Could Tramlink Use The Heavy Rail Lines In South London?
Look at these pictures, I took at Birkbeck station, where one track is for heavy rail and the other is for London Tramlink.
When I took these pictures, I wondered, if it would ease the expansion of the Tramlink network, if trains and trams could share lines.
I am not talking about tram-trains, but more a useful approach to benefit both types of transport.
So lets list the problems.
Rail And Wheel Profile
One of the problems in Sheffield with the introduction of tram-trains is that the rail profile needs to be changed to one that is compatible with the existing trams and the new Class 399 tram-trains.
But to be fair it is a trial and problems will be thrown up.
Platform Height
As someone, who has travelled all over Europe on trams, trains and tram-trains, one of the biggest problem is getting the platform height right, so that everybody including those in wheel-chairs can get on and off easily.
On a scale of five, we generally score about four, but we mustn’t be complacent and I think it will get better.
Some continental countries have problems as their trains have a low step and you step up into the train. This is because traditionally, they had low platforms, whereas for some time, we’ve been aiming for step across.
Karlsruhe has been running tram-trains on their Stadtbahn for over twenty years and are putting in a tunnel to take the tram-trains under the city.
This is said about platform height.
In addition, the platforms of the station’s tunnel will have pedestals that are about 15 metres long with a height of 55 cm above the rail so that the first two doors of Stadtbahn trains will have step-less entry. This will make possible stepless entrance on lines S 4 / S 41 and S 5 / S 51 / S 52 in Karlsruhe for the first time, reflecting a trend that has long been standard elsewhere. The platforms cannot consistently have a height of 55 cm, because the tunnel will be used by trams and DC services of the Stadtbahn, which have an entry level on the modern lines of 34 cm.
If the Germans have to go to that sort of solution, with all their experience, then platform height must be difficult to get right.
I have not heard anything about the platform design at Rotherham Central station, where the platforms must accept trains as different as Pacers and Class 399 tram-trains.
Power Supply
The current trams need overhead power, which with most tram systems is 750 VDC.
So if you want to run Tramlink trams on third-rail lines in South London, you’ll need to put up overhead wires or fit the trams with contact shoes.
It is my view, that for Health and Safety reasons and some design ones too, that running trams using third-rail power will not be practical.
Remember, passengers know they can walk across the tram lines and frequently do, so whatever happens, you don’t want live rails under the trams.
So any rail route, that will be running trams will have to have the 750 VDC overhead supply.
In the Sheffield trial, to extend the Sheffield Supertram, a freight route to Rotherham is being electrified at 750 VDC, rather than the main line standard of 25 KVAC.
Signalling Systems
Rail and tram signalling are different. But after a successful tram-trial in Sheffield, the problems of trams and train sharing the same track, should have risen to the surface.
Rules Of The Tracks
Trams and trains run under different rules.
One main difference is that trams have a maximum speed of 25 mph, whereas trains run at whatever speed the line permits.
So for safety and other reasons, if trams and trains were sharing a length of track, they would have to run under the same set of rules.
I suspect this would mean that the maximum speed would be 25 mph.
In some ways the problems are the equivalent of managing traffic at an airport like Southend, where light aircraft share the runways and airspace with Airbus-319s.
I don’t think it is an insurmountable problem, as two-car diesel multiple units have shared tracks with 125 mph expresses and hevy freight trains for years.
An Ideal Mix Of Trains
So is an ideal solution to use 750 VDC overhead wires for the trams and diesel trains?
Possibly!
But you could always use IPEMUs or EMUs with an on-board battery.
Supposing there is a chord or link line, that would be ideal to be used by trams and say the ubiquitous Electrostars that are popular in South London.
Wires would be put up and all Electrostars using the line, would have to have enough battery capacity to bridge the gap in the track with no electrification.
West Croydon Station
A possible application might be at somewhere like West Croydon station.
The map from carto.metro.free.fr, shows the heavy rail lines through the station and the tram lines around it.
Lines Around West Croydon Station
I’m sure that the engineers in Karlsruhe would have had the trams going through the station to give same-platform interchange to and from trains.
Conclusion
Network Rail has a lot of tools in the box and I think that as technology develops, we’ll see some interesting ideas.
Farewell To The Old Gospel Oak To Barking Line
Today is the last day, that you can ride the Gospel Oak to Barking Line to the East of South Tottenham station, until after the wires are erected in a few months time.
So I took some pictures.
I must say I have not been impressed with progress so far.
- It looks like a large proportion of the piles are in the ground.
- If the piles are in the ground securely, why aren’t more masts erected?
- There would appear to be no start on clearing the platform extensions.
- Only in one place did I see a work-site.
- I didn’t see anyone actually working.
- There is masses of litter
- There’s no sign of how the stations will be electrified.
With my limited experience of looking at large projects that are in trouble, this project has the air of something not being up to scratch.
What has really puzzled me about this project, is that the information coming from Network Rail and especially TfL, has not been up to the usual standard.
The Longest Underwater Electrification In The UK Since The Channel Tunnel
It may only be a tunnel seven kilometres long and a lot shorter than the Channel Tunnel, but the Severn Tunnel has two tracks, which both have to be electrified, so that the Great Western Railway can run electric trains to and from South Wales.
But the Severn Tunnel was built between 1873 and 1886 and it posed various problems during its construction with water ingress and since with operation because of its length, profile and the pumping of constant water. There is a section in Wikipedia, which is called General, which gives more details.
The Severn Tunnel is probably one of those places, sane engineers wouldn’t want to electrify a railway.
So I was interested to read this article in Rail Engineer, which is entitled Preparing For Severn Tunnel Electrification. The article gives this overview of the project.
The electrification project now moves on to probably one of its biggest challenges: the electrification of the 7.012km long Severn Tunnel. The tunnel will be closed to trains between 12 September and 21 October for the work. It is referred to as the “Severn Tunnel Autumn Disruption” or STAD for short and, just to make it a bit more interesting, included in the STAD are the Patchway Tunnels –1.139km Old (Down); 0.057Km Short (Down); 1.609Km New (Up).
Some facts about the tunnel and the work already done.
- More than 76.4 million bricks were used in the construction.
- Between 10 and 20 million gallons of water have had to be extracted every day to prevent flooding.
- There is also a ventilation shaft through which 80,000 cubic feet of fresh air can be forced into the tunnel each minute by means of an eight- metre diameter fan at the top.
- The contractors first had to scarify 2,500 square metres of tunnel lining to remove more than 35 tonnes of soot.
It is not a small job. But at least the tunnel was in better condition than expected.
The article gives a deep insight into how the Severn Tunnel electrification is a collaboration between several major contractors, who are installing a Swiss system from Furrer + Frey called Rigid Overhead Conductor Rail System in the roof of the tunnel. The ROCS system uses a rigid aluminium rail supported on appropriately designed fittings fixed to the roof of the tunnel. There is more on the ROCS system in this article in Rail Technology Magazine.
To makes things more difficult, the engineers have only got thirty-nine days to do the work.
And if it all goes wrong, there are two sets of politicians who will get very angry!
Is The New Bay Platform At West Ealing Opening On August 1st?
I heard a rumour that the new bay platform at West Ealing station was going to open on the first of August, but I have just found a change in the timetable, that could mean that it is true.
If you look at the on-line timetables, you will find the following.
At present the first two trains after 07:00 from Greenford to West Ealing, are the 07:16 and the 07:46, which go on to Paddington in twenty-six minutes.
From the first of August, they are the 07:13 and 07:43 which are shown as only going as far as West Ealing, where you change for Paddington and do the journey in twenty-eight minutes.
The strange thing is that these two trains are the only ones before nine, that require a change for Paddington.
The times of trains from Hayes and Harlington to Paddington appear to change on the first too!
There is also an additional electric service leaving for Hayes and Harlington at 07:18.
Could it be that electric services are starting on the first of August too?
Sorting Out The Late Great Western Electrification
I could have added something like And Other Issues to the title of this post.
An article in the June 2016 Edition of Modern Railways entitled GWR To Order More ‘387s’ starts with the statement.
Govia Thameslink Railway’s fleet of 29 Class 387/1 EMUs is to be retained by the operator and will not be transferred to Great Western Railway, according to industry sources.
It seems that not only do GTR have trouble with their staff and the new Class 700 trains, but also with other train operators too.
So GWR have snapped up the other fourteen ordered by Porterbrook and supplemented this with an order for fifteen new build units.
This means they have got their required 29 trains to go with the eight they ordered some time ago.
Unfortunately, building more Class 387 trains, which would probably help the rolling stock shortage caused by the non-working Class 700 trains, especially as it appears Bombardier has spare capacity, is not on, as changes to crashworthiness regulations mean that these trains can’t be produced after September 2016.
So it’s probably very lucky, that the Great Western doesn’t have much working electrification.
One paragraph in the article gives some news about the progress of Bombardier’s IPEMU technology. Thios is said.
Industry sources confirm that options for some of the GWR order to be produced as independently powered EMU (IPEMU) variants fitted with batteries for operation away from electrified routes are still being explored. This would enable GWR services to Gatwick Airport and on some of the Thames Valley branches to be worked by ‘387s’ prior to electrification. Any decision to look seriously at this proposal will depend on final electrification timescales being confirmed by Network Rail.
Using IPEMUs on the routes mentioned would be a sensible move.
It would also appear from the article that GWR is going to order more Class 800 bi-mode trains from Hitachi.
There is also this article in Rail Technology Magazine entitled Perry Confirms New GWR Class 801 Will Be Bi-Mode.
As the Class 801 electric train and the Class 800 bi-mode train are more of less identical except for the diesel engines, conversion between the two types is possible.
Are Train Coaches Making A Comeback In The UK?
There were two stories yesterday, where new coaches to be built by Spanish company CAF.
- In TransPennine Express Buys Spanish Trains, I wrote about the new trains for TransPennine Express, which include thirteen five-car rakes of coaches pulled by Class 68 locomotives.
- In Expanding The Scottish Sleeper, I wrote about how new coaches could transform the Caledonian Sleeper.
Both sets of coaches probably use the same basic bodyshell, running gear and electrical and heating services, so once CAF designed the sleeper trains, they probably have developed a vehicle that could be used for any profitable purpose.
At present the Caledonian Sleeper uses two types of coach; a sleeping car and a lounge/seated sleeper car and these are being replaced with an identical number of coaches.
But little has been said about the design and make-up of the new coaches.
I suspect, that we will see lounge cars with large windows, so that the Scottish countryside can be enjoyed in style, if the weather permits.
The new coaches will be compared to British Rail’s legendary Mark 3 coach.
- I’m also sure that CAF have set out to design a coach, that rides better.
- The new coach must also be capable of running at 200 kph., as Mark 3s do every day in large numbers.
- Will the coaches pass the cement lorry test, as a Mark 3-derived multiple unit did at Oxshott?
The 1960s design of the Mark 3 has set a very high bar.
Even less has been said about the five car rakes of coaches for TransPennine Express.
But in common with the other rakes of coaches in mainline service in the UK on Chiltern and the East Coast Main Line, and in East Anglia, they would need some means of driving the train from the other end, which is currently done with a driving van trailer.
A DVT is very much a solution of the 1970s, although it does have advantages in that the empty space can be used for bicycles, surfboards and other large luggage. Hence, the van in the name.
If you look at CAF’s Civity train, it is very much a stylish modular design and I’m sure CAF, have the expertise to build a stylish driving cab into some of the new coaches they are building.
I therefore think we will be seeing these five-car rakes of coaches for TransPennine Express, with a driving cab at one end.
One of the big advantages of this approach is that trains can be pulled and pushed by any suitable and available locomotive.
- Class 68 diesel locomotives could provide reliable go-anywhere diesel power.
- Class 88 electro-diesel locomotives could provide electrical power from overhead lines and diesel power elsewhere.
- Class 73 electro-diesel locomotives could provide electrical power from third rail and diesel power elsewhere.
- Class 90 electric locomotives could be used with overhead lines
- A 200 kph-capable electric locomotive could be used on high-speed electrified lines.
Operators wouldn’t be tied to one particular power unit, so as more electrification is installed, they could change to something more suitable.
You also have the possibility of designing the coach with the driving cab as perhaps a buffet/observation car or using it for First Class, so that the other coaches are very much a standard interior.
The approach also has the advantage that if you need a longer train, you just couple another coach into the rake.
I’m sure that CAF have designed a rake of coaches that has impressed TransPennine Express, otherwise they wouldn’t have ordered the coaches.
Some people might think that going back to coaches is a retrograde step.
Consider.
- Chiltern run an excellent service with coaches.
- Deutsche Bahn still uses lots of rakes of coaches.
- Rakes of coaches are more flexible than fixed-length multiple units.
- The most appropriate locomotive can be used.
- Some passengers might think, that coaches give a better ride than multiple units.
But I suspect the biggest factor in the revival of coaches, is that a rake of stylish new coaches and a Class 68 locomotive are more affordable than a new Class 800 train. They are also available earlier.
Imagine going across the Pennines from Liverpool to York in the buffet/restaurant/observation/driving car of one of these new trains, enjoying a Great Western Pullman Dining experience, as the countryside goes by.
If it is done, it would set a high standard for other train operators.
Slow Progress On Electrification To Oxford
A few piles have started to appear on the line between Didcot and Oxford.
But a guy on the station, said Oxford won’t be electrified soon.
Main Line Electrification Between Reading And Didcot
I took these pictures of the electrification on the main lines between Reading and Didcot.
All the masts seem to be erected, but there is stil quite a lot of wires to add.
Discontinuous Electrification Using IPEMUs
In Basingstoke To Exeter By Electric Train, I started to work through, how short lengths of third-rail electrification could be used to power an electric train with an IPEMU-capability.
Third-Rail Electrification
This picture shows typical third-rail electrification at Kidbrooke station in South East London.
Note the following about the station and the electrification.
- The two tracks are between two platforms connected by a footbridge, which is a typical layout for hundreds of stations. Some stations might use a subway for connection.
- The two 750 VDC conductor rails are placed together in the middle of the track, well away from the passengers.
- There is a gap in the third rail, which I assume is for staff or emergency services personnel to cross the track in an emergency.
It is a simple and very safe layout.
With many years of installing third-rail systems in stations, Network Rail has the expertise to create safe systems in stations with island or just a single platform.
A Typical Electrical Multiple Unit
The Class 377 train is a typical modern electrical multiple unit common on third-rail routes.
- There are a total of 239 trainsets in service with lengths of three, four and five cars.
- The trains can work in combinations of two and three trainsets.
- The trains are a member of Bombardier’s Electrostar family.
- The slightly older Class 375 trains can be converted into Class 377 trains.
- The first trains entered service in 2003, so they still have many years of life.
- Some of the trains are dual-voltage and all could be equipped to use 25 kVAC overhead line equipment.
- They have a top speed of 90 mph.
- Bombardier have stated that these trains can be given an IPEMU-capability.
In addition everything said about the Class 377, can also be said about the later Class 379 and Class 387 trains, although these trains are faster.
The traction current supply to the trains has a very comprehensive design, that ensures trains get the electricity they need. Wikipedia says this.
All units can receive power via third-rail pick-up which provides 750 V DC. There are eight pick-up shoes per unit (twice the number of previous generation 4-car Electric multiple units), and this enables them to ride smoothly over most third-rail gaps. The units in the 377/2, 377/5 and 377/7 sub-classes are dual-voltage, and are fitted with a pantograph to pick up 25 kV AC from overhead lines. On these units the shoe mechanism is air-operated so that when powered down, or working on AC overhead lines, they are raised out of the way.
You don’t hear many reports of trains being gapped these days, when they are unable to pick-up electricity at somewhere like a level crossing.
So there could be a large number of electrical multiple units available with an IPEMU capability, which could be ostensibly 25 kVAC units, but could also pick up electricity from a 750 VDC third-rail.
A Charging Station At Oxted
I feel that Network Rail has the expertise to fit short lengths of third-rail electrification into stations, so that IPEMUs could pick up power, when they are stopped in the station.
These pictures show the recent installation of third-rail in the bay Platform 3 at Oxted station.
Note how the conductor rail is enclosed in a yellow shield.
Could this installation at Oxted, have been done, so that IPEMUs can run a shuttle to Uckfield?
Staff at the station didn’t know, but said the platform is used to terminate or park the occasional train from East Grinstea
d
IPEMUs To Lowestoft
Imagine such an installation at a station like Lowestoft, which has been suggested as a destination for trains with an IPEMU-capability.
The picture shows two Class 156 trains at Lowestoft station.
Surely, two lengths of 750 VDC third-rail can be fitted between the tracks.
- The electrified lines would be no closer to passengers, than the third-rail installation at Oxted.
- The power supply would only be needed to supply electricity to charge the batteries.
- When no train was in the platform, the electricity supply to that platform would be switched off.
- The waiting time in the station would need to be sufficient to make sure the battery had enough charge to get to the overhead wires at Ipswich or Norwich.
- There would be little or no modification to the structure of the station.
- There would be no electrification needed between Lowestoft and both Ipswich and Norwich.
The biggest problem would be installing the power supply, but it would only be a transformer and rectiofier to provide 750 VDC. It would not have to cope with all the problems of regenerative braking, as the IPEMU capability of the train would take care of that.
It would appear that by using trains with an IPEMU-capability and well-proven simple technology at Lowestoft, the town can be provided with direct electric train services to Ipswich, Norwich and London.
At present the only trains with sufficient speed to not be a restriction on the Great Eastern Main Line, that can be given an IPEMU-capability are Class 379 and Class 387 trains. But Bombardier told Modern Railways, that a 125 mph Aventra is possible.
It would appear that the infrastructure modifications could be very affordable too!
The major cost would be the extra trains, but hopefully an increase in passenger numbers because of the better service would create the cash flow to lease them!
Perhaps the biggest advantage of using IPEMU trains to Lowestoft, is that electrification of the tracks through a beautiful part of East Anglia will not need to be performed.
It should also be said, that what works for Lowestoft, would also work for services to Sheringham and Great Yarmouth.
The technique would also work for branch lines from an electrified main line, where the out and back distance was more than the range of an IPEMU running on batteries. Examples would include.
- York to Scarborough
- Doncaster to Hull
- Edinburgh to Tweedbank
- Peterborough to Lincoln
- Manchester to Sheffield
But there are many more lines, where a charging station would bring much-needed electric trains to all over the UK.
Longer Lines
Some longer lines, where both ends are electrified and the distance is less than sixty miles, like Norwich to Cambridge and Carlisle to Newcastle, could be served by an IPEMU with sufficient range, that was charged at both ends of the line.
So that leaves longer lines over sixty miles, with no electrification at either end or just one electrified end.
Many, but not all, are through beautiful countryside and would the heritage lobby accept miles of overhead line gantries, marching through the hills and valleys.
I believe that on some longer lines, by using short lengths of third-rail electrification in selected stations, services could be run by electric trains with an IPEMU-capability.
Imagine an electric train an IPEMU-capability, approaching a station on a typical fast line with perhaps a 90 mph speed limit, like say the West of England Main Line, which is not electrified past Basingstoke.
- As the IPEMU applies its brakes, all of the energy generated by the regenerative braking would be stored in the train’s on-board energy storage, ready to be used to accelerate the train back up to line speed after the station.
- When the train makes contact with the third rail in the station, if the battery is not full, it can start to charge the battery from the rail.
- Once the battery is full, the charging would stop.
- On starting away from the station, the train could use power from the third rail, until it lost contact, after which it would use the energy stored on the train.
I think it should be possible that the train would leave the station with a full battery.
I would suspect that Bombardier and Network Rail are doing all sorts of calculations to find the best strategy, so that IPEMUs can be used to avoid the problems and costs of electrification.
Lines that could be electrified in this way would be ones, where trains stop at several stations along the route. Electricity supply at the stations, is no problem these days, as it could be connected to the mains or to some form of local generation.
It could be a very green concept!
Lines that could be electrified in this way would include.
- Cumbrian Coast Line
- Far North Line
- North Wales Coast Line
- Settle To Carlisle
- West of England Main Line
Selected stations would be fitted with charging and the trains would stop accordingly.
I’ve included the Far North Line because I believe it is possible to electrify the line in this way provided you could get a good enough electricity supply to the required number of stations. Obviously, you may decide not to do it, as you may have enough quality diesel trains.
Conclusion
If you could run electric trains on the Far North Line using charging at stations, you could run electric trains on any line in the UK.
The Engineers Have Been Busy
When I went to Bath about a month ago, I wrote Electrification At Didcot Parkway – 29th March 2016.
Today, as I went through the area on my way to Bristol, most of the masts appeared to have been erected, with about half the wires over the slow lines and even some going up over the fast lines.
Past Didcot, there are now rows of piles on both sides of the railway, with some almost as far West as Chippenham.
There is still a lot to do, but I think it has been a good month for the engineers.
The Anonymous Widower 