Uckfield Third Rail Is NR Priority
The title of this post, is the same as that of an article in the April 2022 Edition of Modern Railways.
This is the first two paragraphs.
Electrification of the line between Hurst Green and Uckfield in East Sussex and the remodelling of East Croydon are the top Network Rail investment priorities south of the river, according to Southern Region Managing Director John Halsall. He told Modern Railways that third rail is now the preferred option for the Uckfield Line, as it would allow the route to use the pool of third-rail EMUs in the area. This is in preference to the plan involving overhead electrification and use of dual-voltage units put forward by then-Network Rail director Chris Gibb in his 2017 report (p66, September 2017 issue).
NR has put forward options for mitigating the safety risk involved with the third-rail system, including switching off the power in station areas when no trains are present and section isolation systems to protect track workers.
The Office of Road and Rail hasn’t given Network Rail’s scheme the OK yet, but as an Electrical Engineer, I believe that a safe system is possible.
Making Charging Safe At Greenford
This article on Ian Visits is entitled Ex-London Underground Trains To Be Tested On The Greenford Branch Line.
The article describes how despite using London Underground’s four-rail electrification, it will be possible with the right interlocks and systems to make such a system safe.
As Vivarail’s system is to be installed, it must already agree with all the Health and Safety rules.
A Safe System On The Uckfield Branch
Consider.
- The unelectrified section of the Uckfield Branch is twenty-five miles long.
- There are seven intermediate stations, with the longest section between any two stations under five miles.
- Trains stop in each station on the route.
- Trains appear to have a dwell time of about a minute in each station.
- A ten-car pair of Class 707 trains would be 203.2 metres long.
- All platforms have been lengthened for ten-car trains.
- A battery-electric train running along unelectrified track, is no more dangerous than a diesel train.
This picture shows some typical third-rail electrification at Kidbrooke station in South East London.
Note.
- The electrified rails are between the tracks.
- Gaps are possible to isolate sections of tracks.
- The third-rail is tapered, so that the third-rail shoes on the train can connect and disconnect easily.
Suppose you have a third-rail electric train with a range of say seven or eight miles on batteries.
Would it be possible to devise a safe electrified railway using this train and standard third-rail electrification with some safety modifications?
- The track in each station would be electrified in the normal way with the third-rail away from the platform.
- The length of electrification in each station would be a few metres shorter than the length of the ten-car pair of Class 707 trains.
- This would mean that the train would completely cover the electrification, when it stopped in the station.
- The third-rail electrification would only be switched on, when a train is stopped in the station and the right interlocks are engaged.
- Even if a passenger fell onto the tracks, they would probably be safe, unless they crawled through the wheels to the centre of the tracks.
- There would be no electrification between the stations, which would protect track workers and trespassers.
I believe that a safe system can be devised.
A train going through a station would do the following.
- Slowing down, the train would use regenerative braking, that helped to charge the batteries
- The train would stop in a station, so that it connected with and covered the third-rail.
- When the charging system recognised that a train was connected, it would start to charge the batteries.
- When all passengers had unloaded and loaded and the train was ready, the driver would stop the charging process.
- The train would move to the next station on battery power.
- Safety interlocks would stop the charging under various unsafe circumstances.
I believe that Siemens could have developed a charging system like this for their Class 707 trains, as some of their other trains of a similar vintage to the Class 707 trains already offer battery options.
A Stepping Stone Approach
On the unelectrified section between Hurst Green Junction and Uckfield, there are the following stations.
- Edenbridge Town – two platforms
- Hever – two platforms
- Cowden – single bi-directional platform – 7.9 miles South of Hurst Green Junction.
- Ashurst – two platforms
- Eridge – single bi-directional platform – 6.3 miles South of Cowden
- Crowborough – two platforms
- Buxted – single bi-directional platform – 4.7 miles South of Eridge
- Uckfield – single platform – 2.3 miles South of Buxted
Suppose the following were to be done.
- Do nothing at the two platform stations.
- Fit an intelligent fast charging system at Cowden, Eridge, Buxted and Uckfield.
- If it was felt to be needed to ensure reliable operation, the power supply to the Southbound platform could be boosted at Hurst Green station.
- Procure some ten-car battery-electric trains, which have regenerative braking and a range of perhaps ten-twelve miles on battery power.
Note.
- A pair of five-car trains could be used instead of ten-car trains.
- Some five-car Class 377 trains fitted with batteries might be ideal.
- This would mean only four platforms would need to be electrified with fast charging systems.
I am sure that Vivarail Fast Charge systems could be used, if they were modified to work with standard third-rail systems and for bi-directional use.
What size of battery would be needed for this approach?
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 for a ten-car train running for twelve miles, the train would need a battery capacity of between 360 and 600 kWh.
Or if it was two five-car trains between 180 and 300 kWh in each train.
Note that Vivarail find space for 424 kWh in the two-car Class 230 train, I wrote about in Battery Class 230 Train Demonstration At Bo’ness And Kinneil Railway.
I believe that a five-car Class 377 or 707 train could be fitted with a 300 kWh battery and this would give the train a range of 12 miles, which would enable it to provide a battery-electric service on the Uckfield Branch.
Will Clapham Junction Station Get A Platform 0?
London has a rail capacity problem, for both freight and passenger trains.
This report from Network Rail is entitled The London Rail Freight Strategy (LRFS).
One of the recommendations of the report is to build a Platform 0 at Clapham Junction station. It says this about that that platform.
Creation of additional bay platform capacity at the northern end of Clapham Junction station, for the use
of London Overground WLL services.
This map from cartometro.com shows the track layout as the orange tentacles of the London Overground approach Clapham Junction station.
Note.
- The West London Line approaches Clapham Junction station through Imperial Wharf station.
- The South London Line approaches Clapham Junction station through Clapham High Street and Wandsworth Road stations.
This second map from cartometro.com shows the track layout of the current two Overground platforms at Clapham Junction station and how the third one will fit in.
Note.
- It appears that there are crossovers to allow trains from either South or West London Lines to enter any of Platforms 0, 1 or 2.
- A typical bay platform can turn four trains per hour (tph) or possibly six tph, if the signalling is tip-top.
These pictures show the current state of Platform 0 at Clapham Junction station.
And these show Platforms 1 and 2 at Clapham Junction station.
The current two-platform system seems to work well.
Clapham Junction Station Is A Super-Interchange
Clapham Junction is already a super-interchange on the London Overground with lots of services to Central and Outer London and the wider South of England.
The London Overground probably needs more super-interchanges on its circular route around London.
- Whitechapel and Stratford, which are one stop apart on Crossrail, could develop into one in East London.
- As it grows, Old Oak Common, will develop into one in West London.
Other super-interchanges could develop at Croydon, Hackney (Central/Downs) and West Hampstead.
Network Rail’s Reasons For The New Platform
I’ll start with some information.
Current Overground Services
Current Overground services are as follows.
- 4 tph – Stratford via Willesden Junction
- 4 tph – Dalston Junction via Surrey Quays
The total of 8 tph, is generally easily handled by two platforms, unless something goes wrong.
Future Overground Services
It is expected that in the future services could be as follows.
- 6 tph – Stratford via Willesden Junction
- 6 tph – Dalston Junction via Surrey Quays
As I regularly use the service between Dalston Junction and Clapham Junction to get a connection to places like Portsmouth and Southampton, I know at least one regular traveller, who is looking forward to the increase in frequency.
But there could be another London Overground in the future.
In Gibb Report – East Croydon – Milton Keynes Route Should Be Transferred To London Overground, I wrote how in his report, Chris Gibb recommended that this hourly service should be transferred to the London Overground.
This is said in the Network Rail document about Platform 0 at Clapham Junction station.
The longstanding proposal for the creation of additional bay platform capacity at the northern end of Clapham Junction station, for the use of London Overground West London Line services, is supported by this strategy.
The scheme would reinstate the disused former platform 1 to create a newly designated ‘Platform 0’, adjacent to the present platforms 1 and 2.
This intervention has been recognised as key to long-term growth on the West London Line by several previous pieces of work for both Network Rail and Transport for London, which have consistently concluded that additional platform capacity at Clapham Junction is needed, if TfL’s aspiration to increase the WLL Overground service to 6 trains per hour is to be met.
Capacity analysis for the LRFS has reaffirmed that the desire to operate this level of service throughout the day cannot be achieved with a single bay platform.
Although this scheme would clearly be of direct benefit to the London Overground passenger service, the positive impact it would have on the capacity and performance of the WLL overall means that it is also very much in the interest of freight that Platform 0 be delivered. Without a new bay platform, the main alternative means to increase Overground train frequencies involves the use of platform 17 at the far end of the station, where freight and GTR trains pass through towards the BML. This is a sub-optimal solution for both freight and passenger operations.
Note.
- Platform 0 will share an island platform with Platforms 1 and 2, so there will be short level walks between trains.
- Platform 1 and 2 are already fully accessible, so Platform 0 will be as well.
The report feels that increasing passenger and freight services are often two sides of the same coin.
Questions
I have some questions.
Would Three Platforms Be Enough To Handle Twelve tph?
As two platforms seem to handle eight tph, at most times in the present, I suspect the answer is in the affirmative.
Would Three Platforms Be Enough To Handle Thirteen tph?
This would be needed, if the Milton Keynes service were to be transferred to the Overground and it used Clapham Junction station as a Southern terminus.
If it still went through Clapham Junction station to Croydon, then it would probably use Platform 17, as it tends to do now!
I do suspect that three platforms will be enough, as otherwise the LRFS would be proposing something else.
What Will Be The Length Of The New Platform 0?
Under Future Proposals in the Wikipedia entry for Clapham Junction station, this is said.
In a Network Rail study in 2015, it was proposed that platform 0 could reopen for 8-car operations of the West London Line.
An eight-car platform would allow the current eight-car Class 377 trains, that work the Milton Keynes service to use the platform.
Note that as an eight-car Class 377 train is 163.2 metres long, a platform that will accomodate this train, will be long enough to accomodate a five-car Class 378 train, which is only 102.5 metres long.
But should the platform be built long enough to handle two Class 378 trains working as a pair?
This Google Map shows Platform 1 and the current state of the future Platform 0 at Clapham Junction station.
Note.
- a five-car Class 378 train is standing in Platform 1.
- There are some minor obstructions along Platform 0.
I don’t think it would be impossible to create an eight-car Platform 0. Although, Platforms 0 and 1 might need to be extended by perhaps ten or twenty minutes towards London.
Does The Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction Service Need 110 mph Trains?
I have talked to several drivers, who drive trains on the four 125 mph lines out of London and some have complained about slower 100 mph trains, that get in their way and slow them down.
If the drivers get miffed, I suspect the train operating companies are more annoyed.
But over the last few years, the following has happened.
- Heathrow Express have replaced 100 Class 360 trains with 110 mph Class 387 trains on the Great Western Main Line.
- East Midlands Railway will be running 110 mph Class 360 trains to Corby on the Midland Main Line.
- West Midlands Trains will be replacing 110 mph Class 350 trains with 110 mph Class 730 trains on the West Coast Main Line.
- Great Northern run 110 mph Class 387 trains to Cambridge and Kings Lynn on the East Coast Main Line.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see 110 mph trains running between Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction, as they would just be following a sensible practice to increase capacity.
Conclusion
I have no problems with creating a new Platform 0 at Clapham Junction, but suspect that faster trains would be needed for the Milton Keynes and Clapham Junction, that would use it.
Work Appears To Have Already Started On Platform 0
With the installation of the all-important site hut and the fact that there were several engineers around with laser-measurement tools, I suspect that work is already underway to prepare everything for the construction of Platform 0 at Clapham Junction station.
Related Posts
These are related posts about the London Rail Freight Strategy (LRFS).
Decarbonisation Of London’s Freight Routes
East Coast Main Line South Bi-Directional Capability
Gauge Improvements Across London
Headway Reductions On The Gospel Oak To Barking, North London and West London Lines
Heavy Axle Weight Restrictions
Kensal Green Junction Improvement
Longhedge Junction Speed Increases
Moving The West London Line AC/DC Switchover To Kensington Olympia
Moving The West London Line AC/DC Switchover To Shepherd’s Bush
Stratford Regulating Point Extension
Will Camden Road Station Get A Third Platform?
GTR And Porterbrook Unveil £55 million Fleet Modernisation
The title of this article, is the same as that of this article on RailNews.
This is the introductory paragraph.
Trains built just five years ago are among those set to be upgraded at Selhurst Depot as part of a £55 million fleet modernisation programme announced by Govia Thameslink Railway and leasing company Porterbrook.
The updates to Class 377 and Class 387 trains, include.
- On-board performance monitoring and fault diagnosis
- Passenger information screens
- USB/power points
- LED lighting
- Passenger-counting technology
- Forward-facing CCTV cameras
I wonder, if the forward-facing cameras will be setup, so that passengers can log in to the video. It would surely, be a way of keeping kids of all ages amused.
Trains are getting more and more like computers on wheels.
Beeching Reversal – South Fylde Line Passing Loop
This is one of the Beeching Reversal projects that the Government and Network Rail are proposing to reverse some of the Beeching cuts.
The Project
This project is described on this page on the web site of the Fylde MP; Mark Menzies, which is entitled Improving The South Fylde Rail Line.
The page lists that these improvements are needed.
Track And Stations
These improvements are listed for track and stations.
The bid involves laying around three miles of track between Lytham and St Annes stations, the creation of a new rail platform at Ansdell and Fairhaven Station, the installation of signalling along the line, and potential platform changes at Preston Station. There is scope for improvements to St Annes and Lytham Stations, should Network Rail decide it would rather include those stations within the passing loop – but that would be decided further along the process.
Services
The objective is to be able to run two trains per hour (tph) between Preston and Blackpool South stations.
Trains
Better trains are needed.
It certainly looks like the Pacers have already gone.
The Route
I shall describe the current route in this section.
Blackpool South Station
The Google Map shows Blackpool South station.
Note.
- Entrance to the station is from Waterloo Road, which runs East-West across the map.
- There are a pair of bus stops by the station entrance.
- There is a lot of car parking close to the station.
- I suspect that the single platform can hold a modern eighty-metre four-car train.
- This seventy-year-old has no difficulty waking to the football ground or the Blackpool trams from the station.
With two tph and some updated facilities, this would be a very useful station.
I suspect there is even space to add a second platform in the future, if that were felt to be necessary.
Blackpool Pleasure Beach Station
This Google Map shows Blackpool Please Beach station and the nearby Pleasure Beach.
We shouldn’t underestimate the importance of this station. One beautiful late summer Saturday, I was going to see Ipswich play at Blackpool and out of curiosity I had explored the train to Colne station. In those days a decade ago, Colne and Blackpool South was one service and the train from Colne was full of families, by the time it got to Preston. A large proportion, left the train at the Pleasure Beach.
The conductor told me, that the crowds, I had witnessed weren’t untypical.
Squires Gate Station and Blackpool Airport
This Google Map shows Squires Gate station and the nearby Blackpool Airport.
Blackpool Airport after a troubled few years seems to be finding a niche market, with a few business, commercial, offshore and training flights.
But I believe that airports like Blackpool in the future can develop another large niche – electric aviation.
Getting to places like Ireland, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man and Wales by a nineteen-seat electric airliner will need the following.
- As short a flight as possible.
- Close to the coast would help.
- Good public transport links. Blackpool Airport has both tram and train.
- Space for aircraft to be parked, whilst charging.
- Plentiful supplies of renewable electricity. The over-300 MW Burbo Bank Wind Farm is not far away in Liverpool Bay and it will only be joined by more and larger wind farms.
- Frequent public transport.
Blackpool Airport could tick all these boxes, with a thick green marker.
Some example direct distances from Blackpool include
- Aberdeen – 238 miles
- Amsterdam Schipol – 340 miles
- Belfast City – 128 miles
- Cardiff – 165 miles
- Dublin – 134 miles
- Edinburgh – 150 miles
- Exeter – 211 miles
- Geneva – 661 miles
- Glasgow – 155 miles
- London Gatwick – 220 miles
- London Heathrow – 192 miles
- London Southend – 219 miles
- Newcastle – 89 miles
- Paris Orly – 422 miles
- Isle of Man Ronaldsway – 68 miles
- Southampton – 208 miles
These distances fit nicely with the range of the nine-seater Eviation Alice electric aircraft, which is predicted to be 620 miles.
St. Annes-on-the-Sea Station
This Google Map shows St. Annes-on-the-Sea station.
Note.
- Blackpool is to the North-West and Preston is to the South-East
- St. Annes-on-the-Sea is one of those convenient single-platform stations, where you just walk in-and-out on the level.
- The passing loop would start on the Preston side of the bridge.
There would need to be no major infrastructure work at the station, although I would expect the facilities could do with a makeover.
Ansdell And Fairhaven Station
In Should The Blackpool South Branch Be Electrified?, I said this about improvements to Ansdell and Fairhaven station.
Ansdell and Fairhaven station is nearest to the course at Royal Lytham.
-
- The Open Championship is a very important event on the golfing calendar.
- Other important golfing events are also held on the course
- Royal Lytham and St.Annes, last held the Open in 2012 and 2001. So it might come back to Royal Lytham in the mid-2020s.
Ansdell and Fairhaven station used to have two platforms, as described in Wikipedia.
The station was set out as an island platform with tracks on both faces until the singling of the line in the 1980s. Trains now only use the southern face. A disabled access ramp now covers the northern part of the station.
So could a rebuild of the station do the following?
-
- Restore two platforms on an island at the station.
- Put in full disabled access.
- Create a passing loop.
- Longer platforms might be a good idea.
This Google Map shows the station.
Note.
-
- The disabled ramp winding away.
- The platform is probably about a hundred metres long.
- It would appear that there is space at the far end to extend the platform.
I suspect that an ambitious architect with vision, could design a station that met all objectives.
It could be the best Championship Golf Course railway station in the world.
Lytham Station
This Google Map shows Lytham station.
Lytham station will be the Eastern end of the loop and it is likely, that the single-track will change to double at the Western end of the station.
As with St. Annes-on-the-Sea station, I suspect that a good makeover, will be all that will be needed.
Moss Side Station
This Google Map shows Moss Side station.
The only problem here is the level crossing, so do Network Rail want to remove it?
Kirkham And Wesham Station
This Google Map shows Kirkham and Wesham station.
There are three platforms, which from bottom to top on the map are.
- Platform 1 – Trains to Blackpool South
- Platform 2 – Trains to Blackpool North
- Platform 3 – Trains to Preston
All platforms seem to be being electrified in these pictures. that I took during construction.
Note.
- It can’t be described as a station, built down to a small budget.
- In the captions to the pictures, I’ve numbered the platforms from left to right.
- The last picture looks down Platform 1 and there is an electrification gantry at the Preston end.
Could this comprehensive electrification be so that trains to Blackpool North can use both Platforms 1 and 2?
- This would allow overtaking of say a local train by a London express.
- Trains could also be turned back in Platform 1, before the end of its journey, if there was a problem.
- The electrification is also substantial enough for the longest Class 390 trains.
- It could even accommodate a classic compatible High Speed Two train.
So does the last point, mean that Blackpool North station is a possible High Speed Two destination? Provided, the platforms at Blackpool North station are long enough, I think it does!
This Google Map shows Kirkham West Junction, where trains to Blackpool North and Blackpool South stations diverge.
Note.
- The electrification gantries and their shadows can be seen.
- Preston is to the South-East and the route is fully-electrified.
- Blackpool North is to the North-West and the route is fully-electrified.
- Blackpool South is to the West. The double-track becomes single before Moss Side station.
This picture shows the route going off to Blackpool South.
I took the picture from a train going to Blackpool North station.
So why are wires being run along the first few hundred metres of the Blackpool South Branch?
The Timetable
Currently, trains take the following times to do these journey legs.
- Run between Ansdell and Fairhaven and Blackpool South stations – 12 minutes
- Turnback at Blackpool South station – 3 minutes
- Run between Blackpool South and Ansdell and Fairhaven stations – 11 minutes
As the trains will be running every thirty minutes and the three legs total twenty-six minutes, that means there’s four minutes float.
So hopefully, it should be easily stainable, by an experienced rail timetable creator.
The Trains
I have remarked that I find the electrification at Kirkham & Wesham station, both comprehensive and slightly unusual.
Could The Electrification Have Been Designed For Battery Electric Trains To Blackpool South Station?
But there is one very plausible reason for the electrification layout – The Blackpool South Branch has been designed, so that services on the branch can be rum using battery trains.
- The distance between Kirkham & Wesham and Blackpool South stations is just over eleven miles.
- So for a round trip a range of perhaps twenty-five miles on battery power would suffice.
- There would also be a need for a few minutes of hotel power, whilst waiting at Blackpool South station.
These power needs are well within the capabilities of the average battery train.
- Trains could be charged on the nine minute run between Preston and Kirkham & Wesham stations.
- Changeover between electrification and battery power would take place in Kirkham & Wesham station.
An ideal train would surely be CAF’s four-car battery electric version of the Class 331 train, which I wrote about in Northern’s Battery Plans.
- According to an article in the March 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, with the same name, these trains will be working between Manchester Airport and Windermere.
- Class 331 trains without batteries will be running to and from Blackpool North station.
- Four-car trains are probably the right size for the route.
There would also probably be no need for a charging station at Blackpool South station, if trains could leave Kirkham & Wesham station with a full battery.
Where Would The Trains Terminate In The East?
These would be the obvious choices.
- Blackburn – Where there is a convenient bay platform.
- Colne – Where they used to terminate!
- Liverpool – Merseyrail has the trains and Liverpool has lots of punters and the imagination.
- Preston – Where they do now!
- Skipton – If the Skipton-Colne Link is built!
My money would be on Skipton, using a new Skipton-Colne Link, for the following reasons.
- Politicians of all colours and roses are in favour.
- Skipton has an electrified route to Leeds.
- Skipton-Colne would be a valuable by-pass route during the building of Northern Powerhouse Rail.
- Battery-powered trains would be ideal for Skipton-Colne.
Would A Battery Electric Train Be Feasible Between Blackpool South And Liverpool?
Consider.
- An all-stations service would complement the fast service between Liverpool Lime Street and Blackpool North stations via St. Helens, Wigan North Western and Preston.
- The service could either go between Liverpool and Preston via Ormskirk or Southport and a reinstated Burscough Chord.
- The Ormskirk route is 15 miles of unelectrified line and the Southport route is just four miles further.
- A service via Southport would need to reverse at Southport station.
- The service would be run using dual-voltage Class 777 trains fitted with batteries.
- 25 KVAC overhead electrification, is already installed between Preston and Kirkham & Wesham stations,
- Using existing electrification, trains would leave Kirkham & Wesham, Ormskirk, Preston and Southport stations with full batteries.
- A coastal service between Blackpool and Liverpool would surely attract visitors.
- Liverpool and Blackpool are the two biggest urban areas on the coast.
- There are several golf courses on the route, including three courses that have held the Open; Royal Birkdale, Royal Liverpool and Royal Lytham & St. Annes.
It may be a bit fanciful. But.
- Merseyrail will have the trains.
- Liverpool has the potential passengers.
- I believe the route could handle a two tph service.
- In Reopen Midge Hall Station, I showed that it was possible to run a two tph service between Liverpool and Preston, with one tph via each of Ormskirk and Southport.
Liverpool also has bags of ambition and imagination.
Would A Battery Electric Train Handle Preston And Skipton?
I estimate that this route is forty-one miles, with a stiff rise from Rose Grove to Colne station.
So would a battery electric train be able to handle this distance?
Hitachi are talking 56 miles for their Regional Battery Train, so I suspect CAF would want and need to be competitive with a similar specification.
Perhaps the logical service would be to run between Leeds and Blackpool South.
- The service would go via Preston, Blackburn, Burnley Central, Colne and Skipton.
- Leeds and Skipton is electrified.
- Preston and Kirkham & Wesham is electrified.
- No extra chargers for trains would be needed.
The only new infrastructure needed would be the Skipton and Colne Link.
Electrification Between Preston And Blackburn
Consider.
- In Colne – Skipton Reopening Moves Closer, I talked about the proposed Huncoat Rail Fright Terminal, that could be built North of Blackburn on the East Lancashire Line.
- Blackburn is a major hub for passenger services.
- An electrified Blackburn would allow Manchester and Clitheroe to be run by battery electric trains. Clitheroe is ten miles and Bolton is thirteen.
- An electrified Blackburn would allow Blackburn and Manchester Victoria via the Todmorden Curve to be run by battery electric trains. The whole route is 39.5 miles.
- It may be possible for battery electric trains to reach Leeds via Hebden Bridge, as it is only fifty miles away, which is within Hitachi’s range.
- As the Blackburn area grows, there will be more pressure for a daily London service.
- Some think, the Calderdale route should be electrified.
- Preston and Blackburn stations are just twelves miles apart.
- There is a multiple unit depot at Blackburn.
- I also feel that battery electric trains fanning out from Blackburn, wouldn’t do the town’s image any harm.
For all these reasons, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a short stretch of electrification added between Preston and Blackburn.
Conclusion
I like this proposal and it could be a big asset to trains across the Pennines.
The Flexible Train For A Pandemic
Anybody, who believes that COVID-19 will be the last pandemic is an idiot!
The virus has shown, those with evil intentions to take over the world, that a pandemic, started by a weaponised virus, whether natural or man-made, can be a useful tool in your arsenal.
We must prepare for the next pandemic.
So how will we travel by train?
Current Train Interiors And The Need To Social Distance
The need to social distance will remain paramount and some of our current train interiors are better than others for passengers to remain two metres apart.
These are some typical UK train interiors.
Typical London Overground Interior
These pictures show a typical London Overground interior on their Class 378 trains and Class 710 trains.
Distancing at two-metres will reduce the capacity dramatically, but with wide doors and common sense, this layout could allow social distancing to work.
Siemens Desiro City Suburban Interior
These pictures show the interior of the two Siemens Desiro City fleets; Thameslink‘s Class 700 trains, Great Northern‘s Class 717 trains and South Western Railway‘s Class 707 trains.
As with the London Overground layout, as the trains are fairly spacious with wide doors, social distancing could probably be made to work at reduced capacity.
Four Seats And A Table
These pictures show a selection of trains, where you have four seats around a table.
Trains include Greater Anglia’s Class 379 trains, Class 745 trains, Class 755 trains, and a selection of Class 800 trains, Class 377 trains from various operators and a superb reconditioned Class 150 train from Great Western Railway.
Could these be made to work, if there was only one person or self-isolating group living together at each set of four seats?
Designing For A Pandemic
These are my thoughts on various topics.
Seating Layouts
Consider.
- As the pictures show, maintaining social distancing will be difficult on some trains.
- Could the number of seats in use, be determined by the avert level of the pandemic?
- Could seats have lights on them to show their status?
- Will companies insist on reservations?
As to the last point, some train companies are already doing this!
Luggage
Will there be limits on the luggage you can take?
Entering And Leaving The Train
Would someone with a dangerous infectious disease be more likely to pass it on, when entering or leaving a train, through a narrow doorway?
I believe coaches with narrow single end doors make social distancing impossible.
- Passengers get stuck in the bottleneck that these doors create.
- Passengers are entering and leaving through the same crowded door.
- Anybody in a wheelchair, pushing a child in a buggy or dragging a large suitcase, will make the bottleneck worse.
They are not fit for purpose in a post-COVID-19 world!
It might be possible to make the doors work using a traffic light system, which allowed passengers to leave, before any passengers were allowed to enter.
But any safe system, would be likely to increase dwell times in stations.
These pictures show the doors and entry and exit for Greater Anglia’s Class 745 and Class 755 trains.
These trains have been designed to be able to run London and Norwich services over a distance of more than a hundred miles, so the trains could be considered InterCity services in all but name.
Note.
- All doors are double and lead into a wide and spacious lobby.
- Entry and exit is level, as there is a gap filler between train and platform.
- Entry and exit in a wheelchair, pushing a buggy or wheeling a large suitcase doesn’t
Greater Anglia’s new trains would appear to be better in a post-COVID-19 world.
I also think, that these trains are better designed for the disabled, those with young children, and the elderly and just plain worn-out.
Finding A Seat
If you watch people entering a train, they often take forever to find their seat and sit down. Especially, if they’ve got a massive suitcase that won’t fit in the space provided.
Rules on boarding a train and how much luggage you can bring will be developed.
Toilets
Will visiting the toilet still be allowed? Or will toilets even be removed?
Flexibility
I think a degree of flexibility must be built into the design.
I mentioned lights on seats to show which could be used, that could be lit up according to the threat level.
Conclusion
Travelling will get more complicated.
Ready To Charge
The title of this post is the same as that of this article in Issue 898 of Rail Magazine.
This is the sub-title of the article.
Vivarail could be about to revolutionise rail traction with its latest innovation
The article details their plans to bring zero-carbon trains to the UK.
These are a few important more general points.
- The diesel gensets in the trains can be eco-fenced to avoid unning on diesel in built-up areas.
- The Transport for Wales trains could be the last Vivarail diesel trains.
- A 100 kWh battery pack is the same size as a diesel generator. I would assume they are almost interchangeable.
- Various routes are proposed.
- In future battery trains will be Vivarail’s focus.
- At the end of 2020, a battery demonstration train will be dispatched to the United States.
- Two-car trains will have a forty-mile range with three-cars managing sixty.
- Trains could be delivered in nine to twelve months.
The company also sees Brexit as an opportunity and New Zealand as a possible market.
Modifying Other Trains
The article also states that Vivarail are looking at off-lease electric multiple units for conversion to battery operation.
Vivarail do not say, which trains are involved.
Vivarail’s Unique Selling Point
This is the last two paragraphs of the article.
“Our unique selling point is our Fast Charge system. It’s a really compelling offer.” Alice Gillman of Vivarail says.
Vivarail has come a long way in the past five years and with this innobvative system it is poised to bring about a revolution in rail traction in the 2020s.
Conclusion
Could the train, that Vivarail refused to name be the Class 379 trains?
- There are thirty trainsets of four-cars.
- They are 100 mph trains.
- They are under ten years old.
- They meet all the Persons of Reduced Mobility regulations.
- They currently work Stansted Airport and Cambridge services for Greater Anglia.
- They are owned by Macquarie European Rail.
I rode in one yesterday and they are comfortable with everything passengers could want.
The train shown was used for the BEMU Trial conducted by Bombardier, Network Rail and Greater Anglia.
The only things missing, for these trains to run a large number of suitable routes under battery power are.
- A suitable fast charging system.
- Third rail equipment that would allow the train to run on lines with third-rail electrification.
- Third rail equipment would also connect to Vivarail’s Fast Charge system
As I have looked in detail at Vivarail’s engineering and talked to their engineers, I feel that with the right advice and assistance, they should be able to play a large part in the conversion of the Class 379 fleet to battery operation.
These trains would be ideal for the Uckfield Branch and the Marshlink Line.
If not the Class 379 trains, perhaps some Class 377 trains, that are already leased to Southern, could be converted.
I could see a nice little earner developing for Vivarail, where train operating companies and their respective leasing companies employ them to create battery sub-fleets to improve and extend their networks.
Raw Material For Southern’s Battery Trains
Porterbrook and Southern are proposing to convert a number of Class 377/3 trains to battery operation for the Uckfield Branch and the Marshlink Line, as I wrote about in Electroflex Battery EMU Plan To End Southern Diesel Operation.
This morning I took a ride in a ten-car Class 377 train formed by two three-car Class 377/3 units and one Class 377/4.
I will split my observations into various sections.
First Class
There is a small First Class section.
Is this really needed in a three-car train, considering that some franchises are going for one-class trains?
Gangways
On the Uckfield Branch and the Marshlink Line, I suspect that trains will work in multiple formations, so the gangway will be useful to allow passengers to pass between individual trains.
Interior
The interior is reasonably modern, as the trains were originally built in 2001-2002 and they meet all of the persons of reduced mobility legislation.
Multiple Working
The train I rode on consisted of three Class 377 Trains working together, so it would appear that six, nine and twelve car trains may be possible.
Tables And Cup-Holders
I would prefer full-size tables and perhaps these could be fitted, during the conversion, like they are in some Class 377 trains.
If not tables, then how about some cup-holders?
Universal Access Toilet
A universal-access toilet is fitted in the middle car.
Wi-Fi
Wi-fi appears to be fitted.
25 KVAC Operation
Although the trains are currently configured for operation on 750 VDC trird-rail electrification, these trains can be converted to run on 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
This would obviously mean that if the trains were no longer needed in Sussex, they could run anywhere else, where there is electrification.
Conclusion
They are a well-equipped train.
It would appear that very little will need to be done to the interior of the train in the conversion.
First may be downgraded to standard and I would fit full tables.
The operator would do what they wanted.
Battery Electrostars And The Uckfield Branch
In Rounding Up The Class 170 Trains, I said this, which is based on a quote from an article in the October 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.
Are Battery Electrostars On The Way?
The article finishes with this paragraph about the Class 171 trains, that will come from Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) and be converted back to Class 170 trains.
GTR currently uses the ‘171s’ on the non-electrified Marshlink and Uckfield lines, and the release of these sets to EMR is contingent on their replacement with converted Electrostar EMUs with bi-mode battery capability, removing these diesel islands of operation from the otherwise all-electric GTR fleet.
So are these battery Electrostars finally on their way?
The article got several comments, which said that some five-car Electrostars were to be converted and they would probably be Class 376 trains, that would be used.
The comments also said that Network Rail were working on using short lengths of third-rail to charge the train batteries.
That sounds like Vivarail’s system to me, that I wrote about in Vivarail Unveils Fast Charging System For Class 230 Battery Trains.
Southern’s Current Diesel Fleet
I will start by looking at Southern’s current diesel fleet that works London Bridge and Uckfield stations and the Marshlink Line.
Currently, Southern has a diesel fleet of Class 171 trains.
- 12 x two-car trains
- 8 x four-car trains.
According to Modern Railways, the following trains will transfer to EMR Regional in September 2021.
- 10 x two car
- 6 x three-car, which will be created by moving a few cars in the four-car trains.
It looks as if after the transfer Southern will be left with eight driver-cars and ten intermediate cars.
This would give them four four-car trains and two spare intermediate cars. I’m sure that someone will have a need for the intermediate cars to lengthen a two-car Class 170 train because of capacity issues.
The Marshlink Line Service
The service on the Marshlink Line is an hourly service between Ashford International and Eastbourne stations.
- It is run by Class 171 diesel trains.
- Trains were four-cars most times I’ve used it.
- Journey times are around one hour and twenty-minutes.
- A round trip takes three hours.
- It would appear that three four-car trains are needed to run the service.
So if there is a spare train, four trains would be ideal, After all the transfers, this is the remaining number of Class 171 trains, that would be left with Southern.
If they wanyted to get rid of the diesel trains, then they could replace the trains on the Marshlink Line with four four-car battery bi-mode Electrostars!
Network Rail’s Plan For The Uckfield Branch
This document on the Network Rail web site from 2016, is entitled Delivering A Better Railway
For A Better Britain – Route Specifications 2016 – South East.
In the document, this is said about the the route between Hurst Green and Uckfield.
The key issue presently is overcrowding on the shorter length services that operate on the route during and close to the peak hours. As the route is operated by Class 171 diesel units, there is only a small fleet available to the TOC to deploy on the route. As a result some peak and shoulder peak services are not able to operate at the maximum length the route is capable of (8-car).
Electrification schemes in the North West will displace rolling stock to strengthen existing peak services to 8-car and eventually of 10-car operation during CP5, so associated platform lengthening is currently being developed, this will also be compatible with 12-car 20m vehicle trains.
Electrification is still an aspiration for this route or use of battery-powered trains (currently under development) if they are deemed successful.
Signalling is controlled by Oxted Signal Box but during CP5 this will be transferred to Three Bridges ROC.
The key point is that the platforms have been lengthened for 240-metre long trains, which will also allow ten-car Class 171 trains, which have 23 metre vehicles.
The Uckfield Branch Service
The service on the Uckfield Branch is an hourly service between London Bridge and Uckfield stations.
- It is currently run by Class 171 diesel trains.
- The platforms on the route can accept ten-car trains with 23 m vehicles or twelve-car trains with 20 metre vehicles.
- A round trip takes three hours.
- It would appear that three ten- or twelve-car trains are needed to run the service.
So if we add in a spare and perhaps an extra train for the rush hour, it would appear that around half-a-dozen ten- or twelve-car battery bi-mode trains will be needed for the service.
- As a ten-car train would be two five-car trains, twelve five-car trains would be needed.
- As a twelve-car train would be three four-car trains, eighteen four-car trains would be needed.
Interestingly, Southern have three trains that could be candidates for conversion to battery bi-modes in their fleet.
- One hundred and fifty-two four-car Class 377 trains.
- Thirty-four five car Class 377 trains.
- Twenty-nine four-car Class 387 trains.
All trains were built for longer commuter journeys,
Which Electrostars Will Be Converted To Battery Operation For The Uckfield Service?
Obviously, the trains must be four- or five-cars and suitable for conversion to battery bi-mode trains, but I feel they must have other features.
- Toilets
- First Class seats.
- Plenty of tables.
- Wi-fi and plug sockets.
- Comfortable interiors.
- End gangways, to ensure staff and passengers can move around the train if required.
I’ll now look at the various fleets of Electrostars.
Class 357 Trains
The Class 357 trains can probably be discounted, as I suspect c2c need them and they are not third rail.
Class 375 Trains
The Class 375 trains can probably be discounted, as I suspect Southeastern need them.
But if the new Southeastern franchise should decide on a complete fleet replacement, as the trains are dual-voltage, they might be very useful if fitted with a battery capability.
Class 376 Trains
The Class 376 trains can probably be discounted, as I suspect Southeastern need them.
The trains are also third-rail only and lack toilets, so would probably need a rebuilt interior.
Class 377 Trains
The Class 377 trains are a possibility as Soiuthern has a large fleet of both four- and five-car trains.
But they would be losing the Class 171 trains, so would probably need to bring in some new trains to have a large enough fleet.
Class 378 Trains
The Class 378 trains can probably be discounted, as London Overground need them.
Class 379 Trains
The Class 379 trains are surely a possibility, as Greater Anglia will be releasing them before the end of 2020.
Consider.
- There have no new home to go to.
- I am suspicious that that NXEA overpaid for these trains and Macquarie are sitting on a very good deal, that will cost Grester Anglia a lot to cancel!
- They appeared to me to be a shoe-in for Corby services, so perhaps they lost out to the Class 360 trains on cost.
- They are only 100 mph trains, whereas others are 110 mph trains.
- They would need to be fitted with third-rail shoes.
- The trains are coming up to nine years old and probably need a refresh.
- They have an interior aimed at airport passengers.
If I was Macquarie, I’d convert these into go-anywhere battery bi-modes for use in small fleets by operators.
But, Porterbrook’s battery-bi-mode conversion of a Class 350 train may be available at a lower price.
Class 387 Trains
The Class 387 trains are surely a serious possibility, for the following reasons.
- Govia already has fifty-six of these trains on lease and in service.
- c2c has six trains, that could come off lease in 2021.
- The trains are dual voltage
- The trains are 110 mph trains.
- They can run as twelve-car walk-through trains.
- Many of the trains are leased from Porterbrook.
I’ve felt for some time, that these trains would make excellent battery bi-modes.
But they are a good fit for Southern, as surely one could be scrounged from their Great Northern fleet to create a prototype for test.
I would feel that having the required number of trains for the Uckfield Branch can be achieved by September 2021, when the Class 171 trains will be sent to the Midlands.
There is also a backstop, in that there are nineteen Class 365 trains in store, which were replaced by Class 387 trains on Great Northern services. If there is a shortage of Class 387 trains during the conversion, surely some of these Class 365 trains could stand in, just as they did successfully in Scotland recently.
My Choice
I would convert Class 387 trains.
- There are quite a few Class 387 trains, that could be converted.
- Southern already have fifty-six Class 387 trains.
- There are enough to convert eighteen for Uckfield and four for the Marshlink
- It could be possible to deliver the full fleet before the Class 171 trains leave.
- If during conversion of the trains, they are short of stock, Southern can hire in some Class 365 trains.
It looks to be a low-risk project.
It will also have collateral benefits.
- The hourly London Bridge and Uckfield service will be raised to maximum capacity without any new infrastructure, except the trains and a number of battery chargers.
- Diesel will be eliminated in London Bridge station making the station electric trains only.
- Diesel will be eliminated between London Bridge and Uckfield stations.
- Efficient regenerative braking to battery would be available on the complete route.
- A ten-car diesel service between East Croydon and London Bridge will be replaced by a twelve-car electric service. stations.
In addition, if the diesel trains on the Marshlink Line were to be replaced by battery bi-modes, Southern would be a diesel-free franchise.
What About New Trains?
It’s all about the money and whether the new trains could be delivered in time.
I would suspect that Bombardier, CAF, Stadler and others are making competitive proposals to Southern, but would they be more affordable and timely, than a conversion of Class 387 trains?
But could they be as competitive if Bombadier and Porterbrook co-operated to convert some of Porterbrook’s Class 387 trains, that are already leased to Great Northern?
You don’t usually move house if you need a new boiler, you replace the boiler!
What About Hydrogen Trains?
The Alstom Breeze based on a Class 321 train is scheduled to first come into service in 2022. This is too late, as the Class 171 trains are scheduled to leave in September 2021.
Hydrogen trains would need a hydrogen filling station.
Kinetic Energy Of Class 387 Trains
I will calculate the kinetic energy of a four-car Class 387 train.
I will assume the following.
- Empty train weight – 174.81 tonnes – Read from the side of the train.
- Seats – 223
- Standees – 60 – Estimated from the seats/standing ratio of a Class 720 train.
- Total passengers – 283
- Each passenger weighs 90 Kg, with baggage, bikes and buggies.
- This gives a passenger weight of 25.47 tonnes and a train weight of 200.28 tonnes
Using Omni’s Kinetic Energy calculator, gives the following kinetic energies.
- 40 mph – 8.89 kWh
- 50 mph – 13.9 kWh
- 60 mph – 20.0 kWh
- 70 mph – 27.2 kWh
- 80 mph – 35.6 kWh
- 90 mph – 45.0 kWh
- 100 mph – 55.6 kWh
- 110 mph – 67.3 kWh
These figures are for a full train, but even so many will think they are low, when you think that 60 kWh batteries are used in hybrid buses.
A Trip To Uckfield
I took a trip to Uckfield today and these are my observations.
- The maximum operating speed of the train was no more than 70 mph.
- For much of the journey the train trundled along at around 40-50 mph.
- The route is reasonably flat with only gentle gradients.
- I hardly noticed the diesel engine under the floor of my car.
- Obviously in the Peak, the engines will have to work harder.
It was a very good demonstration of five Turbostars working in unison.
I can understand why East Midlands Railway are using Class 170 trains, as their standard train for EMR Regional.
Modelling the Route
I have built a mathematical model of the route between Hurst Green and Uckfield using Excel.
Input parameters are.
- Cruise Energy Consumption in kWh per vehicle mile. I assumed 3 kWh per vehicle mile
- Cruise Kinetic Energy in kWh. I assumed a 70 mph cruise and used 20 kWh
- Regeneration Energy Loss as a ratio. I assumed 0.15.
These parameters showed that a battery of between 290 kWh and 350 kWh would be needed, that was full at Hurst Green and was recharged at Uckfield.
Note that Vivarail are talking about putting 424 kWh under a three-car Class 230 train.
This page on the Vivarail web site is entitled Battery Train Update.
This is a paragraph.
Battery trains are not new but battery technology is – and Vivarail is leading the way in new and innovative ways to bring them into service. 230002 has a total of 4 battery rafts each with a capacity of 106 kWh and requires an 8 minute charge at each end of the journey. With a 10 minute charge this range is extended to 50 miles and battery technology is developing all the time so these distances will increase.
So it looks like Vivarail manage to put 212 kWh under each car of their two-car train.
I don’t think putting 350 kWh of batteries under a four-car Class 387 train would be impossible.
I have also created an Excel model for the second route between Ashford and Ore stations.
This shows that a battery of about 300 kWh on the train should cover the route.
It might appear strange that the longer Marshlink route needs a smaller battery, but this is because it leaves both ends of the route with a full battery.
These two links give access to the two Excel models that I have used. Feel free to access and criticise them.
It does appear, that on both these routes, if a train starts with full batteries, the energy in the battery is reduced in these ways as it travels along the route.
- There is an energy use to power the train along the line which is proportional to the vehicle-miles.
- Energy is needed to accelerate the train to line speed after each stop.
- Energy is needed to operate stop-related functions like opening and closing the doors.
But there will also be energy recovered from regenerative braking from line speed, although this won’t cover the subsequent acceleration.
I suspect with better understanding and better data, Bombardier can create a simple formula for battery size needed based on the following.
- The length of the route.
- The number of stations.
- The line speed
- The gradient and speed profile of the route
- The kinetic energy of the train at various loadings and speeds
- The amount of energy needed for each vehicle mile
- The efficiency of the regenerative braking
It is not the most difficult of calculations and I was doing lots of them in the 1960s and early 1970s.
Charging The Train At Uckfield
This picture shows the long platform at Uckfield station.
The platform has been built to accept a twelve-car electric train and if traditional third rail electrification were to be installed, this could be used to charge the batteries.
I would use a Vivarail-style system, which I described fully in Vivarail Unveils Fast Charging System For Class 230 Battery Trains.
As trains take a few minutes at Uckfield to turnback, I’m sure enough time can be arranged in the timetable to charge the batteries with enough power to get back to the electrification at Hurst Green.
The train would switch the charging system on and off by automatically connecting and disconnecting.
A London Overground Replacement For Southern’s East Croydon And Milton Keynes Service
In July 2017, I discussed this suggestion by Chris Gibb in Gibb Report – East Croydon – Milton Keynes Route Should Be Transferred To London Overground.
In an article, in the July 2019 Edition of Modern Railways, , which was entitled ‘710s’ Debut On Goblin, this was this last paragraph.
On the West London Line, TfL is curremtly working with the Department for Transport on options for the devolution of services originally suggested in Chris Gibb’s report on the Govia Thameslink Railway franchise, which could lead to ‘710s’ being deployed here.
It made me think, that further investigation was called for.
An Apology
I apologise, if you think I’m repeating myself.
What The Gibb Report Says
The Gibb Report, says this about the current service between East Croydon and Milton Keynes Central stations.
I believe there is an option to transfer the East Croydon – Milton Keynes operation to TfL and it’s London Overground concession in 2018.
TfL may decide to change the service, for example by not running it north of Watford Junction, or running it to an alternative southern destination other than East Croydon. They could also develop the combined West London line service to better match available capacity to demand.
They would have a number of crewing and rolling stock options, but should be able to operate the service more efficiently than GTR in the longer term, without the involvement of Selhurst.
Selhurst TMD is the depot in South London, where the current Class 377 trains are based.
A few of my thoughts.
The Trains
Using Class 710 trains as suggested in the Modern Railways article, would surely offer a suitable crewing and rolling stock option for the route, if they were based at the convenient Willesden TMD, where the fleet of up to twenty-five dual-voltage Class 710/2 trains are stabled.
The Northern Terminus
Chris Gibb suggested the service might not go past Watford Junction.
I think that could be difficult.
- The longitudinal seating of the Class 710 train, is probably not suitable for outer suburban services North of Watford.
- East Croydon to Watford Junction takes 69 minutes, which is not a good journey time to create an efficient service.
It would also appear to be tricky for a train to transfer between the West London Line and the Watford DC Line.
This map from carto.metro.free.fr shows the complicated track layout in the Willesden Junction area.
Note.
- The two Willesden Junction stations, labelled High Level and Low Level.
- The Watford DC Line, which is shown in black and orange, passing to the North of Willesden TMD. and through the Low Level station.
- The four tracks shown in black are the West Coast Main Line, with Watford to the West and Euston to the East.
- The North London Line to Richmond and the West London Line to Clapham Junction splitting at Wilesden High Level Junction.
The current service between East Croydon and Milton Keynes, is only one train per hour (tph) and uses a succession of flat junctions to take the slow lines to and from Watford.
This is not a good operational procedure and I suspect Network Rail and various train operators, would like to see it discontinued.
So if trains in a new London Overground version of the service, don’t go up the Watford DC Line or the West Coast Main Line, where do they turn back?
Note the siding to the East of the High Level platforms, which is labelled Willesden Junction Turnout.
This is regularly used to turnback London Overground services on the West London Line.
I feel that London Overground will be turning their replacement service in Willesden Junction High Level station.
Current train services at the station include.
- For passengers, who want to go further North, there is a good connection to the Watford DC Line for Wembley Central, Harrow & Wealdstone and Watford Junction stations.
- The Watford DC Line can also take you to Euston.
- The Bakerloo Line between Stonebridge Park and Elephant & Castle via Central London.
- Frequent North London Line services between Stratford and Richmond.
The station has kiosks, coffee stalls, toilets and waiting rooms.
There are certainly worse places to change trains.
The Southern Terminus
Obviously, existing travellers on the route would like to see as few changes as possible.
East Croydon station must be a possibility for the Southern terminus, as it is the currently used.
But East Croydon is a busy station and perhaps it is not a convenient station for trains to wait in the platform.
On the other hand, West Croydon station offers some advantages.
- The station has a long bay platform, which might be long enough for nine or ten cars.
- There is a separate turnback siding.
- It has space to add another bay platform, but this may have been sold to a developer.
- It already has a four tph London Overground service to Highbury & Islington station.
- Using West Croydon avoids the crowded lines to the North of East Croydon station.
It is also managed by London Overground, so the landlord would be co-operative.
How Many Trains Would Be Needed For A West Croydon And Willesden Junction Service?
West Croydon station has two possible routes, that trains could take to Willesden Junction.
- Via Norwood Junction and Clapham Junction in 55 minutes.
- Via Selhust and Clapham Junction in 45 minutes.
These times mean that a two-hour round trip between West Croydon and Willesden Junction should be possible.
Trains required for various frequencies would be as follows.
- One tph – Two trains.
- Two tph = Four trains.
- Four tph – Eight trains.
They would need to be dual voltage Class 710/2 trains, as are now running on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
Compare the figures with those for the current East Croydon and Milton Keynes service, which needs four pairs of four-car trains for an hourly service.
What Would Be The Frequency?
I think one, two and four tph are all possibilities!
One tph
One tph would be a direct replacement for the current service. But is it enough?
Services at West Croydon could probably share the bay platform with the existing Highbury & Islington station service.
Two tph
Two tph could be a compromise frequency.
Two tph could probably still share the current bay platform with the Highbury & Islington service.
Four tph
Four tph would be a full Turn-Up-And-Go service,
- It would probably be London Overground’s preference.
- It would give a very passenger-friendly eight tph between Willesden Junction and Clapham Junction stations.
- The two services would call at opposite sides of Clapham Junction station.
- It would give a four tph link between Croydon and High Speed Two.
- Westfield wouldn’t mind all the extra shoppers at Shepherds Bush!
But there could be downsides.
- The service could need an extra bay platform at West Croydon.
- Would it be possible to turn four tph at Willesden Junction?
- Will the train paths be available through South London.
But four tph would probably would be London Overground’s preference.
It will be interesting to see the reasons, why Transport for London choose a particular frequency.
A Trip Between Imperial Wharf And East Croydon Stations
Today, I took a trip between Imperial Wharf and East Croydon stations at around 11:30.
- The train was two four-car Class 377 trains working as an eight-car train.
- After Clapham Junction it wasn’t very busy.
- I was in the last car, which was empty, except for myself.
I came to the conclusion, that an eight-car train was too much capacity for the Southern section of the journey.
I suspect that Transport for London have detailed passenger estimates for this route, so they should be able to determine the frequency and length of replacement trains required.
The Upgraded Norwood Junction Station
In Major Upgrade Planned For Norwood Junction Railway Station, I talked about a plan to upgrade Norwood Junction station.
The idea behind the upgrade is to improve connectivity and capacity in the crowded Croydon area.
If the West Croydon and Willesden Junction service, was routed via Norwood Junction station, the upgraded station would give easy access to both East and West Croydon stations.
Conclusion
I’ve always liked Chris Gibb’s suggestion of the transfer of the service between East Croydon and Milton Keynes stations to the London Overground and I can now start to see flesh on the bones!
At the present time and until better data is available, I think the replacement service should be as follows.
- The Northern terminus should be Willesden Junction.
- The Southern terminus should be West Croydon station, where there are good tram and train connections.
- The route would be via Shepherds Bush, Kensington Olympia, West Brompton, Imperial Wharf, Clapham Junction, Wandsworth Common, Balham, Streatham Hill, West Norwood, Gipsy Hill, Crystal Palace and Norwood Junction.
- Going via Gipsy Hill, rather than the current route via Selhurst, would give access to the connectivity at Norwood Junction.
- The frequency should be four tph.
- Trains will be four- or five-car Class 710 trains.
The benefits would be as follows.
- The rail hubs of Clapham Junction, Norwood Junction, West Croydon and Willesden Junction would be connected together by a Turn-Up-And-Go service.
- The proposed four tph service would need eight Class 710 trains, whereas the current one tph service needs eight Class 377 trains. Would this be better value?
In the future with a connection to High Speed Two in the Old Oak Common area, the benefits would increase.
- There would be a simple interchange with High Speed Two.
- South London from Clapham to Croydon, would get a direct service to High Speed Two.
- There would also be a better connection to Heathrow Airport and other rail services through Old Oak Common.
I think that the connection to High Speed Two trumps everything else.
Will Southern Fit On-board Energy Storage To Class 377 Trains?
When I wrote Will London Overground Fit On-board Energy Storage To Class 378 Trains? in March, I didn’t look very hard at Southern’s collection of over two hundred Class 377 trains, of which forty-six are dual-voltage units.
I then read this article on the Railway Technical web site, which is entitled Southern’s 377/6 takes shape in Litchurch Lane. This is said in the article.
Regenerative braking capability was provided on the trains from the beginning but it was not used.
Things have improved in the last few years and some parts of the network can accept returned power, but the article adds this caveat.
If the train detects that the line is unable to take the extra voltage, the regenerated power is dumped into an on-board resistor grid.
So it would appear that the Class 377 trains could benefit from the addition of on-board energy storage.
How much of the electricity bill it would save, is I suspect known to the accountants and it should be a fairly simple analysis to see if on-board energy storage were to be fitted all or some of Class 377 trains.
But converting a small number of trains, would give Southern a train capable of replacing the Class 171 trains on London Bridge to Uckfield and the Marshlink Line.
Class 377 trains with an IPEMU capability on these routes might give operational benefits.
- London to East Grinstead is already run by Class 377 trains. So the same trains could be used on both branches, which must be a benefit for the operator, in terms of driver and staff training.
- Class 377 trains already run to the end of the electrification at Ore from Brighton, Eastbourne and Cannon Street, so it might be advantageous for both operator and passengers to continue some or all of these services to Ashford.
- Rye and the other stations on the Marshlink Line would get a direct electric service to London.
The only problem is that Hastings wouldn’t get a high-speed service to St. Pancras.
The Anonymous Widower 