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 AnonW |
Transport/Travel | D-Train, Electrification, Engineering, Pacer, Vivarail |
1 Comment
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.
- First TransPennine ordering Class 800 Trains for Liverpool to Hull and Newcastle.
- 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 AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Class 800 Train, Electrification, Hull, Trains |
Leave a comment
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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- London to Yarmouth via Cambridge, Thetford and Norwich
- London to Salisbury and Exeter
- Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough
- Manchester to Sheffield
- 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.
- Aberdeen to Penzance
- Bournemouth to Manchester
- Liverpool to Norwich
- Cardiff to Manchester
- 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.
- 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?
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Anybody who can work with Boris Johnson and Ken Livingstone and not get fired, must have the knack of dealing with politicians.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- London to Ely – Electrified
- Ely to Norwich – Not Electrified
- Norwich Station – Electrified
- 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
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.
- 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.
- Humberside is a mass of small railways and I wouldn’t discount a very innovative solution being found for the area.
- Teesside is trying to develop a Tees Valley Metro and this could be partially electrified and see use of IPEMU
- 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.
- 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.
- A mix of Class 800 electro-diesel and Class 801 electric trains will be found working on lots of lines.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The chosen trains would then be introduced on the line.
- 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 AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Class 395 Train, Electrification, Felixstowe, Gospel Oak And Barking Line, IPEMU, Marshlink Line, Trains |
Leave a comment
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 AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Class 800 Train, East-West Rail, Electrification, First Great Western Trains, IPEMU, Oxford Station, Trains |
4 Comments
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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- London to Norwich via Cambridge
- London to Salisbury
- Ipswich to Cambridge and Peterborough
- Manchester to Sheffield
- 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 AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Class 395 Train, Class 800 Train, Electrification, First Great Western Trains, IPEMU, Trains |
17 Comments
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 AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Blackpool, Electrification |
2 Comments
I have just found this article on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line on the Railfuture web site.
It explains the way the line will be electrified and other issues very well.
One thing it says is that the line will be electrified in two parts, so that whilst the overhead wires are erected on one part and passengers will be put on the bus, the other part can be used by four-car trains. Provided of course they lengthen the platforms.
The Railfuture article is an interesting read, as it talks about this short stretch of electrification.
1. The Line Connects Electrified Lines
It is joined to electrified lines at each end and several along its route, which will enable through electric passenger and more importantly freight trains to use the route.
It also means that getting electric power to the line shouldn’t be too much of a problem.
2. A Freight By-Pass For The North London Line
At present electric freight trains have to use the North London Line, but using an electrified GOBlin would avoid congested junctions at Stratford, Forest Gate and Camden Road.
3. More Passenger Capacity
Replacing two-car Class 172 diesel trains with new four-car Aventra electric trains, won’t just double the passenger capacity, but because electric trains have faster acceleration, they will do better than that.
4. Extended Passenger Routes
The extension of the GOBlin to a new Barking Riverside station was announced in the 2014 Budget, but the Railfuture article talks about extending services the other way to Willesden Junction, Clapham Junction or even Ealing, which probably means Ealing Broadway.
You can understand why Transport for London might want to do this, but it would need new platforms at Gospel Oak. This Google Map shows the station.

Gospel Oak Station
Note that there is a Class 172 in the platform and it looks like accommodating a train, twice that length might need a platform extension.
I suspect that Transport for London will look at other options, depending on where passengers go from Gospel Oak and the number of freight trains that have to be pathed through the area.
On a personal view, I’d like to see trains on the GOBlin terminating in Ealing, as that would give me an easy route to the area, by getting a 141 bus from outside my house to Harringay Green Lanes.
But I don’t think that is likely. After all when Crossrail opens, I can just take a 141 bus the other way to Liverpool Street/Moorgate and get Crossrail to Ealing.
Greater Electric Freight Capacity and Flexibility
Railfuture reckon that up to thirty freight trains a day will leave London Gateway and many will be electric hauled and need to make their way up the West Coast Main Line. An electrified GOBlin gives them two routes across London.
The second route will also enable services to be maintained, when say one line is blockaded.
Limited passenger services could also be run via Stratford and South Tottenham to Gospel Oak, when work is being undertaken on the North London Line.
Harringay Park Junction
Railfuture also says that this vital junction will be electrified.

Harringay Park Junction
The GOBlin runs across the image, with the junction under the bridge on the left.
It will allow eastbound freight trains to go north on the East Coast Main Line.
Carlton Road Junction
Another junction, that Railfuture believes will be electrified.

Carlton Road Junction
It will allow westbound trains to go north on the Midland Main Line, which runs across the bottom of this image
A lot will be freight going up towards the Radlett Freight Terminal or the Midlands, but a proportion will take the Dudding Hill Line to go west.
Dudding Hill Line
I think that it will not be long before the Dudding Hill Line is electrified to allow both electrified freight and passenger services to go west, by bypassing the North London Line.
Certainly Transport for London have identified this route as a possible GOBlin extension.
August 17, 2015
Posted by AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Electrification, Gospel Oak And Barking Line |
1 Comment
Wanstead Park station is another tidy station on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
It has two steep staircases and no lifts, but the platforms can be easily extended, if needed for the new trains.
In my view the station also needs a light-controlled crossing by the entrance and better placed bus stops, so that transfer to the nearby Forest Gate station is easier.
August 16, 2015
Posted by AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Before GOBlin Electrification, Electrification, Gospel Oak And Barking Line, Wanstead Park Station |
Leave a comment
Woodgrange Park station is one of only two stations on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line, that is electrified.
As the electrification stretches all the way to Barking, the only thing the station will need to bring it up to the standrd passengers expect, is perhaps a couple of lifts.
If the platforms need lengthening, there are abandoned sections that could probably be brought back into use. This Google Map clearly shows the usable white and disused sections of the platforms.

Woodgrange Park Station
I estimate from this image that the current length of usable platform is around eighty metres. So they could probably accommodate one of the new four-car trains. But should the platforms be extended to future-proof them for six or even eight-cars.
August 16, 2015
Posted by AnonW |
Transport/Travel | Before GOBlin Electrification, Electrification, Gospel Oak And Barking Line, Wiidgrange Park Statiom |
Leave a comment