The Anonymous Widower

Anglesey Hydrogen Can Bridge UK’s Energy Gap Says Economics Expert

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the University of Bangor web site.

This is the sub title.

Anglesey can become a UK leader in hydrogen energy technology, cleaning up the transport sector and creating high quality jobs across North Wales, according to a leading Welsh economic expert.

The University of Bangor is a respected university, that goes back to the nineteenth century.

But for Liverpool giving me an unconditional offer, as Bangor was one of the universities on my UCCA form, I could have studied in the North-West corner of Wales.

After a resume of where we are with hydrogen in the world, Dr. Edward Jones of Bangor University outlines how North West Wales can be turned into a hydrogen hub, to join similar hubs at Deeside in Flintshire and at Milford Haven in Pembrokeshire.

This is a paragraph of the article.

Dr Jones believes hydrogen could also hold the key to powering transport in future through a Welsh invention from the 19th century (the hydrogen fuel cell was developed in Swansea by William Grove in 1842).

William Grove was an interesting lawyer and scientist.

Dr. Jones would appear to be very much in favour of using hydrogen to take Wales forward to being zero-carbon in 2050.

I have written a few posts about the transformation of Anglesey and North West Wales, as Wales moves towards this goal. I also have some other thoughts of my own.

Holyhead Hydrogen Hub

This is happening and I wrote about it in Holyhead Hydrogen Hub Planned For Wales.

High Speed Two To Holyhead

I believe this could be a way to create a zero-carbon route between London and Dublin in under five hours and I wrote about it in Could High Speed Two Serve Holyhead?.

  • London and Holyhead in a battery-equipped High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train should be under three hours.
  • A single High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train would run between London and Holyhead, with a passenger capacity of around five hundred. It would probably split and join with another service at Crewe.
  • Discontinuous electrification would be provided along the North Wales Coast Line.
  • The trains could call at Old Oak Common, Birmingham Interchange, Chester, Crewe, Llandudno Junction and Bangor.

A High Speed catamaran would speed passengers between Holyhead and Dublin in under two hours.

Hydrogen-Powered Catamarans From Holyhead

The dynamics of a diesel-powered high speed catamaran are well-proven, with some large craft transporting passengers and vehicles on sea crossings all over the world.

Type “hydrogen-powered high speed catamaran” into Google and you get several hits to research and development projects, but no-one appears to have taken a large high speed craft and converted it to hydrogen.

But I do believe that someone somewhere is developing a hydrogen-powered catamaran with something like the following specification.

  • 200 passengers
  • 100-mile range
  • 60 knot operating speed.

The HSC Francisco is a high speed craft that plies between Buenos Aires and Montevideo carrying over a thousand passengers and a hundred cars at 58 knots. It is powered by gas-turbine engines running on liquified natural gas.

I believe I’m not asking for the impossible.

Anglesey Airport As A Zero-Carbon Airport

Anglesey Airport uses part of RAF Valley and has hosted services to Cardiff.

This Google Map shows the runways of RAF Valley.

Note.

  1. The longest runway 14/32 is over two thousand metres long.
  2. Rhosneigr station in the South East corner of the map.
  3. The facilities of Anglesey Airport to the North-East of the runways.

The railway forms the border of the airport, as this second Google map shows.

The railway is straight as it passes the Airport and there would be space for a two-hundred metre bi-directional step-free platform for passengers for the Airport.

Airbus are proposing a hydrogen-powered ZEROe Turbofan.

If you think it looks familiar, I believe that Airbus are proposing to develop the aircraft out of the current Airbus A320neo.

  • The capacity will be up to 200 passengers.
  • The range will be up to 2000 miles.
  • Dublin and Anglesey Airports are just 71.5 miles apart.
  • The cruising speed of Mach 0.78 would be irrelevant on this route, as it would probably fly a route to minimise noise.

The plane would probably be able to do several trips between Anglesey and Dublin without refuelling.

As the Port of Holyhead is developing a hydrogen infrastructure, I suspect that to provide hydrogen refuelling at Anglesey Airport would be possible.

I believe that by combining hydrogen-powered aircraft with battery-electric trains, some difficult sea crossings can be made carbon-free.

I believe that Anglesey Airport could be key to a zero-carbon London and Ireland service.

  • Airbus are also proposing a 100-seat ZEROe Turboprop.
  • Belfast, Cork, Derry and Shannon would also be in range.

Flights could also continue to and from Cardiff.

Reopening The Anglesey Central Railway

This has been proposed as a Beeching Reversal project.

I wrote about it in Reopening The Anglesey Central Railway.

It could be reopened as a zero-carbon railway.

Conclusion

There is a lot of scope to use hydrogen in North West Wales and Anglesey.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

October 7, 2021 Posted by | Hydrogen, Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

First Phase Of ‘Transformational’ Darlington Rail Station Upgrade Approved

The title of this post is the same as that of this article on the North East Times.

This upgrade is on the Eastern side of the current station and will include a new entrance, station building, concourse and three new platforms.

This design should allow the following.

  • LNER, High Speed Two and other expresses not stopping at the Darlington station to pass through at speeds of up to 125 mph or more.
  • Expresses stopping in the station will slow and accelerate in less time than they do now.
  • It will probably allow more local trains to Bishops Auckland, Middlesbrough and Saltburn

A seventy-five percent increase in platforms probably offers other advantages.

October 2, 2021 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , | 2 Comments

Results For HS2’s Trial For Alternative Fuels Set To Cut Carbon Released

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.

This paragraph sums up the results.

Although the results demonstrated partial air quality benefits, when compared to red diesel, the trial showed possible carbon reduction opportunities via the sustainable sourcing of alternative fuels.

It looks like, there will be benefits from swapping from red diesel.

 

October 2, 2021 Posted by | Energy, Transport | , , , , | Leave a comment

Thoughts On Splitting The Northern Line

In Battersea Power Station Station Opens, I talked about the scale of the new Battersea Power Station station.

  • It looks like it could have three entrances.
  • It’s got four escalators and two lifts to go to down to platform level.
  • It has two terminal platforms.

I feel it has been designed to handle as many passengers and trains as Morden station.

  • Morden station has five platforms.
  • The station is step-free.
  • The station handles ten million passengers per year.

The signalling can handle up to thirty trains per hour (tph) to Morden.

It looks to me that Battersea Power Station station has been designed to be big enough to take half the trains from North London with ease.

The Proposed Split

There has been talk of splitting the Northern Line into two separate lines for some years.

  • The Western Line (Charing Cross Line) would run between Edgware and Battersea Power Station via Camden Town, Euston, Charing Cross and Kennington.
  • The Eastern Line (Bank Line) would run between High Barnet and Morden via Camden Town, Euston, Bank and Kennington.

Note.

  1. I will call the two lines the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.
  2. Both lines could have Victoria Line frequencies of over thirty tph.
  3. It is generally felt that the split would need a rebuild at Camden Town station to handle the extra passengers.
  4. Camden Town station needs better access between the trains and the street.
  5. There would need to be better connections at Kennington and Euston stations.

Surely, the main advantages of the split would be as follows.

  • Trains on both lines would go end-to-end without crossing a junction, where signals and points were constantly switching trains. This is why the Victoria Line can handle more than thirty-three tph.
  • Trains will run at Victoria Line frequencies on both lines.
  • All trains at Camden Town and Kennington stations would use a route without points to go as fast as possible through the station.
  • Eliminating the points, would make both lines more reliable.
  • Euston station will have upwards of sixty tph connecting it to Crossrail.

Effectively, the new Bank and Charing Cross Lines would be able to perform just like Dear Old Vicky.

I will now look at where work needs to or could be done to successfully split the two lines.

Kennington Station

In Could Access Between Platform And Train Be Improved At Kennington Station?, I outlined how passengers might use Kennington station to change between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

I developed this rule.

The rule would appear to be if you’re on one line and are going to a station on the other, you change at Kennington station.

Staff would need to be on the platform to help those, who were changing direction.

But I do think changing can be made to work well with step-free access between train and platform on all four platforms at Kennington station.

It will be interesting to see, what proportion of train changes at Kennington are simple cross-platform changes, where there is no use of the steep stairs. I think it could be quite high.

I believe Kennington station will grow into a very smooth interchange between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

Although, there’ll be a problem for some time, if you’re in a wheelchair and want to go between Morden and Battersea Power station.

This could be solved by lifts between each pair of platforms and the intermediate level passage, which connects to the lifts to the surface.

The Camden Town Problem

This map from cartometro.com shows the lines around and through Camden Town station.

Note.

  1. Camden Town station has four platforms.
  2. The Eastern pair are under Kentish Town Road and connect to High Barnet in the North.
  3. The Western pair are under Camden High Street and connect to Edgware in the North.
  4. In each pair of tracks the Northbound track is above the Southbound track.
  5. There is a level passage between the two Northbound tracks, so it is an easy interchange, if you’re on the wrong train going North.
  6. The passage between the two Southbound tracks has stairs at either end, if you want to change Southbound trains at the station.

But the real problem lies South of the station; the horrendously complicated Camden Town Junction.

The junction must be able to handle trains going between the following stations.

  • Bank and Edgware
  • Bank and High Barnet
  • Charing Cross and Edgware
  • Charing Cross and High Barnet

Note in the map, that the High Barnet tracks dive under the Edgware tracks so they can form two separate pairs of tracks to Euston, only one of which goes via Mornington Crescent.

If there was a similar junction on the motorways of the UK or the Interstate Highways of the US, it would have years ago been simplified.

The split will mean the following.

  • The Eastern pair of platforms will still be connected to High Barnet as now, but will also be directly connected to the tracks that go directly to Euston and on to Bank.
  • The Western pair of platforms will still be connected to Edgware as now, but will also be directly connected to the tracks that go to Euston via Mornington Crescent and on to Charing Cross.
  • Camden Town Junction could be seriously simplified, with perhaps the ability to swap between routes only available for depot and engineering movements.

I do suspect, it would also mean all trains from High Barnet will go via Bank and all trains via Edgware will go via Charing Cross.

  • A proportion of passengers would have to change at Camden Town.
  • Both routes would connect to High Speed Two at Euston.
  • Both routes connect to the Central, Jubilee, Piccadilly and Victoria Lines.
  • Improvements promised for Euston will give better access to the Sub-Surface Lines.

I think it will be a case of winning some good routes and losing others. Disgusted from Finchley might complain.

But then there will be Crossrail, which as it connects to both lines at Tottenham Court Road and Moorgate could give serious advantages.

The split isn’t without passengers who will object to losing their preferred route.

Camden Town Station

This document on TfL’s web site gives more details of the proposed capacity upgrade at Camden Town station. This schematic of the tunnels, platforms and walkways shows how the station could look in a few years time.

Note.

  1. New tunnels are shown in light grey.
  2. Existing tunnels are shown in dark grey.
  3. The Northbound platforms are above the Southbound ones.
  4. The tunnels in the foreground are those of the Charing Cross Line.
  5. The far tunnels are those of the Bank Line.
  6. The new Buck Street entrance is labelled 8.
  7. There is a new pedestrian tunnel between the two Northbound Lines.
  8. Below it is a new tunnel between the two Southbound Lines.
  9. There is an existing passage linking the four lines.

The full upgrade is very much on the back burner, but could Camden Town station be upgraded with the proposed extra cross passages.

  • These would enable passengers to change lines easily on the level.
  • Passengers changing between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines would be kept away from the existing escalators and the space at their bottom.
  • The tunnels would increase the circulation area.
  • The tunnels would be part of the new Buck Street entrance if it were to be built.

I feel with improved cross-platform interchange, Camden Town could function as an interchange station between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

A similar rule as I used for Kennington station would apply for passengers.

The rule would appear to be if you’re on one line and are going to a station on the other, you change at Camden Town station.

Staff would need to be on the platform to help those, who were changing direction.

But it would be a more comprehensive and easier interchange than Kennington, as all changes would be without steep stairs.

Once Camden Town station is working well with the new cross passages, I would then get a developer to put a large development on the proposed site of the Buck Street entrance, with a new entrance with lifts and escalators underneath, that reached down to the new cross tunnels.

After what the contractors did at Whitechapel, I suspect this could be achieved, whilst keeping the trains running and leaving the existing Camden Town station intact.

This Google Map shows the area between Camden Road and Camden Town stations.

Note.

  1. Camden Road station on the North London Line is in the North-East corner of the map.
  2. Camden Town station is at the bottom of the map towards the West.
  3. The Charing Cross Line to Edgware is under Camden High Street.
  4. The Bank Line to High Barnet is under Kentish Town Road.
  5. Buck Street is to the North of Camden Town station connecting Camden High Street and Kentish Town Road.
  6. The red-roofed building in Buck Street is the former Hawley School, which is now owned by Transport for London and is earmarked for the new station entrance.
  7. The Regent’s Canal, which has a convenient towpath, runs East-West across the map.
  8. A lot of development is happening on the North bank of the canal.

The map doesn’t show how difficult it is to walk between the two stations along the busy Camden Road.

In Between Camden Road And Camden Town Stations Along The Canal, I walked between the two stations along the canal and then up Kentish Town Road. It took me fourteen minutes in total with seven minutes between the canal and Camden Town station.

I believe the following will happen.

  • People living and working in the new developments will need access to Camden Town station.
  • The Regent’s Canal towpath will be updated into a safer walking route between Camden Lock and Camden Road station, that serves a lot of the developments.
  • More tourists will need to get to Camden Lock and the markets.

These will increase the need for extra capacity at Camden Town station.

The only way it will get built is by a private developer, who puts a lot of housing on the Buck Street site and sells it as quality housing in an iconic location.

A lot of politicians won’t like it, but solving the problems at Camden Town station, which is an overcrowding accident waiting to happen, is more important than their egos.

These pictures show some of the features of Camden Town station.

I believe Camden Town station could grow quickly into a very smooth interchange between the Bank and Charing Cross Lines.

In a few years time, when the Buck Street entrance is built, the capacity problems will be on their way to solution.

Finally, once the Buck Street entrance is complete, the original station can be refurbished.

 

Euston Station, Crossrail, Crossrail 2 and the Northern Line

Consider.

  • Euston station is a very busy station and it will be even busier, when High Speed Two opens.
  • Crossrail 2 will not be built before High Speed 2 opens.
  • The Victoria Line doesn’t connect to Crossrail.
  • The only connection between Euston station and Crossrail are the two branches of the Northern Line.

Splitting the Northern Line into the Bank and Charing Cross Lines will increase the number of Northern Line trains through Euston to at least sixty tph, if both lines can handle Victoria Line frequencies.

It looks to me, that making the Northern Line step-free at Euston is the best short-term alternative to building Crossrail 2.

Euston Station

Euston station is the third station, where the Bank and Charing Cross Lines connect.

This map from cartmetro.com shows the Northern Line through Euston station.

Note.

  1. The Northern Line is shown in black.
  2. The Victoria Line is shown in blue
  3. The Sub-Surface Lines are shown in purple and yellow.

In the map, the platforms are as follows going from top to bottom.

  • Platform 1 – Northbound – Northern – Charing Cross to Camden Town
  • Platform 2 – Southbound – Northern – Camden Town to Charing Cross
  • Platform 6 – Southbound – Northern – Camden Town to Bank
  • Platform 5 – Northbound – Victoria – Victoria to Walthamstow
  • Platform 4 – Southbound – Victoria -Walthamstow to Victoria
  • Platform 3 – Northbound – Northern – Bank to Camden Town

It  is a bit unusual as the cross-platform interchange between Bank and Victoria Lines involves a change of direction.

With the development of Euston station for High Speed Two, I am sure interchange between the two branches of the Northern Line and the other lines at Euston will be made step-free.

Plans have already been published that will connect Euston Square station and Euston station. I wrote about it in The New Step-Free Entrance At Euston Square Station.

These pictures are of Euston station.

I feel the wide Platform 6 could give scope for innovation.

Level Access Between Train And Platform

I believe that many platforms on the Northern Line can be modified to give level access between train and platform.

In Could Access Between Platform And Train Be Improved At Kennington Station?. I outlined how it could be achieved at Kennington station.

At Kennington station, all platforms are straight and this is a prerequisite to making the access level.

I also feel that any straight platform with a Harrington Hump could effectively be given a full length hump.

I suspect that a lot of stations could be converted to level access between train and platform

Conclusion

I believe that splitting the Northern Line would be very worthwhile.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

September 27, 2021 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

High Speed Two Services

This diagram shows High Speed Two services.

Click on the diagram to enlarge it.

September 14, 2021 Posted by | Transport | | 2 Comments

The London And Edinburgh Travel Market

This paragraph comes from of this article on Railway Gazette.

Lumo is aiming to carry more than 1 million passengers per year. It is particularly targeting people who currently fly between Edinburgh and London; in June it says there were 74 764 air journeys on the route, compared to 82 002 by rail.

Lumo’s million passengers per year, will equate to around 83,300 passengers per month.

What these figures don’t show is the number of rail journeys made to intermediate stations like Newcastle, York, Doncaster and Peterborough.

These are a few thoughts.

Rail Capacity Between London And Edinburgh

Consider.

  • LNER is currently the only rail carrier offering a daytime service between London and Edinburgh.
  • LNER run approximately 26 trains per day (tpd) in both directions between London and Edinburgh.
  • A nine-car Class 801 train can carry 510 Standard Class passengers and 101 First Class passengers.

That means that LNER had a capacity of just over 950,000 seats in June.

It might seem poor to have only sold 82,002 seats in June between London and Edinburgh, which is just 8.6 % of the available seats.

On the other hand, LNER’s two trains per hour (tph) are a lot more than London and Edinburgh trains, as they connect towns and cities all the way up the East Coast Main Line between London and Aberdeen.

Lumo’s capacity of a million seats per year, works out at 83,300 seats per month, which is another 8.7 % of capacity.

  • Lumo will sell seats on price initially and I suspect they’ll end up running about 85-95 % full.
  • It has been stated that they need to run 80% full to break even.
  • I also think, that they would like to have a few seats for late bookers.

But even so, they will surely affect LNER’s bookings.

What Will LNER Do?

Several of the things, that Lumo are doing can be easily copied by LNER.

  • Early booking.
  • Improve onboard service.
  • Better seating.

They could even reduce prices.

I think it is very likely we could end up with a price and service war between LNER and Lumo.

Would The Airlines Be The Losers?

This could be an outcome of competition between LNER and Lumo.

We are now talking about times of around four hours and twenty-five minutes between London and Edinburgh, but there are improvements underway on the East Coast Main Line.

  • The remodelling of the approach to Kings Cross station has not been reflected in the timetables.
  • The Werrington Dive Under has not been completed yet.
  • Digital signalling is being installed South of Doncaster.
  • The power supply is being upgraded North of Newcastle.

When these and other improvements are complete, I can see journey times reduced below four hours.

But would that only be for starters?great b

If a 1970s-technology Intercity 225 train, admittedly running as a shortened train formation, could achieve a time of just under three-and-a-half hours for the 393.2 miles between Kings Cross and Edinburgh stations in September 1991, what could a modern Hitachi train do, if all of the improvements had been completed and perhaps half of the route could be run at 140 mph under the watchful eyes of full digital signalling and an experienced driver.

Consider.

  • London and York is nearly two hundred miles of fairly straight railway, that is ideal for high speed.
  • Current trains run the 393.2 miles in four hours 25 minutes, which is an average speed of 89 mph.
  • A train running at 89 mph would take two hours and fifteen minutes to cover 200 miles.
  • A train running at 125 mph would take one hour and thirty-six minutes to cover 200 miles.
  • A train running at 140 mph would take one hour and twenty-six minutes to cover 200 miles.

When Network Rail, Great British Railways or the Prime Minister renames the East Coast Main Line as High Speed East Coast, I think we can be sure that trains between London and Edinburgh will be able to achieve three-and-a-half hours between the two capitals.

High Speed Two is only promising three hours and forty-eight minutes.

What About LNER’s New Trains?

LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes, was written to explore the possibilities suggested by a short article in the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways.

There has been no sign of any order being placed, but Hitachi have moved on.

  • They are building the prototype of the Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery for testing on the Great Western Railway.
  • They have completed some of the Class 803 trains for East Coast Trains, which has now been renamed Lumo. These trains have a battery for hotel power in case of catenary failure, but no diesel engines.
  • They are building the Class 807 trains for Avanti West Coast, which appear to be designed for high speed and have no batteries or diesel engines.
  • The latest versions of the trains will have a reshaped nose. Is it more aerodynamic at high speeds?

It does seem that there is an emphasis on speed, better acceleration and efficiency.

  • Could the lessons learned be used to improve the performance of the existing trains?
  • Could a small high performance sub-fleet be created to run LNER’s Scottish services?

There are certainly possibilities, that would cut journey times between London and Edinburgh.

Conclusion

I can see the airlines flying between London and Edinburgh suffering a lot of collateral damage, as the two train companies slug it out.

 

September 10, 2021 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Electrification Between Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Station

Long term readers of this blog, will have noticed that I make regular references to this proposed electrification, that is part of High Speed Two’s proposals to connect Sheffield to the new high speed railway.

So I thought I would bring all my thoughts together in this post.

Connecting Sheffield To High Speed Two

Sheffield is to be accessed from a branch off the Main High Speed Two route to Leeds.

This map clipped from High Speed Two’s interactive map, shows the route of the Sheffield Branch, from where it branches North West from the main Eastern Leg of High Speed Two.

Note.

  1. Orange indicates new High Speed Two track.
  2. Blue indicates track that High Speed Two will share with other services.
  3. The orange route goes North to Leeds, along the M1
  4. The blue route goes North to Chesterfield and Sheffield, after skirting to the East of Clay Cross.
  5. The orange route goes South to East Midlands Hub station.

This second map, shows where the Erewash Valley Line joins the Sheffield Branch near the village of Stonebroom.

Note.

  1. Red is an embankment.
  2. Yellow is a cutting.
  3. The Sheffield Branch goes North-West to Clay Cross, Chesterfield and Sheffield
  4. The Sheffield Branch goes South-East to East Midlands Hub station.
  5. The Sheffield Branch goes through Doe Hill Country Park.
  6. The Sheffield Branch runs alongside the existing Erewash Valley Line, which goes South to Langley Mill, Ilkeston and the Derby-Nottingham area.

The Sheffield Branch and the Erewash Valley Line appear to share a route, which continues round Clay Cross and is shown in this third map.

Note

  1. Doe Hill Country Park is in the South-East corner of the map.
  2. The dark line running North-South is the A61.
  3. Running to the West of the A61 is the Midland Main Line, which currently joins the Erewash Valley Line at Clay Cross North junction.

High Speed Two and the Midland Main Line will share a route and/or tracks from Clay Cross North junction to Sheffield.

This fourth map, shows where the combined route joins the Hope Valley Line to Manchester to the South West of Sheffield.

Note.

  1. Sheffield is to the North East.
  2. Chesterfield is to the South East,
  3. Totley junction is a large triangular junction, that connects to the Hope Valley Line.

These are some timings for various sections of the route.

  • Clay Cross North Junction and Chesterfield (current) – 4 minutes
  • Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield (current) – 17 minutes
  • Chesterfield and Sheffield (current) – 13 minutes
  • Chesterfield and Sheffield (High Speed Two) – 13 minutes
  • East Midlands Hub and Chesterfield (High Speed Two) – 16 minutes
  • East Midlands Hub and Sheffield (High Speed Two) – 27 minutes

As Class Cross North Junction and Sheffield are 15.5 miles, this means the section is run at an average speed of 53 mph.

Can I draw any conclusions from the maps and timings?

  • There would appear to be similar current and High Speed Two timings between Chesterfield and Sheffield.
  • The various junctions appear to be built for speed.

The Midland Main Line will be electrified between Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield, so that High Speed Two trains can use the route.

What will be the characteristics of the tracks between Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield?

  • Will it be just two tracks as it mainly is now or will it be a multi-track railway to separate the freight trains from the high speed trains?
  • Will it have a high enough maximum speed, so that East Midland Railway’s new Class 810 trains can go at their maximum speed of 140 mph?
  • Will it be capable of handling a frequency of 18 tph, which is the maximum frequency of High Speed Two?

Surely, it will be built to a full High Speed Two standard to future-proof the line.

Current Passenger Services Between Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Station

These trains use all or part of the route between Cross North Junction And Sheffield stations.

  • CrossCountry – Plymouth and Edinburgh via Derby, Chesterfield, Sheffield and Leeds – 1 tph
  • East Midlands Railway – London St. Pancras and Sheffield via Derby and Chesterfield – 2 tph
  • East Midlands Railway – Liverpool Lime Street and Norwich via Stockport, The Hope Valley Line, Sheffield and Chesterfield – 1 tph
  • Northern Trains – Manchester Piccadilly and Sheffield via the Hope Valley Line – 1 tph
  • Northern Trains – Leeds and Nottingham via Meadowhall, Sheffield and Chesterfield – 1 tph
  • TransPennine Express – Manchester Airport and Cleethorpes via Stockport, the Hope Valley Line and Sheffield – 1 tph

Note.

  1. tph is trains per hour.
  2. High Speed Two is currently planning to run two tph to Sheffield, which will run between Cross North junction and Sheffield stations.
  3. The services on the Hope Valley Line run on electrified tracks at the Manchester end.

These services can be aggregated to show the number of trains on each section of track.

  • Hope Valley Line between Manchester and Totley junction – 3 tph
  • Totley junction and Sheffield station – 7 tph
  • Totley junction and Clay Cross North junction via Chesterfield – 4 tph

Adding in the High Speed Two services gives these numbers.

  • Hope Valley Line between Manchester and Totley junction – 3 tph
  • Totley junction and Sheffield station – 9 tph
  • Totley junction and Clay Cross North junction via Chesterfield – 6 tph

This report on the Transport for the North web site, is entitled At A Glance – Northern Powerhouse Rail. It states that Transport for the North’s aspirations for Manchester and Sheffield are four tph with a journey time of forty minutes.

Adding in the extra train gives these numbers.

  • Hope Valley Line between Manchester and Totley junction – 4 tph
  • Totley junction and Sheffield station – 10 tph
  • Totley junction and Clay Cross North junction via Chesterfield – 6 tph

This level of services can be accommodated on a twin-track railway designed to the right high speed standards.

Freight Services Between Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Station

The route is used by freight trains, with up to two tph on each of the three routes from Totley junction.

And these are likely to increase.

Tracks Between Clay Cross North Junction And Sheffield Station

I am absolutely certain, that two tracks between Clay Cross North junction And Sheffield station will not be enough, even if they are built to High Speed Two standards to allow at least 140 mph running under digital signalling.

Battery Electric Trains

The only battery-electric train with a partly-revealed specification is Hitachi’s Regional Battery Train, which is described in this Hitachi infographic.

Note.

  1. The train is a 100 mph unit.
  2. Ninety kilometres is fifty-six miles.

I would expect that battery-electric trains from other manufacturers like Alstom, CAF and Siemens would have similar performance on battery power.

In Thoughts On CAF’s Battery-Electric Class 331 Trains, I concluded CAF’s approach could give the following ranges.

  • Three-car battery-electric train with one battery pack – 46.7 miles
  • Four-car battery-electric train with one battery pack – 35 miles
  • Four-car battery-electric train with two battery packs – 70 miles

I was impressed.

These are my thoughts on battery-electric trains on the routes from an electrified Sheffield.

Adwick

Sheffield  and Adwick is 22.7 miles without electrification

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

If the battery range is sufficient, there may not need to be charging at Adwick.

Bridlington

Sheffield and Bridlington is 90.5 miles without electrification, except for a short section through Doncaster, where trains could top up batteries.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

But there would need to be a charging system at Hull, where the trains reverse.

An alternative would be to electrify Hull and Brough, which is just 10.4 miles and takes about twelve minutes.

Derby Via The Midland Main Line

Clay Cross North junction and Derby is 20.9 miles without electrification.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

Gainsborough Central

Sheffield  and Gainsborough Central is 33.6 miles without electrification

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

But there will need to be a charging system at Gainsborough Central.

Huddersfield Via The Penistone Line

This is a distance of 36.4 miles with electrification at both ends, after the electrification between Huddersfield and Westtown is completed.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

Hull

Sheffield and Hull is 59.4 miles without electrification, except for a short section through Doncaster, where trains could top up batteries.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

But there will probably need to be a charging system at Hull.

An alternative would be to electrify Hull and Brough, which is just 10.4 miles and takes about twelve minutes.

Leeds Via The Hallam Or Wakefield Lines

This is a distance of 40-45 miles with electrification at both ends.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

Lincoln

Sheffield and Lincoln Central is 48.5 miles without electrification

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

But there will probably need to be a charging system at Lincoln Central.

Manchester Via The Hope Valley Line

This is a distance of forty-two miles with electrification at both ends.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

Nottingham

Clay Cross North junction and Nottingham is 25.1 miles without electrification

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

But there may need to be a charging system at Nottingham.

York

This is a distance of 46.4 miles with electrification at both ends.

I am sure that battery-electric trains can handle this route.

Is London St. Pancras And Sheffield Within Range Of Battery-Electric Trains?

In the previous section, I showed that it would be possible to easily reach Derby, as Clay Cross North junction and Derby is 20.9 miles without electrification.

  • Current plans include electrifying the Midland Main Line as far North as Market Harborough.
  • Market Harborough is 82.8 miles from London St. Pancras
  • Derby is 128.3 miles from London St. Pancras

So what would be the best way to cover the 45.5 miles in the middle?

One of the best ways would surely be to electrify between Derby and East Midlands Parkway stations.

  • Derby and East Midlands Parkway stations are just 10.2 miles apart.
  • Current services take around twelve-fourteen minutes to travel between the two stations, so it would be more than enough time to charge a battery-electric train.
  • Power for the electrification should not be a problem, as Radcliffe-on-Soar power station is by East Midlands Parkway station. Although the coal-fired power station will soon be closed, it must have a high class connection to the electricity grid.
  • The East Midlands Hub station of High Speed Two will be built at Toton between Derby and Nottingham and will have connections to the Midland Main Line.
  • An electrified spur could connect to Nottingham station.

I have flown my virtual helicopter along the route and found the following.

  • Three overbridges that are not modern and built for large containers and electrification.
  • Two level crossings.
  • One short tunnel.
  • Two intermediate stations.
  • Perhaps half-a-dozen modern footbridges designed to clear electrification.

I’ve certainly seen routes that would be much more challenging to electrify.

I wonder if gauge clearance has already been performed on this key section of the Midland Main Line.

If this section were to be electrified, the sections of the Midland Main Line between London St. Pancras and Sheffield would be as follows.

  • London St. Pancras and Market Harborough – Electrified – 82.8 miles
  • Market Harborough and East Midlands Parkway – Not Electrified – 35.3 miles
  • East Midlands Parkway and Derby – Electrified – 10.2 miles
  • Derby and Clay Cross North junction – Not Electrified – 20.9 miles
  • Clay Cross North junction and Sheffield – Electrified – 15.5 miles

Note.

  1. The World Heritage Site of the Derwent Valley Mills is not electrified, which could ease the planning.
  2. Leicester station with its low bridge, which could be difficult to electrify, has not been electrified.
  3. Under thirty miles of electrification will allow battery-electric trains to run between London St. Pancras and Sheffield, provided they had a range on batteries of around forty miles.

Probably, the best way to electrify between East Midlands Parkway and Derby might be to develop a joint project with High Speed Two, that combines all the power and other early works for East Midlands Hub station, with the electrification between the two stations.

Will The Class 810 Trains Be Converted To Battery-Electric Operation?

Hitachi’s Class 8xx trains tend to be different, when it comes to power. These figures relate to five-car trains.

  • Class 800 train – 3 x 560 kW diesel engines
  • Class 801 train – 1 x 560 kW diesel engine
  • Class 802 train – 3 x 700 kW diesel engines
  • Class 803 train – All electric – No diesel and an emergency battery
  • Class 805 train – 3 x 700 kW diesel engines (?)
  • Class 807 train – All electric – No diesel or emergency battery
  • Class 810 train – 4 x 700 kW diesel engines (?)

Note.

  1. These figures relate to five-car trains.
  2. Class 807 train are seven-car trains.
  3. Where there is a question mark (?), the power has not been disclosed.
  4. Hitachi use two sizes of diesel engine; 560 kW and 700 kW.

It was generally thought with the Class 810 train to be used on the Midland Main Line, will be fitted with four engines to be able to run at 125 mph on diesel.

But are they 560 kW or 700 kW engines?

  • A Class 802 train has an operating speed of 110 mph on diesel, with 2100 kW of installed power.
  • To increase speed, the power will probably be related to something like the square of the speed.

So crudely the power required for 125 mph would be 2100*125*125/110/110, which works out at 2712 kW.

Could this explain why four engines are fitted? And why they are 700 kW versions?

Interestingly, I suspect, Hitachi’s five-car trains have two more or less identical driver cars, except for the passenger interiors, for the efficiency of manufacturing and servicing.

So does that mean, that a fifth engine could be fitted if required?

There probably wouldn’t be a need for five diesel engines, but as I also believe that the Hyperdrive Innovation battery packs for these trains are plug-compatible with the diesel engines, does that mean that Hitachi’s trains can be fitted with five batteries?

Suppose you wanted to run a Class 810 train at 125 mph to clear an electrification gap of forty miles would mean the following.

  • It would take 0.32 hours or 19.2 minutes to cross the gap.
  • In that time 2800 kW of diesel engines would generate 896 kWh.
  • So to do the same on batteries would need a total battery capacity of 896 kWh.
  • If all diesel engines were replaced, each battery would need to be 224 kWh

A battery of this size is not impractical and probably weighs less than the at least four tonnes of the diesel engine it replaces.

Conclusions

Electrification between Clay Cross North Junction and Sheffield station is an important project that enables the following.

  • A high proportion of diesel services to and from Sheffield to be converted to battery-electric power.
  • With electrification between Derby and East Midlands Parkway, it enables 125 mph battery-electric trains to run between London St. Pancras and Sheffield.
  • It prepares Sheffield for High Speed Two.

It should be carried out as soon as possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

September 5, 2021 Posted by | Transport | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Dwell Time On High Speed Two Trains

This document on the Government web site is the Train Technical Specification for High Speed Two trains.

There is a Section 7.15.6, which is entitled Dwell Time

This is said.

The Unit shall deliver 95% confidence of achieving a Dwell Time of 2 minutes at intermediate stations, calculated in accordance with the Static Dwell Time Model in Appendix I using the 1SL.

The rationale is also given.

Achievement of a two-minute Dwell Time is key to achievement of HS2 railway capacity and journey times.

The Static Dwell Time Model evaluates the key architectural elements of the interior layout that impact the Passenger exchange part of Dwell Time.

Dwell time is mentioned many times in the Technical Specification.

There is a Section 9.7.3.4, which is entitled Train Captain Changeover Time

This is said.

The Unit shall facilitate a changeover of Train Captains within a two-minute Dwell Time.

In this time period there shall be time for the exiting Train Captain to:

    • Release and opening doors.
    • Log out of the Cab
    • Exit the Cab and Unit.

In this time period there shall be time for the entering Train Captain to:

    • Enter the Unit and Cab
    • Log in to the Cab
    • Adjust Cab setting to the Train Captain’s personal preferences
    • Fulfil the Train Captain’s role in closing doors, which does not include checking the PTI.

Note how all these actions must be performed in a two-minute dwell time.

The Technical Specification is certainly very detailed.

August 26, 2021 Posted by | Design, Transport | , | 4 Comments

ATO Stop and Safe Location On High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains

This document on the Government web site is the Train Technical Specification for High Speed Two trains.

There is a Section 8.6.2, which is entitled ATO Stop and Safe Location

This is said.

ATO Stop is an additional function compared to the ATO over ETCS SRS. The purpose of
this function is to enable the Train Captain to command the Train to stop at the next Safe
Location. A Safe Location is a pre-defined location on the HS2 Network where Trains can
wait safely, and evacuation can be carried out if necessary. If it is not necessary to make an
emergency brake application, this enables more control of where Trains make un-planned
stops.

Perhaps all vehicles on motorways need to be fitted with a similar system.

August 26, 2021 Posted by | Transport | , , | 2 Comments

The Cross-Section Of A High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Train

This document on the Government web site is the Train Technical Specification for High Speed Two trains.

There is a Section 7.14.3, which is entitled Maximum Cross Section

This is said.

The Unit shall have a maximum cross-section of 11m².

The rationale is also given.

HS2 interface – This maximum cross-section has been used in the design of the tunnels.
HS2’s gauging analysis has shown that a Vehicle compatible with the CRN infrastructure will probably
have a cross-section closer to 10m²

A Class 800 train is 2.70 metres wide, so if a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train is the same width, the height based on the 10m² figure will be around 3.7 metres or about the same as an Electrostar.

The next  section 7.14.4 gives an interesting piece of information.

Tunnels on the HS2 Network include porous tunnel portals in the infrastructure design to mitigate the adverse effects of micro-pressure waves. Therefore it will not be necessary to include micro-pressure wave mitigation features in the Unit design.

Interesting that they are tackling what is best described as tunnel-plop in the design of the tunnels, rather than catering for it on the train. I wrote about this in HS2 Way Out In Front In Tunnel Design For High-Speed Rail.

August 26, 2021 Posted by | Design, Transport | , | 1 Comment