The Stadler Data Sheet For A Class 777 IPEMU
This data sheet is now available on the Stadler web site.
These are my observations.
Battery Charging
The datasheet says this about battery charging.
While an IPEMU is running on the electrified network, the batteries can be charged from the third rail, as well as through regenerative braking.
I’m glad to see the trains have regenerative braking, which in a train with frequent stops saves electricity.
Battery Charging Time
The datasheet says this about battery charging time.
IPEMUs can be recharged in less than 15 minutes.
That time compares favourably with Hitachi’s time.
Expected Battery Life
The datasheet says this about expected battery life.
The IPEMU battery can undergo more than 10,000 charge/discharge cycles, which is about four times the lifetime of a battery used in EVs.
Stadler also give the battery a minimum expected life of eight years.
Transition Between Electrification And Battery
The datasheet says this about this important transition.
Transition between electrified and non-electrified networks without interruption, reducing travel times.
Stadler certainly do the changeover from electric to diesel smoothly on a Class 755 train.
A Comparison To Tesla
This is a paragraph in the introduction of the data sheet.
The battery/vehicle weight-ratio of a Tesla is about 25 per cent, while the ratio of the IPEMU is only about 6 per cent.
I suspect the rolling resistance, is also a lot less, than the rolling resistance of a Tesla, due to the superior properties of steel wheels on rail, as opposed to rubber tyres on road.
Battery Range
The data sheet gives the following.
- Installed battery capacity – 320 KWh
- Maximum speed (IPEMU mode) – 62 mph
- Range in battery operation – 34 miles
- Maximum demonstrated range – 84 miles
Note.
- I would assume the 55 km given for range on the datasheet is a guaranteed range.
- The maximum demonstrated range is from New Merseyrail Train Runs 135km On Battery.
- All other figures are from the datasheet.
In an article in the October 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled Celling England By The Pound, Ian Walmsley says this in relation to trains running on the Uckfield Branch, which is not very challenging.
A modern EMU needs between 3 and 5 kWh per vehicle mile for this sort of service.
I don’t think the terrain of Merseyrail’s services are much different from the Uckfield branch, so what are the figures for the Class 777 trains on battery power?
- 55 km range – 2.353 kWh per vehicle mile
- 135 km range – 0.952 kWh per vehicle mile
The train appears to be very miserly with electricity.
But if the attention to detail in the electrical system of the train is of the standard of a Swiss watch, I don’t think they are unreasonable.
Operation With 25 kV Overhead Electrification
The datasheet says nothing about this, but the Wikipedia entry for the Class 777 train says this under Design.
Because current regulatory policy makes it unlikely that future extensions of Merseyrail’s unshielded third rail traction power supply will be approved, Class 777 units will be delivered with provision for the future installation of 25 kV 50 Hz AC overhead line traction equipment.
This is probably needed for charging at locations without third-rail electrification.
The Seat Of Aurora
The title of this post, is the same as that of an article in the August 2021 Edition of Modern Railway.
The article has this sub-title.
East Midlands Railway has finalised the new seats for its new trains, and they’re completely useless – as ironing boards.
Note.
- East Midlands Railway‘s new trains are Class 810 trains, which are Hitachi AT300 express trains, as used by several operators.
- Some passengers and industry commentators have criticised the seats in these trains as like ironing boards.
- Abellio Greater Anglia, who are a sister company to East Midlands Railway, also choose the seats for their new trains with care. I wrote No ‘Ironing Board seats’ For Greater Anglia’s New Trains, about their seat choice.
Ian Walmsley, who wrote the article for Modern Railways says this about the Seat of Aurora.
My verdict is that it is a good seat, and that is in absolute terms – not just saying it is better than an 800, which it would have to be really.
For myself, the proof of the seating will be in the sitting.
Third Degree Murder
The title of this post is the same as that of an article by Ian Walmsley in the April 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.
In the article Ian has a heavyweight go at the Office of Road and Rail about their policy towards third rail electrification.
As a Control and Electrical Engineer, I agree with a lot he says, especially as I believe modern control systems and good design can improve safety of third rail systems to a high level.
I also believe the following.
- In some places third-rail electrification, which is only live when a train is protecting the rails from morons, is safer than any other electrification system.
- In some places, like on top of high viaducts third-rail electrification is safer for engineers installing and maintaining it, than overhead electrification.
- Some battery charging systems will be designed around third-rail electrification.
Ian’s article gives various reasons for using third-rail electrification.
He also proposes the radical innovation of using a voltage of 1500 VDC, which he calls 2XV.
I like it and agree with his reasoning..
It sounds radical, but it is not a new idea.
An article on Wikipedia is entitled Rail Transport In The Netherlands.
This is said.
Most of the network is electrified at 1.5 kV DC (which limits interoperability with neighbouring countries), although Belgian trains – built for 3 kV DC – can run on the Dutch network at reduced power. Both the HSL-Zuid and the Betuweroute have been electrified at 25 kV AC; although conversion of existing electrified lines to 25 kV AC was considered in 1997, 2005 and 2012 at a cost of over €10 billion, a 2015 proposal (revised in 2017) is to convert to 3 kV DC at a 2017 cost of €1 billion. The higher DC voltage would reduce power losses and have faster acceleration above 60 to 70 kilometres per hour (37 to 43 mph), so stopping trains would save seven to 20 seconds per stop.
Are the Dutch implementing their proposal?
We Should All Think Radically!
In the August 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, Ian Walmsley, who is a writer, that I respect, thinks radically about how to upgrade or replace the High Speed Trains on the Midland Main Line.
He has a lot of experience in the rail industry and his views in this issue, are probably worth the price of the magazine alone.
He feels the InterCity 125s should be replaced as you can only make-do-and-mend for so long and he proposes replacing them with a modern equivalent, which would initially be two diesel locomotives topping and tailing a rake of new coaches, and then if electrification happens, the diesels are replaced with electric units.
Ian’s article comes a few days after this article in Rail Technology Magazine, entitled New bi-mode fleet a requirement for East Midlands as consultation opens, was published.
This is the first paragraph.
The DfT has this week launched its public consultation on the new East Midlands franchise, including specifications for a new bi-mode fleet of intercity trains, whilst at the same time revealing that plans to electrify the Midland Main Line north of Kettering have been abandoned.
There is going to have to be a lot of radical thinking to get a solution for that.
To make the replacement harder, Ian indicates various problems, which I won’t disclose here.
But I do think Ian’s idea is sound and it could be the solution to the problem of running modern 125 mph trains from St. Pancras to Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield.
So How Feasible Is Ian’s Plan?
Maths and physics don’t change. so I suspect that the calculations done by Terry Miller and his team in the 19670s, which led to the iconic InterCity 125 are still valid.
Locomotive Haulage
The power output of each Class 43 power car is 2,250 hp, so to propel an appropriate number of new carriages, you still need a locomotive at each end of the train.
The most modern diesel locomotive in the UK is the Stadler-built Class 68 locomotive, which has a power voutput of 3,800 hp, but a top speed of only 100 mph. The only 125 mph diesel locomotive in the UK is the Class 67 locomotive. To complicate matters, there is also the Stadler-built Class 88 locomotive, which is a 100 mph electro-diesel locomotive, but this locomotive is more a powerful electric locomotive with a sensible-sized last-mile diesel engine.
Ian suggests, that as the Class 68 is a few tonnes lighter than the Class 67, that a 125 mph Class 68/2 locomotive would be possible.
I don’t disagree, but given the quality of railway engineering coming out of companies like Bombardier, CAF and Stadler, that someone will do better.
We should also consider that the UK will need more than a few new freight locomotives in the next few years, as they do seem to be scratching around for motive power, as this picture shows.
These two Class 86 locomotives date from the mid-1960s. But they do have around 3,600 hp each and a top speed of around 100-110 mph.
I even saw this interesting combination at Shenfield.
The Class 90 and Class 66 locomotives appear to be double-heading the heavy freight train. The Class 90, of which several will become available soon from Greater Anglia are 5,000 hp units with a top speed of 110 mph, whereas the ubiquitous Class 66 has only 3,300 hp and 75 mph.
With more and more long freight trains appearing on increasingly busy main lines, these freight trains must be becoming unwelcome to the companies running passenger trains and also to those, who live alongside the lines.
So is there another desperate need for a powerful locomotive to pull express freight trains at maximum length and weight around the country?
Some main freight routes like these are electrified with 25 KVAC overhead wires or will be soon.
- East Coast Main Line
- West Coast Main Line
- Greast Eastern Main Line
- Great Western Main Line
- North London Line
- Gospel Oak to Barking Line
But others are not.
- London to Southampton
- Felixstowe to Peterborough and The Midlands
- Peterborough to Doncaster via Lincoln
- Trans-Pennine Routes
And that’s just for starters.
I think it becomes obvious, why Direct Rail Services and Stadler came up with the Class 88 locomotive. The 5,300 hp available under the wires is more than adequate for the heaviest express intermodel freight train and the 1,000 hp under diesel can probably move the train into and out of the docks.
But this amount of diesel power is probably inadequate for hauling a heavy freight train at 100 mph.
A New Electro-Diesel Locomotive
So could we see a new electro-diesel locomotive with the following characteristics?
- The ability of a pair to top-and-tail an express passenger train on both diesel and 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
- The ability to haul the heaviest intermodal freight trains at up to 100 mph on both diesel and 25 KVAC overhead electrification.
- The ability to switch between modes at line speed.
- Regenerative braking underboth elkectricity and diesel.
In a few years time the diesel might be replaced by hydrogen or some other exotic fuel.
Electrification South Of Bedford
It might appear that these locomotives if working the Midland Main Line could switch to electric power South of Bedford or in the near future; Kettering, but the electrification is limited to 100 mph and there is no planned upgrade. This is a familiar story for anybody like me who uses the Great Eastern Main Line, where the inadequate electrification has had to be upgraded over the last couple of years to allow faster services.
The Coaches
The coaches are the least of the problems for Ian’s proposals.
This article on Rail Technology Magazine is entitled First bodyshell completed by CAF for new TPE fleet.
This is the first paragraph.
Pictures of the first bodyshell for new rolling stock to be used by TransPennine Express (TPE) have been unveiled as the operator looks to introduce 13 five-car Mark 5A Coaches – being built by Spanish company CAF – as part of its brand-new fleet.
The Mark 5A coaches, being built by CAF are designed for 125 mph! So all that is needed is to specify the interior!
As the Spanish train manufacturer has just announced the building of a factory at Llanwern in South Wales, that might be an ideal place to build the coaches needed.
Beating The PRM Deadline In 2020
The Mark 5A coaches for TransPennine Express are scheduled for delivery in 2018-2019, so I suspect the coaches for the Midland Main Line could start to be delivered after the TransPennine Express and Caledonian Sleeper orders are complete.
The locomotives might be move problematical, but if they are a derivative of an existing type, then surely this wouldn’t delay fleet introduction.
I suspect that a certain amount of testing can be done in parallel too!
So having some trains in service by the PRM eadline of 2020 could certainly be possible.
Conclusion
Ian Walmsley’s proposal for the next Midland Main Line franchise is possible.
CAF Rarely Do The Obvious, But It’s Generally Sound
This article on the BBC is entitled 300 Train Building jobs Created At £30m Newport Centre.
This is the first two paragraphs.
Three hundred “highly-skilled and well paid” engineering jobs will be created when a Spanish train manufacturer opens a production factory in Newport.
Construcciones y Auxiliar de Ferrocarriles (CAF) is expected to open its £30m centre where Llanwern Steelworks once stood in autumn 2018.
Currently CAF are supplying the following trains and trams for the UK.
- Urbos trams for the Midland Metro and the Edinburgh Trams.
- Mark 5 sleeping cars for the Caledonian Sleeper
- Mark 5A coaches for TransPennine Express
- Class 397 trains for TransPennine Express
- Class 195 trains for Northern
- Class 331 trains for Northern
The trains alone add up to nearly five hundred vehicles.
If you look at the geography of the sea routes between the Basque Country and the United Kingdom, taking a cargo ship with a few trains to South Wales is probably not the most difficult or indirect of voyages.
Newport too, is on the South Wales Main Line, which is well connected all over England, by lines that should be electrified and will hopefully be by 2019.
This Google Map shows the Celtic Business Park in relation to Newport and its docks.
The Celtic Business Park is part of the massive rectangular site to the North East of Newport, that is the Llanwern steelworks, which is being downsized. The South Wales Main Line passes along the North side of the site and the map clearly shows access to Newport Docks.
It raises the question that CAF may bring the trains in on their wheels in a specialist train ferry.
I know nothing about how much preparation needs to be performed on a foreign-built train, before it can run on the UK rail network, but it would be expected that just checking the five hundred vehicles must keep quite a few employees busy. I suppose too, that if certain parts of the train were sourced from the UK, that instead of sending them to Spain, they could be fitted in Newport.
It should also be remembered, that Hitachi build their body-shells in Japan and then ship them to Newton Aycliffe for fitting out.
Although, the Welsh and the Basques are two nations with strong cultural ties; rugby included, I think that Newport was chosen with another very practical reason in mind.
In the May 2016 Edition of Modern Railways, Ian Walmsley, wrote an article called Metroland Of My Fathers, which included these paragraphs.
Back in the November 2013 issue of Modern Railways I raised the possibility of converting the Cardiff network to light rail. I was still working for Porterbrook at the time, which, like other rolling stock companies (ROSCOs), saw the Valleys as a retirement home for its old London commuter trains, so when the proposal met with the response it’s heavy rail and that’s that, I was quite happy.
The local press and BBC Wales showed more interest and now I am delighted to say that Network Rail has the Valley Lines electrification ‘on hold’ pending re-evaluation.
Consider the following.
- Urbos trams come in a variety of shapes and sizes.
- Trams are getting better every year at climbing hills.
- The Urbos family includes the Urbos TT, which is a tram-train.
- Midland Metro’s trams are being fitted with energy storage using supercapacitors
- How much marketing advantage for other places, is gained from having Edinburgh and Cardiff on the customer list?
- Conversion could probably be done on a line-by-line basis.
- Provision must be made for freight trains on some lines.
- Cardiff and the Valley Lines were resignalled in the last few years and everything is controlled from Cardiff ROC
But remember that CAF are a very research and design-oriented company.
So what is the likelihood that the Cardiff Valley Lines will be converted to light rail using a CAF product?
I would say pretty high, especially after reading this article in Global Rail News, which is entitled Engineering Firm BWB Consulting Bought By Spanish Giant CAF.
I could see a design of rail vehicle with these features.
- The ability to work on standard rail track.
- The ability to give level step-free access to standard height rail station platforms.
- The ability to use modern railway signalling.
- The ability to climb steep gradients.
- The ability to work on both 25 KVAC and 750 VDC overhead.
- Automatic pantograph raising and lowering.
- Supercapacitor energy storage.
- Regenerative braking.
I could see an energy-saving vehicle being designed, that made clever use of the gradients.
Would it be a train or a tram-train?
Increasingly, the difference is getting blurred!
Why Can’t A Train Be More Like A Tram?
This is the title of a two-part article by Ian Walmsley in the May 2017 edition of Modern Railways.
Part 1 – How Hard Can It Be?
In the First Part, which is entitled How Hard Can It Be?, he contrasts tram operation with typical heavy rail operation.
He starts the First Part with this paragraph.
After a career in trains, I wish they could be more like trams, at least for the short-distance commuting market. Big windows, low-back seats, super-cool looking front ends, terrific acceleration and braking, all at half the price. Meanwhile commuter trains are bogged down with legislation, defensive driving and restrictive practice.
He also compares trams and heavy rail with the London Underground, which has the frequency and speed of a tram to get the needed capacity. This is another quote.
Heavy-rail’s answer to capacity is to take a few seats out or declassify a First Class compartment, going faster is too difficult.
These points are also made.
- A turn-up-and-go frequency is made possible by a continuous stream of trams doing the same thing, uninterrupted by inter-city or freight intruders.
- Frequent stops on a tram mean rapid acceleration is essential, so a high proportion of axles must be motored.
- In many heavy rail services, the culture of caution has removed any urgency from the process.
- Separation of light from heavy rail is essential for safety reasons.
- Trams can take tight corners which helps system designers.
- Trams save money by driving on sight.
- Lots of safety regulations apply to heavy rail,but not trams.
He also uses a lot of pictures from the Bordeaux trams, which I wrote about in Bordeaux’s Trams. These trams run catenary-free in the City Centre.
High-Cacapity Cross-City Heavy Rail Lines
It is interesting to note that cross-city heavy rail lines are getting to the following ideals.
- High frequency of upwards of sixteen trains per hour (tph).
- High-capacity trains
- Heavy-rail standards of train and safety.
- Slightly lower levels of passenger comfort.
- Step-free access.
- Several stops in the City Centre.
- Interchange with trams, metros and other heavy rail services.
- Separation from freight services.
- Separation from most inter-city services.
Have the best features of a tram line been added to heavy rail?
Worldwide, these lines include.
- Leipzig – S-Bahn Mitteldeutschland
- Liverpool – Merseyrail Northern Line
- London – Crossrail
- London – East London Line
- London – Thameslink
- Paris – RER
There are obviously others.
Crossrail with up to 30 tph, platform edge doors, fast stopping and accelerating Class 345 trains, and links to several main lines from London could become the world standard for this type of heavy rail link.
30 tph would be considered average for the London Underground and modern signalling improvements and faster stopping trains, will raise frequencies on these cross-city lines.
All of these lines have central tunnels, but this isn’t a prerequisite.
Manchester is achieving the same objective of a high-capacity cross-city rail link with the Ordsall Chord.
Part 2 – Tram-Train, Are You Sure You Really Wnt |To Do This?,
In the Second Part, which is entitled Tram-Train, Are You Sure You Really Wnt |To Do This?,
Ian starts the Second Part with this paragraph.
Anyone with a professional interest in public transport must have been to Karlsruhe in Germany, or at least heard of it.
He then wittily describes an encounter with the diesel tram-train in Nordhausen, which I shall be visiting within a week or so.
He was not impressed!
I like the concept of a tram-train, where the same rail vehicle starts out in the suburbs or the next town as a train, goes through the City Centre as a tram and then goes to a destination on the other side of the city.
But you could also argue that Merseyrail’s Northern Line and London Underground’s Piccadilly and Central Lines achieve the same purpose, by running at all times as a rail line, with the centre section in a tunnel under the City.
The Sheffield Tram-Train Project
Ian then goes on to talk about the Sheffield Tram-Train Project. He says this about the route extension from Meadowhall to Rotherham.
This route extension runs just over three miles and after a series of delays, it will not open until 2018, 10 years, after the first proposal, six after the scheme approval. The cost is £58million. That’s 21 million Rotherham – Meadowhall single fares, for which the existing journey time is six minutes. Bargain.
He also says that because Nick Clegg was a Sheffield MP, the project should stay in Sheffield.
I will add some observations of my own on the Sheffield -Rotherham tram-train.
- The Class 399 tram-train is a variant of the tram-trains used in Karlsruhe – Good
- The route, doesn’t connect to Sheffield station – Bad
- The frequency is only a miserly three tph – Bad
- The route is too short – Bad
Hopefully, the bad points don’t result in a system that nobody wants.
The Expert View Of Rotherham’s Problems
There is an article in the Yorkshire Post, which is entitled Rotherham could get new rail station, which gives detail from a consutant’s report of how to improve services in the town.
- Rotherham Parkgate station should be developed as an inter-regional station, at a cost of up to £53.2 million
- Rotherham Central station would be be more about local services.
- Rotherham should have one tph to Leeds and Manchester, three tph to Doncaster and six tph to Sheffield.
The consultant’s estimate was that this investment could benefit the area by up to £100million.
Ian’s Conclusion
Ian says this and I am coming to agree with him.
I, like many others, have been a fan of tram-train, but a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
The more I think about it, the more I think trams and trains have their place and mixing them up is fraught with problems.
As I said earlier, I’m off to Karlsruhe ad I’ll see how they’re getting on with the enormous hole in their budget; the new tunnel on the Karleruhe Stadtbahn.
Imagine building a cut-and-cover down Oxford Street in London.
Train Like A Tram
Ian finishes with two further sections, the first of which is Train Like A Tram.
He says this.
Heavy rail needs to recaspture a sense of urgency and realise that more speed = more trains = more capacity. Risk analysis should allow the use of low-back seats and plastics; based on the lower average speeds. All axles need to be motored for tram-like acceleration and lots of regenerative braking.
I agree with what he says, but I’m surprised that he doesn’t mention Zwickau.
In that German town, an extension was built from the Hauptbahnhof to a new station in the town centre. I wrote about Zwickau’s unique system in Riding The Vogtlandbahn
Standard two-car diesel multiple units, run alongside Zwickau’s trams on a dedicated route according to similar operational rules on the three kilometre route.
Surely, there is scope to do this in the UK, on existing and new branch lines or spurs.
- The route must be short.
- All stops would be built like tram stops.
- Trains would be independently-powered by diesel, battery or fuel cell.
- Signalling would be heavy-rail.
In my view this sort of system would be ideal for serving Glasgow, Leeds-Bradford and Liverpool Airports, where off main line running would be done across open country that could be appropriately fenced.
Tram Like A Train
Ian finishes his final section, where he talks about the likelihood of more tram-train systems following Sheffield, with this.
I suspect that the number of follow-on vehicles in the foreseeable future will be about the same as the number of battery EMUs based on the last research trial.
Don’t feel too bad though; do we really want the national rail system full of 50 mph-limited trams?
I feel that Ian and myself would have different views about battery EMUs.
What Do You Do With A Problem Like Rotherham?
I mentioned a consultant’s report earlier and the easiest way to get their recommended frequency of trains through Rotherham would be to expand the electrification network, by wiring the following lines.
- Sheffield to Doncaster
- Leeds to Colton Junction
- Leeds to Selby
- Fitzwilliam to Sheffield
As some of these lines were built or rebuilt recently for the Selby Coalfield, I suspect electrification would be starting from decent documentatyion.
Until the electrification is complete Class 319 Flex trains could work the routes.
Modern Trains From Old
In the February 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, there are several articles about the updating of old trains to a modern standard.
- Class 321 trains being given a Renatus treatment.
- Class 319 trains being converted into a bi-mode Class 319 Flex.
- Class 220, 221 and 222 trains being converted to bi-modes.
There was also an article about the revival of locomotive hauled trains called Long Live The Loco!
The Class 321 Renatus
Note the following about the Class 321 trains.
- There are a total of 117 of the four-car trains.
- ,The trains have a 100 mph capability.
- Many of them are in need of a refurbishment after nearly thirty years in service.
So train leasing company; Eversholt, has come up with a plan to create thirty Class 321 Renatus for Greater Anglia as a stop-gap until their new Aventras arrive in a couple of years time.
The updated trains will feature.
- New air-conditioning and heating systems
- New, safer seating throughout
- Larger vestibules for improved boarding and alighting
- Wi-Fi enabled for passengers and operator
- Improved space allocation for buggies, bicycles and luggage
- Passenger power sockets throughout
- New, energy efficient lighting
- One PRM compliant toilet and a second controlled emission toilet on each unit
- Complete renewal and remodelling of all interior surfaces
The trains will also be given an updated traction package, which is described on this page on the Vossloh Kiepe web site.
This is said.
In 2013, Eversholt Rail and Vossloh Kiepe embarked on the pre-series project to demonstrate modern AC traction on a Class 321 unit. The key objectives were to reduce journey time for passengers, improve reliability and maintainability, and reduce the total cost of operation through a combination of reduced energy consumption and regenerative braking.
The prototype certainly looks good in the pictures.
Eversholt is stated as believing that if the market likes these trains, then other operators could be interested and other trains might be converted.
The Class 319 Flex
I like this concept and I wrote about the Class 319 Flex in Porterbrook Launch A Tri-Mode Train.
I felt one of the first routes would to be to Windermere and Modern Railways says the same.
Northern are quoted as saying, that after the concept is proven, the trains will be made available to a wide range of operators.
Consider.
- There are 86 of the four-car units.
- They are 100 mph trains.
- They are Mark 3-based, so ride well.
- They can work on 750 VDC or 25 KVAC electrification.
- With diesel alternators, they can go virtually anywhere.
If the trains are a success, I think we’ll be very surprised as to the routes they work.
I also think that Porterbrook could keep a small fleet ready for immediate lease for the purposes, like the following.
- Proving the economics of new routes.
- Blockade busting.
- Extra capacity for special events.
- Replacement capacity after train problems or accidents.
I suspect Porterbrook have got lots of ideas. Some of which could be quite wacky!
Bi-Modus Operandi
This is the title of an article by Ian Walmsley in the magazine, who makes the case for adding an extra coach with a pantograph to the Class 220, 221 and 222 and effectively creating a bi-mode train.
The idea is not new and I wrote about it in The Part-Time Electric Train, after a long editorial comment in Modern Railways in 2010.
If anything, the case for convcersion is even better now, as quality high-speed bi-mode trains are desperately needed.
As the article suggests, they could sort out some of the other problems with the trains.
There are quite a few suitable trains.
- Class 220 trains – 34 trains of four cars.
- Class 221 trains – 43 trains of a mix of four and five cars.
- Class 222 trains – 27 trains of a mix of four, five and seven cars.
All are 125 mph trains.
The Vivarail Class 230 Train
The magazine also has an extensive report on the fire in a Class 230 train.
The report says that the definitive report will be published before the end of January, but on reading the detailed report of the damage, I think it will be some months before the rebuilt train is ready to roll.
In a post entitled Class 230 And Class 319 Flex Fight It Out, I came to this conclusion.
Vivarail will have a struggle to sell large numbers of trains, against a larger, faster, more capable train of proven reliability.
I stand by what I said.
Long Live The Loco!
This article describes the various uses of locomotive-hauled passenger trains on the UK rail network.
The title could be read another way, as it talks about the following locomotives.
- Class 37 locomotive – Built 1960-65
- Class 47 locomotive – Built 1962-68
- Class 68 locomotive – Built 2013-present
- Class 73 locomotive – Built 1962-67
- Class 90 locomotive – Built 1987-90
- Class 91 locomotive – Built 1988-91
- Class 92 locomotive – Built 1993-96
Some could not be considered modern, but they perform.
The article goes on to detail how TransPennine Express will use their new Mark 5A carriages.
- Wikipedia says each set will be composed of 1 first class car, 2 Standard class cars, 1 brake standard class car and a standard class driving trailer.
- Sets will be able to be lengthened if required.
- The trains will be worked push-pull between a Class 68 locomotive and a driving trailer.
- The coaches will have a 125 mph design speed for future-proofing reasons.
It is also said, that a Class 88 locomotive is not powerful enough under diesel power to operate on the TransPennine route.
So the article speculates, that there may be a place for a bi-mode locomotive with full diesel capability, given the success of the Hitachi bi-mode concept.
The article finishes by saying that as Chiltern and TransPennine have shown that push-pull operation is viable, could the concept become more widespread?
Would High-Speed Trains With Onboard Energy Storage Enable Environmentally-Friendly High-Speed Lines?
If you stand on the platform at Stratford International station, when a Eurostar Class 373 train comes through, it is a very noisy experience.
For this and other reasons high-speed trains usually have their own fenced-off tracks, well away from centres of population.
High-speed trains like Eurostar tend to have a journey profile, where they accelerate to line speed and then run at this speed, until they stop at the next station.
High speed lines are also designed, so that trains don’t lose energy on gradients and curves for energy efficiency.
I’d love to see an energy use profile for a modern high-speed train like a Class 374 train, as it goes from London to Paris.
Onboard energy storage is rather primitive today, but who’s to know how far the next generation of battery technology will take a train in say ten years time.
Say a high speed train has to go through an area that is highly-sensitive with respect to visual and/or audio intrusion!
If the section was not electrified, which would cut the visual intrusion to just the trains passing through and reduce the pantograph noise to zero, how far would a mix of battery power and the kinetic energy of the train power it until it could get electric power on the other side of the electrification gap?
We could be closer than anybody thinks to the use of batteries on high-speed trains.
The Midland Main Line is being electrified and Ian Walmsley in Modern Railways has speculated that 125 mph Aventras could be used between London and Sheffield. I wrote about this in A High-Speed Train With An IPEMU-Capability.
Could we see sections of the fast lines deliberately built without wires, so that noise is reduced?
Leicester station is a serious bottleneck, so could track be arranged there with two quiet fast lines without wires, through the centre of the city and the station?
It’s an interesting possibility to both reduce the effects on the environment and cut the cost of electrification.
I also think there are other reasons why trains will increasingly have on-board energy storage or in the case of electric locomotives, a small diesel engine.
- A get-to-the-next-station capability for when electric power to the line fails.
- Depots could be without electrification.
- Complicated stations could be electrically-dead.
It is a technology, that will have a large number of positive effects in the coming years.
A High Speed Train With An IPEMU-Capability
Bombardier were reported by Ian Walmsley in the April 2016 Edition of Modern Railways, to be developing Aventra, with a 125 mph capability.
Bombardier have also told me, that all Aventras will be wired so they could be fitted with on-board energy storage.
I don’t know all the masses and speeds, but imagine if an Aventra with an IPEMU capability ran at high speed down an electrified main line and then with its on-board energy storage full to brimming, turned on to line with a reasonably high speed, where it might make a number of calls before returning.
A typical line could be London to Norwich via Cambridge, along the Breckland Line, which is not electrified from Ely to Trowse Junction south of Norwich. Parts have a 90 mph speed limit and I’m sure the speeds could be improved.
The train would need to use the energy storage, but this storage would be partially recharged every time the train stopped, by the regenerative braking of the train.
An interesting fact, is that the kinetic energy of a train is given by half the mass times the square of the speed. So if the train leaves the electrified section, as fast as is reasonably possible, it is carrying extra energy.
Because of the regenerative braking of Aventras and for that matter, Electrostars and some other trains. some of this energy can be recovered and stored in the on-board energy stoppage of an IPEMU, every time the train stops at a station
Intuition and many years of doing this sort of dynamic simulation, tells me, that the faster the train goes at the start, lengthens the range if on-board energy storage is available.
It is worth noting the energy levels involved. If you take the energy of a train travelling at 40 mph as one, the energy of a train travelling at 60 mph is 2.25 times as much and one travelling at 125 mph, a massive 9.76 times.
I think that other factors will also help.
- A track built for speed.
- Modern signalling.
- An efficient train.
- Low dwell-times in stops.
- Advanced driving aids.
- Good driving.
I suspect that Network Rail and Bombardier are doing extensive simulations of possible routes for trains with an IPEMU capability.
These calculations will probably show some routes are more suitable than others.
A route that could might be ideal, would be a branch where the line speed was high to a single station, so that by the use of the regenerative braking, the train could start the return journey with a high level of energy in the storage.
London to Norwich via Cambridge, is not a line to a single station, but both ends are electrified, so the trains will start the journey with full storage, probably losing a proportion of the energy at each stop.
I’d love to be doing those simulations. But it’s all physics that Isaac Newton would have understood.
The Anonymous Widower 