The Anonymous Widower

First Passenger Train In 80 Years Runs On Camp Hill Line

The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.

These two paragraphs described the route, that the train took on the Camp Hill Line.

On Monday morning a train carrying the Mayor, West Midlands Railway’s customer experience director Jonny Wiseman and other representatives from across the rail industry, travelled along the line.

The train followed the route of what would be the re-opened line, stopping at the Moseley, Kings Heath and Hazelwell sites before arriving into Kings Norton, and later returning to Birmingham New Street.

The article has a picture showing the VIPs showing boards indicating the stations at Moseley, Kings Heath and Hazelwell, that will be reopened.

Wikipedia says this under Future for all three stations.

In 2019, the project to re-open the stations at Moseley, Kings Heath and Hazelwell received £15 million in Government funding, with construction due to start in 2020 and aimed for completion in time for the 2022 Commonwealth Games.

£15million seems good value to reopen three stations.

Let’s hope the world has solved the COVID-19 crisis before the 2022 Commonwealth Games.

Trains For The Service

The picture in the article, shows the test service was run by a two-car Class 170 train. This is an ideal train to do the testing, but as the Camp Hill Line is not electrified, self-powered trains will be needed for the passenger service.

West Midlands Trains will have a good selection of self-powered trains with which to run the service.

  • They already have a selection of Class 170 and Class 172 Turbostar diesel multiple units in very good condition, which total thirty-seven two-cars and twenty-one three-cars.
  • I’m sure Vivarail will pitch diesel-electric or battery-electric versions of their Class 230 trains.
  • Alstom will probably pitch the Breeze hydrogen-powered train.
  • Porterbrook will probably pitch their proposed Battery/FLEX conversion of Class 350 trains.

I don’t think there will be a problem finding a suitable fleet for this route.

I suspect some form of battery-electric train will be used, as there is lots of 25 KVAC overhead electrification in the Birmingham area, that can be used to charge the batteries.

Battery-electric trains with a range of perhaps forty miles would also open up the possibilities for other electric services for West Midlands Trains.

A Thought On Construction

Because of COVID-19, there will probably be numbers of unemployed in this part of Birmingham, who have skills that could be useful to do the building work.

So should the non-railway related parts of the reopening be accelerated to put money in the pockets of the local unemployed.

March 19, 2020 Posted by | Health, Sport, Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Community Leaders Add Their Voices To Demand For Railway Extensions In Nottinghamshire To Be A ‘Top Priority’

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Nottinghamshire Live.

This is the introductory paragraph.

The opportunity to make ‘isolated’ rural areas more “attractive to investors” is one reason why campaigners and local politicians think it should be a “top priority” to extend railways in Nottinghamshire.

It does seem to me that arguments for new or reopened rail lines are getting more professional, as more arguments prevail.

I think that the extension of the Robin Hood Line through the Sherwood Forest to Warsop, Edwinstowe and Ollerton, is one of those projects, that will get approved in the next few years.

  • The track is already in place and used for such purposes as driver training.
  • The route could link a large number of people to High Speed Two, if the closely-related Maid Marian Line were to be reopened.
  • The Robin Hood Line also links up to the High Marnham Test Track, which could be extended further East.

I do wonder, if an extended Robin Hood Line would be an ideal route for introducing Alstom’s Class 321 Breeze hydrogen trains.

 

March 9, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , | Leave a comment

I Design A Hydrogen Aventra

This article on Rail News is entitled Alstom Moves Ahead With Bombardier Takeover.

This is a paragraph in the report, which is dated the eighteenth of last month.

n a statement issued last night, Alstom said it had ‘signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Bombardier Inc. and Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec in view of the acquisition of Bombardier Transportation. Post-transaction, Alstom will have a backlog of around €75bn and revenues around €15.5bn. The price for the acquisition of 100 per cent of Bombardier Transportation shares will be €5.8bn to €6.2bn, which will be paid via a mix of cash and new Alstom shares.’

That sounds pretty definite to me.

In the UK, Alstom will take over a company with the following projects.

  • A large order book for building Aventras in the Litchurch Lane factory at Derby.
  • Several support projects for existing train fleets.
  • A joint design project with Hitachi to bid for the trains for High Speed Two. Alstom are also bidding for High Speed Two, as are CAF, Siemens and Talgo.
  • Design and build the cars for the Cairo monorail.
  • Bombardier have been offering train operating companies a bi-mode Aventra.

There are also rumours, that Bombardier are in the running for a large order for Southeastern.

What are Bombardier’s strengths in the UK?

  • The Aventra is without doubt an excellent train, but with some software teething troubles.
  • The company has the ability to turn out finished trains at a formidable rate.
  • The company can make the carriage bodies in a high-tech plant.
  • The company has the ability to design complete trains to the UK’s smaller standards.
  • The company can make trains in both European-sizes in Europe and UK-sizes in Derby.
  • The company builds bogies for other train manufacturing companies.

On the other hand, Bombardier has the following weaknesses.

  • It doesn’t make any diesel-powered trains, although it has successfully trialled battery-powered trains.
  • It has dismissed hydrogen-powered trains.
  • But above all the finances of the parent company are a basket case.

It appears to me that Alstom might bring much needed technology and finance to Bombardier UK. In return, they will acquire a modern design, that caq be used in the UK and other countries, that use a smaller loading gauge.

Obviously, if the takeover goes through, more information should be forthcoming in the near to mid future.

The Future For Hydrogen Trains In The UK

I would suspect, that Alstom have designed a train in the Class 321 Breeze, that fits their view of what will work well in the UK train market.

  • It is a sixty metre long train.
  • It has a capacity similar to that of a modern two-car diesel multiple unit.
  • The Renatus version of the Class 321 train has a modern and reliable AC-based traction package. Or that’s what a Greater Anglia driver told me!
  • Eversholt Rail Group have already devised a good interior.
  • I said I was impressed with the train in A Class 321 Renatus.
  • The train can operate at 100 mph on a suitably electrified line, when running using the electrification.
  • Adding an extra trailer car or two could be a simple way of increasing capacity.

I should say, that I think it will be a quieter train, than the Coradia iLint, which has a rather noisy mechanical transmission.

I feel that a Class 321 Breeze train could be a good seller to routes that will not be electrified, either because of difficulty, expence or politics.

With a 100 mph operating speed on electrification and perhaps 90 mph on hydrogen power, it may have enough performance to work a lot of routes fast, profitably and reliably.

I think, that the Alston Class 321 Breeze will prove whether there is a market for hydrogen-powered trains in the UK.

I would think, that use of these trains could be a big application.

Replacement Of Two-And Three-Car Diesel Multiple Units

There are a lot of these still in service in the UK, which include.

All of these are currently running services all over Great Britain and I have ignored those trains run by Chiltern Railways as they will logically be replaced by a dedicated batch of new trains, with possible full- or part-electrification of the route.

As there are only 105 Class 321 trains that can be converted, some other trains will be needed.

I suppose classes of trains like Class 365 trains and others can be converted, but there must come a point, when it will be better to build a new hydrogen train from scratch.

Components For Hydrogen Trains

This article on Rail Business is entitled Breeze Hydrogen Multiple-Unit Order Expected Soon.

It says this about the design of the Alstom Breeze train.

The converted HMUs would have three roof-mounted banks of fuel cells on each of the two driving vehicles, producing around 50% more power than the iLint. Two passenger seating bays and one door vestibule behind each cab would be replaced by storage tanks. The fuel cells would feed underfloor battery packs which would also store regenerated braking energy. The current DC traction package on the centre car would be replaced by new AC drives and a sophisticated energy management system. Despite the loss of some seating space, each set of three 20 m vehicles would provide slightly more capacity than a two-car DMU with 23 m cars which it would typically replace.

The following components will be needed for hydrogen trains.

One Or More Hydrogen Tanks

This picture shows the proposed design of the  Alstom Class 321 Breeze.

Note how half the side of the front car of the train is blocked in because it is full of the hydrogen tank. As this Driver Car is twenty metres long, each hydrogen tank must be almost seven metres long. If it was one larger tank, then it could be longer and perhaps up to fourteen metres long.

Batteries

As the Rail Business article said, that the batteries are underfloor, I wouldn’t be surprised to see all cars having a battery pack.

I favour this layout, as if cars all are motored, it must cut the length of cabling and reduce electrical losses.

Effectively, it creates a train with the following.

  • Faster acceleration
  • Smooth, fast deceleration.
  • Efficient braking
  • Low energy losses.

It should also add up to a train with good weight distribution and high efficiency.

Hydrogen Fuel Cells

In the Class 321 Breeze, Alstom are quoted as having three banks of fuel cell on the roof of each driver car.

This would distribute the power derived from hydrogen to both ends of the train

Hydrogen For Hydrogen Trains

Alstom’s Coradia iLint trains do not have a custom-design of hydrogen system, but over the last few years green hydrogen systems have started to be supplied by companies including ITM Power from Rotherham. Recently, they have supplied the hydrogen system for the hydrogen-powered Van Hool  Exqui-City tram-buses in Pau in France. A similar system could be used to refuel a fleet of Breeze trains.

It looks like we have a limited number of hydrogen-powered trains and their fuel could be made available, but not enough to replace all of the UK’s small diesel trains.

My Design Of Hydrogen Train

I would start with the Aventra design.

  • It is very much Plug-and-Play, where different types of cars can be connected together.
  • Cars can be any convenient length.
  • Some Aventras, like the Class 345 trains for Crossrail are even two half-trains.
  • There are various styles of interior.
  • The Aventra appears to be a very efficient train, with good aerodynamics and a very modern traction system with regenerative braking.
  • Driver, pantograph, trailer and motor cars and third-rail equipment are available.
  • Battery cars have probably been designed.

This picture shows a four-car Class 710 train, which is an Aventra.

In the next sub-sections I will fill out the design.

Train Layout

Perhaps, a hydrogen-powered train could be five cars and consist of these cars.

  • Driver Motor Car
  • Trailer Car
  • Hydrogen Tank Car
  • Trailer Car
  • Driver Motor Car

Equipment would be arranged as followed.

  • I would put the hydrogen tank in the middle car. Stadler have been very successful in putting a power car in the middle and it could be the ideal car for some of the important equipment.
  • As I said earlier, I would put batteries under all cars.
  • Regenerative braking and electrification would be used to charge the batteries.
  • I think, I would put the hydrogen fuel cells in Alstom’s position on the rear part of the roof of the driver cars.
  • There would also be a need to add a pantograph, so that could go on any convenient car!
  • I do wonder, if the middle-car could be developed into a mini-locomotive with a walkway through, like the PowerCar in a Stadler Class 755 train.

There’s certainly a lot of possibilities on how to layout the various components.

Passenger Capacity

The five-car hydrogen-powered Aventra, I have detailed is effectively a four-car Aventra like a Class 710 train, with a fifth hydrogen tank car in the middle.

So the passenger capacity will be the same as a four-car Aventra.

The Class 710 trains have longitudinal seating, as these pictures of the interior show.

They have a capacity of 189 sitting and 489 standing passengers or a total capacity of 678.

Greater Anglia’s Class 720 trains have transverse seating and a five-car train holds 540 sitting and 145 standing passengers.

Multiplying by 0.8 to adjust for the hydrogen car and the capacity would be 432 sitting and116 standing passengers or a total capacity of 548.

Seats in various UK four-car electric multiple units are as follows.

  • Class 319 – 319
  • Class 321 – 309
  • Class 375 – 236
  • Class 379 – 209
  • Class 380 – 265
  • Class 385 – 273
  • Class 450 – 264

It would appear that a five-car hydrogen-powered Aventra, with one car taken up by a hydrogen tank and other electrical equipment can carry a more than adequate number of passengers.

Extra Passenger Capacity

Suppose to eliminate diesel on a route, a five-car Class 802 train were to be replaced with a six-car hydrogen-powered Aventra, which contained five passenger cars

  • The capacity of the Class 802 train is 326 seats, which still compares well with the five-car hydrogen-powered Aventra.
  • The extra car would increase the passenger capacity.

As Aventras are of a Plug-and-Play design, extra cars would be added as needed.

Maximum Length

Aventras tend to have lots of powered axles, as this improves accelerations and braking, so I suspect that trains with four or five cars on either side of the hydrogen car would be possible.

Nine-car trains could be ideal for replacing trains like Class 800 bi-mode trains to reduce the number of diesel trains. The Class 800 trains would then be converted to Class 801 electric trains or a new battery/electric version.

A Walkway Through The Hydrogen Car

These pictures show the walkway through the PowerCar in a Stadler Class 755 train.

I’m sure that an elegant design of walkway can be created.

In-Cab Digital Signalling

It goes without saying, that the train would be capable of being fitted with in-cab digital signalling.

Performance On Electrification

Bombardier have stated that they have a design for a 125 mph bi-mode Aventra. They might even have designed the trains to achieve 140 mph running on routes with full in-cab digital signalling.

These electrified lines are likely to be able to support 140 mph running with full in-cab digital signalling.

  • East Coast Main Line
  • Great Western Main Line
  • Midland Main Line
  • West Coast Main Line

As these hydrogen-powered Aventras may need to run on these high speed electrified lines, I would design the trains so that they could achieve the design speed of these lines, when using the electrification.

This would enable the trains to keep out of the way of the numerous 140 mph electric expresses.

Performance On Batteries And Hydrogen

Hydrogen-powered trains are essentially battery-electric trains, which have the ability to top up the batteries using hydrogen power.

I would suspect that a well-designed hydrogen/battery/electric train should have the same maximum speed on all modes of power, subject to the capabilities of the track and having sufficient power in the batteries to accelerate as required.

Conclusion

I think it would be possible to design a hydrogen/battery/electric train based on an Aventra with the following characteristics.

  • Up to eleven cars
  • A hydrogen car with a hydrogen tank in the middle of the train.
  • Ability to use 25 KVAC overhead or 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
  • In-cab digital signalling
  • 140 mph running where the route allows.
  • Regenerative braking to batteries.
  • Sufficient range on hydrogen power.
  • Sophisticated computer control, that swaps mode automatically.

The train would be possible to run the following routes, if configured appropriately.

  • Kings Cross and Aberdeen
  • Kings Cross and Inverness
  • Kings Cross and Cleethorpes via Lincoln and Grimsby
  • Kings Cross and Redcar via Middlesbrough
  • Kings Cross and Norwich via Cambridge
  • Paddington and Penzance
  • Paddington and Swansea
  • Waterloo and Exeter via Basingstoke

Some routes might need a section of fill in electrification, but most routes should be possible with a hydrogen fill-up at both ends.

 

 

 

March 9, 2020 Posted by | Business, Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Alstom Coradia iLint Passes Tests

The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Railway Age.

This is the first paragraph.

Alstom has performed 10 days of tests of the Coradia iLint hydrogen fuel cell train—the world’s first passenger train powered by hydrogen fuel cells—on the 65-kilometer line between Groningen and Leeuwarden to the north of the Netherlands.

These details of the tests were given.

  • No passengers were carried.
  • The tests were done at night.
  • A mobile filling station was used.
  • The train ran up to a speed of 140 kph.

As green hydrogen was used, the tests were zero carbon.

The Test Route

This map clipped from Wikipedia, shows the Groningen and Leeuwarden route, used for the tests.

Note.

  1. It appears to be only single-track.
  2. It is roughly 65 kilometres long.
  3. There are eight intermediate stops.

Checking the timetable, the service seems to be two or three trains per hour (tph)

Hydrogen Trains Could Go All The Way To Germany

In From Groningen To Leer By Train, I took a train and a bus from Groningen in The Netherlands to Leer in Germany and eventually on to Bremen Hbf. The route is not complete at the moment, as a freighter demolished the rail bridge.

Once the bridge is rebuilt, a hydrogen-powered train, which could also use the catenary in the area could travel from West of Leeuwarden to possibly as far as Bremen and Hamburg.

It is interesting to note, that Alstom’s hydrogen-powered trains for the UK, which are called Breeze and are currently being converted from British Rail-era Class 321 electric trains, will not lose their ability to use the overhead electrification.

A train with that dual capability would be ideal for the Dutch and German rail network in this area, which is partially electrified.l

March 8, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Northern’s Hydrogen Plans

The title of this post, is half of the title of an article in the March 2020 Edition of Modern Railways.

I discussed Northern’s possible hydrogen trains in Fuelling The Change On Teesside Rails.

This new article gives a lot more detail in this paragraph.

Northern has submitted planning documents, with the preferred site for a maintenance and fuelling facility understood to be at Lackenby. As hydrogen units would have a more limited operating range than DMUs (around 600 miles), they would likely need to return to the depot every night. Northern believes the routes radiating from Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe, Bishop Auckland and Saltburn are ideal candidates for the operation, as they are unlikely to be electrified and can be operated as a self contained network using hydrogen trains. A fleet of around a dozen Breeze units is planned, with the possibility they could also operate services to Whitby and on the Durham Coast Line to Newcastle. Planning documentation suggested the first hydrogen train would be ready for testing in June 2021, but this was based on construction of the depot facility beginning in January this year.

It all sounds very comprehensive.

Capacity Comparison With The iLint

The Modern Railways article says this about the capacity of the Breeze.

A three-car Breeze is expected to have a similar passenger capacity to a two-car DMU.

A two-car Class 156 train, which currently work the lines around Middlesbrough, was built with 163 seats and the Lint 54, on which the iLint is based, has between 150 and 180 seats.

It will be interesting to see how actual seat numbers compare between the Breeze and iLint.

February 28, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , | 2 Comments

First Hydrogen Train Arrives In The Netherlands

The title of this post is the same as that on this article of Railway News.

This is the introductory paragraph.

On 26 February the first hydrogen train arrived in the Netherlands. The Dutch rail infrastructure manager ProRail led the train into the country from Germany via Oldenzaal and then ran it on track to its provisional parking facility in Leeuwarden.

The article also says this.

The public will also have the chance to view the hydrogen train on 7 March, when it will be at Groningen Station between noon and 4pm.

I won’t be going, as I’ve ridden the train in Germany as I reported in My First Ride In An Alstom Coradia iLint.

These trains are technology demonstrators at best and greenwash at worst.

Hydrogen power needs a radical new design of  train and not a quick rehash of an existing design.

The problem is that the Coradia iLint is based on a diesel mechanical train and it has a lot of transmission noise.

You get less noise and vibration in the average British-Rail era diesel multiple unit like a Class 156 train. But then these are diesel hydraulic, have steel-bodies and built thirty years ago.

When I first saw the iLint, I looked for the pantograph, as these trains run on partially-electrified lines and hydrogen-powered trains are effectively electric trains with a different source of electricity.

To be fair to Alstom, their development of the hydrogen-powered Class 321 Breeze, will also be able to use a pantograph, but as this visualisation shows, the hydrogen tanks take up a lot of space.

Hydrogen might find itself a place on the railways, but I suspect that battery-electric will always be better for passenger trains.

  • Battery technology will improve faster than hydrogen technology.
  • Innovators will find better ways of fast-charging trains.
  • A battery-electric train will match the daily range of a hydrogen-powered train, using innovative dynamic charging.
  • Many modern electric trains can be converted into battery-electric ones.

I suspect though, the mathematics will be different for freight locomotives.

February 28, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mule Trains Between Liverpool And Norwich

I have done two trips to Liverpool in the last week.

On Saturday, I saw this collection of one-car Class 153 trains with a two-car Class 156 train thrown in.

They were forming one of East Midlands Railway‘s Liverpool and Norwich services.

And then yesterday, I had to travel between Liverpool and Sheffield and this was the collection of trains that took me.

So what was it like?

It started badly, with the driver announcing that because of the late arrival due to an undisclosed problem with the incoming train, that we would be leaving ten minutes after the planned departure time of 1551. He also indicated that our late departure meant that we would be stuck behind one of Northern’s services.

In the end, despite the gloomy faces of passengers we left twelve minutes late at 1603.

It was a bit like one of those classic films, where an ancient train escapes in the nick of time, with a lot of important and assorted passengers.

The asthmatic Cummins diesels under the train could be heard straining.

  • But the driver was at the top of his game and the train was running smoothly towards Manchester at close to 75 mph, which is the maximum speed of a Class 153 train.
  • At Manchester Piccadilly, the driver had pulled back two minutes.
  • There were obviously, no problems on the Dove Valley Line and the driver pulled back another minute before Sheffield, to arrive nine minutes late.

Looking at Real Time Trains, the train ran well until March (The place, not the month!), but there was some form of delay there and sadly it was thirty-four minutes late into Norwich.

The Train Was Clean

I should say there was nothing wrong with the train except for its design and age. It was also as clean as you can get one of these trains. The toilet, that I used was better than many I’ve used on trains and worked as it should.

Customer Service

East Midlands Railway had loaded a trolley and a steward and in the two hours I was on the train, he came through twice. The only problem for me, that he had no card machine, but I did find a fiver in my briefcase.

At least it was very drinkable. Even, if I hate those plastic tubs of milk, as they are difficult to open with one good hand.

Where Did Two Cars Go?

I had been fairly certain, that we had started with six cars, but we only arrived in Sheffield with four Class 153 trains.

I suspect that the trouble that delayed the train, concerned two cars and these were left on the naughty step or the end of Platform 6 in Liverpool Lime Street station.

Being Fair To East Midlands Railway

This service used to be run by a four-car formation of two-car Class 158 trains, but these have been causing trouble lately and they will be replaced by Class 170 trains cascaded from other operators.

But because of late arrivals of new trains the much better Class 170 trains haven’t arrived yet.

The driver, steward and other staff did a good job and I feel that the steward enjoyed it. No-one was abusive and stories were just exchanged, as we climbed across the Pennines in what by Sheffield was a very crowded train.

Class 153 trains may have been built as a stop-gap for short branch lines, but you couldn’t fault their performance.

Unless of course, one caused the delay at March, by expiring in a cloud of blue smoke.

Other Observations

These are other observations.

Scheduled Journey Times

On my journey the scheduled times were

  • Liverpool and Manchester Oxford Road – forty-seven minutes.
  • Liverpool and Sheffield – one hour and forty-eight minutes.
  • Liverpool and Nottingham – two hour and forty minutes.
  • Liverpool and Norwich – Five hours and twenty-seven minutes

The train considering the configuration, nearly achieved them.

It’s probably the motoring equivalent of doing the journey in a Morris Minor!

The Nine Stops Were Executed Perfectly

There were nine stops on my journey and eight took less than a minute, with Sheffield taking four, as the driver and crew changed.

A modern train like a Class 755 train, with fast acceleration and level boarding could probably save up to three minutes a time on each stop.

The Route Is A Genuine 75 mph Railway In Good Condition

I was checking the speed of the train on parts of the route and the driver had his motley crew at a steady 75 mph for long periods.

  • The train was riding well, indicating to me, that both trains and track were in reasonably good condition.
  • Note that 75 mph is the maximum speed of a Class 153 train.
  • The train recovered three minutes on the late departure from Liverpool.

I can see a faster train and improvements to the route, some of which are underway, could reduce the journey time by a few minutes.

Could Merseyrail’s New Class 777 Trains Work To The Bay Platform At Oxford Road?

Merseyrail’s new Class 777 trains will have the following performance.

  • A possible range of perhaps 40-50 miles on battery power.
  • An operating speed of 75 mph.
  • An acceleration rate of 1.1 m/sec², which is faster than a Class 153 or Class 170 train.
  • Fast stops due to regenerative braking, fast acceleration and level boarding.

As Liverpool Lime Street to Oxford Road is thirty four miles of which nine is electrified, I suspect that these new trains could extend Merseyrail’s Northern Line service from Hunts Cross to Manchester Oxford Road.

  • Two trains per hour (tph), but I’m sure four tph would transform the area.
  • I doubt any track modifications would be needed.

But would Liverpool and Manchester be able to sort out the local politics?

The Future Of The Liverpool And Norwich Service

This service will probably be spilt into two services.

  • Liverpool Lime Street and Derby, which could be run by TransPennine Express or Northern Trains.
  • Derby and Norwich, which would be run by East Midlands Railway.

As to the trains to be used, consider the following.

The Liverpool and Derby leg would probably need six trains, with the same number needed for Derby and Norwich, or twelve in total.

Currently, eleven or twelve is needed for the longer service.

Sections of the route like through Manchester and between Grantham and Peterborough are electrified.

There are even sections of route, where 125 mph running is possible.

Run reliably to an hourly frequency, I think that this service could attract passengers, especially, as it would serve Derby and extra stops like Ilkeston and Warrington West could be added.

This leads to the following trains being possibilities.

Class 802 trains – 125 mph bi-mode train of which TransPennine Express have 19 trains.

Class 185 trains – 100 mph diesel train of which TransPennine Express have 51 trains.

Class 804 trains – 125 mph bi-mode train of which East Midlands Railway have ordered 33 trains.

Class 755 trains – 100 mph diesel train of which Greater Anglia have 38 trains, which are based at Norwich.

Alstom Breeze hydrogen trains could be ideal for Liverpool and Derby.

Note.

  1. Greater Anglia and East Midlands Railway are both subsidiaries of Abellio.
  2. Developments of Class 755 trains could include battery and hydrogen versions.
  3. I suspect that 125 mph trains may be required for both legs, to maximise capacity on the East Coast Main Line and Midland Main Line.

January 29, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Fuelling The Change On Teesside Rails

The title of this post, is the same as that of an article in Edition 895 of RAIL Magazine.

The article is based on an interview with Ben Houchen, who is the Tees Valley Mayor.

Various topics are covered.

Hydrogen-Powered Local Trains

According to the article, the Tees Valley produces fifty percent of UK hydrogen and the area is already secured investment for fuelling road vehicles with hydrogen.

So the Tees Valley Combined Authority (TVCA) is planning to convert some routes to hydrogen.

The Trains

Ten hydrogen-powered trains will be purchased or more likely leased, as the trains will probably be converted from redundant electrical multiple units, owned by leasing companies like Eversholt Rail and Porterbrook.

The RAIL article says that the first train could be under test in 2021 and service could be started in 2022.

That would certainly fit the development timetables for the trains.

Lackenby Depot

A depot Will Be Created At Lackenby.

  • The site is between Middlesbrough and Redcar.
  • It already has rail and hydrogen connections.

This Google Map shows the area.

Note the disused Redcar British Steel station, which is still shown on the map.

I remember the area from the around 1970, when I used to catch the train at the now-closed Grangetown station, after visits to ICI’s Wilton site. It was all fire, smoke, smells and pollution.

Darlington Station

Darlington station will also be remodelled to allow more services to operate without conflicting with the East Coast Main Line.

Wikipedia says this under Future for Darlington station.

As part of the Tees Valley Metro, two new platforms were to be built on the eastern edge of the main station. There were to be a total of four trains per hour, to Middlesbrough and Saltburn via the Tees Valley Line, and trains would not have to cross the East Coast Main Line when the new platforms would have been built. The Tees Valley Metro project was, however, cancelled.

It does sound from reading the RAIL article, that this plan is being reinstated.

Would services between Bishop Auckland and Saltburn, use these new platforms?

Saltburn And Bishops Auckland Via Middlesbrough and Darlington

Currently, the service is two trains per hour (tph) between Saltburn and Darlington, with one tph extending to Bishop Auckland.

  • I estimate that the current service needs five trains.
  • If a two tph service were to be run on the whole route, an extra train would be needed.
  • I suspect, the limitations at Darlington station, stop more trains being run all the way to Bishops Auckland.

I could also see extra stations being added to this route.

The Mayor is talking of running a service as frequent as six or eight tph.

These numbers of trains, will be needed for services of different frequencies between Saltburn and Darlington.

  • 2 tph – 6 trains
  • 4 tph – 12 trains
  • 6 tph – 18 trains
  • 8 tph – 24 trains

As the London Overground, Merseyrail and Birmingham’s Cross-City Line, find four tph a more than adequate service, I suspect that should be provided.

After updating, Darlington station, should be able to handle the following.

  • Up to six tph terminating in one of the new Eastern platforms, without having to cross the East Coast Main Line.
  • Two tph between Saltburn and Bishops Auckland could use the other platform in both directions.

I would suspect that the design would see the two platforms sharing an island platform.

Alternatively, trains could continue as now.

  • Terminating trains could continue to use Platform 2!
  • Two tph between Saltburn and Bishops Auckland stopping in Platforms 1 (Eastbound) and 4 (Westbound)

This would avoid any infrastructure changes at Darlington station, but terminating trains at Darlington would still have to cross the Southbound East Coast Main Line.

If the frequencies were as follows.

  • 4 tph – Saltburn and Darlington
  • 2 tph – Saltburn and Bishop Auckland

This would require fourteen trains and give a six tph service between Saltburn and Darlington.

Ten trains would allow a two tph service on both routes.

There would be other services using parts of the same route, which would increase the frequency.

Hartlepool And The Esk Valley Line Via Middlesbrough

This is the other route through the area and was part of the cancelled Tees Valley Metro.

  • Service is basically one tph, with six trains per day (tpd) extending to Whitby.
  • A second platform is needed at Hartlepool station.
  • There is a proposal to add a Park-and-Ride station between Nunthorpe and Great Ayton stations.
  • One proposal from Modern Railways commentator; Alan Williams, was to simplify the track at Battersby station to avoid the reverse.
  • Currently, trains between Whitby and Middlesbrough are timetabled for around 80-100 minutes.
  • Hartlepool and Middlesbrough takes around twenty minutes.

Substantial track improvements are probably needed to increase the number of trains and reduce the journey times between Middlesbrough and Whitby.

But I believe that an hourly service between Hartlepool and Whitby, that would take under two hours or four hours for a round trip, could be possible.

This would mean that the hourly Hartlepool and Whitby service would need four trains.

Providing the track between Nunthorpe and |Whitby could be improved to handle the traffic, this would appear to be a very feasible proposition.

Nunthorpe And Hexham Via Newcastle

There is also an hourly service between Nunthorpe and Hexham, via Middlesbrough, Stockton, Hartlepool, Sunderland and Newcastle, there would be two tph.

  • It takes around two hours and twenty minutes.
  • I estimate that five trains would be needed for the service.
  • I travelled once between Newcastle and James Cook Hospital in the Peak and the service was busy.
  • A new station is being built at Horden, which is eight minutes North of Hartlepool.
  • The service could easily access the proposed fuelling station at Lackenby.
  • It would reduce carbon emissions in Newcastle and Sunderland stations..

Surely, if hydrogen power is good enough for the other routes, then it is good enough for this route.

Hartlepool Station

Hartlepool Station could become a problem, as although it is on a double track railway, it only has one through platform, as these pictures from 2011 show.

Consider.

  • There is no footbridge, although Grand Central could pay for one
  • There is a rarely-used bay platform to turn trains from Middlesbrough, Nunthorpe and Whitby.

This Google Map shows the cramped site.

The final solution could mean a new station.

Nunthorpe Park-And-Ride

This Google Map shows Nunthorpe with thje bEsk Valley Line running through it.

Note.

  1. Gypsy Lane and Nunthorpe stations.
  2. The dual-carriageway A171 Guisborough by-pass running East-West, that connects in the East to Whitby and Scarborough.
  3. The A1043 Nunthorpe by-pass that connects to roads to the South.

Would where the A1043 crosses the Esk Valley Line be the place for the Park-and-Ride station?

The new station could have a passing loop, that could also be used to turn back trains.

Battersby Station

Alan Williams, who is Chairman of the Esk Valley Railway Development Company, is quoted in the RAIL article as saying.

If you’re going to spend that sort of money we’d much rather you spent it on building a curve at Battersby to cut out the reversal there.

Williams gives further reasons.

  • Battersby is the least used station on the line.
  • It’s in the middle of nowhere.
  • The curve would save five minutes on the overall journey.

This Google Map shows Battersby station and the current track layout.

Note.

  1. The line to Middlesbrough goes through the North-West corner of the map.
  2. The line to Whitby goes through the North-East corner of the map.

There would appear to be plenty of space for a curve that would cut out the station.

LNER To Teesside

LNER, the Government and the TVCA are aiming to meet a target date of the Second Quarter of 2021 for a direct London and Middlesbrough service.

Middlesbrough Station

Middlesbrough Station will need to be updated and according to the RAIL article, the following work will be done.

  • A new Northern entrance with a glass frontage.
  • A third platform.
  • Lengthening of existing platforms to take LNER’s Class 800 trains.

This Google Map shows the current layout of the station.

From this map it doesn’t look to be the most difficult of stations, on which to fit in the extra platform and the extensions.

It should also be noted that the station is Grade II Listed, was in good condition on my last visit and has a step-free subway between the two sides of the station.

Journey Times

I estimate that a Kings Cross and Middlesbrough time via Northallerton would take aroud two hours and fifty minutes.

This compares with other journey times in the area to London.

  • LNER – Kings Cross and Darlington – two hours and twenty-two minutes
  • Grand Central – Kings Cross and Eaglescliffe – two hours and thirty-seven minutes.

I also estimate that timings to Redcar and Saltburn would be another 14 and 28 minutes respectively.

Frequencies

Currently, LNER run between three and four tph between Kings Cross and Darlington, with the competing Grand Central service between Kings Cross and Eaglescliffe having a frequency of five trains per day (tpd).

LNER have also started serving secondary destinations in the last month or so.

  • Harrogate, which has a population of 75.000, is served with a frequency of six tpd.
  • Lincoln, which has a population of 130,000 is now served with a frequency of six tpd.

Note that the RAIL article, states that the Tees Valley has a population of 750,000.

I feel that Middlesbrough will be served by a frequency of at least five tpd and probably six to match LNER’s new Harrogate and Lincoln services.

Will LNER’s Kings Cross and York Service Be Extended To Middlesbrough?

Cirrently , trains that leave Kings Cross at six minutes past the hour end up in Lincoln or York

  • 0806 – Lincoln
  • 0906 – York
  • 1006 – Lincoln
  • 1106 – York
  • 1206 -Lincoln
  • 1306 – York
  • 1406 – Lincoln
  • 1506 – York
  • 1606 – Lincoln
  • 1906 -Lincoln

It looks to me that a pattern is being developed.

  • Could it be that the York services will be extended to Middlesbrough in 2021?
  • Could six Middlesbrough trains leave Kings Cross at 0706, 0906, 1106, 1306, 1506 and 1706 or 1806?
  • York would still have the same number of trains as it does now!

LNER certainly seem to be putting together a comprehensive timetable.

Could Middlesbrough Trains Split At Doncaster Or York?

I was in Kings Cross station, this afternoon and saw the 1506 service to York, go on its way.

The train was formed of two five-car trains, running as a ten-car train.

If LNER employ spitting and joining,, as some of their staff believe, there are surely, places, where this can be done to serve more destinations, without requiring more paths on the East Coast Main Line.

  • Splitting at Doncaster could serve Hull, Middlesborough and York.
  • Splitting at York could serve Scarborough, Middlesborough and Sunderland.

Scarborough might be a viable destination, as the town has a population of over 100,000.

Onward To Redcar And Saltburn

One of the changes in the December 2019 timetable change, was the extension of TransPennine Express’s Manchester Airport and Middlesbrough service to Redcar Central station.

The RAIL article quotes the Mayor as being pleased with this, although he would have preferred the service to have gone as far as Saltburn, which is a regional growth point for housing and employment.

But the extra six miles would have meant the purchase of another train.

Redcar Central Station

This Google Map shows Redcar Central station and its position in the town.

It is close to the sea front and the High Street and there appears to be space for the stabling of long-distance trains to Manchester Airport and perhaps, London.

TransPennine seem to be using their rakes of Mark 5A coaches on Redcar services, rather than their Class 802 trains, which are similar to LNER’s Azumas.

Surely, there will be operational advantages, if both train operating companies ran similar trains to Teesside.

Saltburn Station

Saltburn station is the end of the line.

This Google Map shows its position in the town.

Unlike Redcar Central station, there appears to be very little space along the railway and turning back trains might be difficult.

There may be good economic reasons to use Saltburn as a terminal, but operationally, it could be difficult.

Will Redcar And Saltburn See Services To and From London?

Given that both towns will likely see much improved services to Middlesbrough, with at least a service of four tph, I think it will be unlikely.

But we might see the following.

  • LNER using Redcar as a terminus, as TransPennine Express do, as it might ease operations.
  • An early morning train to London and an evening train back from the capital, which is stabled overnight at Redcar.
  • TransPennine Express using Class 802 trains on their Redcar service for operational efficiency, as these trains are similar to LNER’s Azumas.

It would all depend on the passenger numbers.

A High-Frequency Service Between York And Teesside

After all the changes the service between York and Teesside will be as follows.

  • LNER will be offering a train virtually every two hours between York and Middlesbrough.
  • Grand Central will be offering a train virtually every two hours between York and Eaglescliffe, which is six miles from Middlesbrough.
  • TransPennine Express will have an hourly service between York and Redcar via Middlesbrough.
  • There will be between three and four tph between York and Darlington.

All services would connect to the hydrogen-powdered local services to take you all over Teesside.

Could this open up tourism without cars in the area?

Expansion Of The Hydrogen-Powered Train Network

Could some form of Hydrogen Hub be developed at Lackenby.

Alstom are talking of the hydrogen-powered Breeze trains having a range of over six hundred miles and possibly an operating speed of 100 mph, when using overhead electrification, where it is available.

In Breeze Hydrogen Multiple-Unit Order Expected Soon, I put together information from various articles and said this.

I am fairly certain, that Alstom can create a five-car Class 321 Breeze with the following characteristics.

  • A capacity of about three hundred seats.
  • A smaller three-car train would have 140 seats.
  • A near-100 mph top speed on hydrogen-power.
  • A 100 mph top speed on electrification.
  • A 1000 km range on hydrogen.
  • Regenerative braking to an on-board battery.
  • The ability to use 25 KVAC overhead and/or 750 VDC third rail electrification.

The trains could have the ability to run as pairs to increase capacity.

The distance without electrification to a selection of main stations in the North East from Lackenby is as follows.

  • Newcastle via Middlesbrough and Darlington – 21 miles
  • Newcastle via Middlesbrough and Durham Coast Line – 53 miles.
  • York via Northallerton – 27 miles
  • Doncaster via Northallerton and York – 27 miles
  • Leeds via Northallerton and York – 52 miles
  • Sheffield via Northallerton, York and Doncaster – 45 miles

I am assuming that the trains can use the electrification on the East Coast Main Line.

From these figures it would appear that hydrogen-powered trains stabled and refuelled at Lackenby could travel to Doncaster, Newcastle, Leeds, Sheffield or York before putting in a days work and still have enough hydrogen in the tank to return to Lackenby.

Several things would help.

  • As hydrogen-powered trains have a battery, with a battery range of thirty miles all these main stations could be reached on battery power, charging on the East Coast Main Line and at Lackenby.
  • Electrification between Darlington and Lackenby.
  • Electrification between Northallerton and Eaglescliffe.

I am fairly certain that a large proportion of the intensive network of diesel services in the North East of |England from Doncaster and Sheffield in the South to Newcastle in the North, can be replaced with hydrogen-powered trains.

  • Trains could go as far West as Blackpool North, Carlisle, Manchester Victoria, Preston and Southport.
  • Refueling could be all at Lackenby, although other refuelling points could increase the coverage and efficieny of the trains.
  • Green hydrogen could be produced by electrolysis from the massive offshore wind farms off the Lincolnshire Coast.
  • Hydrogen-powered trains would be ideal for re-opened routes like the proposed services from Newcastle to Blyth and Ashington.

The hydrogen-powered trains on Teesside could be the start of a large zero-carbon railway network.

The Alstom Breeze And The HydroFlex Would Only Be The Start

As I said earlier, the initial trains would be conversions of redundant British Rail-era electrical multiple units.

Thirty-year-old British Rail designs like the Class 319 and Class 321 trains based on the legendary Mark 3 carriages with its structural integrity and superb ride, may have been state-of-the-art in their day, but engineers can do better now.

  • Traction and regenerative braking systems are much more energy efficient.
  • Train aerodynamics and rolling resistance have improved, which means less energy is needed to maintain a speed.
  • Interior design and walk-through trains have increased capacity.
  • Crashworthiness has been improved.

Current Bombardier Aventras, Stadler Flirts or Siemens Desiros and CAF Civities are far removed from 1980s designs.

I can see a design for a hydrogen-powered train based on a modern design, tailored to the needs of operators being developed.

A place to start could be an electric CAF Class 331 train. or any one of a number of Aventras.

  • From the visualisation that Alstom have released of their Breeze conversion of a Class 321 train, I feel that to store enough hydrogen, a large tank will be needed and perhaps the easiest thing to do at the present time would be to add an extra car containing the hydrogen tank, the fuel cells and the batteries.
  • Alstom have stated they’re putting the fuel cells on the roof and the batteries underneath the train.

Although, it is not a hydrogen train, Stadler have developed the Class 755 train, with a power car in the middle of the train.

Stadler’s approach of a power car, must be working as they have received an order for a hydrogen-powered version of their popular Flirts, which I wrote about in MSU Research Leads To North America’s First Commercial Hydrogen-Powered Train.

I think we can be certain, that because of the UK loading gauge, that a hydrogen-powered train will be longer by about a car, than the equivalent electric train.

I can see a certain amount of platform lengthening being required. But this is probably easier and less costly than electrification to achieve zero-carbon on a route.

Batteries can be distributed under all cars of the train, anywhere there is space., But I would suspect that fuel cells must be in the same car as the hydrogen tank, as I doubt having hydrogen pipes between cars would be a good idea.

Alstom have resorted to putting hydrogen tanks and fuel cells in both driving cars and they must have sound reasons for this.

Perhaps, it is the only way, they can get the required power and range.

As I understand it, the Alstom Breeze draws power from three sources.

  • The electrification if the route is electrified.
  • The electricity generated by regenerative braking.
  • The hydrogen system produces electricity on demand, at the required level.

Energy is stored in the batteries, which power the train’s traction motors and internal systems.

The electrical components needed for the train are getting smaller and lighter and I feel that it should be possible to put all the power generation and collection into a power car, that is somewhere near the middle of the train. Stadler’s power car is short at under seven metres, but there is probably no reason, why it couldn’t be the twenty metres, that are typical of UK trains.

Suppose you took a four-car version of CAF’s Class 331 train, which has two driver cars either side of a pantograph car and a trailer car.

This has 284 seats and by comparison with the three-car version the trailer car has eighty. As the pantograph car is also a trailer, I’ll assume that has eighty seats too! Until I know better!

Replacing the pantograph car with a hydrogen car, which would be unlikely to have seats, would cut the seats to 204 seats, but a second trailer would bring it back up to 284 seats.

I actually, think the concept of a hydrogen car in the middle of a four-car electric train could work.

  • The five-car hydrogen train would have the same capacity as the four-car electric version.
  • The train would need an updated software system and some rewiring. Bombardier achieved this quickly and easily with the train for the Class 379 BEMU trial.
  • There are several types of four-car electrical multiple units, that could possibly be converted to five-car hydrogen-powered multiple units.
  • Some five-car electrical multiple units might also be possible to be converted.

Obviously, if an existing train can be adapted for hydrogen, this will be a more cost effective approach.

Conclusion

Overall, the plans for rail improvements on Teesside seem to be good ones.

I’m looking forward to riding LNER to Teesside and then using the network of hydrogen-powered trains to explore the area in 2022.

My only worry, is that, if the network is successful, the many tourists visiting York will surely increase the numbers of day visitors to Whitby.

This is a paragraph from the RAIL article.

Alan Williams says that the EVRDC’s long-term objective is to see the Esk Valley served at intervals of roughly every two hours, equating to eight return trains per day, but with Northern and NYMR services sharing the single line between Grosmont and Whitby, introducing further Middlesbrough trains during the middle of the day, brings the conversation back to infrastructure.

He goes on to detail what is needed.

January 8, 2020 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

RTRI Tests Fuel Cell Multiple Unit

The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.

This is the first two paragraphs.

JAPAN: Railway Technical Research Institute has started test running with a prototype multiple-unit which can work as a conventional or battery EMU or using a fuel cell powerpack.

Converted from an older 1·5 kV DC EMU, the test train comprises a 34 tonne motor car and 29 tonne trailer vehicle. Each car is 19 760 mm long and 2 950 mm wide. It is able to operate as a conventional EMU when running under overhead catenary, or as a battery unit off-wire, with or without the fuel cell in use to trickle-charge the batteries.

These are my thoughts.

The Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

The article says this about the hydrogen fuel cells.

Two polymer electrolyte fuel cells are contained in an underfloor module 2 600 mm long, 2 655 mm wide and 720 mm high, which weighs 1·9 tonnes.

The fuel cells are stated to have a rating of 90 kW at 200 to 350 V.

To get a handle on how powerful the hydrogen fuel cells are, these are some characteristics of a British Rail Class 456 train.

  • It is a two-car electric multiple unit.
  • It weighs 72.5 tonnes.
  • It has an operating speed of 75 mph.
  • It is a 750 VDC train.
  • It has a power output of 373 kW

I wouldn’t think that the two trains are that far apart in performance and capacity.

The Japanese train has a total power output from the fuel cells of 180 kW, but it can also use power from the battery.

I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that the Japanese fuel cell and battery combination was powerful enough to power the British train.

I also think, they would fit underneath a typical British train like the Class 456 train, which has a width of 2800 mm.

The Hydrogen Tanks

The article says this about the hydrogen tanks and the range.

Hydrogen is stored in four high pressure cylinders at 35 MPa, with a capacity of 180 litres, giving a range of 72 km.

The mass of the hydrogen in the tank according to this calculator on the Internet is around 4.3 Kg.

In How Much Energy Can Extracted From a Kilogram Of Hydrogen?, I showed that a typical fuel cell can produce 16 kWh from a kilogram of hydrogen.

So the hydrogen tank can be considered a battery holding 4.3 * 16 = 68.8 kWh.

That doesn’t sound much, so perhaps the capacity figure is for a single tank. In that case the total for the train would be 275.2 kWh, which seems more in line with the battery size of Vivarail’s two-car battery prototype, which has 424 kWh.

Each tank would be something like 2500 mm long and 300 mm in diameter, if they were cylindrical. Double the diameter to 600 mm and the capacity would be over 700 litres.

The Battery

The article says the train has a 540 kW battery, which I think could be a misprint, as it would more likely be 540 kWh.

Performance

The article says this about the performance.

The four 95 kW traction motors provide a maximum acceleration of 0·7 m/s2, and an electric braking rate of 0·86 m/s2

It also says that the range is 72 km.

My observations on the performance and traction system are.

  • The traction power of the two-car Japanese train at 380 kW is very similar to the 373 kW of the similar-sized British Class 456 train
  • The acceleration rate is very typical of an electric multiple unit.
  • Bracking is regenerative and used to charge the batteries. As it should!

This leads me to conclude, that this is a train, that could run a short public service, just as the Class 379 BEMU demonstrator did in 2015.

Thoughts About Range

The range is quoted at 72 kilometres (forty five miles.) This figure is unusual in that it is very precise, so perhaps it’s the Japanese way to give an exact figure, whereas we might say around or over seventy kilometres.

Applying my trusty formula of three kWh per vehicle-mile for cruising gives a energy requirement of 270 kWh for the full range, which is close to the four-tank energy capacity of 275.2 kWh.

Comparison With Alstom’s Breeze

Alstom are building a hydsrogen-powered version of a Class 321 train, which they have named Breeze.

Like the Japanese train, this is a effectively two-car train with respect to capacity as large hydrogen tanks to give a thousand kilometre range are installed.

So do the developers of both trains feel that a hydrogen-powered train to replace two- and three-car diesel multiple units is the highest priority?

Conclusion

If nothing else, it seems the Japanese have designed a two-car electric multiple unit, that has the following characteristics.

  • Practical size of two-cars.
  • Most equipment underneath the train.
  • Useful range.
  • Acceleration and braking in line with modern units.
  • Regenerative braking.
  • Ability to work on overhead, battery and hydrogen power.

I am led to the conclusion, that once their research is finished, the Japanese could design a very practical hydrogen-powered train for production in the required numbers.

 

 

 

September 7, 2019 Posted by | Transport | , , , | Leave a comment

Could A Battery- Or Hydrogen-Powered Freight Locomotive Borrow A Feature Of A Steam Locomotive?

Look at these pictures of the steam locomotive; Oliver Cromwell at Kings Cross station.

Unlike a diesel or electric locomotive, most powerful steam locomotives have a tender behind, to carry all the coal and water.

The Hydrogen Tank Problem

One of the problems with hydrogen trains for the UK’s small loading gauge is that it is difficult to find a place for the hydrogen tank.

The picture is a visualisation of the proposed Alstom Breeze conversion of a Class 321 train.

  • There is a large hydrogen tank between the driving compartment and the passengers.
  • The passenger capacity has been substantially reduced.
  • The train will have a range of several hundred miles on a full load of hydrogen.

The Alstom Breeze may or may not be a success, but it does illustrate the problem of where to put the large hydrogen tank needed.

In fact the problem is worse than the location and size of the hydrogen tank, as the hydrogen fuel cells and the batteries are also sizeable components.

An Ideal Freight Locomotive

The Class 88 locomotive, which has recently been introduced into the UK, is a successful modern locomotive with these power sources.

  • 4 MW using overhead 25 KVAC overhead electrication.
  • 0.7 MW using an onboard diesel engine.

Stadler are now developing the Class 93 locomotive, which adds batteries to the power mix.

The ubiquitous Class 66 locomotive has a power of  nearly 2.5 MW.

But as everybody knows, Class 66 locomotives come with a lot of noise, pollution, smell and a substantial carbon footprint.

To my mind, an ideal locomotive must be able to handle these freight tasks.

  • An intermodal freight train between Felixstowe and Manchester.
  • An intermodal freight train between Southampton and Leeds.
  • A work train for Network Rail
  • A stone train between the Mendips and London.

The latter is probably the most challenging, as West of Newbury, there is no electrification.

I also think, that locomotives must be able to run for two hours or perhaps three,  on an independent power source.

  • Independent power sources could be battery, diesel, hydrogen, or a hybrid design
  • This would enable bridging the many significant electrification gaps on major freight routes.

I feel that an ideal locomotive would need to meet the following.

  • 4 MW when running on a line electrified with either 25 KVAC overhead or 750 VDC third-rail.
  • 4 MW for two hours, when running on an independent power source.
  • Ability to change from electric to independent power source at speed.
  • 110 mph operating speed.

This would preferably be without diesel.

Electric-Only Version

Even running without the independent power source, this locomotive should be able to haul a heavy intermodal freight train between London and Glasgow on the fully-electrified West Coast Main Line.

I regularly see freight trains pass along the North London Line, that could be electric-hauled, but there is a polluting Class 66 on the front.

Is this because there is a shortage of quality electric locomotives? Or electric locomotives with a Last Mile capability, that can handle the routes that need it?

If we have to use pairs of fifty-year-old Class 86 locomotives, then I suspect there are not enough electric freight locomotives.

Batteries For Last Mile Operation

Stadler have shown, in the design of the Class 88 locomotive, that in a 4 MW electric locomotive, there is still space to fit a heavy diesel engine.

I wonder how much  battery capacity could be installed in a UK-sized 4 MW electric locomotive, based on Stadler’s UK Light design.

Would it be enough to give the locomotive a useful Last Mile capability?

In Thoughts On A Battery Electric Class 88 Locomotive On TransPennine Routes, I estimated that a Class 88 locomotive could replace the diesel engine with a battery with a battery capacity of between 700 kWh and 1 MWh.

This would give about fifteen minutes at full power.

Would this be a useful range?

Probably not for heavy freight services, if you consider that a freight train leaving the Port of Felixstowe takes half-an-hour to reach the electrification at Ipswich.

But it would certainly be enough power to bring the heaviest freight train out of Felixstowe Port to Trimley.

If the Felixstowe Branch Line were to be at least partially electrified, then I’m sure a Class 88 locomotive with a battery instead of the diesel engine could bring the heaviest train to the Great Eastern Main Line.

  • Electrifying between Trimley and the Great Eastern Main Line should be reasonably easy, as much of the route has recently been rebuilt.
  • Electrifying Felixstowe Port would be very disruptive to the operation of the port.
  • Cranes and overhead wires don’t mix!

I wonder how many services to and from Felixstowe could be handled by an electric locomotive with a Last Five Miles-capability, if the Great Eastern Main Line electrification was extended a few miles along the Felixstowe Branch Line.

As an aside here, how many of the ports and freight interchanges are accessible to within perhaps five miles by electric haulage?

I believe that if we are going to decarbonise UK railways by 2040, then we should create electrified routes to within a few miles of all ports and freight interchanges.

Batteries For Traction

If batteries are to provide 4 MW power for two hours, they will need to have a capacity of 8 MWh.

In Thoughts On A Battery Electric Class 88 Locomotive On TransPennine Routes, I said this.

Traction batteries seem to have an energy/weight ratio of about 0.1kWh/Kg, which is increasing with time, as battery technology improves.

This means that a one tonne battery holds about 100 kWh.

So to hold 8 MWh or 8,000 kWh, there would be a need to be an 80 tonne battery using today’s technology.

A Stadler Class 88 locomotive weighs 86 tonnes and has a 21.5 tonne axle load, so the battery would almost double the weight of the locomotive.

So to carry this amount of battery power, the batteries must be carried in a second vehicle, just like some steam locomotives have a tender.

But suppose Stadler developed another version of their UK Light locomotive, which was a four-axle locomotive that held the largest battery possible in the standard body.

  • It would effectively be a large battery locomotive.
  • It would share a lot of components with the Class 88 locomotive or preferably the faster Class 93 locomotive, which is capable of 110 mph.
  • It would have cabs on both  ends.
  • It might have a traction power of perhaps 2-2.5 MW on the battery.
  • It would have a pantograph for charging the battery if required and running under electrification.
  • It might be fitted with third rail equipment.

It could work independently or electrically-connected to the proposed 4 MW electric locomotive.

I obviously don’t know all the practicalities and economics of designing such a pair of locomotives, but I do believe that the mathematics say  that a 4 MW electric locomotive can be paired with a locomotive that has a large  battery.

  • It would have 4 MW, when running on electrified lines.
  • It would have up to 4 MW, when running on battery power for at least an hour.
  • ,It could use battery-power to bridge the gaps in the UK’s electrification network and for Last Mile operation.

A  very formidable zero-carbon locomotive-pair could be possible.

The battery locomotive could also work independently as a 2 MW battery-electric locomotive.

Hydrogen Power

I don’t see why a 4 MW electric locomotive , probably with up to 1,000 kWh of batteries couldn’t be paired with a second vehicle, that contained a hydrogen tank, a hydrogen fuel-cell.and some more batteries.

It’s all a question of design and mathematics.

It should also be noted, that over time the following will happen.

  • Hydrogen tanks will be able to store hydrogen at a greater pressure.
  • Fuel cells will have a higher power to weight ratio.
  • Batteries will have a higher power storage density.

These improvements will all help to make a viable hydrogen-powered generator or locomotive possible.

I also feel that the same hydrogen technology could be used to create a hydrogen-powered locomotive with this specfication.

  • Ability to use 25 KVAC overhead or 750 VDC third-rail electrification.
  • 2 MW on electrification.
  • 1.5 MW on hydrogen/battery power.
  • 100 mph capability.
  • Regenerative braking to batteries.
  • Ability to pull a rake of five or six coaches.

This could be a very useful lower-powered locomotive.

What About The Extra Length?

A Class 66 locomotive is 21.4 metres long and a Class 68 locomotive is 20.3 metres long. Network Rail is moving towards a maximum freight train length of 775 metres, so it would appear that another twenty metre long vehicle wouldn’t be large in the grand scheme of things.

Conclusion

My instinct says to be that it would be possible to design a family of locomotives or an electric locomotive with a second vehicle containing batteries or a hydrogen-powered electricity generator, that could haul freight trains on some of the partially-electrified routes in the UK.

 

 

 

July 28, 2019 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , | Leave a comment