 metres.
These give a column of 0.75 cubic metres.
Bombardier used to manufacture a Primove 50 kWh battery, which was built to power trams and trains, that had the following characteristics.
- A weight of under a tonne.
- Dimensions of under two x one x half metres.
Were these boxes under the floor of the driver cabs of the Class 710 train designed to hold a Primove 50 kWh or similar battery?
Four batteries could give the train as much as 200 kWh of energy storage.
But surely for trundling along the Gospel Oak to Barking Line. a smaller battery capacity would be sufficient. I suspect that you fill the boxes with how many batteries you need and the computer does the rest.
Perhaps, just one 50 kWh battery would be enough! This could explain, why the cooling system appears to be blanked off at one end of the train.
Could The Batteries Be Used To Power The Class 710 Train?
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 a 50 kWh bsttery would give the following ranges with these consumption rates for a four-car Class 710 trains.
- 3 kWh – 4.2 miles
- 4 kWh – 3.1 miles
- 5 kWh – 2.5 miles
It looks to me, that battery power would be possible over the extension to Barking Riverside station, which is about a mile long.
Battery power would also other uses.
- Moving the train to a safe place for passenger evacuation, when the overhead electrification fails.
- Moving the train in a depot or sidings, without overhead power.
- Running innovative on-board services for maintenance and train preparation, when the train is parked overnight.
Reliable battery power has a lot of uses on a train.
West London Orbital Railway
The West London Orbital Railway would have less than ten miles of lines without electrification, with several electrified miles on either side.
I believe that Class 710 trains with the right amount of batteries could bridge the gap and make a massive difference to rail transport in North and West London.
I think that jumping a gap of a few miles on battery power, may well be easier than doing an Out-and-Back service..
A Flexible System
As it appears, each Class 710 train has got four battery boxes, I suspect that batteries can be installed as to the needs of the route.
- Standard operation on Gospel Oak to Barking, Watford DC Lines and Lea Valley Lines could be one or two batteries to handle regenerative braking.
- Out-and-Back to Barking Riverside station ,might need two batteries.
- West London Orbital services might need three or four batteries.
These battery boxes also could be designed to allow an easy and quick change of battery, as batteries on buses have given Transport for London trouble in the past.
Conclusion
Bombardier’s design of the Aventra has been designed with battery operation in mind, which opens up lots of possibilities!
Abbey Line Passing Loop Proposed
The title of this post is the same as that of an article in the June 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.
Bricket Wood station used to be an important station on the Abbey Line, with grand buildings and a passing loop to allow trains to run a teo trains per hour (tph) service as opposed to the current inconvenient train every forty-five minutes.
Consultants have now said that a traditional passing loop, with a second platform and a bridge would cost up to £10million, which is probably not viable.
The Penryn Solution
The article says this about the consultants’ alternative solution.
The platform at Bricket Wood be lengthened such that trains stop at different ends of a single platform, similar to the solution adopted in Penryn on the branch line from Truro to Falmouth, which would help to minimise costs.
This Google Map shows Penryn station.
Note the long single platform in the station.
This section in the Wikipedia entry called Signalling, gives a full explanation of the method of operation at Penryn.
Truro-bound trains use the northern end of the station (Platform 2), arriving before the Falmouth-bound train, which will pass through the new loop and to the southern end of the platform (Platform 1), allowing the Truro-bound train to continue its journey north. This gives a rare situation in the United Kingdom where trains run on the right, instead of on the left as is usual in this country. Trains are scheduled to depart simultaneously for Truro and Falmouth.
Bricket Wood station already has a platform, that can take a comfortably take a four-car Class 319 train, as this Google Map shows.
Consider.
- I estimate from Google Maps, that the single platform at Bricket Wood station is currently around 190 metres long.
- Looking at the map, it might be possible to add another ten metres or so to the platform length.
- The current Class 319 trains are 79.5 metres long or 159 metres for a pair.
- It wouldn’t matter, if for reasons of safety, the front of the trains were allowed to extend for perhaps ten metres past the end of the platform.
- There also appears to be space to put a second track alongside the current single track.
I also suspect, that Network Rail have track design software, that can precisely calculate the size and position of the points, so that the manoeuvre can be safely executed every time.
I very much feel, that a design can be produced, that will staff, passengers and regulators.
Can This Proposal Handle More Than Two tph?
If you look at the timings of the train, it takes eight minutes to run these legs.
- Watford Junction and Bricket Wood
- Bricket Wood and St. Albans Abbey
The times are identical, irrespective of direction.
If times are the same after installation of the novel loop. A train will take sixteen minutes plus however much time, it takes to turnback the train to get back to Bricket Wood.
As trains will be running every thirty minutes and both trains will leave Bricket Wood at the same time, the train must be able to run the out-and-back journey from Bricket Wood in thirty minutes or less.
- The out and back legs both take eight minutes.
- This means that the turnback time must be less than fourteen minutes.
Currently, turnback times are fourteen minutes or less.
- If you look at four tph, there is a train every fifteen minutes. As each leg is eight minutes long, it would appear another method of operation will have to be used.
- If you look at three tph, there is a train every twenty minutes. Would it be possible to turn back the trains in under four minutes? It might be possible, but it would be a tough call.
I would suspect, that for a reliable service, the proposed method of operation has a maximum frequency of two tph.
I suspect, that the only way to get more than two tph, would be to fully double track the route, with two platforms at all stations on the route.
Does The New Track Need To Be Fully-Electrified?
There would be around two hundred metres of new track and if electrification were to be installed, a pair of the current Class 319 trains could provide a two tph service.
Surely Network Rail can manage to put up this amount of new electrification without massive cost and time overruns?
Despite being over thirty years old, the Class 319 trains scrub-up well as these pictures show.
But what could be done if electrification was deemed to be outside the budget? Or it was decided that new zero-carbon trains should be used on the Abbey Line?
Battery trains are coming and there are several trains that can use both electric and battery power under development, in the UK, Europe, China and Japan.
Battery Power On The Abbey Line
Bricket Wood station is 3.5 miles from the Watford Junction end of the Abbey Line and perhaps three miles from the St. Albans end.
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, as is the Abbey Line.
A modern EMU needs between 3 and 5 kWh per vehicle mile for this sort of service.
So if a four-car electric-battery hybrid train was to handle the whole of the 6.5 mile route, it would need a battery of between 156-260 kWh to go between Watford Junction and St. Albans Abbey stations and back. It would also need charging at one or both ends of the route.
But supposing trains used the current electrification between Watford Junction and Bricket Wood stations to both power the train and charge their batteries.
- The trains would only be doing six miles on batteries, so the battery would be between 72-120 kWh.
- Trains would raise and lower their pantographs at Bricket Wood station.
- No new electrification would be required.
- If trains needed to top-up their batteries, they would do this using the electrification in the two terminal stations.
It might even be preferential to remove electrification between St. Albans Abbey and Bricket Wood stations to save maintenance costs and improve safety.
Could West Midlands Trains’ Class 730 Trains Be Used?
The current franchise holder; West Midlands Trains has ordered a large fleet of Class 730 trains for services between London and the West Midlands and for local electric services in the West Midlands.
Included are thirty-six three-car trains for working suburban services across Birmingham. These have twenty-four metre long cars, so are eight metres shorter than the four-car Class 319 trains, so they are another possibility, unless their longer car length would cause problems in the Bricket Wood manoeuvre.
Should The Abbey Line Be Transferred To Transport for London?
There have been suggestions in the past, that the route be transferred to Transport for London.
I’ll leave the politics aside, but electric-battery hybrid versions of London Overground’s Class 710 trains, which will soon be serving Watford Junction station would probably be ideal.
As they are dimensionally similar to the Class 319 trains, they may also be able to work the route under electric power.
Conclusion
There are certainly, several affordable ways to improve the Abbey Line.
My preferred solution would be go for the Penryn solution, using a fleet of Class 319 trains.
- Penryn seems to be working well.
- Track would need to be re-laid through Bricket Wood station, to add the passing loop.
- About two hundred metres of extra electrification would need to be erected.
- There would probably need to be some modification to the signalling, as there was at Penryn.
- Three trains as a minimum, would be needed, two for the service and one as a spare or as maintenance cover.
- West Midlands Trains already have fifteen Class 319 trains, so finding a viable fleet in top-class condition, shouldn’t be difficult.
- If slightly shorter trains could be needed, the trains might be able to be shortened to three-car trains.
- Staff training would be minimal.
- The current trains are liked by drivers.
- The trains would be zero-carbon.
- The current trains are in very good condition.
- The current trains even have toilets, which are probably not needed on a six-and-a-half mile journey
- If say in ten years time, new trains are needed, I suspect there will be fleets of suitable electric multiple units, less than eighty metres long.
It is probably the most affordable solution.
Bedwyn, Didcot Parkway And Oxford Services After Crossrail Opens To Reading
When Crossrail opens to Reading as it is rumoured with happen in December 2019, what will happen to the Great Western Railway (GWR) services to Bedwyn, Dicot Parkway and Oxford?
The Current Services
These services currently run to these destinations from London Paddington station.
- Bedwyn station has an hourly service, that goes non stop between London and Reading and then calls at all stations between Reading and Bedwyn.
- Didcot Parkway station has a two trains per hour (tph) stopping service, that stops at most stations, including those between Reading and Didcot Parkway.
- Oxford station has a two tph fast service.
- Reading station has a two tph stopping service, that stops at most stations.
- The Didcot Parkway and Reading services give London and Reading a four tph electric service.
- Other trains stop at important stations and there are some shuttle trains serving Reading, Didcot Parkway and Oxford.
Recent developments have included
- Oxford and Bedwyn services now generally seem to run from the main station.
- The fast Oxford services now run by Class 802 trains.
GWR are also testing running Class 802 trains to Bedwyn.
Future Services To Bedwyn
The turnback facility at Bedwyn station has been upgraded, so that it can take a five-car Class 802 train.
When some sighting and safety issues are settled, it is likely that Class 802 trains will take over services to Bedwyn.
- Five-car bi-mode Class 802 trains will be used.
- Trains will not stop between London and Reading.
- Trains will stop at all station between Reading and Bedwyn.
- Trains will run on electric power between London and Newbury.
- Trains will run on diesel power between Newbury and Bedwyn.
Will the current seventy minute time be reduced by the faster trains, running at higher speed between London and Reading?
Battery Trains To Bedwyn
In Hitachi Plans To Run ScotRail Class 385 EMUs Beyond The Wires, I wrote about how batteries could be added to Class 385 trains, so they could run services without electrification.
Consider.
- Class 802 and Class 385 trains are both both members of Hitachi’s A-Train family, sharing many features and systems.
- Newbury to Bedwyn and back is about thirty miles.
- Batteries could be charged between London and Newbury.
I very much feel that if Hitachi apply battery technology to the Class 802 trains, that Bedwyn could be an ideal test destination.
Extension Of Bedwyn Services To Marlborough
In A Station For Marlborough, I wrote about a local plan to open a new station in the twon of Marlborough, which would be on a single track branch, that leaves the main line to the West of Bedwyn.
Class 802 trains with a battery capability, would be the ideal trains for this extension.
Future Services To Oxford
GWR have started running bi-mode Class 802 trains to Oxford at a frequency of two tph
- Services stop at Slough and Reading.
- I have seen nine-car trains on this route.
- Trains run on electric power between London and Didcot Parkway
- Trains run on diesel power between Dicot Parkway and Oxford.
The service is augmented with a diesel shuttle between Oxford and Didcot Parkway.
- This service runs at a frequency of two tph
- One train every two hours is extended to Banbury.
- This service is the only way to get to the intermediate stations of Appleford, Culham and Radley.
I very much feel that services between London and Oxford can be improved.
Four tph To Oxford
If train companies feel that Reading is worth four tph on Crossrail between the city and London, surely Oxford needs a four tph GWR service to the capital.
- Two would be fast trains stopping only at Reading and Slough.
- Two would stop at Slough and all stations between Reading and Oxford.
- Bi-mode Class 802 trains would be used.
- Trains run on electric power between London and Didcot Parkway
- Trains run on diesel power between Dicot Parkway and Oxford.
Note.
- All intermediate stations would have a direct two tph service to London, Reading and Oxford.
- Currently, many journeys involve a long wait or a change at Didcot Parkway.
In addition, no station between Reading and Didcot Parkway gets a worse service than they do now, with the Class 387 trains to Didcot Parkway.
Battery Trains To Oxford
If Hitachi develop them, why not?
A Reading And Oxford Shuttle
I very much believe that important commuter routes need a frequency of four tph, as this enables a Turn-Up-And-Go service and encourage passenger numbers. Especially on a route like Reading and Oxford, where there is a lot of new housing being built.
If two tph are run between London and Oxford, stopping at all staions between Reading and Oxford, perhaps the way to give this service would be to run a shuttle between Reading and Oxford using bi-mode Class 769 trains.
- A two tph shuttle would give four tph at all intermediate stations.
- Trains would run on electric power between Reading and Didcot Parkway.
- Trains would run on diesel power between Didcot Parkway and Oxford.
- Some or all trains could be extended to Banbury.
- I estimate that four trains would,d be needed for two tph.
Oxford would only be getting the quality of railway system a city of its size and standing needs.
Conclusion
There is a lot of scope to improve the train services in the Thames Valley, whether or no Crossrail takes over the Reading services.
East Midlands Class 222 Trains
The Class 222 train is the workhorse of the Midland Main Line.
Where will they go, when they are replaced by new bi-mode trains in 20222?
They have some good properties.
- Built in 2003-2005 and refurbished in 2011-2012.
- 125 mph capability
- Lots of tables.
- Meet all the access reguilations.
- Good ride on FLEX-Eco bogies.
But there is the annoying noise of the under-floor diesel engines.
In Have Bombardier Got A Cunning Plan For Voyagers?, I commented on a statement by Bombardier to upgrade these trains with batteries, to give full regenerative braking, improve their efficiency and require less running of the engines in stations.
Abellio’s Plans For London And Melton Mowbray Via Corby And Oakham
This page on the Department for Transport web site is an interactive map of the Abellio’s promises for East Midlands Railway.
These are mentioned for services to Oakham and Melton Mowbray.
- After electrification of the Corby route there will continue to be direct service each way between London and Oakham and Melton Mowbray once each weekday, via Corby.
- This will be operated with brand new 125mph trains when these are introduced from April 2022.
This seems to be a very acceptable minimum position.
In Abellio’s Plans For London And Corby, I suggested that Class 379 trains could be used on the route and that the trains might be fitted with batteries.
- Corby and Melton Mowbray are about twenty-fives apart.
- Batteries and their fast-charging technology has come on at a fast pace since Abellio participated in the Class 379 BEMU Trial in 2015.
Are Abellio thinking about extending some Croby services using battery technology?
The technology is certainly capable, but is there a proven passenger need?
Turning Trains At Melton Mowbray stations
This Google Map shows Melton Mowbray station.
It looks to be a station on a large site with more than adequate car parking and I suspect building a bay platform with charging facilities would not be the most difficult of projects.
Conclusion
As current trains take about thirty minutes between Corby and Melton Mowbray, with a bay platform at the latter station, I think it would be possible to run hourly Class 379 trains with batteries to and from St. Pancras.
The Anonymous Widower 