The Anonymous Widower

Will Abellio East Midlands Railway Go Flirting?

Abellio take over the East Midlands franchise in a few days and it will be renamed to East Midlands Railway.

It has already disclosed that it will have three divisions.

  • EMR Intercity for long distance services from London St Pancras
  • EMR Regional for local services
  • EMR Electrics for the London St Pancras to Corby service

It has also confirmed it has ordered thirty-three AT-300 trains for EMR Intercity.

Wikipedia also shows, that the following trains will be transferred to East Midlands Railway.

The first three fleets will come from Abellio-run franchises and the last will be released fairly soon, as Hull Trains new fleet is arriving.

Looking at the EMR Regional fleet it will comprise.

Consider.

  • Many probably feel that the Class 153 trains are inadequate.
  • Except for the Class 170 trains, these trains are around thirty years old.
  • Some of the Class 156 trains, which will be transferred from Greater Anglia, are currently being replaced with brand-new Class 755 trains.
  • Abellio are going through extensive fleet replacement exercises in ScotRail, Greater Anglia and West Midlands Trains.

The EMR Regional routes, that they will run are a mixed bunch.

This page on the Department for Transport web site is an interactive map of the Abellio’s promises for East Midlands Railway.

Digging out the blurb for each route shows the following.

Norwich – Nottingham – Derby

Crewe – Derby – Nottingham

Matlock – Derby – Nottingham

Nottingham – Lincoln – Grimsby

Nottingham – Worksop

Nottingham – Skegness

Leicester – Nottingham

Peterborough – Lincoln – Doncaster

Barton-On-Humber – Cleethorpes

Lincoln – London

London – Oakham – Melton Mowbray

London- Leeds – York

 

Newark North Gate – Lincoln

I have come to a few conclusions.

The Fleet Is Not Being Expanded Enough To Retire The Class 153 Trains

Consider.

  • There are twenty-one Class 153 trains.
  • Five Class 170 trains and nine Class 156 trains are being added to the fleet.

Surely, this means that some Class 153 trains will be retained.

Perhaps, the remaining Class 153  trains, will be reorganised into two-car trains to increase capacity.

Extended Services Will Be Run Using New Bi-Mode AT-300 Trains

Services to Leeds and York, Oakham and Melton Mowbray and Lincoln would appear to be run by the new AT-300 trains that have been ordeed from Hitachi.

I’ve no problem with that,but there are three developments that may effect passenger numbers.

  • There is a lot of housing development in the Corby, Oakham and Melton Mowbray area.
  • There is a very large renewable energy sector developing in North Lincolnshire.
  • Sheffield are proposing to add new stations between Sheffield and Leeds, at Rotherham and Barnsley Dearne Valley.

Does the proposed service pattern take this fully into account?

In a way it doesn’t matter, as the worst that could happen, is that East Midlands Railway will need to increase the fleet size by a small number of trains.

Hopefully, they’ll just need to get Hitachi to build the trains!

Most Regional Services Will Be Run By Refurbished Modern Trains

Most services will be run by refurbished modern trains with the following features.

  • More reliable service
  • Improved comfort
  • Passenger information system
  • Free on-board wi-fi
  • At-seat power sockets
  • USB points
  • Air-conditioning
  • Tables at all seats
  • Increased luggage space

Can East Midlands Railway Refurbish Their Augmented Fleet To Meet Their Required Standards?

Consider.

  • The Class 170 trains are relatively recent and were built to a high standard, so can probably meet EMR’s standard.
  • The Class 158 trains are thirty years old and were built to a high standard, so they might be able to be upgraded to EMR’s standard.
  • The Class 156 trains are thirty years old and noisy and old-fashioned, so will need a lot of work to bring them up to EMR’s standard.
  • The Class 153 trains are thirty years old and only one car, so would probably be best retired or reduced to an auxiliary role like a bicycle car.
  • Only the Class 170 and Class 158 trains can be high standard trains.
  • All trains are diesel and only the Class 170 trains are possibly planned to be upgraded to more economical diesel hybrid trains

One additional option might be to refurbish some of the Class 222 trains, when they are replaced by the new Hitachi AT-300 trains on main line services, so they were suitable for the longer regional routes.

Will East Midlands Railway Replace The Fleet?

In their three other franchises in the UK; Greater Anglia, ScotRail and West Midlands Trains, Abellio have opted for replacement of all or a substantial part of the fleet.

So will the same action be taken at East Midlands Railway?

The company could do a lot worse, than invest in a fleet of Class 755 trains like Greater Anglia.

  • They could be a mix of lengths, so each route could have a train with capacity for the traffic.
  • The trains may be capable of 125 mph running on the Midland Main Line and the East Coast Main Line.
  • The interiors meet the company’s requirements.
  • The trains could use electrification , where it exists.
  • The trains could be fast enough to cover for the AT-300 trains.
  • Abellio Greater Anglia will soon have a large knowledge base for the trains.

The clincher could be, that as electrification increases, the trains could fit batteries and generate less carbon.

Conclusion

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Abellio East Midlands Railway buy a fleet of Class 755 trains for their EMR Regional services.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

August 7, 2019 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Is Bombardier’s 125 mph Bi-Mode Aventra With Batteries, A 125 mph Battery-Electric Aventra With Added Diesel Power To Extend The Range?

The LEVC TX taxi is described in Wikipedia as a plug-in hybrid range-extender electric vehicle.

Could Bombardier’s 125 mph Bi-mode Aventra with batteries, be an equivalent rail vehicle?

I will start with the Class 720 train for Greater Anglia, which is probably the nearest train to a 125 mph Aventra in production.

  • It is formed of ten-cars.
  • It is 243 metres long.
  • It can accommodate 1,100 seated and 290 standing passengers.
  • It has a 100 mph operating speed, although this article on the East Anglian Daily Times, says it will be tested at up to 110 mph.

I will use this information to make some assumptions about Bombardier’s proposed 125 mph bi-mode Aventra with batteries.

Weight Of A Ten-Car Class 720 Train

In The Formation Of A Class 710 Train, I give the weight and length of a four-car Class 710 train as the following.

  • Weight – 157.8 tonnes
  • Length – 82.88 metres

Adjusting this weight to the 243 metres length of a ten-car Class 720 train, gives a weight of 462.7 tonnes.

This is the best I can do for the moment.

Kinetic Energy Of A Train At 125 mph

This is my calculation.

  • The empty weight of the train is 462.7 tonnes
  • To that must be added 1390 passengers, who average out at 90 Kg each with baggage, bikes and buggies. This is 125.1 tonnes.
  • This gives a total train weight of 587.8 tonnes.
  • Using Omni’s Kinetic Energy Calculator, gives a kinetic energy of 255 kWh at 125 mph.

For those of you, who feel I am a bit cavalier over the use of mass and weight, I agree with you, but many reading this won’t know the difference.

Handling Regenerative Braking

Imagine a train stopping from 125 mph at a station.

  • Looking at the roof of a Class 345 train, they don’t have any resistor banks, so energy must be stored on the train or returned through the electrification. Are all Aventras the same? See Class 710 Train Rooves At Blackhorse Road Station.
  • The batteries must be able to handle all the energy generated by the traction motors in their braking mode.
  • So they must be able to handle the 255 kWh of a train running at 125 mph.

It would probably mean energy storage over 300 kWh.

Some Aventras Are Two Half Trains

In A Detailed Layout Drawing For A Class 345 Train, I give the formation of a nine-car Class 345 train as.

DMS+PMS+MS1+MS3+TS(W)+MS3+MS2+PMS+DMS

Note.

  1. Eight cars have motors and only one doesn’t.
  2. The train is composed of two identical half-trains, which are separated by the TS(W) car.
  3. There are four wheelchair spaces in the TS(W) car.

In this article in Global Rail News from 2011, which is entitled Bombardier’s AVENTRA – A new era in train performance, gives some details of the Aventra’s electrical systems. This is said.

AVENTRA can run on both 25kV AC and 750V DC power – the high-efficiency transformers being another area where a heavier component was chosen because, in the long term, it’s cheaper to run. Pairs of cars will run off a common power bus with a converter on one car powering both. The other car can be fitted with power storage devices such as super-capacitors or Lithium-ion batteries if required. The intention is that every car will be powered although trailer cars will be available.

Unlike today’s commuter trains, AVENTRA will also shut down fully at night. It will be ‘woken up’ by remote control before the driver arrives for the first shift

This was published over seven years ago, so I suspect Bombardier have refined the concept.

The extract talks about pairs of cars, which share the main electrical components.

So in the Class 345 train and possibly the ten-car Class 720 trains, are the DMS and PMS cars at the ends of the train, these pairs of cars?

I like the half-train concept, as I suspect a clever computer system on the train can reconfigure the train, if say a pantograph or other major component fails.

Distributing The Energy Storage

I feel that the best philosophy would be to distribute the batteries and/or supercapacitors through the train.

Energy storage of somewhere between thirty and sixty kWh in each car would probably be more than sufficient to handle the braking energy by a wide margin.

As typically, hybrid buses like London’s New Routemaster have batteries of about 60 kWh, I’m fairly certain a big enough battery could be placed under each car.

My Electrical and Control Engineering experience also suggests that if most axles are powered on the train, distributing the energy storage could mean shorter and more efficient cabling and electricity flows.

Could the train be a formation of more independent cars each with their own computer systems, connected by the common power bus mentioned in the earlier extract and a high-capacity computer network.

How Much Power Would A Train Need In The 125 mph Cruise?

I investigated this question in How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph? and came to the conclusion, that 3 kWh per vehicle mile is a sensible figure.

I also feel that as the three kWh per vehicle mile relates mainly to an InterCity 125, that Bombardier could do better with a modern train.

Consider.

  • Derby and Leicester are thirty miles apart.
  • A journey takes twenty minutes.
  • A train is running non-stop between the two stations at 125 mph.

Using the train consumption figure of three kWh per vehicle mile, means that a ten-car train would need 900 kWh.

The required power would need to be supplied at a rate of 2,700 kW.

This means one of the following.

  1. The train has an enormous on-board power-unit.
  2. The train has an enormous battery.
  3. The train has a very high aerodynamic and electrical efficiency.

Or it could be a figment of Bombardier’s imagination.

Only the Option 3 is feasible.

Consider.

  • Bombardier also build aircraft and must have some aerodynamicists, wind tunnels and other facilities of the highest class.
  • Aventras seem to have very clean lines.
  • Aventras are very quiet trains inside and outside.
  • Bombardier claim that the trains have intelligent air-conditioning and lighting.
  • Class 710 trains have an average car weight, which is seven percent lighter than Class 378 trains.

It is also known that Bombardier have had a lot of trouble programming the advanced Train Control and Management System (TCMS). I believe that this could be because it is very sophisticated and getting it right took longer than expected.

I say this because the specification for the first version of Artemis was challenging to program as so much was first-of-its-type software. It was late, but once correct, it became an amazing world-wide success.

Is the Aventra another game-changing project?

There are all sorts of ways, that a sophisticated TCMS, can save electricity on a train.

  • Ultra smooth acceleration and braking.
  • Intelligent power management.
  • Precise control of all train systems, like heating, air-conditioning and lighting, according to ambient conditions and passenger loading.
  • GPS or ERTMS-controlled Driver Assistance Systems.

Couple this with lightweight structures, innovative design and world-class aerodynamics and could the train have an electrical usage as low as one kWh per vehicle mile?

This would mean a train between Derby and Leicester would consume 300 kWh, at a rate of 900 kW for twenty minutes.

Have Bombardier read about the design of the Douglas Skyhawk?

Wikipedia says this about the design and development of the aircraft.

The Skyhawk was designed by Douglas Aircraft’s Ed Heinemann in response to a U.S. Navy call for a jet-powered attack aircraft to replace the older Douglas AD Skyraider (later redesignated A-1 Skyraider). Heinemann opted for a design that would minimize its size, weight, and complexity. The result was an aircraft that weighed only half of the Navy’s weight specification. It had a wing so compact that it did not need to be folded for carrier stowage. The first 500 production examples cost an average of $860,000 each, less than the Navy’s one million dollar maximum.

I remember reading how Heinemann was ruthless on saving weight and complexity to get a more capable aircraft.

Every improvement in efficiency means you need less power to power the train, which in a multi-mode train, means one or more of the following.

  • Physically-smaller diesel engines and fuel tanks.
  • Smaller hydrogen fuel cells and hydrogen tanks.
  • Smaller onboard energy storage.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see some radical weight-saving developments in the traction system. Lightweight diesel engines, energy storage and other large electrical components are all possibilities.

This all may seem pie-in-the-sky thinking, but a similar control revolution happened at Rollls-Royce with the RB 211 engine, when around 1990, full authority digital engine control or FADEC was developed

Is another company, with its designers and researchers in Derby going down the same route? Or do they all drink in the same pub?

Rolls-Royce certainly appear to have been successful, with their large aero engines.

I stated earlier that an energy use of one kWh per vehicle mile, would mean a train between Derby and Leicester would consume 300 kWh, at a rate of 900 kW.

Here’s a complete set of figures for a ten-car train.

  • 4 – 1200 kWh – 3,600 kW
  • 3 – 900 kWh – 2,700 kW
  • 2 – 600 kWh – 1800 kW
  • 1 – 300 kWh – 900 kW
  • 0.5 – 150 kWh – 450 kW

The second figure is the energy needed by the train between Derby and Leicester and the third is the rate, it would need to be supplied for a twenty-minute schedule.

Note how, that as the train gets more efficient and needs less power per vehicle mile, the rate of supplying energy to the train gets dramatically less.

Supplying 3,600 kW from electrification would be easy and trains like the Class 390 train are designed to take 5,000 kW to maintain 125 mph. But supplying that energy from on-board diesels or batteries would durely require enormous, heavy components.

Could 125 mph Be Sustained By Diesel Engines?

Bombardier have said, that their proposed High-Speed Bi-Mode Acentra with batteries will have the following characteristics.

  • Ability to run at 125 mph on both electricity and diesel.
  • A flat floor
  • A class-leading passenger environment.

The last two points are the difficult ones, as it means that engines must be smaller.

  • Smaller engines make a flat floor, which is so good for less-mobile passengers, buggy pushers or case-pullers, much easier to design.
  • Smaller engines make much less noise and vibration.

But surely, small engines wouldn’t provide enough power to drive the train at 125 mph.

CAF’s new Class 195 train has a Rolls-Royce MTU 6H1800R85L engine, which is rated at 390 kW in each car. These engines aren’t that noisy and fit neatly under the train floor. But disappointingly, they drive the train, through a noisy ZF Ecolife mechanical transmission.

Dimensions and weight of this engine are as follows.

  • Length – : 2.6-4 metres
  • Width – 2.1- 2.8 metres
  • Height – 0.8 metres
  • Dry Weight – 2.9-4.0 tonnes
  • Wet Weight – 3.0-4.2 tonnes

If engines like this were packaged properly with an alternator to generate electricity, I believe it would be possible to put enough power under the floor of a ten-car train.

  • The train is 240 metres long.
  • It will probably be two half trains, so it could be easy to fit two engines in each half train.
  • One engine could be under the driving cab and the other in the best place for balance.

I’m sure Rolls-Royce MTU could oblige.

They have a 12V1600R80LP PowerPack, described in this datasheet on the MTU web site.

  • It has a 700 kW output.
  • It is built for diesel-electric operation.
  • It is slightly larger than the engine in the Class 195 train.

Could one of these engines be put under each driving car?

Calculating backwards would mean that the train would need an energy use of 1.55 kWh per vehicle mile.

I believe that by good design, this is a very attainable figure.

As in London’s New Routemaster bus, the engines would top up the batteries on the train, which would then power the traction motors and the other train systems.

The TCMS would control everything.

  • Use an appropriate number of engines in every phase of the trip.
  • Raise and lower the pantograph without driver action.
  • Use battery power if required to boost diesel power.
  • Even out engine use, so that wear was equalised.

I’m led to the conclusion, that with power of about 1,400 kW from two modern underfloor diesel engines, a high-speed bi-mode Aventra with batteries can cruise at 125 mph.

Kinetic Energy Implications

If I modify the kinetic energy calculation to add ten tonnes for the diesel engines, the kinetic energy goes up to 259 kWh.

This may seem surprising, but the kinetic energy calculation is dominated by the square of the speed of the train.

If the engines at ten tonnes each, that only increases the train’s kinetic energy to 264 kWh.

One of the arguments against bi-mode trains, is that they are carrying heavy diesel engines around, that are doing nothing most of the time.

Whe  the train is accelerating to operating speed, some extra kWhs will be expended, but once in the cruise, they enjoy a free ride.

Stopping At A Station

As I said earlier, when the train is running at 125 mph, it has an energy of 255 kWh.

With the two added diesel engines, this could be a bit higher and perhaps up to 264 kWh.

This energy would be used to recharge the onboard storage at a station stop.

The TCMS would probably ensure that, when the train came to a full stop, the onboard storage was as full as possible.

In a five-minute stop, running the two diesel engines could add 116 kWh to the batteries, but I suspect an automatic charging system could be better.

Accelerating From A Station

Diesel power would probably not be enough working alone, but the energy in the onboard storage would also be used to accelerate the train to the 125 mph cruise.

Optimal Station Stops

The Class 720 trains on Greater Anglia will be sharing tracks and platforms on the Great Eastern Main Line with Class 745 and Class 755 trains from Stadler.  It has been stated by Greater Anglia, that the Stadler trains will provide level access between platform and train and will use gap fillers to improve the operation.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see the Class 720 trains providing level access on Greater Anglia, where most of the platforms seem to be fairly straight.

Level access is important, as it speeds up station calls by easing entry to and exit from the train.

Most of the stations on the Midland Main Line appear to be fairly straight. The exception was Market Harborough station, which has now been rebuilt with step-free access and straighter platforms.

I would think it extremely likely, that whatever bi-mode trains run the Midland Main Line in the future, they will save time on the current service, by executing very fast station stops.

I would expect that maximum stop time at the stations will be of the order of two minutes.

This time may not be long enough for a train to connect to a charger and take on more power for the batteries.

Conclusion

The TCMS and the way it manages all the energy on the train, is key to creating a successful 125 mph bi-mode Aventra with batteries.

It would appear that the diesel engines can be used as required to charge the batteries.

So it perhaps might be best to consider the train to be a battery one, with diesel engines.

As a Control Engineer, I’m proud of what Bombardier are doing.

But the aviation industry was doing this thirty years ago, so it has probably been a long time coming.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

July 9, 2019 Posted by | Transport | , , , , | 1 Comment

Abellio’s Plans For Nottingham And Crewe Via Derby

This page on the Department for Transport web site is an interactive map of the Abellio’s promises for East Midlands Railway.

These are mentioned for services between Nottingham and Crewe via Derby.. This is an extension of the current service which is two separate services, that need a change at Derby.

Crewe-Derby Services Will Operate With Increased Capacity Compared To Today

Consider.

  • Currently, the service between Derby and Crewe takes 43 minutes with another 30 minutes for Derby And Nottingham.
  • It is run by a Sprinter with one or two cars.
  • The service is hourly.
  • I suspect that a well-driven train will be able to do a round trip from Nottingham to Crewe and back in under three hours.

This would mean that three trains are needed to provide the hourly service.

But put four- or five-car Class 222 trains on the route and this would mean.

  • Much greater capacity.
  • Faster journeys.
  • More comfort and facilities.

If a train could do the round trip in under two hours, then just two trains would be needed for the hourly service.

Most Services Will Be Extended To And From Nottingham

I assumed this in the previous section and it appears sensible.

, Later Evening Service Is To Be Provided In Both Directions

Trains can never be too late.

Enhanced Sunday Service With A Regular Hourly service Starting Early In The Morning

You can’t fault that!

Increased Community Rail Partnership Funding

Or that one!

Refurbished Modern Trains

As with their plans for Nottingham to Norwich, they use the same words about the trains.

Read Abellio’s Plans For Norwich And Liverpool, to see what I said.

Wikipedia’s View

The Wikipedia entry for the Crewe-Derby Line says this about services on the route.

The line sees a basic hourly service in each direction with trains calling at all stations on the route however Peartree which is served by 2 Derby bound trains and 3 Crewe bound trains per weekday.

The majority of services on the route since December 2008 have been provided by Class 153 “Super Sprinter” Diesel Multiple Units however Class 158 “Express Sprinter” and Class 156 “Super Sprinter” units are occasionally used. Overcrowding remains a major issue on the route, particularly in the morning and evening peak and a weekends. Passengers are occasionally left behind.

A Class 222 train on this line with a 70 mph operating speed, must provide a better service.

Collateral Benefits

I see these as collateral benefits.

Extra Services Between Derby and Nottingham

If you take this plan with Abellio’s Plans For Norwich And Liverpool, they both have added an hourly service between Derby and Nottingham.

Better Connections To High Speed Two

\Will these extra services connect to High Speed Two at the East Midlands Hub station?

Remember that Abellio’s is an eight year franchise and High Speed Two will arrive in the area, at the time of the end of the franchise.

April 14, 2019 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Could A 125 Mph Electric Train With Batteries Handle The Midland Main Line?

In Bombardier’s 125 Mph Electric Train With Batteries, I investigated a pure electric train based on Bombardier’s proposed 125 mph bi-mode Aventra with batteries.

It would have the following characteristics.

  • Electric power on both 25 KVAC overhead and 750 VDC third-rail.
  • Appropriately-sized batteries.
  • 125 mph running, where possible on electrification and/or battery power.
  • Regenerative braking using the batteries.
  • Low energy interiors and systems.

It would be a train with efficiency levels higher than any train seen before.

It would also be zero-carbon at the point of delivery.

An Example 125 mph Train

I will use the same size and specification of train, that I used in Bombardier’s 125 Mph Electric Train With Batteries.

  • The train is five cars, with say four motored cars.
  • The empty train weighs close to 180 tonnes.
  • There are 430 passengers, with an average weight of 90 Kg each, with baggage, bikes and buggies.
  • This gives a total train weight of 218.7 tonnes.
  • The train is travelling at 200 kph or 125 mph.

Travelling at 200 kph, the train has an energy of 94.9 kWh.

I will also assume.

  • The train uses 15 kWh per mile to maintain the required line speed and power the train’s systems.
  • Regenerative braking is eighty percent efficient.

I will now do a few calculations.

Kettering To Leicester

Suppose one of the proposed trains was running between St. Pancras and Leicester.

  • I’m assuming there are no stops.
  • In a year or two, it should be able to run as far as Kettering using the new and improved 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
  • The train would leave the electrification at Kettering with a full charge in the batteries.
  • The train would also pass Kettering as close to the line speed as possible.
  • Hopefully, the twenty-nine miles without electrification between Kettering and Leicester will have been updated to have the highest possible line speed, with many sections capable of supporting 125 mph running.

I can do a rough-and-ready calculation, as to how much energy has been expended between Kettering and Leicester.

  • Twenty-nine miles at 15 kWh per mile is 435 kWh.
  • The train has a kinetic energy of 94.9 kWh at 125 mph and twenty percent will be lost in stopping at Leicester, which is 19 kWh.

This means that a battery of at least 454 kWh will be needed to propel the train to Leicester.

Kettering To Sheffield

If the train went all the way without stopping between Kettering and Sheffield, the energy used would be much higher.

One hundred-and-one miles at 15 kWh is 1515 kWh.

So given that the train will be slowing and accelerating, we’re probably talking of a battery capacity of around 2000 kWh.

In our five-car example train, this is 400 kWh per car.

Kettering To Sheffield With Stops

The previous calculation shows what can be achieved, but we need a practical train service.

When I last went to Sheffield, the train stopped at Leicester, Loughborough, East Midlands Parkway, Long Eaton, Derby and Chesterfield.

I have built an Excel spreadsheet, that models this route and it shows that if the train has a battery capacity of 2,000 kWh, the train will get to Sheffield with 371 kWh left in the battery.

  • Increase the efficiency of the regenerative braking and the energy left is 425 kWh.
  • Reduce the train’s energy consumption to 12 kWh per mile and the energy left is 674 kWh.
  • Do both and the energy left is 728 kWh.

The message is clear; train manufacturers and their suppliers should use all efforts to improve the efficiencies of trains and all of their components.

  • Aerodynamics
  • \Weight savings
  • Bogie dynamics
  • Traction motors
  • Battery capacity and energy density
  • Low energy lighting and air-conditioning

No idea however wacky should be discarded.

Network Rail also has a part to play.

  • The track should have as a high a line speed as is practical.
  • Signalling and timetabling should be designed to minimise interactions with other services.

Adding all these together, I believe that in a few years, we could see a train, that will consume 10 kWh per mile and have a regenerative braking efficiency of ninety-five percent.

If this can be achieved then the train will have 960 kWh in the batteries when it arrives in Sheffield.

Sheffield To Kettering

There is no helpful stretch of electrification at the Sheffield end of the route, so I will assume that there is a method of charging the batteries at Sheffield.

Unsurprisingly, as the train is running the same total distance and making the same number of stops, if the train starts with a full battery at Sheffield, it arrives at Kettering with the same amount of energy in the battery, as on the Northbound-run to Sheffield.

An Interim Conclusion

I am led to the interim conclusion, that given the continued upward curve of technology and engineering, that it will be possible to run 125 mph electric trains with an appropriately-sized battery.

How Much Battery Capacity Can Be Installed In A Train?

In Issue 864 of Rail Magazine, there is an article entitled Scotland High Among Vivarail’s Targets for Class 230 D-Trains, where this is said.

Vivarail’s two-car battery units contains four 100 kWh lithium-ion battery rafts, each weighing 1.2 tonnes.

Consider.

  • Vivarail’s cars are 18.37 metres long.
  • Car length in a typical Aventra, like a Class 720 train, is 24 metres.
  • Aventras have been designed for batteries and supercapacitors, whereas the D78 trains, used as a base for the Class 230 train,were not.
  • Batteries and supercapacitors are getting better all the time.
  • Batteries and supercapacitors can probably be built to fit in unusually-shaped spaces.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see Aventras being able to take double the capacity of a Class 230 train under each car.

I wouldn’t rule out 2,000 kWh energy storage capacity on a five-car train, that was designed for batteries.

The actual size installed would depend on operator, weight, performance and cost.

My Excel spreadsheet shows that for reliable operation between Kettering and Sheffield, a battery of at least 1200 kWh is needed, with a very efficient train.

Charging Trains En-Route

I covered en-route charging fully in Charging Battery/Electric Trains En-Route.

I came to this conclusion.

I believe it is possible to design a charging system using proven third-rail technology and batteries or supercapacitors to transfer at least 200 kWh into a train’s batteries at each stop.

This means that a substantial top up can be given to the train’s batteries at stations equipped with a fast charging system.

An Astonishing Set Of Results

I use astonishing lightly, but I am very surprised.

I assumed the following.

  • The train uses 15 kWh per mile to maintain the required line speed and power the train’s systems.
  • Regenerative braking is eighty percent efficient.
  • The train is fitted with 600 kWh of energy storage.
  • At each of the six stations up to 200 kWh of energy can be transferred to the train.

Going North the train arrives in Sheffield with 171 kWh in the energy storage.

Going South the train arrives at Kettering with 61 kWh in the energy storage.

Probably a bit tight for safety, but surprising nevertheless.

I then tried with the following.

  • The train uses 12 kWh per mile to maintain the required line speed and power the train’s systems.
  • Regenerative braking is ninety percent efficient.
  • The train is fitted with 500 kWh of energy storage.
  • At each of the six stations up to 200 kWh of energy can be transferred to the train.

Going North the train arrives in Sheffield with 258 kWh in the energy storage.

Going South the train arrives at Kettering with 114 kWh in the energy storage.

It would appear that increasing the efficiency of the train gives a lot of the improvement.

Finally, I put everything, at what I feel are the most efficient settings.

  • The train uses 10 kWh per mile to maintain the required line speed and power the train’s systems.
  • Regenerative braking is ninety-five percent efficient.
  • The train is fitted with 500 kWh of energy storage.
  • At each of the six stations up to 200 kWh of energy can be transferred to the train.

Going North the train arrives in Sheffield with 325 kWh in the energy storage.

Going South the train arrives at Kettering with 210 kWh in the energy storage.

These sets of figures prove to me, that it is possible to design a 125 mph battery/electric hybrid train and a set of charging stations, that will make St. Pancras to Sheffield by electric train, a viable possibility without any more electrification.

Should The Train Be Fitted With A Means Of Charging The Batteries?

Why not?

Wires do go down and rest assured, a couple of battery/electric hybrids would get stuck!

So a small diesel or hydrogen generator to allow a train to limp a few miles might not be a bad idea.

Electrification Between Sheffield And Clay Cross On The Midland Main Line

In The UK’s New High Speed Line Being Built By Stealth, there is a sub-section with the same title as this sub-section.

This is the first part of that sub-section.

This article on Rail Technology Magazine is entitled Grayling Asks HS2 To Prepare For Electrification Of 25km Midland Main Line Route.

If this electrification happens on the Midland Main Line between Sheffield and Clay Cross, it will be another project in turning the line into a high speed route with a 200 kph operating speed, between London and Sheffield.

Currently, the electrified section of the line South of Bedford is being upgraded and the electrification and quadruple tracks are being extended to Glendon Junction, where the branch to Corby leaves the main line.

The proposed electrification will probably involve the following.

  • Upgrading the line to a higher speed of perhaps 225 kph, with provision to increase the speed of the line further.
  • Rebuilding of Chesterfield station in readiness for High Speed Two.
  • Full electrification between Sheffield and Clay Cross.

Clay Cross is significant, as it is where the Midland Main Line splits into two Southbound routes.

Note.

  1. Some of the tunnel portals in the Derwent Valley are Listed.
  2. Trying to electrify the line through the World Heritage Site will be a legal and engineering nightmare.
  3. Network Rail has spent or is spending £250million on upgrading the Erewash Valley Line.
  4. High Speed Two will reach The East Midlands Hub station in 2032.

When High Speed Two, is extended North from the East Midlands Hub station, it will take a route roughly following the M1. A spur will link High Speed Two to the Erewash Valley line in the Clay Cross area, to enable services to Chesterfield and Sheffield.

But until High Speed Two is built North of the East Midlands Hub station, the Erewash Valley Line looks from my helicopter to be capable of supporting 200 kph services.

If this electrification is performed, it will transform the prospects for battery/electric hybrid trains between London and Sheffield.

  • Trains will have to run fifteen miles less on battery power.
  • Trains will arrive in both St. Pancras and Sheffield with batteries that are at least three-quarters full.
  • Returning the trains will fill them up on the electrification at the end of the line.
  • There will probably not be a need for charging systems at St. Pancras, Chesterfield and Sheffield.

I also think, that as the train could arrive in Sheffield with a full battery, there is the possibility of extending services past Sheffield to Barnsley, Huddersfield and cLeeds, if the operator felt it was a worthwhile service.

Nottingham

Nottingham is just eight miles from East Midlands Parkway station, which is less distance than Derby.

So if the battery/electric hybrid trains can reach Derby from Kettering on Battery power, with some help from charging at Leicester and Loughborough, the trains can reach Nottingham, where charging would be installed.

Conclusion

From my calculations, I’m sure that an efficient battery/electric hybrid train can handle all current services on the Midland Main Line, with third-rail charging at intermediate stations.

I do think though, that if Sheffield to Clay Cross Junction is electrified in preparation for High Speed Two, that it makes the design easier and the economics a lot better.

It would also give Sheffield a genuine sub-two hour service to London, which would only get better.

 

 

November 1, 2018 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

By Rail Between Derby And Manchester via Sheffield

In his article entitled Connecting The Powerhouses in the June 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, Colin Boocock, says that the one rail route between Derby and Manchester, is to go via Sheffield.

There is one train an hour that takes one hour 38 minutes with a change at Sheffield. The two legs appear to take 33 and 52 minutes respectively with a thirteen minute wait at Sheffield station, which is a well-equipped station.

Change the destination to Manchester Airport and it’s still one train an hour and the journey takes two minutes over two hours.

Incidentally, the fastest trains to Manchester and Manchester Airport via Sheffield seem to be the same trains.

Improving the times on this route will not be easy.

  • Stops are minimal at only Chesterfield, Stockport, Manchester Piccadilly and Manchester Airport.
  • The service uses the 90 mph Hope Valley Line between Sheffield and Manchester.
  • The only electrification is between Stockport and Manchester Airport.
  • Electrification from Sheffield to Stockport on the Hope Valley Line will be difficult because of the terrain and the countryside lobby.
  • Electrification from Derby to Sheffield will be difficult, as the line goes through a World Heritage Site.

The closure of the electrified Woodhead Line to passenger traffic in 1970, with the benefit of hindsight, now looks to be a crass decision of the highest order. I assume that, the great friend of the railways; Harold Wilson was in charge!

Conclusions

Going between Derby and Manchester by rail is a practical proposition, but it is a route, which would be difficult to improve.

 

June 3, 2017 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , | 1 Comment

By Rail Between Derby And Manchester via Stoke

In his article entitled Connecting The Powerhouses in the June 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, Colin Boocock, says that the best rail route between Derby and Manchester, is to go via Stoke.

There is one train an hour that takes one hour 44 minutes with a change at Stoke. The two legs appear to take 51 and 42 minutes respectively with an eleven minute wait at Stoke station, which is a well-equipped Virgin station.

Change the destination to Manchester Airport and there is an extra change of train and a journey which is at least half-an-hour longer.

You can actually do Derby to Manchester Airport in a couple of minutes over two hours, if you go via Sheffield.

But it does seem a bit crazy, as Manchester Airport is actually eight miles closer to Derby if you drive.

Stoke is well connected to Manchester with up to four trains per hour to Manchester Piccadilly, some of which take just forty minutes. Manchester Airport takes just over the hour with a change at Crewe or Manchester Piccadilly.

The Crewe to Derby Line links Derby and Stoke via Uttoxeter.

This description of the route comes from this section in Wikipedia.

The route is double track for all of its length except for a three-mile section between Alsager and Crewe, which was singled by British Rail. Whilst the majority of the route is not electrified, the section between Stoke Junction and Crewe is as this is a part of the West Coast Main Line.

This means that it should be possible to run electric trains between Manchester Airport and Stoke. As there would be no chnge at Crewe using best times on Stoke-Crewe and Crewe-Manchester Airport giives a time of about fifty minutes.

The route between Stoke and Derby is not electrified and the operating speed of the line is given as 70 mph.

Surely, as it connects Derby and Nottingham to Stoke and the electrified West Coast Main Line, it should have a faster operating speed. In an ideal world, Derby to Stoke must be a prime candidate for electrification. Some of London Overground’s redundant 100 mph Class 317 trains could probably do Derby to Stoke in perhaps thirty-five minutes.

So with electrification all the way, a time of about one hour twenty -five minutes between Derby and Stoke would be possible in a train, that once graced the Stansted Express. So it’s even got luggage racks.

But Derby to Stoke won’t be electrified for years, so could the current service get passengers to Stoke?

There is a section called Services in the Wikipedia entry for the Crewe-Stoke Line. This is said.

The line sees a basic hourly service in each direction with trains calling at all stations on the route however Peartree which is served by 2 Derby bound trains and 3 Crewe bound trains per weekday.

The majority of services on the route since December 2008 have been provided by Class 153 “Super Sprinter” Diesel Multiple Units however Class 158 “Express Sprinter” and Class 156 “Super Sprinter” units are occasionally used. Overcrowding remains a major issue on the route, particularly in the morning and evening peak and a weekends. Passengers are occasionally left behind.

That is a truly pitiful service, as the main rail route from Derby to Manchester is run by a single-coach Class 153 train at times.

It’s amazing anybody trusts the line enough to use it.

As with the Derwent Valley Line, which I wrote about in Exploring The Derwent Valley Line, the problem is probably down to a shortage of suitable trains.

The line needs a suitable bi-mode train.

  • At least four-cars.
  • Airport interior with  luggage racks.
  • Possibly a First Class compartment.
  • Ability to do the forty miles between Stoke and Nottingham on diesel.

A Flex version of a Class 317 train would do nicely and could probably do Nottingham to Manchester Airport in two hours. This would mean.

  • Four trains could provide an hourly service.
  • Eight trains would provide a two trains per hour service.

Would you believe that London Overground will release the eight Class 317/7 trains with the Airport interior next year, when they are replaced by new Class 710 trains?

Conclusion

The more I do little exercises like this, the more I believe that Porterbrook’s Flex concept is not only high-class engineering, but it is a idea, that has arrived at exactly the right time.

The only problem with converting Class 317 trains, is they are owned by Angel Trains! I’m sure that that is not an insurmountable problem!

June 2, 2017 Posted by | Transport | , , , , | 1 Comment

Ilkeston Station Opens

I went to the new Ilkeston station this morning and took these pictures.

It is not the most sophisticated of stations and it is worth comparing the design with Lea Bridge station.

This picture is from A Look At Lea Bridge Station, which shows the station in detail.

 

Alongside Lea Bridge Station

 

Comparing Ilkeston and Lea Bridge stations, there are similarities and differences.

  • Both stations are built adjacent to existing road bridges.
  • Both road bridges have some good brickwork and a utilitarian span over the railway.
  • Both stations have two platforms on the outside of a double-track main line.
  • Both stations don’t have ticket barriers.
  • Lea Bridge has lifts and Ilkeston has long ramps for step-free access.
  • Lea Bridge is fitted with comprehensive CCTV for Driver Only Operation (DOO). Ilkeston is not!
  • Ilkeston has car parking and Lea Bridge has none.

Both stations cost around ten million pounds, with perhaps Lea Bridge slightly more because of the lifts and DOO cameras.

My Overall View

I think that Ilkeston station is a job well-done by the architect to keep costs to a minimum for a well-functioning station, that meets all current and future regulations.

These are more details on various features.

The Station Entrance

One of my gripes with Lea Bridge station, is that when I use that station, I take a bus to it, which drops me just before the road bridge over the station. I then have to walk past the station footbridge, with no possible access and in a great circle to get to the station entrance at the side.

At Ilkeston, those walking to the station by the side of the road that crosses the bridge, just walk over the station footbridge, from which they walk down to their chosen platform.

This is a much better arrangement and will surely suggest to passers-by, that using the train isn’t a hassle.

When I went to Ilkeston, some months ago, I remember that the area between the Town Centre had what developers call potential and perhaps could be turned into a green walking and cycling route.

This Google Map shows the relationship between the town and the station.

It certainly isn’t as desolate as the Town Centre was on my last visit. There’s even a Marks and Spencer’s Simply Food store in a retail park, just a couple of hundred metres from the station.

I made a mistake in not exploring that way today, as it looked not to be finished.

I shall return!

Car Parking

The car parks are on both sides of the tracks, which is good for the able-bodied passengers, as if space allows they can park where is best for their personal circumstances.

My one worry about the car parking, is that 150 spaces might not be enough.

On the other hand car ownership is low in the Erewash Valley! So perhaps they expect a lot of passengers to walk to the station.

Access To The Platforms

At present, the landscaping is not finished on the Nottingham-bound side (Platformk 2) of the station and I suspect the walking route to the platform will be improved.

But supposing you are a passenger with a touch of arthritis and failing eyesight. Whatever side you park your car, you will have to negotiate both  long ramps to cross the tracks, when you catch a train out of Ilkeston or on your return.

But saying that several London Overground stations near me use long ramps and there doesn’t appear to be too many protests.

Lifts would of course be better. But a lot more costly!

Picking Up And Dropping Off Passengers

The drop-off/pick-up point is by the Chesterfield-bound Platform 1, but I suspect that when the station is completed, drivers will be able to do the drop-off/pick-up in the car park by Platform 2.

Taxi Rank

The taxi rank is  by the Chesterfield-bound Platform 1, so passengers arriving on Platform 2 will have to cross the tracks on the footbridge.

I did talk to a taxi driver called Paul Kitchener,  who is one half of a taxi company called Paul and Jackie Taxi. I was able to find them on Fscebook, so if you have special needs for a taxi and you don’t live in Ilkeston, you could always contact them first.

Shelters and Ticket Machines

As expected a shelter is provided on both platforms, but perhaps more surprisingly, there is a ticket machine on both platforms as well.

Thjs duplication of ticket machines is to be welcomed, as is placing them in an obvious place on the platform.

The Germans make their ticket machines very easy to find, which is not often the policy of some of our train operators.

Two ticket machines by stairs to the footbridge, which pedestrians will use as access to the station, is an idea, that might result in more revenue for the train operator.

Bike And Motor-Cycle Parking

I didn’t see much, although there were a few hoops outside Platform 1

Coffee Kiosks

A guy from London Overground, told me that if you have a coffee kiosk on the platform, it may attract more passengers.

The platforms at Ilkeston might not be quite big enough for a kiosk, but I’m certain the architect has ideas.

Future Proofing

There have been troubles recently, where stations have been built without enough clearance for future electrification.

Without getting out a measure, it appears that the two existing road bridges and the new foot-bridge at Ilkeston, may have enough clearance to satisfy the most nit-picking of inspectors. The bridge that could be dodgy is the rusty road bridge and that would not be the most difficult bridge to replace with a new one.

Perhaps, as it has not been given a coat of paint, the new bridges are being constructed, as I write.

The design of the station, would also allow the following.

  • Two fast lines through the station, between Platform 2 and the boundary fence, where there is already an avoiding line.
  • The possibility of putting a second face on Platform 2, so that a bay platform or a platform on a fast line could be created.
  • The addition of lifts.

I also suspect that the platforms are long enough for a Class 222 train to call.

A Good Local Reaction

One of the staff told me that he reckoned about five hundred people had come to have a look at the new station, which he felt was more than expected.

Several, that I spoke to seemed enthusiastic.

One couple, I spoke to, said forty-eight pounds each was a lot to get see their daughter and her family. But yet again, they hadn’t heard of the Two Together Railcard. They felt thirty-two pounds was a lot more reasonable.

Services

Current services through the station are an hourly train between Leeds and Nottingham via Sheffield and a two-hourly service between Liverpool and Nottingham via Manchester.

This gives an impressive list of destinations from Ilkeston, that includes Barnsley, Chesterfield, Ely (for Cambridge), Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Norwich, Nottingham and Sheffield.

But what is missing are connections to Birmingham, Derby, London and Mansfield.

London will be solved in the future, when passengers by their journey hsbits put sufficient pressure on the train operator.

A solution for Derby and Mansfield was proposed in this article in the Nottingham Post which is entitled Hopes HS2 could see ‘Maid Marian Line’ opened to passengers.

There is a freight-only line between Kirkby-in-Ashfield station on the Robin Hood Line and Pye Bridge on the Erewash Valley Line, on which Ilkeston is situated.

The proposal would allow trains to go between Kirkby-in-Ashfield via Pinxton and Selston to Langley Mill and Ilkeston and then on to Toton for HS2.

From there services could go on to Nottingham or Derby and also give access to the Nottingham Express Transit at Toton.

In my view, the ideal service would be Mansfield to Derby via Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Langley Mill, Ilkeston, Toton (when built), Long Eaton and Spondon.

At Derby, there is also up to four trains per hour to Birmingham.

Conclusion

This is a fine station, which has been built at a keen price, which with more services will be a big asset to Ilkeston.

 

April 2, 2017 Posted by | Transport | , , , | 1 Comment

Plans For East Midlands Hub Station For HS2 Are Beginning To Emerge

East Midlands Hub (Toton) station depending on who’s writing the words is beginning to emerge from HS2’s plans. (I shall use Toton HS2 in this post, to emphasise I mean the HS2 station.) Wikipedia says this about the station.

It is intended to be located on the existing railway sidings in Toton, situated between Nottingham and Derby. A connection to the Nottingham tram system and new connections to existing rail services are proposed, to link the station to Nottingham, Derby and Leicester railway stations. The station would be located adjacent to the M1 motorway in Nottinghamshire, close to the border with Derbyshire.

This Google Map shows the location.

toton

The red arrow marks Toton Lane Tram Stop, which is a Psrk-and-Ride terminus of the Nottingham Express Transit. Between the tram stop and the M1, the Erewash Valley Line passes through in a North-South alignment. South of the East-West A52 is the site of Toton Sidings, which is proposed for the new Toton HS2 station.

I think that HS2 have made a good start in the planning of the connections at this station.

Link To Nottingham Express Transit

Extension of route 1 to serve HS2 at Toton and Derby is a section in the Wikipedia entry for the Nottingham Express Transit.

This is said.

News that a station for the proposed HS2 line (the East Midlands Hub) is likely to be built on the site of Toton sidings, only a short distance from the Toton Lane terminus has fuelled speculation that the line could be extended to the new station. In November 2015 there was a proposal for the tram network to be extended from Toton to Derby. Two routes were later proposed by the D2N2 local enterprise partnership for the route to Derby. The first route would be via the A52 while the second would be via Borrowash and Spondon.

This is not a cheapskate extension to connect Nottingham to HS2, but a proper solution, that creates a high-capacity link running from Nottingham to Derby via the new Toton HS2 station.

  • The A52 is the East-West road connecting Derby and Nottingham, which is clearly shown on the Google Map.
  • Borrowash is a village at the Western edge of the Google Map, with Spondon, which has a station on the Midland Main Line to Derby, just off the map to the West.

I wouldn’t rule out the possibility of extending the trams from Toton HS2 using tram-trains to go via Long Eaton and Spondon to Derby.

  • Tram-trains could use existing track between Toton HS2 and Derby, provided it was electrified.
  • Daul-voltage tram-trains would be needed to work on main line and tramway electrification.
  • Journey time from Derby to Toton HS2 could be around 20 minutes.
  • Network Rail’s plan to move Long Eaton station should make this easier.
  • A high frequency service could be run.
  • Extra stops could be introduced.
  • There are tram-train versions of the Alstom Citadis trams used in Nottingham.

Tram-trains would need 25 KVAC electrification along the route between Toton HS2 and Derby stations. But surely the Midland Main Line electrification will have got to these two stations by 2026 or so!

Nottingham To Derby Via Toton HS2

Nottingham and Derby are two very different cities, but both are successful in their own ways.

Currently, there are about three direct trains per hour (tph) between the two cities.

  • Birmingham-Coventry has 7 tph
  • Birmingham-Wolverhampton has 9 tph and the Midland Metro.
  • Manchester-Leeds has 8 tph
  • Leeds-Bradord has 6 tph

Nottingham and Derby get a very raw deal and working on the London Overground/Merseyrail principle of Turn-Up-And-Go , Derby and Nottingham need a four tph connecting service to give passengers something that is acceptable.

As with Birmingham-Woverhampton, a mix of heavy rail, tram and perhaps tram-train might give the two cities the service to Toton HS2 and between themselves, that they need.

Bssed on good practice in London, Birmingham and Liverpool, I would provide the following minimum service.

  • 4 tph – Express heavy rail stopping at Beeston, Toton HS2, Long Easton and Spondon.
  • 4 tph – Tram-train stopping everywhere between Hucknall and Derby via Beeston, Toton HS2, Long Eaton and Spondon.
  • 3 tph – Extra long distance trains calling at both, which would probably also stop at Toton HS2.

It would be a darn site better than what is currently provided.

A Notts/Derbys Crossrail

There might even be a case for a Newark to Burton-on-Trent service via Nottingham, Toton HS2, Long Eaton and Derby. It would be Notts/Derbys version of Crossrail, feeding passengers from all over the area to HS2.

Nottingham City Centre To London In Under 90 Minutes

Currently Nottingham to London takes one hour forty minutes by the fastest trains. But after HS2 opens, it would take 30 minutes from Nottingham to Toton HS and the 52 minutes by HS2 to London.

So even if the classic service to St. Pancras gets faster and more frequent, will passengers opt for the quicker HS2 from Toton HS2?

If say Toton HS2 to London was four tph and run on almost a Turn-Up-And-Go basis, and the connections to Derby and Nottingham were upwards of six tph, the classic trains will have to work hard to maintain market share.

Derby to London wouldn’t show the same improvement as Nottingham to London, but the service could be more frequent and probably well under ninety ,minutes.

The big winners would be the passengers from the Far West of Derby to the Far East of Nottingham.

Using The Erewash Valley Line

Network Rail is improving the Erewash Valley Line. Under Future  is a section in the Wikipedia entry for the line.

This is said.

Network Rail as part of a £250 million investment in the regions railways has proposed improvements to the junctions at each end, resignalling throughout, and a new East Midlands Control Centre.

As well as renewing the signalling, three junctions at Trowell, Ironville and Codnor Park will be redesigned and rebuilt. Since the existing Midland Main Line from Derby through the Derwent Valley has a number of tunnels and cuttings which are listed buildings and it is a World Heritage Area, it seems that the Erewash line is ripe for expansion.

It would seem that Network Rail are creating a 125 mph-plus line between East Midlands Parkway and Chesterfield stations. Is this part of a pragmatic philosophy to improve services from London to Chesterfield and Sheffield.

  • Derby to Chesterfield along the Derwent Valley will not be electrified because of heritage and engineering reasons.
  • Derby to Sheffield via Chesterfield will be served by bi-mode or other independently-powered trains.
  • The Erewash Valley Line will be electrified and could even be cleared to allow 140 mph running.
  • London to Sheffield trains would go via East Midlands Parkway, Long Eaton, Toton HS2 and Chesterfield.

Even if HS2 isn’t built, Chesterfield and Sheffield would get a vastly improved service to London.

When HS2 is built to Toton HS2,  HS2 can take advantage of the Erewash Valley Line to create faster services to the North.

Extending HS2 To Sheffield

If HS2 can get to Toton HS2 in 52 minutes, surely this could mean a London-Sheffield time of well under two hours once the Erewash Valley Line is electrified, even if passengers had to change trains.

But I think we know enough about the dynamics of High Speed Trains, that can run at 225 mph on High Speed Lines to get them to run at 125 or even 140 mph on high standard main lines, like the Midland Main Line.

After HS2 opens to Toton HS2, Chesterfield and Sheffield would get a better service from London in three ways.

  • Direct from London on the Midland Main Line.
  • By HS2 with a change at Toton HS2 to a classic service.
  • By HS2 direct.

All services would use the electrified Erewash Valley Line to get to Chesterfield.

It should be noted that from 2020, London-Norwich will be on a frequency of 3 tph. Surely, the much larger Sheffield needs 4 tph to and from London.

Using The Robin Hood Line

The Robin Hood Line goes between Nottingham in the South to Mansfield Woodhouse and Worksop in the North.

  • It is an underdeveloped line with diesel multiple units running to a frequency of 2 tph.
  • The Southern end of the line connects to the tracks through Toton HS2, so it wouldn’t be difficult to use the new station as an additional terminus for the Robin Hood Line.
  • At the Northern end, there is scope to develop new branches.

I can envisage Nottingham developing the Robin Hood Line into a suburban network feeding passengers to both the City Centre and Toton HS2.

Extending HS2 to North Nottinghamshire And Lincoln

In  After The Robin Hood Line Will Nottingham See The Maid Marian Line?, I wrote about an article in the Nottingham Post is entitled Hopes HS2 could see ‘Maid Marian Line’ opened to passengers.

There is a freight only line, that if reopened to passenger traffic would allow trains to connect from Toton HS2, through Ilkeston and Langley Mill to North Nottinghamshire and all the way across Lincolnshire to Lincoln, thus giving a large area direct access to HS2.

Lincoln to London would be under two hours with a change at Toton HS2.

Will All Sorts Of Towns And Cities Get The Benefit Of Direct HS2 Trains?

I have mentioned a lot of stations at various town and cities in this post.

To take Langley Mill station as an example, currently this gets at least one fast train a day to and from St. Pancras.

When the new HS2 trains are running between London, Chesterfield and Sheffield via Toton HS2, will they do the same thing?

If they do, then stations like Ilkeston, Langley Mill and Alfreton could get a direct HS2 service to and from Birmingham and London.

One of the things to note, is that the new trains will be much faster at stopping and getting on their way again, than the current generation of trains, so adding stops between Toton HS and Sheffield. won’t delay the service like it does today.

As I said earlier, I believe there could be a similar connecting service from Toton HS2 to Lincoln, calling at Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Mansfield, Gainsborough, Lincoln and Cleethorpes.

The train to Lincoln would probably be a short five can train and it would couple and uncouple with a similar train at Toton for the express journey South.

Other destinations from Toton HS, might include Doncaster, Doncaster Airport and Hull.

It’s one thing for a short train to trundle round Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire at 100 mph, but when on HS2, you probably need two trains coupled together to maximise the use of a limited number of train paths.

Connections could also be created using slower trains! But they wouldn’t be so sexy!

A New City At Toton

The Sunday Times has an article this week, which was entitled Next Arrival On The HS2 Line: A Brand New City.

It is an interesting proposition.

  • There’s certainly space between Derby and Nottingham.
  • Birmingham will be 19 minutes away by HS2.
  • London will be within the hour.
  • The M1 will pass right through the city.

But above all we need more housing.

Conclusion

The HS2 station at East Midlands Hub or Toton HS2, is a lot more than a HS2 station for Nottingham and Derby.

I would do the following.

  • Electrify to Sheffield on the Erewash Valley Line and between Derby and Nottingham.
  • Extend the Nottingham Express Transit to Derby via Toton HS2 using tram-train technology.
  • Run a 4 tph express local service between Derby and Nottingham via Toton HS2.
  • Make sure that HS2  reaches Toton HS2 as soon as possible.
  • Build the new city at Toton.

Surely because the Nottingham-Derby area has a lot to gain from HS2, it would probably be very beneficial for HS2’s revenue.

 

 

 

February 13, 2017 Posted by | Transport | , , , , | 1 Comment

Thoughts On Midland Main Line Electrification

I have been thinking about how the method of electrifying the Midland Main Line might change if the Aventra IPEMU was available.

These are thoughts in no particular order.

The Battery High Speed Train

An Aventra uses a modern version of the same bogies that are used in the Class 222 trains, which are capable of 200 kph. As the Class 387 train, which is a version of the Electrostar, can travel at 110 mph, I wouldn’t rule out that the more modern Aventra could run at 200 kph or 125 mph.

Acceleration on batteries would be the problem, not maintaining a high speed. that had been built up whilst running under the wires.

Also, when the train comes to the end of its northward journey at say Corby, it has to brake. With regenerative braking on the Aventra IPEMU, all of this energy would go back into the batteries.

So does this mean that no charging would need to be provided at say Corby?

I’m not totally sure of the mathematics and physics, but I’m certain that a battery electric train with regenerative braking, would put a significant part of the electricity it would need to accelerate away from a station, into the batteries as it stopped.

This would mean that stops at Wellingborough and Kettering would not stop Corby services from reaching their destination.

St. Pancras to Corby

I estimate that the distance from the end of the electrification at Bedford and Corby station is about thirty five miles.

This would mean that this route out of St.Pancras could be covered by an Aventra IPEMU.

Would this release a Class 222 train for use elsewhere? Or would the Aventra IPEMUs enable East Midlands Trains to offer more capacity or an increased frequency on this service?

St. Pancras to Leicester

I estimate that the distance from the end of the electrification at Bedford and Leicester station is about fifty miles.

This would mean that this route out of St.Pancras to Leicester could be covered by an Aventra IPEMU, especially if it were possible to recharge the train at Leicester, using the sort of short electrification, I wrote about at Rugeley Trent Valley station in Up And Down The Chase Line.

Leicester has problems as a station, as this extract from Wikipedia says.

Train operators using the station include CrossCountry and East Midlands Trains. Due to a 15 mph maximum speed to the south of the station, all passenger trains stop at the station. Up until the winter 2008 timetable, the morning southbound The Master Cutler express from Leeds to London St Pancras was an exception although this now also calls.

Leicester is a bottleneck station as it has only four platforms. All platforms are well utilised, especially platforms two and three which receive freight as well as passenger trains. A freight loop goes to the east of the station alongside the carriage sidings which run adjacent to platform four.

This Google Map of the station shows the platforms and the freight loop.

Leicester Station

Leicester Station

It does look that there would be space to expand the station and from this section in Wikipedia, I’m sure Network Rail are working on an upgrade to the area to address all the problems.

It would appear to be stating the obvious to say, that Leicester station must be sorted first before any electrification in the area.

An extra bay platform would probably allow Aventra IPEMUs to run an electrified service to St. Pancras, if East Midlands Trains felt this was needed. Because of the regenerating braking of the train, it might not be necessary to provide a means of charging the trains at Leicester.

Creating A High Speed Route To Chesterfield and Sheffield

A few years ago, much of the Erewash Valley Line was upgraded ready for electrification and high speed running. On the Future of this line, Wikipedia says this.

Network Rail as part of a £250 million investment in the regions railways has proposed improvements to the junctions at each end, resignalling throughout, and a new East Midlands Control Centre.

As well as renewing the signalling, three junctions at Trowell, Ironville and Codnor Park will be redesigned and rebuilt. Since the existing Midland Main Line from Derby through the Derwent Valley has a number of tunnels and cuttings which are listed buildings and it is a World Heritage Area, it seems that the Erewash line is ripe for expansion. As the new signalling is rolled out, train detection is moving away from the traditional Track circuit detection of trains to Axle counting.

So could we see all of the very fastest services from St. Pancras to Chesterfield and Sheffield using this route?

Is the route from Trent Junction in the South to Chesterfield and Sheffield in the North ready for electrification?

Network Rail must ensure that as much of the line is capable of 125 mph running and that all bridges and tunnels have sufficient clearance from London to Sheffield via Chesterfield.

Creeping The Electrification North

From Bedford the electrification would be crept north at a sensible pace, which would be designed to cause minimum disruption to services.

Every mile it went north would increase the reach of the new electric trains, but only after the bottleneck of Leicester was eased to allow high speed running through the station.

The Electric Spine

If the Electric Spine was to be implemented in full from Southampton to Sheffield and Doncaster, then the electrification must be completed North of Bedford.

But as there are a lot of places where the electrification will not be completed elsewhere, will we see a shift towards electro-diesel freight locomotives like the Class 88.

So although freight would take advantage of an electrified Midland Main Line, it may not be as important as many think.

Completing The Electrified Routes to Sheffield, Nottingham and Derby

These three important cities all have extensive local rail networks, that could benefit from an electrified hub, so that Aventra IPEMUs could be used to bring benefits to all the communities served by diesel multiple units and in Sheffield’s case, quite a few Pacers.

So as a minimum, this electrification must be completed.

  • East Midlands Parkway to Derby
  • East Midlands Parkway to Nottingham
  • East Midlands Parkway to Chesterfield and Sheffield via the Erewash Valley Line.

Chesterfield to Derby would probably be filed in the Too Difficult box, but would be an easy run for an Aventra IPEMU.

Note that I would start the electrification from East Midlands Parkway, as this station and the Airport are talked about as destinations for tram-train services.

Obviously to complete the Electric Spine, the following electrification would also need to be done.

  • Complete the electrification between Bedford and East Midlands Parkway.
  • Sheffield to Doncaster.

But once Sheffield station is electrified none of the many local lines reaching out from the city would need to be electrified, as most services could be run using Aventra IPEMUs. Obviously, if there was a special reason like freight or tram-trains, this wiring would only help the Aventra IPEMUs.

New Elecric Services

Once electrification has been installed up the Erewash Valley Line to Sheffield, lots of important places become within range of Aventra IPEMUs running from St. Pancras.

  • Barnsley
  • Bradford
  • Huddersfield
  • Leeds
  • Manchester

It would also mean that several existing cross-country services could be run using electric trains.

  • Liverpool to Norwich
  • Nottingham to Cardiff
  • Bristol to Newcastle

Remarkable in some ways as a lot of electrification has been dropped.

September 28, 2015 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Ilkeston Station In A Few Years Time

I am not putting a time-scale on this, as there are so many possibilities in the mix.

I think we can assume that at some point, there will be a new station, that will look substantially like this visualisation.

Ilkeston Station Visualisation

Ilkeston Station Visualisation

The Wikipedia entry for Ilkeston station says that the station is expected to open in August 2016. I think this may be challenging, but there is one factor that makes building a station here easier. It would appear that there will not be any substantial new track, so other than the station, there should not be a great deal of work to do, before trains can provide a service at the station.

There was also a substantial amount of engineering work done to the line through Ilkeston and Langley Mill in Summer 2007.

The Initial Train Service

I had intended to check whether trains between Nottingham and Leeds that call at Langley Mill, actually pass through the Ilkeston station site, when I visited Ilkeston. But as the weather was so bad and I was sitting on the other side of the train, I didn’t see anything.

I shall certainly be going to Nottingham on October 24th, so if I don’t get the information by then, I can take a detour.

If the trains that go through Langley Mill can stop at Ilkeston, the station would not have to wait long before the timetables were adjusted, so that they called. According to Wikipedia, this is the services at Langley Mill.

Northern Rail run an hourly service between Nottingham and Leeds that stops at Langley Mill. This service started from the December 2008 timetable change.

East Midlands Trains operate a few services per day from Langley Mill southbound to Nottingham and beyond (usually Norwich) and northbound to Sheffield (usually continuing to Liverpool Lime Street).

Some East Midlands Trains Mainline services from London St Pancras to Sheffield / Leeds call here, but generally interchange with London services should be made at Nottingham.

 

Incidentally a typical Nottingham to Leeds service stops at Langley Mill, Alfreton, Chesterfield, Dronfield, Sheffield, Meadowhall, Barnsley and Wakefield Kirkgate.

So will the new station at Ilkeston get a similar service? I think that the service will be at least as good as that to Langley Mill.

After all the timetable change of 2008 was implemented, when it was quite likely that a station would be built at Ilkeston, so I would assume timings make allowance for a possible stop at Ilkeston

In fact of the two stations, if either gets preference for services, it is more likely to be Ilkeston, as unless Langley Mill is upgraded it is a very basic station according to Network Rail.

One of the usual problems, when starting a service is finding the trains to run it. This delayed the opening of the Todmorden Curve by several months.

But in the case of services at Ilkeston, it’s mainly a process adjusting schedules so that passing trains, stop at the station.

Problems On The Midland Main Line Through Derby

It’s an ill wind, that blows nobody any good!

Ilkeston station is actually on the Erewash Valley Line, which runs from Long Eaton to south of Chesterfield joining the Midland Main Line at both ends.

In the Future section for the Erewash Valley Line on Wikipedia, this is said.

Network Rail as part of a £250 million investment in the regions railways has proposed improvements to the junctions at each end, resignalling throughout, and a new East Midlands Control Centre.

As well as renewing the signalling, three junctions at Trowell, Ironville and Codnor Park will be redesigned and rebuilt. Since the existing Midland Main Line from Derby through the Derwent Valley has a number of tunnels and cuttings which are listed buildings and it is a World Heritage Area, it seems that the Erewash line is ripe for expansion.

So it looks like Ilkeston could be on a by-pass of the Midland Main Line.

Electrification

The Midland Main Line is scheduled to be electrified and the services on the line could be provided by Class 800 and Class 801 trains,

I just wonder if Class 800 electro-diesel trains were run through Derby and Class 801 electric trains were run on the Erewash Valley Line, this might get round the problem of the heritage lobby objecting to electrifying through the World Heritage Area of the Derwent Valley, with its Grade 2 Listed tunnels and cuttings.

Derby would still get new trains. It would just be that the faster electrified ones ran up the Erewash Valley Line.

Would these trains call selectively at Long Eaton, Alfreton and Ilkeston?

Services To Derby

Ilkeston is in Derbyshire, so I expect there will be pressure to have a direct service to Derby.

At present, if you want to go between Langley Mill and Derby, you have to change at either Nottingham or Chesterfield.

I suspect that when Ilkeston station opens the route between Ilkeston and Derby will be as tortuous as it is now from Langley Mill.

Look at this Google Map of the area.

Around Ilkeston

Around Ilkeston

Ilkeston is indicated by the red arrow.

There must be a better way, than changing trains in Nottingham or Chesterfield.

But what?

The Erewash Valley Line goes South to Long Eaton, which has several trains per hour direct to Derby, so this could be the key to getting to Derby.

In a Notes on Current Station section on the Wikipedia entry for Long Eaton station, this is said.

The usable length of the station platforms is shorter than the express trains which stop here, so passengers arriving from London, Derby or Sheffield will usually have to get off from the front four carriages. Elderly passengers or those with pushchairs, heavy luggage or bicycles wishing to alight at Loughborough should take particular care to board the correct portion of the train. Cycles may have to be stored in vestibules away from the cycle lockers depending on the orientation of the train.

It is planned that both platforms will be extended by up to 10 metres by no later than 2012.

It is anticipated that developments along the Erewash line will result in changes for Long Eaton station. A plan drawn up in 2011 recommended a new Derby to Mansfield service via new stations at Breaston & Draycott, Long Eaton West (renamed from Long Eaton), Long Eaton Central, Stapleford & Sandiacre, Ilkeston, Eastwood & Langley Mill (renamed from Langley Mill), Selston & Somercotes and then to Pinxton via new trackbed connecting with the Mansfield line from Nottingham at Kirkby in Ashfield.

It strikes me that work at Long Eaton, the several new stations and improvements north of Langley Mill would enable direct services from Ilkeston to both Derby and Mansfield. A trackbed from Langley Mill to Kirkby in Ashfield is shown on Google Maps.

Langley Mill to Kirkby-in-Ashfield

Langley Mill to Kirkby-in-Ashfield

Alfreton is the station at the top left and Kirkby-in-Ashfield is at the top right. The Erewash Valley Line from Langley Mill, enters at the bottom and splits with one branch going to Alfretonand the other going East to cross the M1 and join the Robin Hood Line south of Kirkby-in-Ashfield.

On an Ordnance Survey map, dated 2009, the railway is shown as a multiple track line, probably serving collieries and open cast coalfields.

It all sounds very feasible too! Especially, as the Erewash Valley is an area of high unemployment, low car ownership and a dependence on public transport.

IPEMU Trains For Ilkeston?

If the Erewash Valley Line is electrified, so that Class 801 can run fast from London to Chesterfield and Sheffield, one option for the local services is to use Aventra IPEMU trains, which will be built in Derby.

IPEMU stands for Independently Powered Electric Multiple Unit. These trains have all the features of the standard four-car electric multiple unit, but they have an on-board battery that is charged when running from the overhead line and gives them a range of about sixty miles, when the wires run out.

So chargeing the battery on the Erewash Valley Line, they could reach Derby, Mansfield and Nottingham.

If Nottingham and Derby weren’t electrified until a later phase, then Class 800 electro-diesel trains could work the routes to London, until full electrification were to be completed.

Watch what happens about IPEMU trains.

Rumours have appeared in Modern Railways that orders for trains powered by the technology are imminent.

Tram-Trains For Ilkeston?

In my view the Nottingham Express Transit will get overcrowded in a few years and the capacity of the system will have to be increased.

One way to increase capacity would be to run tram-trains to destinations away from the city on the heavy rail lines. Once in the city centre they transfer to the tram lines and run as trams to suitable destinations, thus increasing the number of trams running on the various lines.

So tram-trains could say run between Ilkeston and say the Old Market Square or the Queens Medical Centre and then on to one of the terminals.

It all sounds rather fanciful, but go to Karlsruhe or Kassel and see the tram-trains in action.

Ilkeston To HS2

Tram-trains, IPEMU or standard trains from Ilkeston and other places to the North could link quite a few places to the proposed East Midlands Hub station at Toton.

Conclusion

The more I look at the future of Ilkeston station, the more I realise that constructing the new station is just petty cash in the big scheme of things around rail and tram expansion in the East Midlands.

A lot of money has been spent in sorting Nottingham station and expanding the Nottingham Express Transit and a lot more will be spent in improving and electrifying the Midland Main Line and the Erewash Valley Line. The latter will be equipped with several new stations and probably new trains of some sort.

 

 

September 4, 2015 Posted by | Transport | , , , | 3 Comments