The Anonymous Widower

Thoughts On Electrification

This document is for your eyes only and is to brief you for Monday.

By chance, a few days ago, I happened to go to Manchester with two guys from one of the big insurance companies, who are in to financing infrastructure like housing, office complexes, ports and shopping centres.

Their thoughts led me to this way of thinking.

The Problems Of Electrification

We all know of the problems of electrification and the related one of too few independent powered multiple units.

A few things I have seen and thought.

  • Northern Rail has cut back the service between Liverpool and Blackpool to Preston, except for a couple of services. Have they given up temporarily on Blackpool ever getting electrified?
  • I feel that electrification is suffering from a lack of resources.
  • Electrification in the North West is suffering terrible ground problems.
  • The October edition of Modern Railways is saying that there is uncertainty over the start date for the Gospel Oak to Barking electrification.
  • If I was looking for conspiracy theories, all references to Midland Main Line electrification has been removed from Wikipedia.
  • When a few weeks ago I visited all work between Preston and Blackpool had ceased and they’d tidied it all up. But bridges and platforms looked like they were ready for new four-car electric trains. I wrote What’s Gone Wrong With The Blackpool To Preston Electrification?
  • Then today, I went to look at the electrification on the Chase Line and wrote Up And Down The Chase Line.

In both the Blackpool and Chase Lines electrification, they would have appeared to have rebuilt the bridges and lengthened the platforms, but had then tidied up and gone away. There were no piles of uninstalled steelwork for the overhead lines, you see up and down the GWR.

Electrification is said to be paused. These looked very much like long ones to have a serious think about it.

But both lines would accept a four-car diesel multiple unit immediately.

The Aventra IPEMU

Help is at hand in the shape of the new Aventra IPEMU train. ( IPEMU stands for Independently Powered Electric Multiple Unit)

An Artist's Impression Of The Proposed Aventra

An Artist’s Impression Of The Proposed Aventra

These are facts about the Aventra and its IPEMU variant.

  • The Aventra should be a modern train, to as high a standard as any train anywhere.
  • Aventras will start to be delivered by the end of 2017.
  • All the train and manufacturing technology has been proven for years or is running in the latest Electrostars.
  • There has not been one adverse comment on the Class 379 IPEMU Demonstrator, that I can find.
  • The Class 379 IPEMU Demonstrator was financed by Abellio Greater Anglia, Bombardier and Network Rail.
  • I rode the test train and the on-board engineer told me the performance on battery was the same as an unmodified train and that it had a range of up to 60 miles without overhead power.
  • Bombardier have sent me documents that say that all Aventra trains will have the capacity to run as IPEMUs by the addition of an appropriate energy storage device like a battery or supercapacitor.
  • Aventras can be introduced on to any line that can handle a modern four car diesel multiple unit, where there is enough electrification at one or both ends.
  • Aventras can be changed from standard to IPEMU variant to fit the numbers required for schedules.
  • I do wonder if all Aventras would have an IPEMU capability, as this must make operation easier for train companies. If all trains had energy storage, would depots be wire-free for a start?
  • There will certainly be 110 mph Aventras, but will they go even faster to say 125 mph?
  • Aventras have regenerative braking and may be lighter than Electrostars.
  • An engineer who worked on the InterCity 125 said to me, that aerodynamic drag on trains is one of the biggest problems. It also goes up with the square of the speed. An Aventra with its smooth front end will need less power than a corresponding Electrostar.
  • There is also a paradox with rolling resistance of steel wheels on steel rails. The more heavily-loaded a train, the less the rolling resistance!

Various rumours are circulating that train operating companies are considering ordering IPEMUs.

  • GWR were mentioned in the September Modern Railways.
  • Merseyrail were mentioned in the October Modern Railways.

So the concept must have impressed people with cheque-books.

With my electrical engineering hat on, I would add.

  • BAe Systems, GKN and others are experimenting with flywheels as energy storage devices for buses and other large road vehicles and specialist applications like KERS in Formula One. I suspect that the technology will end up in trains. Modern Railways is also talking this month about KERS for the Class 230.
  • Retrofiting new and improved energy storage systems will be a very simple operation.
  • Switching from overhead line or third rail power to battery could be totally automatic and controlled by GPS and ERTMS.
  • Some routes like York-Scarborough, may be a bit long for the Aventra IPEMU, as although the train could easily do one-way on batteries, going out and back would not be possible.  Some form of charging system, whilst in the terminal platform must be possible. A modern third-rail system in stations? Or a short length of overhead wiring as has been installed at Rugeley Trent Valley.
  • Say an Aventra IPEMU was going at 100 mph towards a terminal station, as trains do on many unelectrified lines in the UK. How much energy would be put into the battery by regenerative braking as the train stopped in the station. So calculations of an out-and-back range are complicated and could be much longer than expeced.
  • Smart driving systems linked to GPS, ERTMS and people counting and weight calculating software will improve range. As a control engineer, I would never underestimate how far the perfect automatic driver might take a train on a full charge on a predictable route.

Overall, I think that the range of an Aventra IPEMU on batteries will grow! At present all published range figures are based on  a cobbled-together prototype, based on an Electrostar built using ten-year old technology. Bombardier have probably created a computer simulation of a definitive Aventra IPEMU, with fully integrated systems running over known routes, which would give true figures.

When the final figure is announced prepare to be surprised!

Where Could An Aventra IPEMU Be Used?

Basically anywhere, where one or both ends of the line are electrified. How about?

  • Gospel Oak to Barking – There is enough electrification at the Barking end, especially if the extension to Barking Riverside was built first. It would immediately release eight Class 172s.
  • Manchester to Leeds by all routes including Huddersfield and Caldervale. – It’s well under 60 miles and could give Liverpool to Newcastle in under two and a half hours without any more expensive electrification.
  • Cardiff Valleys Lines – Electrification has been costed at £350million. At £8million or so for an Aventra IPEMU, it must be cheaper to cut back on the electrification and buy some new trains. No more London cast-offs!
  • Hexham to Middlesbrough – It would need some electrification at Middlesbrough.
  • Bristol and Teesside Metros and expansion and modernisation of local train services in Birmingham, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle.
  • Edinburgh to Tweedbank
  • St. Pancras to Hastings and Eastbourne via Ashford.
  • Salisbury to Exeter – Probably too long now, but once the technology is proven and a small amount of electrification was put in at Exeter and Salisbury, I think this line will go electric.
  • St.Pancras to Corby and Leicester. – This is probably possible and could lead to an interesting philosophy for electrifying the Midland Main Line.

Many routes would need little or no modification, other than to allow four-car trains and adjustments to track and signalling, most of which could be done without too much inconvenience to passengers and train companies.

I am going to see what proportion of the country can be served by Aventra IPEMUs. I suspect, it’s upward of more than fifty percent.

The places that can’t be served are not very many.

  • The South-West
  • Chiltern
  • North Wales
  • North of Scotland
  • Cumbria
  • Lincolnshire
  • Around Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield – Until Midland Main Line Electrification.

Some of these like the Devon lines, could be served by Class 230s. Unless it was decided to install  a short stretch of third-rail electrification at Exeter, to charge the Aventra IPEMUs.

I think that until proven otherwise,Class 230s trains may join the pile of heroic failures. The Aventra IPEMU can do many of its routes and would be so much better.

Would you prefer a refurbished Ford to a new Jaguar?

Property Development

This may seem a long way from electric trains, but my travelling companions and their eyes like cash registers, got me thinking.

Let’s take an isolated town or city served by a tired branch line or crap trains. Lowestoft, Scarborough, Bury St. Edmunds, Weston Super Mare or Barrow-in-Furness for example. One of my companions suggested the latter!

In many cases, there is a package to be put together of new electric trains, rebuilding the area around the station with new commercial and residential development, that the local authority would find attractive. If the trains were sexy new electric ones, that could take you a lot further than the next large town, they would up the value of the package to the local authority considerably.

These packages would be very easily funded by say large insurance companies, as all the risks are well known and predictable. Once Aventra IPEMUs have proved themselves in service, they will have a risk profile on investment.

Political Considerations

Not my field!

But consider.

  • Replacing Pacers in many places is just putting in new trains. In others, it’s using the better examples of the displaced diesel multiple units.
  • There are arguments to perform electrification in a series of smaller projects, that minimise disruption to passengers, train companies and services.
  • Will any politician object to new British-built trains appearing in large numbers? Especially in his or her patch!
  • Some people object to all of money spent on the railways. Reducing the money spent can only give political advantage!
  • New trains are visible, schemes like Great Northern Great Eastern Joint Line or ERTMS are not!
  • In many parts of the UK, there is a perception that London gets all the investment . With Aventra IPEMUs the investment is spread around.

But surely the biggest political factor, is that elected representatives will get much greater control of the railways in their area.

Problems

Would politicians and people think that their train service couldn’t possibly be improved by a Mickey Mouse concept of large milk-floats with seats?

Bombardier have financial problems and probably not enough capacity in Derby.

Conclusion

I think the concept could be mind-blowing and could transform the UK.

I can’t believe that all this has not been put together before and this led me to the trial of the Class 379 BEMU, which I thought until I rode it and looked at the maths and physics would be a total disaster. There’s a BBC video.

What do the three partners get out of it?

  • Bombardier are hoping the technology will sell more trains, other than the few trams, they’ve sold to Nanjing.
  • Network Rail remove a lot of difficult lines from the need for electrification. No more dealing with Nimbys, bats, newts, terrible ground conditions and the militant wing of the heritage lobby.
  • Abellio at present have three franchises with a lot of lines that could use trains able to run for sixty miles without an external power source. They must know the likely benefits of introducing a new electric service and how much new trains would return.

It does seem that using Aventra IPEMUs is one of these things that just seems too good to be true!

But then if you understand the physics of rolling resistance of steel wheels on steel rails, the improving capabilities of modern energy storage and what modern automatic control systems can perform, it all looks to be not magic but superb engineering from many different fields coming together.

It has all the aura of one of those brilliant concepts put together in a pub, whilst under the influence of copious amounts of alcohol and drawn and written down on the back of those special fag packets and envelopes that engineers use.

I must admit, that I can’t understand, why someone hasn’t done it before.

The only reason I can think of, is that countries like France, Germany, Italy and Japan have had electrified railways for years and so they don’t have the problems we have of unelectrified railways.

 

September 25, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Up And Down The Chase Line

I went up the Chase Line to look at the progress of the electrification from Walsall to Rugeley Trent Valley.

The train was an improvised three-car consisting of a two-car Class 170 train attached to a Class 153 train.

So I have to assume that most of the platforms are probably now long enough for four-car trains. It also looked to my untrained eye, that all the signalling had been renewed and the all the stations were up to a high standard, as they usually are around Birmingham.

The line is fully electrified between Birmingham and Walsall and Rugeley Trent Valley station has a fully electrified bay platform, from where the electrification stretches a couple of hundred metres down the Chase Line.

There was no sign of any electrification work and it was almost if they had tidied everything up and gone away, just leaving a few builders putting the finishing touches to the new and raised bridges on the route. There was no piles of steelwork for the overhead lines or yellow special-purpose vehicles anywhere! I didn’t see them on my last visit to Blackpool, which I wrote about in What’s Gone Wrong With The Blackpool To Preston Electrification?

As the target for introducing electric trains on the route between Rugeley Trent Valley and Birmingham New Street is December 2017, they would seem to be cutting it fine, to get the work done in time. Especially as so many of Network Rail’s projects like the Todmorden curve have been delayed.

A short time ago, I wrote Electrification May Be In Trouble Elsewhere, But The Brummies Keep Marching On, which was based on this article in Rail Engineer, which said it was going so well.

What’s happened?

I have come to the conclusion, that this line could almost have been specially prepared so that it could be run by Aventra IPEMUs.

The length of the section without electrification  is only perhaps a dozen miles, so an Aventra IPEMU that  charged up on the existing electrification between Birmingham and Walsall, could easily make Rugeley Trent Valley, where it could charge itself again on the new electrification at the station, if it was thought necessary.

I have found this article in the Wolverhampton Express and Star which is entitled Walsall railway bridge rebuild begins in £30m line electrification.

So how much of that cost is electrification of the dozen miles of double-track between Walsall and Rugeley? In this press release from the Green Party, they give the cost of railway electrification at £3million a mile. If that includes bridge and track modification, then that figure ties up well with the £30million for the whole project from the Express and Star, given that as there is electrified lines at both ends, the major cost of bringing power to the new section is probably not very large.

In The Cost Of Aventra Trains, I said that a standard four-car Aventra train will all the extras and servicing costs around £8million. So conservatively, I would suspect that a four-car Aventra IPEMU would come in at a little bit more.

So long as all platforms and the signalling could accept a four-car train, the extra costs of introducing an Aventra IPEMU, should not be much more than training drivers and other staff.

Would the savings on not completing the electrification, pay for the purchase of the probable two Aventra IPEMUs needed to provide a half-hourly service on the lines? As the trains would be faster over the route, two trains might be able to provide a three trains an hour service, which is what Redditch on the other side of Birmingham gets.

Are the clever engineers in Derby, going to give the good citizens of Walsall, a brand new, but very affordable electric train service to Birmingham and Rugeley?

 

September 25, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | 3 Comments

An Alternative Approach To Provide A Local Metro Network

The UK rail industry is looking at the creation or upgrading of three local metro networks Bristol, Cardiff and Teesside. You could also argue, that they are seriously thinking about local networks out of Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield.

The Objectives Of A Metro Network

So what do passengers and train companies want to see in a metro?

I would say that the most successful metro lines we have created in the last few years have been the London Overground lines.

They operate under the following rules and principles.

  • Quality electric trains – Quality diesels would be fine in some places
  • Frequencies of four trains an hour. – Two or three trains per hour might suffice.
  • Clean stations, many of which are step-free.
  • A station improvement program.
  • Reliable service.
  • Visible staff on stations from first to last trains.
  • Extensive and visible information and maps.
  • Touch in and out ticketing with bank cards.
  • Good links to local buses.

The major problem of the Overground is that the trains keep needing to be lengthened, as they get crowded. The Class 378 trains started at three-cars and are now five.

Birmingham, Glasgow, Leeds and Liverpool seem to be using similar principles.

So how do three proposed metro networks stack up?

Cardiff

Let’s look at the electrification of the Cardiff Valleys Lines. According to the Wikipedia, the cost of the electrification is £350million.

I just wonder, if the scheme could be made more affordable, if the project was redesigned to use Aventra IPEMUs. The trains would obviously need sufficient electrification at Cardiff and Newport, so that they would leave the coast for their trips up the valleys with a full charge. Coming down wouldn’t be a problem and as the trains have regenerative braking, they would even charge the batteries.

Extensive testing would be easy once the current is switched on at Cardiff in a couple of years time and the clincher would be if an Aventra IPEMU could take a full load of Welshmen up to Merthyr Tydfil or Ebbw Vale after an international rugby match at the Millennium Stadium.

The scope of work would be greatly reduced.

  • Upgrading all stations to take a four car train.
  • Upgrading of the track layout and signalling, so that four car-trains could use each branch in an efficient manner.
  • There may be a need for some selective electrification, to ensure trains left fully charged, or for other operational reasons concerning diversions from the South Wales Main Line or for freight.

There are advantages to this approach.

  • Passengers get shiny new four-car trains, instead of refurbished hand-me-downs.
  • As money would be spent on trains, track and signalling rather than electrification, this could mean more trains and increased frequencies on the lines.
  • The Aventra trains could also take over some longer distance services to Bristol, Cheltenham, Fishguard and Gloucester.
  • Much of the network, probably only needs minimal upgrades to track and signalling.
  • There would be little or no heavy construction work in difficult places.
  • Much of the construction work on the stations has probably been completed.
  • There would be few line closures during the construction phase.
  • Bridges and tunnels that are not large enough to accept the overhead wires can be left as they are, unless the line is being opened up for freight traffic running to a larger gauge.
  • A higher proportion of the work to do will be general construction, rather than specialist overhead line installation, where there is a chronic shortage of engineers.
  • There is little scope for something to go seriously wrong.
  • The major source of delay would be late delivery of the Aventra IPEMU trains, but this would only mean that the diesel trains that currently work the line, would continue to serve the line for longer.

It strikes me that this approach has only one loser – the construction companies, who have helped create the electrification fiasco we have in this country. Passengers, train companies and the Welsh economy would all benefit!

According to this article on Global Rail News, London Overground’s contract for 45 Aventra trains is worth £260million. This works out at around £5.8million for each train. If the Aventra trains could work the Cardiff Valley Lines, with a little bit extra for the batteries or other energy storage device, twenty trains would probably cost around £140million or £7million a train.

I don’t know how many four-car trains they’d need to work the Valley Lines, but surely there is a trade-off between electrification and Aventra IPEMUs.

I can’t believe that Network Rail are not looking at this alternative approach, where instead of spending money on expensive and difficult electrification, the money is spent on shiny new trains built in a nice warm factory.

Teesside

The Tees Valley Metro is rather stillborn. The only thing that happened was the creation of James Cook station.

But there are two small electrification projects that could happen in the area in the near future.

  • Hitachi are building electric trains at Newton Aycliffe and this will probably mean that the Tees Valley Line will at least be electrified between the Hitachi factory and the East Coast Main Line at Darlington.
  • Plans exist to electrify between Middlesbrough and the East Coast Main Line, so that the town could benefit from a much improved train service.

If say this electrification were to be sufficient so that Aventra IPEMUs could be fully charged as they travelled from say Saltburn to Bishop Auckland, Phase 1 of the proposed Tees Valley Metro would get the new trains it will need.

Improve the stations and add a few new ones and you’d have a local railway to rival any in the UK.

In some ways if Aventra IPEMUs were used to develop the Metro everything would be in the opposite order to the traditional way of rebuilding a local line.

Normally, you close a line at great inconvenience to everyone, do a lot of construction and then spend months testing the new trains or trams, before a grand opening.

Compare this to upgrading a new line to run Aventra IPEMUs,

  1. Any work on the line to perhaps lengthen platforms and passing loops, and update signalling would be done first.
  2. Provided there is enough electrification to charge the trains, Aventra IPEMUs can be introduced alongside the existing trains, as they arrive from the factory and drivers and other staff have been trained.
  3. Adding new stations, is just a series of small well-defined construction projects, programmed to be done at convenient times and according to the budget.
  4. Other existing lines can be added to the system, if they are within the capability of the train and the platforms, track and signalling can accept the new trains.

A local network can be built by stealth in a series of small steps.

In Teesside’s case, you would certainly add the Phase 2 of the proposed Teesside Metro between Nunthorpe and Hartlepool.

An interesting possibility would be the Esk Valley Line to Whitby, if the Aventra IPEMU could manage the distance. If it couldn’t a Vivarail D-train certainly could.

Looking at the map, I feel that an Aventra IPEMU could be used on the Northern Rail service from Hexham via Newcastle, Sunderland, Hartlepool and Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe. It would charge the batteries running through Middlesbrough and Newcastle, and I don’t think any of the unelectrified stretches of line are more than thirty miles.

Bristol

Bristol has plans for creating a Metro, based on the two stations at Bristol Temple Meads and Bristol Parkway, which will be electrified (hopefully!) in the near future.

There are lines going all over the place providing services from outlying suburbs and towns to the centre.

Bristol has an opportunity to create a metro in the area, by upgrading all of the lines so they can take four-car trains, with longer platforms and updated track, signalling and stations. But in common with the rest of the country, there isn’t really any sensible trains available, although services could be developed using a collection of Pacers, D-trains and dodgy diesel unit.

However, once the two main stations are electrified, when the budget allows, Aventra IPEMUs could be introduced to the network.

So instead of one massive and expensive project, the metro is created in a series of small steps that don’t inconvenience passengers or train companies.

Other Services

When I discussed Teesside, I said this.

Looking at the map, I feel that an Aventra IPEMU could be used on the Northern Rail service from Hexham via Newcastle, Sunderland, Hartlepool and Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe. It would charge the batteries running through Middlesbrough and Newcastle, and I don’t think any of the unelectrified stretches of line are more than thirty miles.

How many other lines and services fall into this category of lengths of electrified line joined by no more than a total of sixty miles of unelectrified line that can easily be bridged by an Aventra IPEMU running on batteries?

I think these lines could fit the profile.

  • Blackpool South to Colne – When Blackpool electrification is finished
  • Carlisle to Newcastle
  • Hexham to Middlesbrough
  • Liverpool and Manchester Victoria to Leeds, York and Newcastle – The gap is just 43 miles
  • Liverpool Lime Street to Manchester Oxford Road via Warrington Central

Many are currently served by Pacers and others are served by diesel multiple units like Class 150 or Class 156 trains, that could in turn replace Pacers.

The most significant line is the TransPennine route from Liverpool to Newcastle, which could really transform travel by being run by four-car Aventra IPEMUs rather than inadequate three-car Class 185 diesel trains.

Someone at Bombardier has done a very good job in designing a train to circumvent the problems of electrification in the UK.

Project Costs And Cash Flows

I would be interested to see properly audited figures for the traditional electrification approach and one using Aventra IPEMUs.

There are surely various benefits that the Aventra IPEMU approach will bring to the costs.

  • The costs of the trains will be just a matter of negotiation, whereas the cost of electrification is not so predictable.
  • Enlarging bridges and tunnels to take the overhead wires, is an expensive process and often results in unexpected problems, that cost a fortune to solve. With the Aventra IPEMU, most infrastructure can be left untouched, unless it needs to be replaced anyway.
  • Most construction to accept the new trains, will be small projects, that can be handled by any competent construction company, whereas overhead line installation is a specialist construction job.
  • Electrification often seems to attract those who object to the overhead line equipment spoiling the view of an important rural landscape or cityscape. Aventra IPEMUs only need sufficient to charge the batteries.
  • With the Aventra IPEMU approach some new trains could be working on the network much earlier than they would be under a traditional approach. In some projects, will this have a beneficial cash flow?

I also come to the conclusion, that the Aventra IPEMU approach is more likely to deliver an affordable project on budget to an agreed time-scale, as the risk profile of electrification is so much worse than building a train on a production line in a factory.

One of the benchmarks of good project management is being able to deliver what is agreed. I believe that an Aventra IPEMU approach is much more likely to hit targets, as there is much less to go wrong.

Railways in the UK need a succession of successful projects, that impress engineers, train companies and passengers alike.

What better way to restore their credibility than for Network Rail, to deliver a series of projects that give millions of passengers efficient new electric train services all over the country.

 

 

September 22, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , | 2 Comments

Have We Got Enough Trains?

In Who Will Be First To Order Vivarail D-Trains?, I came to the conclusion that as the various Pacers need to be replaced, that we’re going to have to work hard to fill the enormous gap.

If you summarise possible requirements for D-Trains to replace Pacers and perhaps sort out the Class 153 trains, you get the following.

East Anglia – 3 to replace inadequate Class 153s

London Midland – 4 to replace inadequate Class 153s, 2 for the Coventry Arena shuttle

East Midlands – 8 to replace inadequate Class 153s, 2 for Robin Hood

Great Western Railway – 8 to replace Class 143 Pacers

Wales – 30 to replace inadequate Class 142 and Class 143 Pacers, 2 for Heart of Wales Line

Northern Rail – 50 to replace inadequate Class 142 Pacers

That totals up to a hundred and three and it assumes that all of the Class 144 Pacers can be upgraded to Class 144e trains and that North Western electrification releases a few good diesel trains to replace Pacers.

There is only a maximum of seventy-five D-Trains. So without any other sources of new trains, we’re definitely in the doo-dah.

So what other sources of good quality diesel or other self-powered trains are there, that we could use to solve this crisis, that will happen, when the inadequate trains hit the brick wall of access and disability regulations in 2019/2020.

The Aventra IPEMU

The Aventra is Bombardier’s successor train to the ubiquitos Electrostar and it has already been ordered for Crossrail and the London Overground.

Bombardier have told me, that all Aventras can be delivered with provision for a battery to allow them to run for up to 60 miles independently of the power supply. This is all based on the technology demonstrated in a BEMU trial with a Class 379 train.

These trains are now called Independently Powered Electric Multiple Units  or IPEMUs

The Aventra IPEMU has lots of advantages.

  • It is a modern four-coach electric train with everything passengers and train companies expect, that can bring the benefits of electrification to many places without putting up any wires or laying any third rails.
  • It is normally an 100 mph train, but some Electrostar versions are faster than this. If it was a 110 mph train, it could mix it up something like the West Coast , East Coast  or Great Western Main Lines and then go to an important place just a few miles from the main route, like Chester, Middlesbrough or Oxford.
  • The low-speed performance on batteries is the same as the standard train, but with a range of only sixty miles.
  • The train has sufficient performance to handle cross-country lines like Newcastle to Carlisle with electrification at both ends, that might be difficult to electrify.
  • In some places using an Aventra IPEMU might be more affordable and much quicker to implement than full electrification.
  • The trains will probably be available from 2018 or so, when current orders are completed.
  • If we end up with too many of the IPEMU variant, the batteries are just removed and probably with a change of software, we have the standard train.

We’ll be hearing a lot about IPEMUs in the future.

There are already rumours that Great Western Railway are going to order some IPEMU trains.

I suspect the biggest problem with these trains, other than demonstrating that trains powered by batteries are not some Mickey-Mouse idea, is that producing enough of them will be challenging for Bombardier.

As the Crossrail order can’t be delayed, I do wonder whether if the pace of delivery of the forty-five Aventras for London Overground will be slowed., after perhaps the eight for Gospel Oak to Barking are delivered, to allow other routes to have Aventra IPEMUs.

Vivarail D-Train, Class 144e Train Or Aventra IPEMU

There are three possible new or refurbished trains that can help to fill the gap of a lack of independently powered trains and help to replace all the trains that will have to be retired in 2020.

So how do they compare?

  • The Vivarail D-train is a rebuilt London Underground D78 Stock train powered by a number of Ford Transit engines. It may turn out to be successful train, but the politicians are against it. I see it no more than providing some short term capacity or fulfilling unusual needs in particular places.
  • The Class 144e Train is a Class 144 Train that has been rebuilt by Porterbrook. But it is obviously a Pacer! They may be produced as an affordable stop-gap.
  • The Aventra IPEMU is a serious train built to the highest and most acceptable standards, whose one disadvantage is that it needs to have access to overhead electrification at times, to charge the batteries! Stop-gap they are not and if the batteries are removed, it becomes the standard Aventra.

My choice as a passenger would be the Aventra, although I would ride in the others out of curiosity.

Electrification

Electrification will be the major source of good quality diesel trains, as these are often no longer needed after a line is electrified.

As a simple example consider the Gospel Oak to Barking Line, which on electrification will release eight rather nice and fairly new Class 172 diesel trains.

North Western Electrification

The North Western Electrification between Manchester and Preston and Preston to Blackpool is in trouble, but if this can be brought on track, so that Manchester to Preston is completed in December 2016 and Preston to Blackpool is completed in 2017, these lines can be run by refurbished Class 319 trains and a number of Pacers will not be needed and some Class 150 and Class 156 trains will be released for service elsewhere.

Everybody blames Network Rail, but it seems the problem is the same one faced by George Stephenson and his fellow engineers in Victorian times – the nature of the land. This is a recent report from the Manchester Evening News about more problems in the Farnworth Tunnel, which is being enlarged. This extract sums up the problems.

Engineers have been hindered by ‘large swathes of sand’, which are proving difficult to bore through.

The sand means it is no longer possible to safely excavate at the same time as grouting sections of the tunnel, as the sand pours down.

The problem first reared its head on August 14, when running sand created a hole which required 35 tonnes of grout to fill it.

Then on August 27, a collapse meant engineers had to remove 100 tonnes of sand by hand.

Let’s hope that the engineers are getting the overhead line equipment up on time.

But I do think some very experienced engineers are wondering, why they didn’t order trains, that could run on the existing infrastructure. On the other hand the Farnworth Tunnel was probably a problem, that could have bit the railway in half at any time.

I think it is essential that other lines in the North West are electrified as soon as possible, so that more Class 319s can replace Pacers and release Class 15X trains (A mixture of 150 and 156 trains!).

This is a map of the proposed electrification in the North.

Northern Electrification Map

Northern Electrification Map

There are various connecting lines around Liverpool, Manchester and Preston, on which electrification works have not yet started, but have certainly been talked about.

Electrifying these lines would certainly get rid of a few Pacers and release some Class 15X trains for refurshment and use elsewhere.

However, as there is established electrification at Liverpool, Manchester and Preston, it might be more affordable and quicker to use a few Aventra IPEMUs on these lines until the electrification is completed.

Manchester To Leeds Electrification

The Manchester to Leeds electrification has now been paused and it is likely that it will not be completed in the next ten years.

The line has its problems as the three-car Class 185 trains, that work the line, are totally inadequate for the route.

The distance by rail between Manchester and Leeds is 43 miles. When I saw this, I didn’t believe it, but it’s all in this article in the Guardian.

So this means that if you want to run an electric train between Liverpool and Manchester to Leeds, York and Newcastle, the Aventra IPEMU would bridge the gap with ease. The test version of the Aventra IPEMU was a modified Class 379 Train. Similar versions of these like the Class 387 Train are 110 mph trains, so could we see an Aventra IPEMU with such a top speed?

In other words the North Transpennine route could be electrified using four-car 110 mph Aventra IPEMUs. They would certainly be able to serve Newcastle and Middlesbrough, but Scarborough and Hull might still need to be operated by diesel trains.

It would also appear that Aventra IPEMUs could also bridge the gap between Leeds and Manchester Victoria on the Caldervale Line.

This would mean that all stations between Leeds and Manchester on both routes could be served by electric Aventra IPEMUs, if the line was not electrified.

Great Western Electrification

The electrification of the Great Western Main Line is important in solving the train crisis for several reasons.

  • If the electrification of the Great Western can be completed as far as Swindon and Newbury, this might release some of the 36, two- and three-car Class 165 trains or the 21, three-car Class 166 trains. These are in good condition and every train company will want a few to provide modern services.
  • Once electrification is completed to Bristol and Cardiff and Class 800 and Class 801 trains are running on the route, will release a number of InterCity 125s. Some are ear-marked for Scotland to provide flagship services and I’m sure that train companies will find uses for the rest.
  • Electrification to Cardiff will enable electrification of the Cardiff Valleys Lines. But the Valleys electrification needs the new trains to be delivered for Crossrail and/or the London Overground, so that the Class 315 trains can be refurbished and cascaded.

This report in Construction News entitled Crossrail, Thameslink, Great Western and North-west identified as priorities in Network Rail report says this.

The report into the planning of Network Rail’s £38.5bn improvement plan is expected to be released next month.

Sir Peter has identified Crossrail, Thameslink, Great Western and the North-west electrification as the four key “priority projects” for Network Rail, according to sources close to the report.

So it looks like the Great Western and North Western projects might get the resources to finish in time to allow cascades to release trains to help solve the shortage of train problems everywhere.

Scottish Electrification

Although the train shortage is more pronounced in England and Wales, Scottish electrification could give the rest of the UK a helping hand.

In the Wikipedia entry for Abellio ScotRail there is a section entitled Future. This is said.

Abellio ScotRail will introduce a fleet of 46 three car and 24 four car Hitachi AT200 electric trains from December 2017, to operate services on the lines being electrified as part of the Edinburgh to Glasgow Improvement Programme, if it granted a three-year optional franchise extension, it will order a further 10 three car units.

Abellio ScotRail will also introduce 14 four-carriage and 13 five-carriage refurbished High Speed Trains by December 2018 on longer-distance services between Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Inverness. This is contingent on the rolling stock being released by First Great Western, with suggestions in July 2015 that the electrification of the Great Western Main Line was running 12 months late.

This new rolling stock will result in 10 Class 156, eight Class 158 and 34 Class 170s returning to their leasing companies.

So when the new Hitachi trains are delivered by the end of 2018, there could be around fifty diesel trains available to help out in England and Wales.

It is also another reason why electrification of the Great Western must be completed, as without it, Scotland won’t get the High Speed Trains.

Gospel Oak To Barking Electrification

The eight Class 172 trains on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line will be released when that line is electrified.

But who knows when, that will happen?

As the services on the line could be provided by Aventra IPEMUs charging from the electrification at Barking, I do wonder if this should be done to release the Class 172 trains as early as possible. The electrification of the line would then be done at a more relaxed pace, whilst a full service was provided by the Aventras.

Pushing The Train Operating Companies To Help Themselves

In the last few months, some of the franchises have been extended or advertised for new franchisees.  And I think it is true to say, that the Department for Transport, is expecting that the train companies do something about improving the service.

Perhaps this paragraph from Transforming The North’s Railways is the most significant.

We are looking for a complete modernisation of the Northern rolling stock fleet, which will involve replacing Pacer trains completely by 2020 and delivering high quality modern trains for passengers. Bidders’ rolling stock plans must include at least 120 new-build carriages for use on non-electrified routes. The new carriages that will be introduced on the Northern network, along with the release of diesel units following the introduction of electric trains on newly-electrified routes, will enable the replacement of the Pacer units. Existing electric and diesel trains on Northern will receive a complete modernisation to make them ‘as new’ as soon as practicable after franchise start, with the emphasis that the design of new and existing interiors should feel thoroughly modern and focus on passenger comfort.

One hundred and twenty new build carriages for non-electrified routes either means something like sixty two-car diesel multiple units, thirty four-car Aventra IPEMUs or perhaps a mixture of the two. I don’t thin it means D-Trains or Class 144e Trains.

With Jeremy Corbyn threatening to nationalise the railways, it does seem the train companies are being told to sharpen up their acts significantly.

I think we’ll see more innovation and better services offered in the next few years.

Class Is Permanent

When Chiltern Railways wanted trains to run a high standard of service between London and Birmingham, they turned to locomotive-hauled Mark 3 coaches.

The coaches were refurbished to a very high standard, where every passenger can look out of the window, as shown in Hauled By A Diesel Locomotive To Birmingham. They even have sliding doors and modern toilets that meet all current and known future regulations.

And of course, they still have one of the finest ride qualities of any train in the world.

This is said on the Wikipedia entry for Abellio ScotRail.

Abellio ScotRail will also introduce 14 four-carriage and 13 five-carriage refurbished High Speed Trains by December 2018 on longer-distance services between Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Inverness. This is contingent on the rolling stock being released by First Great Western, with suggestions in July 2015 that the electrification of the Great Western Main Line was running 12 months late.

High Speed Trains are formed of two Class 43 locomotives and an appropriate number of Mark 3 coaches.

I would assume the coaches will be refurbished very much like the Chiltern examples with a high class interior, sliding doors and modern toilets, so they meet all current and known future access, disability and environmental regulations.

Terry Miller’s magnificent design, that was built between 1975 and 1988, just seems to keep putting off the inevitable. I wouldn’t bet against some Mark 3 coaches still being in regular service for a hundred years.

Despite their age, there are still a lot of Mark 3 coaches in regular service. I’m not sure how many, but there are over 800 in InterCity 125 sets.

In addition to the superb Chiltern Class 68 locomotive-hauled sets, there are also several sets used by Abellio Greater Anglia on Liverpool Street to Ipswich and Norwich services, where they are hauled by Class 90 locomotives.

These Greater Anglia sets need upgrading with sliding doors and modern toilets, if they are to stay in service past 2020.

The next operator for this franchise is being given tough conditions, which include putting modern trains on the flagship route and running some services in ninety minutes from Norwich to London and sixty from Ipswich. The question has to be asked if this would be possible with a modern locomotive and refurbished Mark 3 coaches!

I think there is a high chance that the winning bidder for the next Greater Anglia franchise will still be using refurbished Mark 3 coaches between Liverpool Street, Ipswich and Norwich.

The new franchisee will have to offer lots of new services and three possibilities have been run in my lifetime.

  • Liverpool Street and Great Yarmouth, via Cambridge, the new Cambridge Science Park station and Norwich.
  • Liverpool Street and Peterborough via Colchester, Ipswich, Bury St. Edmunds and Ely.
  • Liverpool Street to Lowestoft via Colchester and Ipswich.

They have a problem, in that sections of these routes are not electrified. There are four possible solutions.

  • Run the routes in such a way that an Aventra IPEMU can service it. A possibility!
  • Buy a few Class 800 electro-diesel trains, which would probably be made in Japan by Hitachi. Expensive but possible!
  • Get a few more sets of refurbished Mark 3 coaches and haul them with a Class 88 electro-diesel locomotive. No problem and in style!
  • Use InterCity 125s. Possibly, but 100% diesel!

The only options that could be done quickly would be to use the Class 88 or InterCity 125s.

The latter would work, but surely a mainly electric modern solution is probably better and more acceptable to politicians.

I would also never rule out more sets of Mark 3 coaches being used around the country after refurbishment. The only problem is something environmentally-friendly to haul them!

The Scottish solution of shortened High Speed Trains could also be used.

Aventra IPEMUs Running From Or Between Electrified Hubs Or Lines

Many branch lines or secondary routes meet the following conditions.

  • They are electrified at one or both ends.
  • The electrification is sufficient to charge an Aventra IPEMU’s battery, as it waits to return or passes along the line.
  • The non-electrified sections of the line are short enough to be handled by an Aventra IPEMU.

Examples of lines suitable for an IPEMU include.

  • Newcastle to Carlisle
  • Manchester to Leeds
  • Cambridge to Ipswich
  • Coventry to Nuneaton
  • Carnforth to Barrow-in-Furness
  • Norwich to Yarmouth

I think that once the Aventra IPEMU concept is proven, then we’ll see them increasingly used around electrified lines.

There is a long list of places, where branch and secondary routes meet main electrified lines.

  • Birmingham
  • Carlisle
  • Coventry
  • Crewe
  • Darlington
  • Doncaster
  • Ely
  • Ipswich
  • Leeds
  • Liverpool
  • Manchester Piccadilly
  • Manchester Victoria
  • Newcastle
  • Norwich
  • Peterborough
  • Preston
  • Wolverhampton
  • York

This list will hopefully be increased, when the Great Western Main Line is electrified.

  • Bristol
  • Cardiff
  • Reading
  • Swansea

I have written An Alternative Approach To Provide A Local Metro Network, which investigates how  Aventra IPEMUs can be used to provide electric trains on lines without full electrification.

The only area of the country that will lack electrified hubs in a few years will be the East Midlands Main Line and the far South West and the Northern parts of Scotland and Wales.

So surely, it is important that we electrify the Midland Main Line to bring electrification to the important hubs of Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield, so we can use Aventra IPEMUs to provide electric trains on their local lines.

Conclusions

It’s tight, but I think it’ll be alright in 2020, but there are certain things we must do.

  1. Use no more than a handful of Vivarail D-Trains to provide services on some far-flung lines.
  2. The Great Western, North Western and Scottish electrifications must be completed on time.
  3. Use the Mark 3 coaches intelligently
  4. Use new Aventra IPEMUs to side-step electrification in places like, the electrification gap between Manchester and Leeds and the Cardiff Valleys Lines.
  5. Use new Aventra IPEMUs to provide services around electrified hubs.
  6. Scrap all the Pacers except possibly upgraded Class 144e trains.
  7. Upgrade the Class 150, Class 153 and Class 156 trains.

I think it’ll be interesting to see how the companies jump.

 

 

 

 

 

 

September 21, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , | 4 Comments

Who Will Be First To Order Vivarail D-Trains?

This is pure speculation on my part, but I suspect that before the end of the year, one train company or another will give the Class 230 or Vivarail D-train a serious trial, prior to a possible order.

I shall list some of the reasons why a train company might use Vivarail D-trains.

Pacer Replacement

The main market for the D-train must be to help drive the Pacer trains to the scrapyard.

There are five classes and they all suffer from the same problems, explorerd in detail in this section on Wikipedia.

  • They look and feel like thirty year old buses.
  • They don’t meet the current access and disability regulations.
  • Doubts have been raise about their safety in an accident.

But I do think for the average passenger and train company, their biggest problem is their reputation, which drives passengers away and makes it difficult to attract new ones.

They certainly need replacement, but whether the D-train is the solution in all cases is open to question.

Comparing a D-train with a Pacer can be summarised as follows.

  • The ride quality of a D-train on conical rubber springs, proper bogies and a chassis and body designed to be strong enough to accept London’s punishment is what you would want from any train built in the last twenty years, whereas the Pacer with its two axles and bus-style construction, feels like a bus you’d ride in the Third World.
  • The D-train will have the sort of interior and passenger facilities in a new train, whereas the Pacer interior is pure 1980s bus design. London’s oldest buses built in the early years of this century, make Pacer design look appalling.
  • . Ride a D78 Stock at the Upminster end of the District Line and you can get a feeling how when the trains are carrying a reasonable load of passengers, the trains have a light and airy they feel because of the large areas of glass. Pacers are nothing but claustrophobic.
  • The D-train will meet all access and disability regulations, whereas the Pacer does not.
  • The D78 Stock on which the D-train is based was designed for quick and easy loading and unloading, whereas for many getting into and out of a Pacer is challenging.
  • Will the D-train have an integral ramp for wheelchairs and refreshment trolleys, as is fitted to all buses in London? It would make loading and unloading wheelchair passengers so much faster and thus improve time-keeping and overall train speed.
  • The D-train has wi-fi, which everybody expects these days. A Pacer with wi-fi would be a waste, as the trains ride so badly, you can’t really use a mobile device.
  • I’ve read that passengers will be able to use the wi-fi to order drinks from a server and that train information will be easily available, but my computer system designing mind, says that these are just a small part of what could be done.
  • Many Pacers are overworked on lines that need probably more trains, so I doubt we’ll see many one-to-one replacements.
  • The Pacer is faster at 75 mph, than the D-train at sixty, but then the D-train will handle stops faster and have better acceleration.
  • The Pacers were designed in an era, where bicycles, wheelchairs and buggies were not so common on trains. The D-train will be designed according to the profile of a typical passenger load.

Class 153 Train Replacement

The Class 153 train is a single coach, diesel train built in the 1980s, with a capacity of 75 passengers and a couple of bikes. There are seventy of them and they have a top speed of 75 mph and typically work rural and branch lines throughout the UK.

A lot of what applies to Pacers applies to the Class 153, although they are better trains.

They are not bad trains, but they do have a few problems.

  • Seventy-five passengers is not a large enough capacity on many of the routes they serve.
  • Many Class 153s serve seaside resorts or leisure areas, where there is a large need for bike and buggy capacity.
  • The toilets and other on-board facilities on some need upgrading.
  • Loading and unloading can often be a slow process.

From personal experience, I suspect that some of these trains have reliability problems.

I think that if a lot of these trains, especially those working branch lines like Ipswich  to Felixstowe, could be replaced by D-trains. On some routes like Peterborough to Lincoln, the slower speed (60 mph) of the D-train, may mean that replacement is not feasible.

I also think that on some lines with lots of stops, the D-train’s speed of loading and unloading may be an advantage.

One advantage of releasing a few Class 153 trains, would be that the remaining units could be refurbished and coupled together in pairs to increase capacity on some of the routes they serve, where D-trains would not be acceptable.

D-Train Variants

But perhaps the biggest difference between D-trains and Pacers and the later Sprinters like the Class 153 trains, is that the older trains were designed as a one-size-fits-all solution to the problem of providing local trains. D-trains will be a fully-engineered train rebuilt to modern standards, but of a size and capability designed for the route on which it will be intended to run. Vivarail have talked of different versions and looking at where Pacers and other old trains that need replacing are used, you can come up with some ideas.

These will be discussed in the next few sections.

The Commuter Train

Vivarail are promoting the D-train as a commuter train. Many of these routes have frequent stops going into and out of a city, so the stop-at-a-station performance is more important than pure speed. Recent research has shown that more stations may actually be more important for commuting time, than the point-to-point performance of the train.

The Luxury Commuter Train

If you look at some of the latest commuter trains in London like the Class 377 train, much of the seating is at tables, where passengers sit four to a window, giving an experience far removed from any services fifteen years ago.

Also, some cities like Reading and Cambridge now use buses with leather seats and wi-fi on commuter routes into the city.

Over the next few years passengers will demand higher standards on their commute into major centres and train companies will have to provide them to coax commuters out of their cars.

A luxury commuter train could be designed around the D-train with leather seats, space to work, wi-fi, refreshments and a place to store their bicycle.

I would argue that most D-train commuting variants would be furnished internally to a high standard.

The Leisure Train

Quite a few Pacers and Class 153 trains run on scenic lines, often with lots of stations, or a branch to a resort.

They are totally unsuited for this role, as there is not enough provision for large luggage, bicycles and buggies.

The performance of a D-train would be totally adequate for this role and it could be fitted out with perhaps a hundred seats arranged round tables in the windows, so passengers could admire the view, with a large area for the baggage, that these trains attract.

The affordability and availability of the D-train, may mean that a seaside branch would be run by two trains, if the track allowed, so there could be a doubling of services on many lines, at not too great a cost.

The Special Events Train

A couple of years ago, I was travelling in the West Country, at the time of the Glastonbury Festival. It was a nightmare and I’ve never seen rural trains so crowded.

In Is This Rail Project Going Nowhere?, I talked about the problems of getting passengers to and from the new Coventry Arena station on match days.

A special events version of the D-train, could be used to shuttle visitors and spectators to major events like these and the many others that happen around the country.

In its simplest form, it might just be two standard commuter D-trains coupled together to make a four- or six-car train.

I have assumed that D-trains can be run in pairs, as D78 Stock does on the District Line.

If there were a couple of spare D-trains available, they would also be useful to bypass line closures perhaps using non-electrified lines.

Recently, Network Rail have been improving the lines between London and Norwich and regularly, I have endured Rail Replacement Buses to get to and from football at Ipswich. It would have been much easier for passengers, if say a six-coach D-train had been used to ferry everybody between Ipswich and Norwich and Cambridge to catch fast trains to connect to and from London.

The Longer Distance Trundler

There are some important remote lines in the UK, like the Far North Line in Scotland, the Heart of Wales Line in Wales and the Cumbrian Coast Line in England.

Lines like this are very important to the local community, are scenic and often get a rather irregular service with basic trains, that doesn’t encourage use by either locals or visitors.

They must also present problems to train operators, when perhaps a train fails or the line is blocked because of adverse weather or a train hitting stray animals.

The right concept of D-train and operating strategy, either with D-trains working alone or in conjunction with faster trains on these lines, could be the key to providing the first class service that the areas they serve need, at an acceptable cost.

Anything innovative can’t be tried at the moment, as there aren’t any spare trains.

The Creation Of A Spare Train Philosophy

Typically to provide any service or get a job done, you must have adequate resources.

It’s the same, when providing a train service.

As an example, the Victoria Line in London has a fleet of 47 2009 Stock trains. At peak hours there should be 43 trains in service.

So there are a few spare trains either in maintenance or perhaps sitting ready to come into service, should a train fail.

This provision of spare trains is typical of well-managed train networks, as it means that running a full service is a lot easier.

But I suspect most local networks running Pacers and Sprinters have access to very few spare trains. And there just isn’t available to lease!

So could we see the likes of Abellio Greater Anglia, Northern Rail and First Great Western, investing in D-trains, as a sort of insurance, against the sort of problems they face?

A Flexible Train

The beauty of the D-train concept is that the train can be configured to what it will be doing.

We’ve always relied on a standard train and moulded the services and passengers to fit what it offers. That is an outmoded concept.

When you buy a new car, you at least get to choose the colour, whether it is a saloon, estate or hatchback and often the level of luxury you want!

So why can’t train operators buy or lease a train that fits their routes and passengers?

So who might give the D-train a trial?

East Anglia

According to this article on Global Rail News, the Department of Transport has just invited operators to bid for the franchise with the new operator taking over from October 2016, after the winner is announced in the summer.

One of the requirements of the new franchise, would be to introduce 180 new services every week. That is a very demanding requirement, as surely it will need more trains to do this.

So where do they get extra trains?

On the flagship service between Norwich and London via Ipswich, the Class 90 locomotive hauled Mark 3 coaches will be replaced with electric multiple units like Class 801 trains at some time in the future. In the mean-time, the Mark 3 coaches could be updated with automatic doors and retention toilets, just as Chiltern have done. This would meet one condition of the franchise, which is to fix the toilets.

If they needed more trains to run the flagship service, they could always add a few more suitably refurbished Mark 3 coaches, that are currently in store. But there isn’t any suitable electric locomotives in the UK or even on order. One solution would be to use some of the electro-diesel Class 88 locomotives on order from Vossloh for delivery in 2016. These could also be used on new services like.

  • Liverpool Street and Great Yarmouth, via Cambridge, the new Cambridge Science Park station and Norwich.
  • Liverpool Street and Peterborough via Colchester, Ipswich, Bury St. Edmunds and Ely.
  • Liverpool Street to Lowestoft via Colchester and Ipswich.

The first service would also add much-needed extra capacity between Norwich and Cambridge.

Most of the rest of the East Anglian franchise is an intense electric network into Stratford and Liverpool Street.

To improve and increase services, there may be a few electric trains to be scrounged from somewhere, but they would need probably need extensive refurbishment, like many of the trains like Class 321 trains running currently. There might be some Class 319 trains from Thameslink available, but they would need work to be done.

As to new trains, the question has to be asked if any train-maker has the capacity to build them quickly? I can’t see any new trains being delivered before 2020.

There is also the various diesel trains, connecting Cambridge, Ipswich and Norwich and running the branch lines out of Ipswich and Norwich. Most are tired, except for a dozen Class 170 trains running the main routes, and all trains lack capacity and especially space for bicycles.

As the franchising documents mention innovative new trains, surely the branches are places where Vivarail D-trains might be used! They have these advantages.

  • They can be appropriately configured for the routes, with plenty of space for bicycles and buggies, that seaside and country services attract.
  • More trains could be ordered, so that service frequencies could be increased.
  • The trains would be available in the near future.
  • They would release some better diesel multiple units to augment services like Ipswich to Cambridge.

East Anglia also has a big problem with irregular but predictable leisure use of trains.

It has two major football clubs and an important racecourse, that are all served by nearby train stations.  It also has several seaside resorts, where if the weather is fine, there will be a large increase in traffic. There are also several festivals and other events  like the Lowestoft Air Show.

So could two-car D-trains coupled together as a four-or six-car train, be used to shift the extra passengers on busy days? I can’t find anything on the web about whether this is possible, but there must be lots of uses for a four-car or longer event special. Often the solution today, is to bring in a few coaches top and tailed with two diesel locomotives. Surely, two D-trains is a better solution.

The big disadvantage of the D-train, which is its low top speed of 60 mph, would probably not matter on East Anglia’s branch lines, as I doubt trains currently go much faster anyway.

But it would probably preclude using the trains from Cambridge to Ipswich and Norwich, except when there were problems on the main line!

According to this article on the BBC, the new franchisee will have to fulfil certain conditions. I like this.

The establishment of a £9.5m Customer and Communities Improvement Fund to benefit passengers and local residents is required.

Does it mean that the government will expect some new and improved stations?

I think it highly likely, that the three bidders for the new East Anglian franchise, will have a serious look at the prototype D-train.

Possible Requirement – 3 to replace inadequate Class 153s

London Midland

London Midland has a few lack of capacity problems..

The well-publicised one is that between Coventry and Nuneaton, which I talked about in Is This Rail Project Going Nowhere? Coventry councillors have already looked at the D-train for a shuttle from Coventry to the new station at Coventry Arena station.

To serve Coventry Arena, the original plan was to have a six-car shuttle between the station and Coventry.

So could the Coventry to Nuneaton Line and the related Coventry to Leamington Line, via the new Kenilworth station be run using three-car D-trains? Two could be coupled together on match days to provide the six-car shuttle for the stadium.

London Midland has a total of eight Class 153 trains, most of which work local routes, except for Birmingham to Shrewsbury.

Replacing just one Class 153 with a D-train on a short route that needs more capacity, would release a train to work as a pair with another Class 153 elsewhere.

Birmingham is a mass of rail lines, many of which still have freight traffic, some of which the local authorities want to reopen.

Consider the following.

So if London Midland had a few spare D-trains could they be used to reopen these lines. Especially, if they reduced the cost of reopening.

In some ways using ex-London Underground D78 Stock in Birmingham would be rather ironic. The trains would truly be coming home.

I can’t believe that London Midland are not taking a serious look at the D-train.

Possible Requirement – 4 to replace inadequate Class 153s, 2 for the Coventry Arena shuttle

East Midland Trains

East Midland Trains has seventeen Class 153 trains. As with franchises discussed previously, I suspect that some of the routes might be better served with a two-coach D-train.

Depending on the performance of the D-train some of the other routes may well be very suited to D-trains.

  • The Robin Hood Line to Worksop will need some extra trains for its proposed extension to Ollerton and a possible link to the Erewash Valley Line.
  • The Derwent Valley Line to Matlock, is a scenic branch, that would probably benefit from more capacity.
  • Several of the routes from Nottingham run Class 153 trains, so perhaps these are possibilities. Tram-trains keep being mentioned, but there are new stations like Ilkeston and routes to serve.

As East Midland Trains have just been awarded a franchise extension to March 2018, I suspect they’ll check out if the D-train can make them money.

Possible Requirement – 8 to replace inadequate Class 153s, 2 for Robin Hood

Great Western Railway

In the Wikipedia entry for Class 230 trains, which is the proper name for a D-train, there is a section called Potential Customers. This is said.

Under a recent franchise agreement, FirstGroup (owner of the Great Western Railway franchise) has agreed to carry out a study on the use of overhauled Vivarail D-Trains on branch lines by the end of the year, possibly leading to a trial of the units.

Certainly Great Western Railway has a lot of branch lines, where D-trains could possibly replace Pacers or Class 153 to provide better trains and larger capacity.

Their small fleet of Class 143 Pacer trains are all based in the Exeter area, serving the following lines.

If Great Western Railway decided to run D-trains here, there shouldn’t be any operational problems as the longest line is only just under forty miles. If they were all stabled together, it must ease servicing and cut the risk of introducing new trains.

Vivarail would certainly be pleased, as they’d get iconic pictures of D-trains running along the sea at Dawlish.

I think we’ll be seeing D-trains on that sea wall by next summer.

Should Great Western Railway go for an all D-train fleet for these three Exeter lines, it would release some Class 150 and Class 153 trains for use elsewhere.

Possible Requirement – 8 to replace Class 143 Pacers

Wales

In the Potential Customers section of the Wikipedia entry for Class 230 trains, this is said.

In May 2015, it was claimed Arriva Trains Wales are to open talks with Vivarail over taking on converted D78s.

 

I got positive vibes from Vivarail D-trains And The Heart Of Wales Line, but this is not the only place where D-trains could be used.

Wales is developing the Cardiff Valley Lines extensively and when you ride them, you get the impression, that they could do more with a few more decent trains. Especially, as electrification is running late and they need to improve things now.

So could D-Trains be used to extend and improve services in South Wales?

There is also the problem of fifteen Class 142 Pacer trains and fifteen Class 143 Pacer trains that need replacement because of the access and disability legislation by 2019/20, unless the Cardiff Valley Lines are electrified.

Possible Requirement – 30 to replace inadequate Class 142 and Class 143 Pacers, 2 for Heart of Wales Line

Scotland

Scotland doesn’t have any Pacers or Class 153 trains, although I do feel in the absence of anything better, D-Trains would be ideal to improve the service on the Far North Line.

Northern Rail

Northern Rail has the real Pacer problem in that they have 79 Class 142 Pacers and 23 Class 144 Pacers.

I suspect that the company is desperately looking for ways to cut the number of Pacers. But some factors are working in their favour.

  • When Manchester to Preston is electrified in December 2016 and this line can be run using Class 319 trains, how many Pacers will this remove and how many Class 150 and Class 156 trains will be released for use elsewhere?
  • Preston to Blackpool electrification is supposed to be finished in 2017 and as it is a top priority, this target should be met, so that Class 319 trains can give the Order of the Boot to a few more Pacers and release perhaps a few more Class 150 and Class 156 trains.
  • Pacers often run in pairs, so how often would a three-car D-train replace a pair of Pacers.
  • There is also a Porterbrook project to create the Class 144e train, which is a Class 144 Pacer, that meets all of the regulations.

If all the Class 144s get upgraded, there’s still probably about sixty Class 142 Pacers to replace. But at least there is probably a dozen or so Class 150 and Class 156 trains to help.

Possible Requirement – 50 to replace inadequate Class 142 Pacers

Conclusions

The possible requirement could be higher than the number of D-Trains available.

So the Vivarail D-Train had better work, as it looks like that if Pacers are going to be eliminated by 2020, UK railways are going to need every one of them.

 

What is needed is a good source of quality diesel multiple units. But there are possibilities.

  • If the electrification of the Great Western can be completed as far as Swindon and Newbury, this might release some of the 36, two- and three-car Class 165 trains or the 21, three-car Class 166 trains. But everybody will want them!
  • The eight Class 172 trains on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line will be released when that line is electrified.
  • If Bombardier can get their production line for Aventra trains going at full speed and also create some battery packs to enable some trains to run as the IPEMU variant, these might displace a few diesel trains on branch lines off electrified lines.
  • Class 144 Pacers are converted to Class 144e.
  • All of the Class 150, Class 153 and Class 156 trains must be refurbished to a high standard, as given the pace of electrification, they will be needed for a long time.

As a last resort, it might be necessary to convert the Class 142 Pacers to meet the access and advisability regulations.

 

September 20, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , | 1 Comment

Hull Trains Take The Pragmatic Decision

The September edition of Modern Railways has an article entitled Hull Trains Plans Bi-Mode Fleet.

Like First Great Western, First Hull Trains seem to have lost patience with Network Rail and the article said they were thinking about ordering bi-mode or electro-diesel trains.

They have now ordered five Class 800 trains from Hitachi, as is reported here on the BBC. This is the start of the article.

A rail company is investing £68m in a fleet of faster trains to ensure shorter journey times to London.

Hull Trains said it was buying five trains capable of running on either electricity-powered routes or with diesel fuel.

The firm said the trains had been bought because of delays in country-wide electrification of the rail network.

 

So it looks like the non-electrification of Selby to Hull has caused the company to take this pragmatic decision. In the last few months, they’ve even looked at electrifying that line themselves.

At least they will not be left with a fleet of incompatible trains, as when the electrification finally happens on all their routes to Hull and Beverly, the trains can be converted to all-electric Class 801 trains.

I do wonder if the delayed electrification across the UK, will cause a few more companies to take pragmatic decisions!

I think we might see.

  1. First TransPennine ordering Class 800 Trains for Liverpool to Hull and Newcastle.
  2. Virgin ordering Class 800 Trains for London to Chester, North Wales and Holyhead.

To get around the problems of non-electrified lines.

September 5, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | Leave a comment

Affordable Electrification

In First Great Western’s Pragmatic Large And Little Solution To The Problems Of Great Western Electrification, I put forward a theory that First Great Western were thinking pragmatically and using new innovative trains to provide services on their network.

The Large And Little Approach

I called it a Large (Class 800 train or similar) and Little (IPEMU) approach. In the related article I was assuming that the IPEMU or Independently Powered Electrical Multiple Unit was based on a Class 387 train, but as Electrostars are being succeeded by Aventras, the IPEMU could equally well be based on the newer design.

So how will these trains affect electrification in other parts of the country?

Also in the September 2015 Edition Modern Railways are three articles, where a Class 800 or an IPEMU could be the solution.

  1. Hull Trains are reported looking for a bi-mode fleet to run their Hull services, as they would bridge the unelectrified seventy miles of line between Selby and Hull. Their specification seems to have been written for the Class 800 train.
  2. Services to Blackpool have also been approved, which if the electrification is not ready in time, is a route that could be handled by a Class 800 or an IPEMU.
  3. Roger Ford is also talking about Open Access Hotting Up. Some of the routes would be ideal for either a Class 800 or an IPEMU, as lots of places without a decent service to London, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow or other large cities, are thirty or so miles off a main electrified line. Places like Yarmouth, Lowestoft, Sudbury, Cromer, Lincoln, Skegness, Wisbech, Windermere, Chester and Burnley come to mind.

Part-Time Electric Trains

Both the Class 800 trains and an IPEMU, are effectively part-time electric trains.

The Class 800 is an electric train with an on-board diesel engine for use, where there are no overhead wires. It will thus be able to go between London and the South West in a few year’s time, by using electric power between London and Newbury and diesel power eldsewhere. As more and more of the line is electrified, more of the journey will be done under electric power.

The IPEMU uses an on-board battery, charged when working under the overhead wires to effectively serve the same purpose as the diesel engines of the Class 800, and provide power on sections of the line without overhead wires.

Common to both types of train will be a sophisticated control system, that puts the pantograph up and down depending on whether the train is running under electrified wires.

So as more and more overhead wires are installed, the trains become much more full-time electric trains.

When a Class 800 is no longer needed to use its diesel engines, they can be removed to convert the train into an all-electric Class 801 train.

With the IPEMU, you just remove the batteries.

So one of the big advantages of these two trains, is that you never end up with a surplus of trains, that are no use anywhere else on the network.

We’re always going to have a need for 200 kph high-speed electric trains for long-distance services and four-car electric trains will find plenty of work all over the network.

Thoughts On IPEMU Trains

I also think, that as the years pass, IPEMU technology will get better and much more efficient with a longer range when running on the batteries. Drivers and computerised train management systems will also learn how to coax the maximum range out of the trains.

Also with Bombardier switching production to the new lighter and more efficient Aventra train, which according to this article on Global Rail News, is designed so that lithium-iron batteries can added as required. 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-Iron batteries if required.

The prototype train based on a Class 379 train, weighs in at forty tonne a car, as against the planned weight of thirty-five tonne for an Aventra. The article also says this.

Bombardier’s EBI Drive 50 Driver Assistance System enables drivers to achieve an economical driving style and energy savings of up to 15%. Regenerative dynamic braking saves yet more, as does the use of ‘intelligent’ air conditioning and a ‘Smart Stabling’ system to shut unused vehicles down when out of service but come back online quickly when required.

So what sort of range will an Aventra set up to run as an IPEMU, have on batteries, bearing in mind that the heavier and less-efficient prototype can do sixty miles. But does it really matter what the train can do on batteries, if you can provide short lengths of overhead wire and have intelligent systems on the train to put the pantograph up and down accordingly.

I believe that there is probably an opportunity to create the ultimate Aventra IPEMU within a few years.

This could enable services like.

  1. London to Yarmouth via Cambridge, Thetford and Norwich
  2. London to Salisbury and Exeter
  3. Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough
  4. Manchester to Sheffield
  5. Newcastle to Carlisle

In my list, there would seem to be a large number of routes in East Anglia. But then Anglia Greater Anglia were part of the trials of the Class 379 IPEMU test train.

Aventra And Aventra IPEMU Compared

If what I gleaned on my tip in the Class 379 IPEMU at Manningtree is true, the performance difference between the two trains will be minimal.

I also believe that from a passenger’s view, the trains will be identical.

The big difference comes, when you convert a line for the two trains.

Suppose you want to run either train on say a branch line like Felixstowe, which is a dozen miles off an electrified line with a station at the end.

Obviously, you would need to modify stations, track, bridges and tunnels accordingly, so they fitted the new trains and any freight traffic on the route. You would probably make enough space, for overhead wires, even if you were not fitting them at this time.

If the line was only going to be served by the IPEMU variant and there was to be no other electric traffic, the wires would not need to be installed.

Once the line was complete with signalling and fully inspected and certified, the trains would be able to run.

If the trains to be used were to be the IPEMU variant, you would be running test services on the line long before you would with conventional trains.

In how many places would the use of these trains provide a modern service without the expense and time-scale of full electrification, which seems to be riddled with all sorts of cost-elevating problems?

Case Study 1 – Edinburgh To Inverness

I’m including this as it is a journey I have done in the cab of an InterCity 125. I took a video.

The journey takes three hours thirty three minutes with stops along the way.

At present only a small amount of the route close to Edinburgh is electrified, but by 2018, the line will be electrified as far as Dunblane.

When the new Class 800 trains are delivered, these trains will run this route from London, as my train had done.

As there is now so little electrification between Edinburgh and Inverness, these trains will probably take the same time on introduction, but as more electrification is commissioned, the time through the Highlands will drop.

They will at least get up from London to Edinburgh in a faster time, than they do now, as they will take full advantage of the fully electrified route.

Other very long routes would probably benefit from the use of Class 800 trains.

  1. Aberdeen to Penzance
  2. Bournemouth to Manchester
  3. Liverpool to Norwich
  4. Cardiff to Manchester
  5. London Euston to Holyhead

Many like London to Holyhead have long stretches of electrified line.

One great advantage, is that if say the route gets electrified in the future, you can use Class 801 electric trains, to give passengers the same or better level of service.

Case Study 2 – Carlisle To Newcastle

I have listed that IPEMU trains would be able to run between Carlisle to Newcastle.

So I will look at this line as a case study.

I don’t know the Tyne Valley Line well, but it is about sixty miles long and has electrified lines at both ends. Traditional electrification may require a lot of bridge and station reconstruction to accommodate the overhead wires, whereas an IPEMU could use the line without any modifications to infrastructure, as it can use any line that the current Class 156 trains on the line can. There would of course be a need to make sure that at both ends of the line, there was sufficient electrification to fully charge the train for its return journey.

So the cost of replacing diesel trains on this line with modern electric ones, would be solely the cost of the new trains, and perhaps the cost of a small amount of electrification in the stations and the stabling sidings at each end of the line.

In this case, I suspect Network Rail would breathe a big sigh of relief, if they didn’t have to electrify this line, with all its logistical and possibly environmental problems.

How many lines in the UK, could be given new electric passenger trains in this way?

Infrastructure Problems

Much of the infrastructure problems delaying and increasing the costs of electrification is dealing with inadequate Victorian infrastructure like the flying buttesses at Chorley and Farnworth Tunnel.

Some of these infrastructure problems have to be fixed as they are in danger of collapse and others offer inadequate clearance for modern freight trains.

I also heard from drivers in Liverpool, that they notice the quality of the land as they drive the Class 319 trains over Chat Moss. It caused Stephenson a lot of trouble and also didn’t help in the erection of the overhead wires between Liverpool and Manchester.

So perhaps we should adopt a pragmatic approach to putting up the overhead wires.

For instance, if IPEMU trains had been a standard UK train, when the electrification between Liverpool and Manchester was designed, would engineers have decided not to electrify across Chat Moss, as the batteries could be used?

Visual Intrusion Of Electrification

I think too, we shouldn’t underestimate the lack of visual intrusion if say a picturesque branch line was to be served by an IPEMU rather than by a traditional electric train. The Windermere branch and some lines in South Wales may well be better served by a more visually acceptable IPEMU.

Case Study 3 – The Windermere Branch

So will we see the electrification on the ten mile long, Windermere branch cut back and IPEMU serving this branch? According to this government document, the project will cost sixteen million pounds. Buying trains is often quoted at a million pounds a carriage, so would the budget be better spent on buying two or three  IPEMU for First TransPennine?

There are other reasons, why this could happen.

  1. First TransPennine is owned by the same company as First Great Western and they have the same problems over electrification as their West Country cousins. So will we see the same pragmatism in both companies?
  2. There would be no infrastructure work required at all on the branch and the electric trains could serve any desired point to the south like Preston, Liverpool, Manchester and Crewe.
  3. This area is very special to a lot of people and it only wants someone with deep pockets and no sense, who objects to electrification to cause Network Rail to blow the whole budget on legal fees. Replacing one diesel train with a quieter battery train probably doesn’t cause these problems.
  4. Remember too, that working from the overhead line, the Class 387 is an 110 mph train, that could mix it with the Class 390 Pendolinos on the West Coast Main Line.
  5. Network Rail probably don’t want to do the electrification of the Windermere branch, as it will consume resources that could be better deployed elsewhere.

So if I was in charge, I wouldn’t electrify the Windermere branch, but use IPEMU trains. Windermere would get smart new electric trains and Network Rail would have one less job to do.

The Big Beast Enters The Jungle

Sir Peter Hendy has now been made the Chairman of Network Rail.

In my view, he is an excellent choice and he will make a difference to the perceived shambles that is Network Rail’s record on electrification.

He has certainly got proven qualities that will help him in his new job.

  1. Anybody who can work with Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone and not get fired, must have the knack of dealing with politicians.
  2. In the creation of Crossrail and the London Overground, he seems to have got on well with train companies and Network Rail, despite some of them having to give way on decisions, that meant they lost revenue and profits.
  3. From what I’ve heard from workers and engineers, project management in Transport for London is pretty good and projects regularly come in on time and under budget.
  4. On the Over/Underground innovative infrastructure solutions like the Circle Line becoming a spiral and the Clapham Kiss are encouraged.

The way a company or organisation behaves starts at the top.

Tram-Trains

I like tram-trains and I’ve seen them working successfully all over Germany. In their simplest form, they allow trams on a self-contained tram network like Croydon, Manchester or Sheffield to transfer onto the heavy rail network and run as trains to another town or city. The tram-train trial in Sheffield, where Class 399 tram-trains will run between Cathedral and Rotherham Parkgate, is fairly simple, but some tram-train networks in Germany like Kassel and Karlsruhe stretch for over a hundred miles.

There is no reason, why extensive tram-train networks could not be developed in some UK cities and towns. How about?

  • Birmingham
  • Blackpool
  • Cardiff
  • Edinburgh
  • Nottingham
  • Sheffield

Obviously the trial in Sheffield must be successful.

If a city has a modern tramway, I feel that to use it as a base for tram-trains, has many advantages.

  • Affordable electrification on rural and secondary routes
  • Increasing the number of trams running through city centres and on parts of the network needing an increase in capacity.
  • Tramway running to difficult to reach local attractions and locations
  • Relieving capacity problems in stations by putting some lines on a much better-routed tramway, like say through a Shopping Centre, past a sports ground or along the coast.
  • In some places in Germany, tram-trains have even released the main station for redevelopment for other uses.
  • Also in Germany, I have a feeling that tram-trains have been used to link two separate tram networks by using a connecting heavy rail route. Think Manchester and Sheffield along the Hope Valley Line.

In addition, we could even make a particular type of tram-train a standard and develop methods of standardised tramway construction.

But would say Yarmouth accept the same system as Blackpool? Or Liverpool the same one as Manchester?

Tramway construction in this country has a bad reputation, as systems like Birmingham, Nottingham, Sheffield and Edinburgh have been delivered late and have caused excessive grief during construction. It is worth comparing these unhappy experiences with the current progress of the Wimbledon Line Enhancement Programme on the London Tramlink. It is a tricky project to provide a new terminal platform within Wimbledon station. Work started on July 13th this year and the new platform is scheduled to open in October.

We must get our project management of tramway construction and enhancement right!

Case Study 4 – Tram-Trains In Blackpool

Blackpool Tramway used to be much larger and is one that could be grown by the use of tram-trains.

This report on the BBC, talks about Balfour Beatty withdrawal from the project to electrify the lines around the North-West, which includes Blackpool.

Modern Railways in September is also reporting that the Liverpool to Blackpool North service will be split to allow Class 319 electric trains to work the southern part of the route.

Let’s hope this hiatus results in a sensible solution for Blackpool.

Included in the report of the North of England Electrification Task Force is a proposal in Tier Two to electrify Burnley to Colne  and Kirkham to Blackpool South.

These two routes meet at Preston, so why not use a tram-train to connect Colne to Blackpool. The line is mainly single-track and around Burnley, there are some massive viaducts, which probably would be expensive to electrify to main line standards.

So electrifying this route to allow tram-trains to serve it, would probably be more affordable. The route would be as follows.

  • Colne to Rose Grove – Single-line tramway
  • Rose Grove to Kirkham via Preston – Double track electrified heavy rail
  • Kirkham to Blackpool South – Single-line tramway
  • At Blackpool South the tram-train would join the Blackpool tramway.

There would also be possibilities to use tram-trains on the former Fleetwood Branch to link the town to Preston.

In the long term, I believe that tram-trains emanating from Blackpool and Preston could make use of some of the disused or rather badly-served rail lines in the area.

Could the Ormskirk to Preston Line be served by tram-trains working from Blackpool, thus improving connection between Preston and Blackpool and the area of Lancashire north of Liverpool and around Southport?

Around the turn of the Century, Blackpool was a decaying resort living on former glories, with a rather quaint tram going up the coast, no direct rail service to London and only a fleet of decrepit trains taking visitors and residents to Preston and beyond.

Now fifteen years later, it has a modern tramway, that compares well with any in the world and it is due to get electrified services to Preston, the rest of the North West and London, if the electrification project can be rescued.

Adding tram-trains into the town to increase connectivity can only be good for Blackpool, Preston and the Greater North West. They would also have the benefit of taking two lines off the list of lines to be electrified.

Power Stations

If we look at the IPEMUs, they will have a range of at least 60 miles. So suppose an IPEMU wanted to go from perhaps fifty miles one side of an electrified station like Crewe to fifty miles the other side. Could the train sit at the platform at Crewe, whilst passengers are unloaded and loaded with its pantograph up to charge the battery for the next part of the journey? Or perhaps its journey could be arranged so that for a short distance, the train ran along an electrified line?

I thin engineers will come up with innovative ideas to get power to IPEMUs.

Suppose for example, a branch line from an electrified main line was say about thirty miles long, which as the train would have to go out and back from the main line, this might be towards the range limit of an IPEMU. Perhaps by electrifying a few miles at the main line end of the branch, the branch would now be well within the range of an IPEMU. As the electric power would be taken from the main line, there would be no problems getting power to the short length of overhead wire.

Case Study 5 – London to Yarmouth Via Cambridge And Norwich

Could this route be run by an IPEMU?

The journey is effectively in four parts.

  1. London to Ely – Electrified
  2. Ely to Norwich – Not Electrified
  3. Norwich Station – Electrified
  4. Norwich to Yarmouth – Not Electrified

The longest section that is non-electrified is the section between Ely and Norwich at just over fifty miles.

Yarmouth is just twenty miles from Norwich, so it would appear that if the wait at Norwich station is sufficient to charge the battery, then a London to Yarmouth service via Cambridge, Cambridge Science Park and Ely would be a feasible service for an IPEMU. The only infrastructure needed might be to electrify some extra platforms at Norwich and the bay platforms at Cambridge.

I think that this case study shows the flexibility and capabilities of an IPEMU, AND illustrates why Abellio Greater Anglia (AGA) were very keen to help out in the trial of the Class 379 IPEMU. They knew that it was likely that a four-car IPEMU could start from London or Cambridge, stop at the new Cambridge Science Park station, Ely and Thetford and reach Norwich, where after charging batteries it would proceed to Yarmouth and return to Norwich. Most of the journey to Norwich could possibly be done at a line speed of upwards of 70 mph, thus comfortably outperforming the current diesel multiple unit in terms of time, frequency and comfort. The service could also bring Yarmouth into the electrified network and give the town a direct connection to London. AGA would be rewarded in extra passengers bringing in more revenue.

Knowing the area well, I think that if two trains an hour ran each way between Cambridge and Norwich, the locals would be very pleased.

Whilst looking at Norwich the distances of Cromer, Sheringham and Lowestoft from the city are twenty, thirty and twenty-five miles respectively. So all four major destinations on the branches from Norwich could be served by IPEMUs.

Case Study 6 – Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough

To be fair to Ipswich and Suffolk, I will also look at how IPEMUs could be used between Ipswich and Cambridge and Peterborough

Ipswich to Cambridge is electrified at both ends, so the IPEMU trains would just have to bridge the gap between Haughley Junction and Cambridge, which is a distance of about thirty miles. At both ends of the line they would fully charge their batteries.

Ely to Peterborough is not electrified for about thirty miles, so even if an Ipswich to Peterborough IPEMU didn’t pick up power at Ely, it could probably travel direct from Haughley to Peterborough under battery power.

The two branch lines at Ipswich to Felixstowe and Lowestoft are twelve and fifty miles long respectfully, so although Felixstowe would be easily served by an IPEMU, unless some form of charging could be provided at Lowestoft, serving Lowestoft is probably not possible.

But then Suffolk people are very resourceful and as the county is pretty flat, so I suspect they’ll find some way of getting the standard IPEMU between Ipswich and Lowestoft.

One way might be for the Lowestoft trains to actually go between Ipswich and Norwich via Lowestoft. Trains would leave Ipswich and Norwich at times, so that they arrived in Lowestoft a few minutes apart. The trains would then leave in a few minutes to the alternate start point.

An advantage of this routing, is that towns like Beccles and Halesworth, would get a direct connection to Norwich and those on the Norwich to Lowestoft Line would get a direct connection to Ipswich.

So both trains would travel a distance of seventy-five miles over some very flat countryside, which could probably be managed by an Aventra IPEMU.

If the Felixstowe branch was to be electrified, this would cut a couple of miles off the non-electrified route.

This analysis is probably totally wrong, but I suspect that Network Rail have a cunning plan to get IPEMUs from Ipswich to Lowestoft.

The only other line in East Anglia run with diesel trains is the twelve-mile long Gainsborough Line from Marks Tey to Sudbury. It therefore could be easily served using a single IPEMU, This would give the possibility of all London and local passenger services in East Anglia being served by electric trains.

Saying they were an all-electric railway, would not be a negative marketing point for AGA or their successors. But perhaps more importantly, what would it save in running and maintenance costs?

Extending Local Networks With IPEMUs

In the earlier Case Studies 5 and 6, I showed how a network of lines running electric trains could be created around Cambridge, Ely, Ipswich and Norwich, using IPEMUs.

So are there any other hubs, which have a network of local lines converge, where IPEMUs could be used to create an electric network or expand an existing one?

The following cities have networks of local lines and are on electrified major routes.

  • Birmingham
  • Edinburgh
  • Glasgow
  • Leeds
  • Liverpool
  • Manchester
  • Peterborough

In the next few years the following places should be added.

  • Bristol
  • Cardiff
  • Middlesbrough
  • Nottingham

In some places like Cardiff and Leeds, the local networks are being developed by traditional electrification,  and in others like Nottingham, tram-trains may play a big part, but could IPEMUs be used as I showed they could be in East Anglia?

Case Study 7 – Bristol

This entry in Wikipedia entitled Rail Services in the West of England gives details of all the myriad lines that exist or did exist in the Bristol area.

This page on the Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways shows a rather jolly map of railways around the city.

There have also been plans for a Greater Bristol Metro for some time, that ties all of the lines together.

Once Bristol Temple Meads station and some of the lines are electrified, it might be possible to use IPEMUs to serve some of the branch lines, as most of them are less than twenty miles long.

Electro-Diesel Freight Locomotives

Nobody except possibly the operators, love the Class 66 locomotive, which is extensively used for freight in the UK. It doesn’t meet the latest EU regulations and it’s noisy and unloved by the drivers to whom I’ve spoken.

Electrifying freight routes like Felixstowe to Nuneaton, would allow operators to send freight trains between Felixstowe and the Midlands, North and Scotland, using electric haulage all the way.

Next year, we’ll see the first of the new electro-diesel locomotives; the Class 88, which is an electric locomotive, that can use an on-board diesel engine, where there are no overhead wires.

How will these and other locomotives using similar technology affect the costs and need for electrification?

In the case of any electrified route to a port like Felixstowe or London Gateway, overhead wires in the port can present a problem, which an electro-diesel locomotive solves, as it uses the on-board diesel, anywhere near the sidings in the port.

Future Electrification

In England and Wales, there are several big electrification projects in progress in addition to the Great Western.

  • Gospel Oak to Barking Line
  • East Anglia and Freight Routes From Felixstowe
  • Trans Pennine from Liverpool to Hull
  • Midland Main Line/Electric Spine
  • Secondary and Branch Lines In The North
  • South Wales Valleys
  • Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter
  • Ashford to Hastings and Eastbourne
  • Hurst Green and Uckfield
  • Reading to Gatwick

I’ll now discuss each in detail with respect to the pragmatic attitude that seems to be being taken by train operating companies and Network Rail.

Gospel Oak to Barking Line

The problems on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line (GOBLin) are summed up as follows.

  • Not enough passenger capacity
  • Too many environmentally-unfriendly Class 66 locomotives pulling freight trains through the area.

The line is also being extended to Barking Riverside, where given the infrastructure in the area, the new extension will be fully electrified. So the layout of the line is effectively a twelve mile or so non-electrified line connected to fully electrified lines at both ends.

As new Aventra trains are being delivered for the line, why not add batteries to the GOBlin part of the order so that these trains can run as IPEMUs, thus just leaving the problem of the freight locomotives.

The money saved could be used to improve some of the stations, with full step-free access, longer platforms,better shelters and other facilities.

Incidentally, this line would surely make a very good test track for the Aventras with batteries. If the trains were available tomorrow, they could probably start running after a few modifications to the platforms and electrification of the platform the trains use at Barking station.

The Class 66 locomotive problem will only be solved by full electrification, but an interim solution would be to use Class 88 locomotives on the GOBlin.

I think Network Rail would file abandonment of full electrification under Relieved, as electrifying this line is going to be difficult with all the viaducts and bridges and the need to run lots of replacement buses across a congested city to get passengers to work, rest and play. There is an article on the Railfuture web site, which describes how the electrification might be performed. This is a paragraph.

It is expected that NR will electrify first one half of the line and then the other half, and that whilst electrification is in progress on each half, that part of the line will be closed and the service provided by rail replacement bus. Whilst electrification is in progress LOROL will be able to run longer trains on the remaining half of the line with the existing stock, provided platform lengthening is completed early whilst work proceeds. Therefore if electrification keeps to current plans and if TfL could source electric stock (possibly temporarily, until the new stock is available) when electrification is completed, overcrowding will only be a problem for a period of a year between now and the start of electrification.

It sounds like a lesson in how to organise chaos.

Changing the trains to Aventra IPEMU would also release eight Class 172 diesel trains, for cascade to other routes all over the country on delivery of the new trains.

Obviously, the GOBlin needs to be fully electrified for freight trains, but if the passenger train problem has been solved, this could surely be done at a slower pace, without closing the line, for more than the odd day or two at weekends.

Also if all stations were made step-free before the full electrification, there would be some easier routes for passengers to use to by-pass the works.

East Anglia and Freight Routes From Felixstowe

East Anglia in general suffers from similar problems to the GOBlin of not enough quality passenger  train capacity and large numbers of freight trains, mostly going to and from the Port of Felixstowe.

The main routes are electrified from London to Ipswich, Norwich, Cambridge and Ely, but there are several large gaps in the electrification.

  • Ely to Ipswich
  • Ely to Norwich
  • Ely to Peterborough
  • Ipswich to Cambridge
  • Ipswich to Felixstowe
  • Norwich to Yarmouth

In addition, there are branch lines that need better trains or are being talked about for reopening.

  • Ipswich to Lowestoft
  • March to Wisbech
  • Marks Tey to Sudbury
  • Norwich to Cromer
  • Norwich to Lowestoft

I haven’t included it, but given the right trains would it be possible to re-open Sudbury to Cambridge via Haverhill? Perhaps, as a single track or even a tramway.

There is also a new station at Cambridge Science Park being built and I believe this needs direct services to Norwich and Ipswich.

I believe most, if not all, of the main line gaps could be bridged and the branch lines could be served by IPEMUs. These trains would also open up the possibility of direct services between London and Bury St. Edmunds, Lowestoft, Thetford, Yarmouth and perhaps a few other places. In recent memory both Lowestoft and Yarmouth had direct services to and from London.

I feel that Norwich in Ninety will require faster trains with better acceleration on the route. These would probably be nine-car Class 801 electric trains. Would perhaps, a couple of electro-diesel Class 800 trains be added, to run London to Norwich and Yarmouth via Cambridge, Ely and Thetford?

It might appear that this would remove a lot of the need for completing the electrification in East Anglia, but I believe two lines should be electrified.

The Felixstowe branch line, which serves the Port of Felixstowe should probably be electrified, so that engine changes at Ipswich are avoided for freight trains that are being hauled all the way by an electric  or electro-diesel locomotive.

The line from Peterborough to Ely should also be electrified, as this would provide a valuable electrified diversion route for the East Coast Main Line. Such a diversion would have been invaluable last Christmas, when Kings Cross was closed, due to overrunning engineering work. A twelve coach shuttle could have been run between Liverpool Street and Peterborough via Cambridge and Ely.

As I showed in Case Studies 5 and 6, all other lines in East Anglia could be run by IPEMUs.

At some point in the next couple of decades, Network Rail will tackle the biggest bottleneck on the railways of the UK; the Digswell viaduct. This will obviously need line closures and if Ely to Peterborough is electrified, a shuttle can be run bypassing the trouble.

Trans Pennine Routes from Liverpool to Hull

The routes across the Pennines are both complex and comprehensive. This map shows the current and planned electrification.

Northern Electrification Map

Northern Electrification Map

At present Network Rail is attempting to electrify the lines shown in yellow and to be frank, is not really performing on time and on budget.

In Crossrail Of The North, I said this.

Is it farther between Liverpool and Hull or from London to Norwich?

Actually, they are about the same being around two hundred kilometres for both.

But compare the train times between the two city pairs.

Liverpool to Hull takes three and a quarter hours, with at least one change, whereas London to Norwich takes five minutes under two hours.

We;re not far off now, before Network Rail publish their Norwich in Ninety plans. In this recent article in the Eastern Daily Press, this is said.

Recommendations from a task force which has been pressing for improvements – which includes £476m of infrastructure investment and new trains to be demanded in the next operator contract – were supported by chancellor George Osborne in the autumn statement.

So what are they doing about the similar problems of speeding up the myriad rail routes across the Pennines?

The problems across the Pennines are in addition to the timing problems, one of inadequate capacity in the Class 185 trains, that run on most of the long distance routes. They may have a 100 mph top speed, but these three-car trains are definitely budget trains, specified by the Treasury.

The first solution is for the operator; First TransPennine Express to do what its sister company First Great Western has done and get some trains, that can do the job that the infrastructure will allow.

These are the various routes run by First TransPennine Express.

Much of the North Transpennine Route from Liverpool to Newcastle and Hull via Manchester and Leeds, is electrified, although the Manchester to Leeds section and the three branches to Hull, Scarborough and Middlesborough are not.

The South TransPennine Route, is only electrified round Manchester, whereas on the TransPennine NorthWest Route only the branches to Blackpool, Barrow and Windermere are without electrification.

Timings are generally slow and I do hope that Network Rail are coming up with the track improvements that will speed up the journeys. They seem to have been able to find savings between London and Norwich, so can they do the same across the Pennines?

Perhaps Liverpool to Hull in Hundred would be a catchy target?

As some parts of the route are electrified, a Large and Little solution to the trains may also be appropriate.

The Large component could be a variant of the standard electro-diesel Class 800, of an appropriate size and layout. I suspect that the standard five-car train being built at Newton Aycliffe for First Great Western and Virgin Trains East Coast might be a good starting point. In the September edition of Modern Railways, there is a headline of Bi-Modes for TPE? Translated out of jargon, that is saying will TransPennine Express get Class 800 trains or similar?

Electro-diesel trains would be specified, as I can’t see the Northern Electrification being finished in the near future. But when it is finished, the diesel engines will just be removed to convert the trains to the electric Class 801.

The Little component would be the IPEMU. It would probably be needed as some of the destinations and branches may not accept the larger train.

In the Future section for the Wikiedia entry for First TransPennine Express, this is said.

In June 2014 the DfT confirmed that there will be two separate franchises in the north of England, one providing intercity rail services and a second providing local rail services. There are proposals to transfer theManchester Airport to Blackpool North, Preston and the Lancaster to Barrow-in-Furness, Oxenholme to Windermere and the York to Scarborough and Doncaster to Cleethorpes services to the Northern franchise and transfer the Nottingham to Liverpool portion of the Norwich to Liverpool service currently operated by East Midlands Trains to the TransPennine franchise.

So before I leave TransPennine Routes, I had better look at what this might mean.

It looks like the Scarborough, Cleethorpes, Windermere and Barrow branches will become part of Northern Rail.

I showed earlier that the Windermere branch would be an easy trip for an IPEMU and this could run over the electrified network from there to Manchester Victoria, Piccadilly and Airport, Liverpool and hopefully, Blackpool.

The Barrow branch would also be possible for an IPEMU as it is well under sixty miles for a return trip from Carnforth, so this would mean that one of the most scenic rail routes in the UK, wouldn’t ruin the countryside by electrification.

The Scarborough branch is forty-two miles long, so it is too long for the current predicted performance of a IPEMU. If a simple method of charging the train at Scarborough station could be developed, then this route would probably be feasible.

The Cleethorpes Branch is probably possible with an IPEMU.

So I come to the conclusion, that although electrification of the TransPennine routes, would be nice and will eventually be done, the same high-quality passenger service across the Pennines, you would get with electric trains, can be obtained with a Large and Little mixture of new Class 800 and IPEMU trains.

Midland Main Line/Electric Spine

The Midland Main Line and the closely-related Electric Spine is one project that will be electrified conventionally, although there would be scope for perhaps using a mix of Class 800 and Class 801 trains,so that new services can be added out of St. Pancras.

Once resources are released from the Great Western Main Line, I would start to electrify North from Bedford to Corby, Derby and Nottingham.

One issue in Nottingham, is where the tram-trains that have been proposed will go. As the tram-trains when they run on heavy rail line can use the standard overhead lines at 25KVAC, there could be scope for some meaningful co-operation.

Another issue was thrown in, when I wrote Ilkeston Station In A Few Year’s Time. Network Rail have a major project on the Erewash Valley Line, which has been upgraded and may become a high-speed by-pass for high speed electric trains to Chesterfield and Sheffield, as electrifying the line through Derby and the World Heritage Site of the Derwent Valley might prove a difficult project.

So I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bedford to Sheffield electrified first and electro-diesel Class 800 trains used to serve Derby and Nottingham, until those branches on the line were fully electrified.

Secondary and Branch Lines In The North

This is virtually every line that isn’t electrified north of a line from the Humber to the Mersey.

Depending on the line and its relationship to electrified lines and major centres of population, different solutions will be proposed by engineers as they look at the alternatives.

  • Full Electrification
  • Using high-quality diesel trains, like the Class 172 trains displaced from the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
  • Running an IPEMU on the line, as I proposed earlier for between Carlisle and Newcastle.
  • Conversion to Tram or Tram-Train Operation

The engineers are going to have fun on this one, as new or refurbished modern trains running on electric power are delivered all over the North.

In the report of the North of England Electrification Task Force, the various lines were grouped into three tiers in order of priority.

Tier One included. The comment at the end, is my view of what is possible.

  • Calder Valley – Leeds to Manchester and Preston via Bradford and Brighouse – Full Electrification
  • Liverpool to Manchester via Warrington Central – Full Electrification
  • Southport/Kirkby to Salford Cresent – Full Electrification
  • Chester to Stockport – See Note 1
  • Northallerton To Middlesbrough – Full Electrification
  • Leeds to York via Harrogate – Full Electrification
  • Selby to Hull – Full Electrification
  • Sheffield (Meadowhall) to Leeds via Barnsley/Castleford – Full Electrification – See Note 4
  • Bolton to Clitheroe – Possible IPEMU
  • Sheffield to Doncaster/Wakefield Westgate (Dearne Valley) – Full Electrification – See Note 4
  • Hazel Grove to Buxton – Possible  IPEMU
  • Warrington to Chester – See Note 1

Tier Two included.

  • Manchester to Sheffield and South East Manchester Local Services – Partial Electrification with Possible IPEMU
  • York to Scarborough – See Note 3
  • Bishop Auckland/Darlington to Saltburn and Sunderland –  See Note 3
  • Barnsley to Huddersfield – IPEMU when Huddersfield and Sheffield are electrified. – See Note 4
  • Sheffield to Lincoln via Retford – Partial Electrification with Possible IPEMU – See Note 4
  • Chester to Crewe – See Note 1
  • Burnley to Colne & Kirkham to Blackpool South – Tram-Train or IPEMU
  • Knottingley to Goole – IPEMU

Tier Three included.

  • Barrow to Carnforth – IPEMU
  • Pontefract to Church Fenton
  • Hull to Scarborough –  See Note 3
  • Omskirk to Preston – Tram-Train or IPEMU
  • Carlisle to Newcastle – IPEMU
  • Skipton to Carlisle – Full Electrification or Cascaded DMUs
  • Barton on Humber – See Note 2
  • Cumbrian Coast – Full Electrification or Cascaded DMUs
  • Doncaster to Gilberdyke – See Note 2
  • Cleethorpes to Thorne (Doncaster) – See Note 2
  • Middlesbrough to Whitby – See Note 3
  • Skipton to Heysham – Possible IPEMU

The various notes are as follows.

  1. Chester is the centre of a busy network and probably needs full electrification, especially if the North Wales Line to Holyhead is electrified. Although that line could use Class 800 trains.
  2. Humberside is a mass of small railways and I wouldn’t discount a very innovative solution being found for the area.
  3. Teesside is trying to develop a Tees Valley Metro and this could be partially electrified and see use of IPEMU
  4. Routes to Sheffield might also be served using tram-trains. I would also connect Sheffield’s trams to those in Manchester and Nottingham using tram-trains running along the electrified connecting heavy rail lines.

And after the North there’s the South, the Midlands, Wales and Scotland.

South Wales Valleys

This follow-on project after the Great Western electrification to Cardiff and Swansea, will electrify the Valley Lines in South Wales. This project will probably be done in a very conventional manner, especially, as the Welsh seem to have got much of the bridges, stations and other infrastructure ready for electrification.  I don’t know for sure, but I suspect that IPEMUs running on battery power aren’t the best trains at climbing hills.

It would now appear that tram-trains are entering the plans and who’s to say if IPEMUs creep into the project somewhere.

Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter

Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter on the West of England Main Line is not a wholly electrified journey, as the third-rail stops at Basingstoke.

As the Class 800 train is closely related to the Class 395 train that works the high-speed commuter services out of St. Pancras, which is configured to use third-rail electricity collection, I wonder whether the solution to getting electric trains to Salisbury and Exeter is to create a third-rail variant of the Class 800.

Ashford to Hastings and Eastbourne

Electrification has been promised on the Marshlink Line to allow High Speed services from Hastings and Eastbourne to St. Pancras using HS1.

As with electrification to Salisbury and Exeter, more third-rail electrification is probably not going to be performed.

But could an electro-diesel variant of the Class 395 train be built to serve Hastings and Eastbourne.

Probably not, as the certification costs would be high for a small number of units.

But I would hope that engineers are looking at ways to bridge the gap between Ashford and Hastings. It would certainly be possible with a dual-voltage IPEMU!

Hurst Green and Uckfield

The route between Hurst Green and Uckfield on the Oxted Line is current served by Class 171 diesel trains. As the Aventra is built to a similar size as these trains, to run this line with IPEMUs would probably be just a matter of delivering the trains and driver and staff training.

If the Ashford to Hastings and Eastbourne route was also converted to electric trains, as I showed was possible in the previous section, a total of ten 2-car and six 4-car Class 171 trains would be released for service elsewhere. I think too that Southern would become an electric-only train operating company.

Reading to Gatwick

Reading to Gatwick along the North Downs Line is effectively in three sections.

  • Reading to Guildford – 19 miles
  • Guildford to Redhill – 25 miles
  • Redhill to Gatwick – 4 miles

Of the forty-eight miles of the line, just nineteen miles are electrified using third rail.

it would appear that a dual-voltage IPEMU with third-rail pickup, would give a faster electric service along the route.

It would appear that Surrey County Council would like to improve this line and perhaps with a look at stations, level crossings and speed restrictions, the service on this line could be considerably improved by using IPEMUs.

No electrification work would be necessary, although filling easy gaps in the third-rail would give more improvement.

This route looks like it has been specially designed for an IPEMU.

A dual-voltage IPEMU could also extend the route at either end.

Conclusion

Innovate like crazy using proven trains and methods!!!

Some things have surprised me in this analysis.

  1. The Aventra IPEMU has a specification, range and capability, that is very well-matched to lots of sections of the UK rail network, that either need electrification and/or new electric trains.
  2. A mix of Class 800 electro-diesel and Class 801 electric trains will be found working on lots of lines.
  3. A large number of high quality diesel multiple units are available for cascade. Many could go to replace the dreaded Pacers all over the country.
  4. South of the Thames is as far as passenger trains are concerned is virtually a diesel-free zone.

The first two points mean that a lot of the difficult electrification can be done in nice warm factories in Newton Aycliffe and Derby. So perhaps we might see a line improved using the following project structure.

  1. Stations, bridges and tunnels are modified to fit both the passenger and freight trains that will run on the route. If there is a chance that electrification might happen eventually, then clearances would be improved accordingly.
  2. All stations would be upgraded to the modern standards of accessibility and customer facilities. Many like the new Custom House station for Crossrail would be built in factories.
  3. The chosen trains would then be introduced on the line.
  4. Finally, the overhead wires would be erected, if that has been decided is appropriate.

The first phase of the project is the difficult one, as there is some truly horrendous Victoria infrastructure out there and much of it is Listed and infested with bats, great crested newts and other protected wildlife.

Get this sort of project structure right and there might be a chance that we’d find an affordable way to do electrification!

As improved stations are delivered early, passengers may still be being carried in dreaded Pacers, but at least they’ll have a modern, customer-friendly interface to the railway.

Hopefully, by the time that full electrification is implemented, all local problems wil have been solved and the electrification is a much easier business.

 

 

 

 

 

August 30, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

First Great Western’s Pragmatic Large And Little Solution To The Problems Of Great Western Electrification

The electrification of the Great Western Main Line from West of Airport Junction to Bristol, Cardiff and Swansea is proving to be a difficult project to deliver.

This article on the BBC web site talks about the problems and starts with these paragraphs.

Electrifying the Great Western line is “a top priority”, the transport secretary has said, as he announces a rethink of a £38bn programme to overhaul Britain’s railways.

Patrick McLoughlin said Network Rail’s five-year plan was being “reset” as it was “costing more and taking longer”.

In an ideal world, the whole of the Great Western Main Line and its branches to places like Worcester, Gloucester, Cheltenham, Exeter,Plymouth and Penzance would be electrified.

But it was never intended to electrify the major branches and for a time InterCity 125 diesel trains will be used on these lines.

Then in February 2014, the sea wall at Dalwish was breached in a storm and much of the track and Dawlish station was washed away. Although the line was rebuilt in a few months, it is only recently that the sea wall and the walk alongside the railway has been reinstated.

The force of the storm probably put an end to thoughts for many years of fully electrifying the line from Exeter to Plymouth and Penzance

The Large Class 800 Electro-Diesel Train

The trains that will work the Great Western Main Line to Bristol and Cardiff are the Hitachi Super Express, which comes in two variants.

The two trains are very similar, but the Class 800 has on-board diesel engines to generate electricity. Wikipedia says this.

The Class 800 units will be electro-diesel multiple units, able to draw power from electrified overhead lines where available and power themselves via underfloor diesel generators outside of the electrified network. The train specification requires that this changeover can occur at line speed. The trains are able to be converted to electric only operation by removal of the diesel engines

Current plans are for 21 9-car Class 801 and 36 5-car Class 800 to replace 60 InterCity 125.

With no prospect of electrification to Devon and Cornwall and because of the nature of the line with gradients, First Great Western have taken the pragmatic decision to order twenty-nine more trains, which will effectively be a variant of the Class 800, but with uprated diesel-engines and larger fuel tanks. It’s reported in this article in the Railway Gazette International.

So the total fleet will eventually be 47 9-car trains and 39 5-car trains of all new variants to replace 60 2+7 InterCity 125 and 5 5 car Class 180 trains.

So it would appear that about 490 x 23 metre cars will be replaced by 618 x 26 metre cars. On a crude calculation that is just over a forty percent increase in capacity, with a sixteen percent increase in the number of trains.

When everything is delivered towards the end of this decade, First Great Western would seem to have available a substantial increase in capacity, with a large proportion of the fleet having a go-anywhere capability because they are electro-diesel trains.

So it looks like some of these trains will be used to extend the network, as well as increase the frequency to Devon and Cornwall.

But there will be no need to need for any extra electrification. Although of course if there were, this would only be to the advantage of the electro-diesel trains, which would run on electric power for longer.

The Little Class 387 IPEMU

If the rumours about the Class 387 trains for First Great Western in this month’s Modern Railways are true, then some or all of the eight trains on order will be IPEMUs, with an on-board battery to power the train for up to sixty miles.

Modern Railways said this about their use.

Delivery as IPEMUs would allow EMUs to make use of as much wiring as is available (and batteries beyond) while electrification pushes ahead under the delayed scheme, and in the longer term would allow units to run on sections not yet authorised for electrification, such as Newbury to Bedwyn. The use of IPEMUs might also hasten the cascade of Class 16x units to the west of the franchise.

As Newbury to Bedwyn is probably less than twenty miles, a Class 387 IPEMU could easily do the trip out and back on a battery, charged whilst running from Paddington.

There is also a small problem highlighted in a section entitled Review after May 2015 general election in an article on Wikipedia describing the Great Western electrification.

This has led to speculation that the GW electrification scheme (although it remains “top priority”) could be cut back. On 27 May 2015, the website of Theresa May, MP for Maidenhead, contained the following: “… a recent report stated that it would not be ‘technically feasible’ for electrification to go ahead on the Marlow branch, raising questions about the future of the Henley branch as well”

The Marlow and Henley branches are 7.25 and 4.5 miles long respectively and mainly run a shuttle service to the main line with occasional services to Paddington.

So would it be more cost-effective to use a Class 387 IPEMU on these branches, as there would be no need to electrify the lines?

If a Class 387 IPEMU was good enough for these branches, what about the other branches on the Great Western Main Line to Greenford and Windsor and Eton Central?

The only work that would need to be done on these branches to accept the 4-car Class 387 IPEMU would be some platform lengthening and electrifying any bay platforms they use on the main line.

There may be other places on the Great Western Main Line, where electrification can be omitted by the use of the Class 387 IPEMU.

Class 387 IPEMU Or Aventra IPEMU?

This question has to be asked.

The Class 387 train on which the Class 387 IPEMU will be based is a member of the Electrostar family of trains, that have been produced by Bombardier since 1999,

The Electrostar is being superseded by the new Aventra family and the first orders have been placed for Crossrail and the London Overground.

The improvements in the Aventra design are summed up here in Wikipedia. This is said.

The multiple units have been designed to be lighter, more efficient, and have increased reliability. They will have lightweight all-welded bodies, wide gangways and doors to shorten boarding times in stations, and ERTMS. The design incorporates FlexxEco bogies which have been used in service on Voyagers, Meridians and newerTurbostars.

The design features a gangway design that allows maximum use of the interior space and ease of movement throughout the train.

As the Aventra is a new train, that has been designed since the successful IPEMU trial with a Class 379 in 2014, I do wonder if it has been designed with the ability to be fitted with an on-board battery to make it an Aventra IPEMU! In this article on Global Rail News 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-Iron batteries if required. The intention is that every car will be powered although trailer cars will be available.

So every Aventra can be converted to an Aventra IPEMU! And as that article was written in 2011, it increasingly looks like the IPEMU trial was a test of one of the new systems for an Aventra.

It would surely be a big advantage to a train operator running a fleet of Aventras, if they could add and remove battery packs as their schedules required.

But surely, because of the fact that an Aventra is lighter and more efficient than a Class 387, I wouldn’t be surprised that the range of an Aventra IPEMU is greater than the sixty miles quoted for the prototype.

Every extra mile, that the train can complete on batteries would open up new routes.

I suspect too that the Aventra IPEMU will have more customer appeal than a Class 387 IPEMU.

No-one will believe that a train running on batteries could possibly be a viable proposition, so at least if it looks like one of the new Crossrail Class 345 trains, passengers would at least think the train was modern.

So I wouldn’t be surprised if the order for Class 387 IPEMU was delivered as Aventra IPEMUs.

Oxford

To say that Oxford station has had planning problems in the last few years would be a massive understatement. I talked about them in Network Rail’s Problems In Oxford.

According to this article on the BBC, planning permission has at last been given to extend platforms at the station, so that Chiltern Trains can run services to the city.

But there is no mention of a new platform on the South side of the station, as is mentioned in Future Expansion in the station’s Wikipedia entry.

Or any mention of electrification either!

So will Network Rail postpone the new platform and the electrification to Oxford?

If they do, then First Great Western can serve the city by Class 800 trains going along the Cotswold Line to and from Evesham and Worcester.

First Great Western could also still use the current Class 165/6 trains, but they would like to cascade them to other places on their network.

Now here’s a thing!

Didcot to Oxford  is probably less than thirty miles, so once Didcot is electrified, Oxford could be easily reached by an IPEMU.

If this happened Oxford would get new 110 mph 4-car electric trains to replace 90 mph 2-car and 3-car diesel trains.

The electrification needed for the East-West Rail Link would be done later, when Oxford decided to join the twentieth century.

Rolling Stock Cascade

At present First Great Western has a fleet of diesel multiple units that work the Thames Valley Services.

These will be replaced by twenty-one 4-car Class 365 trains from Great Northern and twenty-nine 4-car Class 387 trains cascaded from Thameslink as the new Class 700 trains arrive.

Another order for eight 4-car Class 387 trains has been placed and it is this order that Modern Railways said could be for IPEMUs.

In terms of carriages 151 diesel carriages are being replaced by 232 electric ones.

According to this document on the ATOC web site, this will happen to the Class 165 and Class 166 trains.

Some will be displaced by electrification (and the resulting cascade) on Great Western. One option is that they remain in service, to accommodate growth and to provide a cascade of Class 15x vehicles, subject to necessary modifications and PRM-TSI.

So it looks like they will be used to replace the outdated Class 15x trains.

Cardiff to Portsmouth

Cardiff to Portsmouth is a route run by First Great Western. When I went from East London To Yeovil By The Long Way, I used a First Great Western Class 158 train from Fratton to Salisbury. I said this in the related post about the journey.

I think this journey shows up our trains in a reasonable light. The journey times are slow not because of slow trains, but because of the frequent stops and complicated route. The journey took three hours seventeen minutes from Littlehampton to Yeovil, but there was only thirty-three minutes wasted in connections.

Although some trains date from the 1980s, there wasn’t anything as bad as the dreaded Pacers that inhabit the North. The services were pretty well-used and except for the short leg from Littlehampton to Fratton, there was a catering trolley on all trains.

I do think though, that perhaps this journey might be better done in something like a 4-car Class 800. Although, there isn’t much electrification to make use of until you get to Bristol, once you’ve left Southampton.

An IPEMU wouldn’t be much help, as it’s a long way between Cardiff and Portsmouth.

So is there a need for a 4-car Class 800 train, optimised for long cross-country routes, where there is not much electrification or high-speed running?

Conclusion

The Large and Little approach by First Great Western seems to be a pragmatic way around the problems of the Great Western electrification.

The new Class 800 trains and their closely-related siblings will enable services to be expanded at the extremities of their network, without any need for full electrification.

If all or some of that future order for eight Class 387 trains, was for the IPEMU variant or were even Aventras, so long as electrification reached Newbury and Didcot, new Class 387 IPEMUs could run to Marlow, Henley, Windsor, Oxford and Bedwyn.

One side effect would be the release of Class 165/6 trains, currently used on the routes out of Paddington and the branch lines, for other services on their network.

 

 

 

 

August 29, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Rumours Of Battery Powered Trains

In the September edition of Modern Railways, there is an article entitled Class 387s Could Be Battery Powered.

The Class 387 train is an electric train, where the first twenty-nine members of the class are running on Thameslink between Bedford and Brighton. Built in Derby by Bombardier, they are possibly the last variant of the numerous Electrostar family. When the new Thameslink Class 700 trains are delivered, these units will be transferred to First Great Western to run services out of Paddington on the electrified Great Western Main Line.

At present Bombardier are building twenty-seven new Class 387 trains to run the Gatwick Express out of Victoria.

When this order is complete, they will build another eight units for services out of Paddington, for delivery in late 2016.

It is these eight trains that are rumoured to be capable of battery running, using technology I saw demonstrated and talked about in Is The Battery Electric Multiple Unit (BEMU) A Big Innovation In Train Design?

If you still think these trains aren’t practical, there is a BBC video on YouTube of the Class 379 IPEMU during its tests at Manningtree.

In their article, Modern Railways says the following.

Delivery as IPEMUs would allow EMUs to make use of as much wiring as is available (and batteries beyond) while electrification pushes ahead under the delayed scheme, and in the longer term would allow units to run on sections not yet authorised for electrification, such as Newbury to Bedwyn. The use of IPEMUs might also hasten the cascade of Class 16x units to the west of the franchise.

Note that these trains are now called IPEMUs or independently powered electric multiple units.

It looks to me, like the rolling stock engineers at Bombardier in Derby are getting their fellow engineers in electrification out of trouble.

Having a small number of IPEMUs could be very useful to train companies, as they could be used tactically to perhaps extend electric services, when the wires are being installed or onto a scenic branch line, where putting up overhead wires would be strongly opposed. They could also be used for blockade busting, say when a tunnel or bridge is being rebuilt.

It would be interesting to see the cost difference between a standard Class 387 and one with batteries, as this would determine, whether to electrify say a branch or use IPEMUs.

Other Places For An IPEMU

Also in Modern Railways are three articles, where an IPEMU could be the solution.

  1. Hull Trains are reported looking for a bi-mode fleet to run their Hull services, as they would bridge the unelectrified seventy miles of line between Selby and Hull. A Class 387 IPEMU probably doesn’t have enough performance, but it might be capable of running the route.
  2. Services to Blackpool have also been approved, which if the electrification is not ready in time, is a route that could be handled by a Class 387 IPEMU.
  3. Roger Ford is also talking about Open Access Hotting Up. Some of the routes would be ideal for a Class 387 IPEMU, as lots of places without a decent service to London, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow or other large cities, are thirty or so miles off a main electrified line. Places like Yarmouth, Lowestoft, Sudbury, Cromer, Lincoln, Skrgness, Wisbech, Windermere, Chester and Burnley come to mind.

I also think, that as the years pass, IPEMU technology will get better and much more efficient with a longer range when running on the batteries. Drivers will also learn how to coax the maximum range out of the trains.

This could enable services like.

  1. London to Norwich via Cambridge
  2. London to Salisbury
  3. Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough
  4. Manchester to Sheffield
  5. Newcastle to Carlisle

In my list, there would seem to be a large number of routes in East Anglia. But then Anglia Greater Anglia were part of the trials of the test train.

Visual Intrusion Of Electrification

I think too, we shouldn’t underestimate the lack of visual intrusion if say a picturesque branch line was to be served by an IPEMU rather than by a traditional electric train. The Windermere branch and some lines in South Wales may well be better served by a more visually acceptable IPEMU.

Affordable Electrification

I have listed that these IPEMU trains would be able to run between Carlisle to Newcastle.

I don’t know the Tyne Valley Line well, but it is about sixty miles long and has electrified lines at both ends. Traditional electrification may require a lot of bridge and station reconstruction to accommodate the overhead wires, whereas a Class 379 IPEMU could use the line without any modifications to infrastructure, as it can use any line that the current Class 156 trains on the line can. There would of course be a need to make sure that at both ends of the line, there was sufficient electrification to fully charge the train for its return journey.

So the cost of replacing diesel trains on this line with modern electric ones, would be solely the cost of the new trains, and perhaps the cost of a small amount of electrification in the stations and the stabling sidings at each end of the line.

In this case, I suspect Network Rail would breathe a big sigh of relief, if they didn’t have to electrify this line, with all its logistical and possibly environmental problems.

How many lines in the UK, could be electrified this way?

Route Proving For Electrification

The lines in East Anglia from Felixstowe and Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough are not electrified.

They carry a large amount of freight to and from the Port of Felixstowe, so if they were to be electrified the benefits of replacing Noisy and polluting diesel locomotives with environmentally-friendly electric ones is probably easily calculated.

But how do you calculate what will happen when two and three car diesel multiple units, albeit modern Class 170 trains, with new four-car electric ones?

In the case of these East Anglian lines, you could run a Class 379 IPEMU on the line.

The only problem after the test was completed, would the passengers allow their brand-new ekectric train to be moved elsewhere.

But you would get an accurate figure to put in your costings for electrification.

Electro-Diesel Freight Locomotives

Nobody except possibly the operators, love the Class 66 locomotive, which is extensively used for freight in the UK. It doesn’t meet the latest EU regulations and it’s noisy and unloved by the drivers to whom I’ve spoken.

Electrifying freight routes like Felixstowe to Nuneaton, would allow operators to send freight trains between Felixstowe and the Midlands, North and Scotland, using electric haulage all the way.

Next year, we’ll see the first of the new electro-diesel locomotives; the Class 88, which is an electric locomotive, that can use an on-board diesel engine, where there are no overhead wires.

How will these and other locomotives using similar technology affect the costs and need for electrification?

In the case of any electrified route to a port like Felixstowe or London Gateway, overhead wires in the port can present a problem, which an electro-diesel locomotive solves, as it uses the on-board diesel, anywhere near the sidings in the port.

Class 800 Trains

The Class 800 train being introduced in a few years is an electro-diesel train, which has been designed to run at 200 kph to the farthest corners or the UK, as a replacement for the diesel InterCity 125.

The specification of the train and what they’ve seen so far of the prototype must have impressed First Great Western as they’ve ordered extra trains as Wikipedia reports.

In March 2015 First Great Western agreed to acquire 29 bi-mode Hitachi AT300 (Class 800 variant) trains as HST replacements on services in and to the southwest of England. The order consisted of 22 five-car and 7 nine-car trainsets, with an option for 30 more sets. Differences with the original design included more powerful diesel engines more suited to steeper graded line in Devon and Cornwall, as well as larger fuel tanks. A £361 million contract between FGW and rolling stock leasing company Eversholt Rail was signed in July 2015. The expected introduction date of the new trains was summer 2018.

So where else could these trains appear to provide high speed services on routes with no or only partial electrification?

The Class 800 is closely related to the Class 395 train used on High Speed and third-rail routes South of the Thames. So could we see a third-rail version of the Class 800, or an electro-diesel Class 395 variant, which could run from St. Pancras to Hastings and Eastbourne and from Waterloo to Salisbury and Exeter? This would kill any thoughts of adding more third-rail electrification.

The Class 387 IPEMU and the Class 800 are a Little and Large combination to provide a cost-effective alternative to full electrification of some routes across the UK.

 

Conclusions

The Class 387 IPEMU, could be a component of a series of solutions, that bring high-quality new electric or electro-diesel trains to a large portion of the UK.

My only worry about them is the battery technology of the IPEMU, which has reportedly been troublesome in some applications on buses and aircraft.

August 28, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , | 17 Comments

What’s Gone Wrong With The Blackpool To Preston Electrification?

On Friday this news item appeared on the BBC web site. It is entitled Balfour Beatty pulls out of Lancashire rail electrification.

The article starts like this.

The main contractor behind plans to electrify the railway line between Preston and Blackpool has pulled out.

Balfour Beatty confirmed it was leaving the scheme after a review said the work was unlikely to be on time and budget.

Network Rail insisted the electrification was still due to finish by spring 2017 and a new contractor would be “appointed shortly”.

On the Saturday, on my route from Liverpool to Preston, I took a detour up the Blackpool branch and took these pictures.

The aim was to see, if I could get a clue as to what has gone wrong.

For a start, I saw a succession of bridges that appeared to have been recently replaced or refurbished. Often with electrification, the cost of getting bridges and stations ready for electrification is a major part of the cost.

Even Poulton-le-Fylde station  appeared to have acquired a cafe from when I saw it in May this year.

At Blackpool North station crowds of people were leaving, as the weather was atrocious, so I took the next train back to Preston.

As to why, Balfour Beatty have given up the contract, there were no clues.

I think there could be two reasons for the delay.. In this section on Electrification for the Wikipedia entry for Blackpool North station, this is said.

This will result in the semaphore signalling at the station being replaced by modern colour lights controlled from the WCML North Rail Operating Centre in Preston and will also see the station track & platform layout altered (the current eight curved platforms will be reduced to six on a straighter alignment than at present). Work has begun to raise many of the intermediate overbridges to accommodate the overhead wires and the project was due for completion by May 2016, with the line onwards to Manchester following by the end of the year. This has since been pushed back to March 2017 so that the track remodelling & resignalling work can be carried out at the same time as the wiring, reducing disruption to passengers (as only one period of closure will be required)

So could an over-complicated project or lack of resources be the cause?

Look at other Wikipedia entries for lines in this area and it gets more complicated with aspirations to reopen the Fleetwood Branch Line.

Or could it be that there are so many ideas about what to do in Blackpool with the trains, the planners at Balfour Beatty can’t keep pace with all the changes? So backing out is the esiest thing to do!

I think there is a need to take a long hard look at all the possibilities, like the Fleetwood Branch and linking to the Blackpool trams and the way they actually perform any track changes and electrification.

Perhaps everything from the West Coast Main Line to Blackpool and Fleetwood should be devolved to an elected mayor or someone, who gets voted out, if the project fails.

I know Blackpool reasonably well and if ever an are needs an upgraded transport system, with an electrified line to nearby cities, it is Blackpool.

 

August 23, 2015 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , | 2 Comments