How To Charge A Battery Train
There is a Twitter hashtag of #ipemu and this tweet has been posted, which describes something called a Railbaar from a well-known Swiss company called Furrer + Frey, who are very much involverd in transport electrification.
Railbaar
This could be the missing link in running IPEMU trains on branch lines, like those to Barrow, Lowestoft, Scarborough or Windermere. After pulling into the terminal, the battery is topped up to make sure the train gets all the way back.
As an example, current schedules at Windermere allow somewhere between six and fifteen minutes for the turnround, which is probably typical around the UK rail network
Could IPEMU Trains Use KERS?
I have just read this article on The Business Desk, which is entitled Torotrak’s bus KERS system gets all-clear. The article starts like this.
Torotrak, a developer and supplier of emissions reduction and fuel efficiency technology in vehicles, and Wrightbus are celebrating the successful completion of the in-service trial of the Flybrid mechanical kinetic energy recovery system (KERS) for buses.
The trial was conducted with Arriva, one of the largest bus operators in the UK.
It must have been successful, as other reports say Torotrak shares have risen and the company is expected to start production of the Flybrid KERS in 2016.
I’m probably not the only engineer, who’s wondering, whether the technology can have applications with trains.
My one regret is that I only bought a thousand pounds worth of shares in the company.
London Air Ambulance Gets A Brain Scanner
The BBC are running a story this morning about the London Air Ambulance having a portable brain scanner and that they are able to scan injured patients on the way to hospital.
I’ve had a few brain scans in my time, but I can’t imagine one of the machines that have scanned me, being air-transportable in anything less than a C-130 Hercules.
But search the Internet and you find the device. It’s called an InfraScanner. It works using the same infra-red spectrum as a television remote control.
This superb piece of medical engineering, or others based on the same technology, must end up in the bag of every A&E doctor, or those who work in areas where there is a high risk of brain injuries, like sporting events or combat zones.
Squeezing Blood Out Of A Stone On The Northern Line
The Northern Line is not the most popular or glamorous line of the London Underground.
It is a line I try to avoid for various reasons.
- It’s often too crowded.
- I have buses, Victoria Line and the London Overground as alternatives. For example, I use Camden Road station instead of Camden Town station and walk.
- In recent months, stations I want to use have been renewing escalators.
- I also want to get to stations, that are on the Charing Cross branch of the line.
I also wonder, if I’m prejudiced against the Northern Line, as I spent so much of my formative years on the Piccadilly Line.
I have just read this article on London Reconnections, which is entitled Twin Peaks: Timetable Changes On The Northern Line.
I have extracted these points from the article.
- Until mid-2014, both central sections and both northern branches of the Northern Line in the peak hours were only able to handle twenty trains per hour (tph). This compares with 30 tph on the Jubilee Line, 33 tph for the Victoria Line and 34 tph for the Central Line.
- In June 2014, with the full introduction of automatic train operation (ATO), this was raised to 22 tph.
- Engineers were working hard to improve the track to allow better speeds and from December 2014, the train frequency in the peak was raised to 24 tph.
- The line is now running at 30 tph between Kennington and Morden.
- The Off Peak service at the start of 2014 was 15-16 tph and it is now 20 tph.
All of this frequency improvement has been attained because they have got ATO working well and they’ve done a good job to allow trains to run faster on much better track.
You could say it’s all down to quality engineering. With probably the input from someone, who understands scheduling.
The article has a section entitled As Good As It Can Get For The Moment?, where this is said.
No doubt the ATO system will continue to be refined but the dramatic time reductions already achieved are unlikely to be improved on much more. Unless more available trains or speed can be coaxed of the existing fleet it is hard to see how the peak timetable can be improved until new trains arrive.
So have we got to the limit of the current lines and the 1995 Stock trains?
If you read the article, you’ll see that Transport for London are talking about peak hour services of 30 tph with new trains after the reworking of track in Summer 2020.
But given the skilful way, the frequency of this line has been ramped up over the last couple of years, I suspect, there’s more blood to come from this particular stone!
Museum de Cruquius
The Museum de Cruquius is just up the road from The Hague near Haarlem, although our journey up wasn’t the easiest, because the motorway was closed.
It is well worth a visit as it shows a tremendous amount about how the Dutch have kept water at bay.
The enormous steam engine, which sadly doesn’t work, was actually built in Cornwall.
When I see a museum and engine like this, I do think it sad that London’s massive sewage engines at Crossness were just filled with sand and abandoned in the 1960s.
Both sites incidentally, are about the same age!
An Alternative Approach To Provide A Local Metro Network
The UK rail industry is looking at the creation or upgrading of three local metro networks Bristol, Cardiff and Teesside. You could also argue, that they are seriously thinking about local networks out of Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield.
The Objectives Of A Metro Network
So what do passengers and train companies want to see in a metro?
I would say that the most successful metro lines we have created in the last few years have been the London Overground lines.
They operate under the following rules and principles.
- Quality electric trains – Quality diesels would be fine in some places
- Frequencies of four trains an hour. – Two or three trains per hour might suffice.
- Clean stations, many of which are step-free.
- A station improvement program.
- Reliable service.
- Visible staff on stations from first to last trains.
- Extensive and visible information and maps.
- Touch in and out ticketing with bank cards.
- Good links to local buses.
The major problem of the Overground is that the trains keep needing to be lengthened, as they get crowded. The Class 378 trains started at three-cars and are now five.
Birmingham, Glasgow, Leeds and Liverpool seem to be using similar principles.
So how do three proposed metro networks stack up?
Cardiff
Let’s look at the electrification of the Cardiff Valleys Lines. According to the Wikipedia, the cost of the electrification is £350million.
I just wonder, if the scheme could be made more affordable, if the project was redesigned to use Aventra IPEMUs. The trains would obviously need sufficient electrification at Cardiff and Newport, so that they would leave the coast for their trips up the valleys with a full charge. Coming down wouldn’t be a problem and as the trains have regenerative braking, they would even charge the batteries.
Extensive testing would be easy once the current is switched on at Cardiff in a couple of years time and the clincher would be if an Aventra IPEMU could take a full load of Welshmen up to Merthyr Tydfil or Ebbw Vale after an international rugby match at the Millennium Stadium.
The scope of work would be greatly reduced.
- Upgrading all stations to take a four car train.
- Upgrading of the track layout and signalling, so that four car-trains could use each branch in an efficient manner.
- There may be a need for some selective electrification, to ensure trains left fully charged, or for other operational reasons concerning diversions from the South Wales Main Line or for freight.
There are advantages to this approach.
- Passengers get shiny new four-car trains, instead of refurbished hand-me-downs.
- As money would be spent on trains, track and signalling rather than electrification, this could mean more trains and increased frequencies on the lines.
- The Aventra trains could also take over some longer distance services to Bristol, Cheltenham, Fishguard and Gloucester.
- Much of the network, probably only needs minimal upgrades to track and signalling.
- There would be little or no heavy construction work in difficult places.
- Much of the construction work on the stations has probably been completed.
- There would be few line closures during the construction phase.
- Bridges and tunnels that are not large enough to accept the overhead wires can be left as they are, unless the line is being opened up for freight traffic running to a larger gauge.
- A higher proportion of the work to do will be general construction, rather than specialist overhead line installation, where there is a chronic shortage of engineers.
- There is little scope for something to go seriously wrong.
- The major source of delay would be late delivery of the Aventra IPEMU trains, but this would only mean that the diesel trains that currently work the line, would continue to serve the line for longer.
It strikes me that this approach has only one loser – the construction companies, who have helped create the electrification fiasco we have in this country. Passengers, train companies and the Welsh economy would all benefit!
According to this article on Global Rail News, London Overground’s contract for 45 Aventra trains is worth £260million. This works out at around £5.8million for each train. If the Aventra trains could work the Cardiff Valley Lines, with a little bit extra for the batteries or other energy storage device, twenty trains would probably cost around £140million or £7million a train.
I don’t know how many four-car trains they’d need to work the Valley Lines, but surely there is a trade-off between electrification and Aventra IPEMUs.
I can’t believe that Network Rail are not looking at this alternative approach, where instead of spending money on expensive and difficult electrification, the money is spent on shiny new trains built in a nice warm factory.
Teesside
The Tees Valley Metro is rather stillborn. The only thing that happened was the creation of James Cook station.
But there are two small electrification projects that could happen in the area in the near future.
- Hitachi are building electric trains at Newton Aycliffe and this will probably mean that the Tees Valley Line will at least be electrified between the Hitachi factory and the East Coast Main Line at Darlington.
- Plans exist to electrify between Middlesbrough and the East Coast Main Line, so that the town could benefit from a much improved train service.
If say this electrification were to be sufficient so that Aventra IPEMUs could be fully charged as they travelled from say Saltburn to Bishop Auckland, Phase 1 of the proposed Tees Valley Metro would get the new trains it will need.
Improve the stations and add a few new ones and you’d have a local railway to rival any in the UK.
In some ways if Aventra IPEMUs were used to develop the Metro everything would be in the opposite order to the traditional way of rebuilding a local line.
Normally, you close a line at great inconvenience to everyone, do a lot of construction and then spend months testing the new trains or trams, before a grand opening.
Compare this to upgrading a new line to run Aventra IPEMUs,
- Any work on the line to perhaps lengthen platforms and passing loops, and update signalling would be done first.
- Provided there is enough electrification to charge the trains, Aventra IPEMUs can be introduced alongside the existing trains, as they arrive from the factory and drivers and other staff have been trained.
- Adding new stations, is just a series of small well-defined construction projects, programmed to be done at convenient times and according to the budget.
- Other existing lines can be added to the system, if they are within the capability of the train and the platforms, track and signalling can accept the new trains.
A local network can be built by stealth in a series of small steps.
In Teesside’s case, you would certainly add the Phase 2 of the proposed Teesside Metro between Nunthorpe and Hartlepool.
An interesting possibility would be the Esk Valley Line to Whitby, if the Aventra IPEMU could manage the distance. If it couldn’t a Vivarail D-train certainly could.
Looking at the map, I feel that an Aventra IPEMU could be used on the Northern Rail service from Hexham via Newcastle, Sunderland, Hartlepool and Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe. It would charge the batteries running through Middlesbrough and Newcastle, and I don’t think any of the unelectrified stretches of line are more than thirty miles.
Bristol
Bristol has plans for creating a Metro, based on the two stations at Bristol Temple Meads and Bristol Parkway, which will be electrified (hopefully!) in the near future.
There are lines going all over the place providing services from outlying suburbs and towns to the centre.
Bristol has an opportunity to create a metro in the area, by upgrading all of the lines so they can take four-car trains, with longer platforms and updated track, signalling and stations. But in common with the rest of the country, there isn’t really any sensible trains available, although services could be developed using a collection of Pacers, D-trains and dodgy diesel unit.
However, once the two main stations are electrified, when the budget allows, Aventra IPEMUs could be introduced to the network.
So instead of one massive and expensive project, the metro is created in a series of small steps that don’t inconvenience passengers or train companies.
Other Services
When I discussed Teesside, I said this.
Looking at the map, I feel that an Aventra IPEMU could be used on the Northern Rail service from Hexham via Newcastle, Sunderland, Hartlepool and Middlesbrough to Nunthorpe. It would charge the batteries running through Middlesbrough and Newcastle, and I don’t think any of the unelectrified stretches of line are more than thirty miles.
How many other lines and services fall into this category of lengths of electrified line joined by no more than a total of sixty miles of unelectrified line that can easily be bridged by an Aventra IPEMU running on batteries?
I think these lines could fit the profile.
- Blackpool South to Colne – When Blackpool electrification is finished
- Carlisle to Newcastle
- Hexham to Middlesbrough
- Liverpool and Manchester Victoria to Leeds, York and Newcastle – The gap is just 43 miles
- Liverpool Lime Street to Manchester Oxford Road via Warrington Central
Many are currently served by Pacers and others are served by diesel multiple units like Class 150 or Class 156 trains, that could in turn replace Pacers.
The most significant line is the TransPennine route from Liverpool to Newcastle, which could really transform travel by being run by four-car Aventra IPEMUs rather than inadequate three-car Class 185 diesel trains.
Someone at Bombardier has done a very good job in designing a train to circumvent the problems of electrification in the UK.
Project Costs And Cash Flows
I would be interested to see properly audited figures for the traditional electrification approach and one using Aventra IPEMUs.
There are surely various benefits that the Aventra IPEMU approach will bring to the costs.
- The costs of the trains will be just a matter of negotiation, whereas the cost of electrification is not so predictable.
- Enlarging bridges and tunnels to take the overhead wires, is an expensive process and often results in unexpected problems, that cost a fortune to solve. With the Aventra IPEMU, most infrastructure can be left untouched, unless it needs to be replaced anyway.
- Most construction to accept the new trains, will be small projects, that can be handled by any competent construction company, whereas overhead line installation is a specialist construction job.
- Electrification often seems to attract those who object to the overhead line equipment spoiling the view of an important rural landscape or cityscape. Aventra IPEMUs only need sufficient to charge the batteries.
- With the Aventra IPEMU approach some new trains could be working on the network much earlier than they would be under a traditional approach. In some projects, will this have a beneficial cash flow?
I also come to the conclusion, that the Aventra IPEMU approach is more likely to deliver an affordable project on budget to an agreed time-scale, as the risk profile of electrification is so much worse than building a train on a production line in a factory.
One of the benchmarks of good project management is being able to deliver what is agreed. I believe that an Aventra IPEMU approach is much more likely to hit targets, as there is much less to go wrong.
Railways in the UK need a succession of successful projects, that impress engineers, train companies and passengers alike.
What better way to restore their credibility than for Network Rail, to deliver a series of projects that give millions of passengers efficient new electric train services all over the country.
Who Will Be First To Order Vivarail D-Trains?
This is pure speculation on my part, but I suspect that before the end of the year, one train company or another will give the Class 230 or Vivarail D-train a serious trial, prior to a possible order.
I shall list some of the reasons why a train company might use Vivarail D-trains.
Pacer Replacement
The main market for the D-train must be to help drive the Pacer trains to the scrapyard.
There are five classes and they all suffer from the same problems, explorerd in detail in this section on Wikipedia.
- They look and feel like thirty year old buses.
- They don’t meet the current access and disability regulations.
- Doubts have been raise about their safety in an accident.
But I do think for the average passenger and train company, their biggest problem is their reputation, which drives passengers away and makes it difficult to attract new ones.
They certainly need replacement, but whether the D-train is the solution in all cases is open to question.
Comparing a D-train with a Pacer can be summarised as follows.
- The ride quality of a D-train on conical rubber springs, proper bogies and a chassis and body designed to be strong enough to accept London’s punishment is what you would want from any train built in the last twenty years, whereas the Pacer with its two axles and bus-style construction, feels like a bus you’d ride in the Third World.
- The D-train will have the sort of interior and passenger facilities in a new train, whereas the Pacer interior is pure 1980s bus design. London’s oldest buses built in the early years of this century, make Pacer design look appalling.
- . Ride a D78 Stock at the Upminster end of the District Line and you can get a feeling how when the trains are carrying a reasonable load of passengers, the trains have a light and airy they feel because of the large areas of glass. Pacers are nothing but claustrophobic.
- The D-train will meet all access and disability regulations, whereas the Pacer does not.
- The D78 Stock on which the D-train is based was designed for quick and easy loading and unloading, whereas for many getting into and out of a Pacer is challenging.
- Will the D-train have an integral ramp for wheelchairs and refreshment trolleys, as is fitted to all buses in London? It would make loading and unloading wheelchair passengers so much faster and thus improve time-keeping and overall train speed.
- The D-train has wi-fi, which everybody expects these days. A Pacer with wi-fi would be a waste, as the trains ride so badly, you can’t really use a mobile device.
- I’ve read that passengers will be able to use the wi-fi to order drinks from a server and that train information will be easily available, but my computer system designing mind, says that these are just a small part of what could be done.
- Many Pacers are overworked on lines that need probably more trains, so I doubt we’ll see many one-to-one replacements.
- The Pacer is faster at 75 mph, than the D-train at sixty, but then the D-train will handle stops faster and have better acceleration.
- The Pacers were designed in an era, where bicycles, wheelchairs and buggies were not so common on trains. The D-train will be designed according to the profile of a typical passenger load.
Class 153 Train Replacement
The Class 153 train is a single coach, diesel train built in the 1980s, with a capacity of 75 passengers and a couple of bikes. There are seventy of them and they have a top speed of 75 mph and typically work rural and branch lines throughout the UK.
A lot of what applies to Pacers applies to the Class 153, although they are better trains.
They are not bad trains, but they do have a few problems.
- Seventy-five passengers is not a large enough capacity on many of the routes they serve.
- Many Class 153s serve seaside resorts or leisure areas, where there is a large need for bike and buggy capacity.
- The toilets and other on-board facilities on some need upgrading.
- Loading and unloading can often be a slow process.
From personal experience, I suspect that some of these trains have reliability problems.
I think that if a lot of these trains, especially those working branch lines like Ipswich to Felixstowe, could be replaced by D-trains. On some routes like Peterborough to Lincoln, the slower speed (60 mph) of the D-train, may mean that replacement is not feasible.
I also think that on some lines with lots of stops, the D-train’s speed of loading and unloading may be an advantage.
One advantage of releasing a few Class 153 trains, would be that the remaining units could be refurbished and coupled together in pairs to increase capacity on some of the routes they serve, where D-trains would not be acceptable.
D-Train Variants
But perhaps the biggest difference between D-trains and Pacers and the later Sprinters like the Class 153 trains, is that the older trains were designed as a one-size-fits-all solution to the problem of providing local trains. D-trains will be a fully-engineered train rebuilt to modern standards, but of a size and capability designed for the route on which it will be intended to run. Vivarail have talked of different versions and looking at where Pacers and other old trains that need replacing are used, you can come up with some ideas.
These will be discussed in the next few sections.
The Commuter Train
Vivarail are promoting the D-train as a commuter train. Many of these routes have frequent stops going into and out of a city, so the stop-at-a-station performance is more important than pure speed. Recent research has shown that more stations may actually be more important for commuting time, than the point-to-point performance of the train.
The Luxury Commuter Train
If you look at some of the latest commuter trains in London like the Class 377 train, much of the seating is at tables, where passengers sit four to a window, giving an experience far removed from any services fifteen years ago.
Also, some cities like Reading and Cambridge now use buses with leather seats and wi-fi on commuter routes into the city.
Over the next few years passengers will demand higher standards on their commute into major centres and train companies will have to provide them to coax commuters out of their cars.
A luxury commuter train could be designed around the D-train with leather seats, space to work, wi-fi, refreshments and a place to store their bicycle.
I would argue that most D-train commuting variants would be furnished internally to a high standard.
The Leisure Train
Quite a few Pacers and Class 153 trains run on scenic lines, often with lots of stations, or a branch to a resort.
They are totally unsuited for this role, as there is not enough provision for large luggage, bicycles and buggies.
The performance of a D-train would be totally adequate for this role and it could be fitted out with perhaps a hundred seats arranged round tables in the windows, so passengers could admire the view, with a large area for the baggage, that these trains attract.
The affordability and availability of the D-train, may mean that a seaside branch would be run by two trains, if the track allowed, so there could be a doubling of services on many lines, at not too great a cost.
The Special Events Train
A couple of years ago, I was travelling in the West Country, at the time of the Glastonbury Festival. It was a nightmare and I’ve never seen rural trains so crowded.
In Is This Rail Project Going Nowhere?, I talked about the problems of getting passengers to and from the new Coventry Arena station on match days.
A special events version of the D-train, could be used to shuttle visitors and spectators to major events like these and the many others that happen around the country.
In its simplest form, it might just be two standard commuter D-trains coupled together to make a four- or six-car train.
I have assumed that D-trains can be run in pairs, as D78 Stock does on the District Line.
If there were a couple of spare D-trains available, they would also be useful to bypass line closures perhaps using non-electrified lines.
Recently, Network Rail have been improving the lines between London and Norwich and regularly, I have endured Rail Replacement Buses to get to and from football at Ipswich. It would have been much easier for passengers, if say a six-coach D-train had been used to ferry everybody between Ipswich and Norwich and Cambridge to catch fast trains to connect to and from London.
The Longer Distance Trundler
There are some important remote lines in the UK, like the Far North Line in Scotland, the Heart of Wales Line in Wales and the Cumbrian Coast Line in England.
Lines like this are very important to the local community, are scenic and often get a rather irregular service with basic trains, that doesn’t encourage use by either locals or visitors.
They must also present problems to train operators, when perhaps a train fails or the line is blocked because of adverse weather or a train hitting stray animals.
The right concept of D-train and operating strategy, either with D-trains working alone or in conjunction with faster trains on these lines, could be the key to providing the first class service that the areas they serve need, at an acceptable cost.
Anything innovative can’t be tried at the moment, as there aren’t any spare trains.
The Creation Of A Spare Train Philosophy
Typically to provide any service or get a job done, you must have adequate resources.
It’s the same, when providing a train service.
As an example, the Victoria Line in London has a fleet of 47 2009 Stock trains. At peak hours there should be 43 trains in service.
So there are a few spare trains either in maintenance or perhaps sitting ready to come into service, should a train fail.
This provision of spare trains is typical of well-managed train networks, as it means that running a full service is a lot easier.
But I suspect most local networks running Pacers and Sprinters have access to very few spare trains. And there just isn’t available to lease!
So could we see the likes of Abellio Greater Anglia, Northern Rail and First Great Western, investing in D-trains, as a sort of insurance, against the sort of problems they face?
A Flexible Train
The beauty of the D-train concept is that the train can be configured to what it will be doing.
We’ve always relied on a standard train and moulded the services and passengers to fit what it offers. That is an outmoded concept.
When you buy a new car, you at least get to choose the colour, whether it is a saloon, estate or hatchback and often the level of luxury you want!
So why can’t train operators buy or lease a train that fits their routes and passengers?
So who might give the D-train a trial?
East Anglia
According to this article on Global Rail News, the Department of Transport has just invited operators to bid for the franchise with the new operator taking over from October 2016, after the winner is announced in the summer.
One of the requirements of the new franchise, would be to introduce 180 new services every week. That is a very demanding requirement, as surely it will need more trains to do this.
So where do they get extra trains?
On the flagship service between Norwich and London via Ipswich, the Class 90 locomotive hauled Mark 3 coaches will be replaced with electric multiple units like Class 801 trains at some time in the future. In the mean-time, the Mark 3 coaches could be updated with automatic doors and retention toilets, just as Chiltern have done. This would meet one condition of the franchise, which is to fix the toilets.
If they needed more trains to run the flagship service, they could always add a few more suitably refurbished Mark 3 coaches, that are currently in store. But there isn’t any suitable electric locomotives in the UK or even on order. One solution would be to use some of the electro-diesel Class 88 locomotives on order from Vossloh for delivery in 2016. These could also be used on new services like.
- Liverpool Street and Great Yarmouth, via Cambridge, the new Cambridge Science Park station and Norwich.
- Liverpool Street and Peterborough via Colchester, Ipswich, Bury St. Edmunds and Ely.
- Liverpool Street to Lowestoft via Colchester and Ipswich.
The first service would also add much-needed extra capacity between Norwich and Cambridge.
Most of the rest of the East Anglian franchise is an intense electric network into Stratford and Liverpool Street.
To improve and increase services, there may be a few electric trains to be scrounged from somewhere, but they would need probably need extensive refurbishment, like many of the trains like Class 321 trains running currently. There might be some Class 319 trains from Thameslink available, but they would need work to be done.
As to new trains, the question has to be asked if any train-maker has the capacity to build them quickly? I can’t see any new trains being delivered before 2020.
There is also the various diesel trains, connecting Cambridge, Ipswich and Norwich and running the branch lines out of Ipswich and Norwich. Most are tired, except for a dozen Class 170 trains running the main routes, and all trains lack capacity and especially space for bicycles.
As the franchising documents mention innovative new trains, surely the branches are places where Vivarail D-trains might be used! They have these advantages.
- They can be appropriately configured for the routes, with plenty of space for bicycles and buggies, that seaside and country services attract.
- More trains could be ordered, so that service frequencies could be increased.
- The trains would be available in the near future.
- They would release some better diesel multiple units to augment services like Ipswich to Cambridge.
East Anglia also has a big problem with irregular but predictable leisure use of trains.
It has two major football clubs and an important racecourse, that are all served by nearby train stations. It also has several seaside resorts, where if the weather is fine, there will be a large increase in traffic. There are also several festivals and other events like the Lowestoft Air Show.
So could two-car D-trains coupled together as a four-or six-car train, be used to shift the extra passengers on busy days? I can’t find anything on the web about whether this is possible, but there must be lots of uses for a four-car or longer event special. Often the solution today, is to bring in a few coaches top and tailed with two diesel locomotives. Surely, two D-trains is a better solution.
The big disadvantage of the D-train, which is its low top speed of 60 mph, would probably not matter on East Anglia’s branch lines, as I doubt trains currently go much faster anyway.
But it would probably preclude using the trains from Cambridge to Ipswich and Norwich, except when there were problems on the main line!
According to this article on the BBC, the new franchisee will have to fulfil certain conditions. I like this.
The establishment of a £9.5m Customer and Communities Improvement Fund to benefit passengers and local residents is required.
Does it mean that the government will expect some new and improved stations?
I think it highly likely, that the three bidders for the new East Anglian franchise, will have a serious look at the prototype D-train.
Possible Requirement – 3 to replace inadequate Class 153s
London Midland
London Midland has a few lack of capacity problems..
The well-publicised one is that between Coventry and Nuneaton, which I talked about in Is This Rail Project Going Nowhere? Coventry councillors have already looked at the D-train for a shuttle from Coventry to the new station at Coventry Arena station.
To serve Coventry Arena, the original plan was to have a six-car shuttle between the station and Coventry.
So could the Coventry to Nuneaton Line and the related Coventry to Leamington Line, via the new Kenilworth station be run using three-car D-trains? Two could be coupled together on match days to provide the six-car shuttle for the stadium.
London Midland has a total of eight Class 153 trains, most of which work local routes, except for Birmingham to Shrewsbury.
Replacing just one Class 153 with a D-train on a short route that needs more capacity, would release a train to work as a pair with another Class 153 elsewhere.
Birmingham is a mass of rail lines, many of which still have freight traffic, some of which the local authorities want to reopen.
Consider the following.
- Walsall to Wolverhampton used to have a direct train service until recently. But the government withdrew funding in 2008. The whole story is documented in Recent History in the Wikipedia entry for the line.
- The Camp Hill Line lost its passenger services in 1941.
- The Sutton Park Line is being considered for reopening.
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.
- Avocet Line – 11.25 miles to Exmouth
- Riviera Line – 28.25 miles to Paignton
- Tarka Line – 39 miles to Barnstaple
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.
Is Vivarail True Disruptive Innovation?
Disruptive innovation is defined like this in Wikipedia.
A disruptive innovation is an innovation that helps create a new market and value network, and eventually disrupts an existing market and value network (over a few years or decades), displacing an earlier technology.
I’ve always been a great believer in this sort of innovation.
When we started Metier Management Systems and created Artemis, project management was worthy, time-consuming and if a computer was used it was an expensive mainframe. So we took a small but powerful industrial computer put it in a desk, added a VDU and a printer to do the same PERT and financial calculations much faster and often much physically closer to where the answers were needed. I have heard argued that one of our reasons for great success in the early days of North Sea Oil, was that you could find space for an Artemis system in Aberdeen, but not for a mainframe. The city was crawling with dozens of our systems.
After Artemis, project management was never the same again!
If we look at the building of trains, it is supposed to be an expensive business, with large manufacturers like Alstom, Bombardier, Hitachi and Siemens make expensive complicated trains, that are virtually computers on wheels. But at a price and to a time-scale that is such, that say a train company needs perhaps some extra four coach diesel multiple units to support say a Rugby World Cup or Open Golf venue, there is nothing that can be delivered in a short time.
Over the last few years, disruptive innovation has been alive and well in the train building industry. In the 1970s and 1980s, we built a large number of trains and electric and diesel multiple units based on the legendary Mark 3 coach. Wikipedia says this about the coach.
The Mark 3 and its derivatives are widely recognised as a safe and reliable design, and most of the surviving fleet is still in revenue service on the British railway network in 2015.
It is truly one of the great British designs. My personal view is that the ride in a Mark 3 coach, is unsurpassed for quality by any other train, I’ve ever ridden, in the UK or Europe.
A Mark 3-based multiple unit also survived the incident at Oxshott, where a 24-tonne cement mixer lorry fell on top of the train. There were injuries, but no-one was killed.
So what has the Mark 3 coach got to do with disruptive innovation?
They are like a well-built house, that constantly gets remodelled and improved by successive owners.
The structure and running gear of a Mark 3 coach is such that it is often more affordable to rebuild and improve Mark 3-based trains, rather than order new ones.
If Terry Miller and his team in Derby, had not designed the Mark 3 coach and the related InterCity 125 in the 1960s, I suspect that UK railways would be in a truly terrible state today.
These trains still remain the benchmark against which all other trains are judged. Two journeys sum up the class of a Mark 3 coach.
- Travel in First and enjoy Pullman Dining on a First Great Western service between London and Wales or the West. Is there any better rail journey available without a special ticket in the world?
- Travel in Standard on Chiltern to Birmingham and enjoy the ride and the views from the large windows, in the style that the designers envisaged for all passengers.
But the Mark 3 coach has created this industry in the UK, that can take well-built old trains and turn them into modern trains, that are often the equal of shiny new ones from the factory.
So where do Vivarail fit in all this?
London Underground has always specified the best for its railways and expected the trains to last a long time. In some ways it had to, as when it depended on Government favours for new trains, it could not predict if the replacements would ever be forthcoming.
Until the 1980s, most trains were built by Metro-Cammell in Birmingham and regularly fleets have lasted for forty or fifty years, as they were built to handle the heavy use in London, where journeys can be over an hour of full-speed running with frequent stops and often with far more passengers than the trains were designed. Take a Piccadilly Line train from say Kings Cross to Heathrow in the rush hour, if you want to see the sort of punishment that London Underground trains are built to take. The last of these Piccadilly Line trains were built in 1977 and under current plans, they will have to stay in service to 2025.
The oldest London Underground trains still in regularly passenger service, are the Class 483 trains used on the Isle of Wight. Admittedly, they are running a service in a less-stressful environment after fifty years service in London, but the trains were originally delivered to London Underground in 1939 or 1940.
The London Underground D78 Stock, that has been purchased by Vivarail for conversion into the D-train, were first delivered in 1980, so they have only taken about thirty-five years of London’s punishment.
The trains were also extensively refurbished in the mid-2000s.
It also has to be born in mind, that although London works its Underground trains very hard, they also get first class servicing.
Several factors have all come together to create an opportunity for Vivarail.
- There is a desperate shortage of diesel multiple units all over the UK. Partly, this is because of a need to replace the ageing Pacers, but mainly because of the growth in passenger numbers and the reluctant of Government in the 2000s to invest in much-needed new diesel trains.
- Network Rail’s well-publicised problems with electrification, only makes the need for more diesel trains more important.
- A lot of trains will have to be taken out of service as they don’t meet the disability regulations.
- The UK’s world-class train refurbishment business, which has honed its skills on creating new trains from old for forty years, is ready for a new project.
- There is now a supply of well-maintained, corrosion-free D78 Stock, that may not be sexy, but are as tough as teak, that are surplus to requirements.
It should also be said, that train operators and passengers want more flexible and better specified train services on difficult lines that are unlikely to be electrified in the near future and are difficult lines on which to provid a decent reliable train service.
Read any of the serious literature about the D-Train and it shows that the engineers are taking the project very seriously and are thinking very much outside the box.
- Power units are based on Ford Duratorq diesel engines mounted on rafts under the train, with two to each power car.
- These rafts can be changed using a fork lift at a remote location.
- Flexibility of interior layout to suit the route.
- Extensive use of LED lighting, Wi-fi and other modern technology.
- The crash test has been released as a video. How often do you see that?
But perhaps this article from Rail Magazine entitled Catering for VivaRail’s rebuilt D-Stock, illustrates their innovative thinking better than ever.
The more I read about the D-train, the more I think it will surprise everybody.
It is true world class disruptive technology. And British technology too!
How To Work Outdoors
We all love working outside in the dark and wet, repairing things and perhaps digging holes.
Wouldn’t it be much nicer to do the work indoors in a workshop.
The problem is much worse on the railways, where when say you want to check rails, points or sleepers, you need to make sure the workers are protected from passing trains.
So I was intrigued to see this report on Rail Engineer entitled Video: Mobile Maintenance Train.
Talk about taking your shed with you and parking it over the problem!
It’s such a brilliant concept, I find it amazing that this hasn’t been standard practice for at least fifty years!
Do they have trucks like this, so they can repair potholes or accident damage on motorways?
The Falkirk Wheel
The Falkirk Wheel was the destination of the walk.
I think it is impressive. But is it art, engineering or a spectacular solution to lifting boats between two canals?. Wikipedia says this about the purpose of the lift.
The wheel raises boats by 24 metres (79 ft), but the Union Canal is still 11 metres (36 ft) higher than the aqueduct which meets the wheel. Boats must also pass through a pair of locks between the top of the wheel and the Union Canal. The Falkirk Wheel is the only rotating boat lift of its kind in the world.
It is also unique.
This Google Map gives a view looking down on the area.
Falkirk Wheel
The Forth and Clyde Canal, which runs across the top of the picture is thirty five metres lower than the Union Canal that runs along the bottom.
Perhaps we should create more spectacular machines like this. In the same class, I would include, these from the UK, that I have seen.
All are different in their own way. But certainly at the Falkirk Wheel on a sunny Sunday afternoon, kids of all ages had gathered to watch.
The Anonymous Widower 