The Anonymous Widower

Open Access Operators And The Lumo Model

In the UK, there are only three established Open Access operators, who run UK train services.

  • Grand Central
  • Heathrow Express
  • Hull Trains

From the 25th of October, they will be joined by Lumo.

We probably don’t think of Heathrow Express as an Open Access operator and as it is effectively a short distance special service with new trains between Heathrow and Paddington, it has its own business model, that may or may not survive.

But how will Lumo and their bold new business model affect Grand Central, Hull Trains and any future Open Access operators?

Grand Central Trains

Grand Central is a well-established Open Access operator.

  • They run services between London King’s Cross and Bradford Interchange, Sunderland and several other convenient en-route stations.
  • They are owned by Deutsche Bahn.
  • They also regularly seem to apply for new routes and extra services.

But they have a big problem fast catching up on them; they have a diesel-only fleet and need to decarbonise.

I also think that all express passenger services on the East Coast Main Line will at some date need to be run by 140 mph trains capable of running with full digital signalling and a degree of Automatic Train Operation.

In Lumo: Why Won’t The New Train Service Stop At Yorkshire Stations?, I said that to continue to be successful, they probably need to embrace the Lumo model and acquire new trains.

I will repeat what I said in the related post.

This would entail.

  • The ten diesel Class 180 trains would be replaced by new electric trains.
  • The trains would need a 140 mph capability under digital signalling to fit in with the plans of Network Rail, LNER and Lumo to create a top-class high-speed high-capacity East Coast Main Line.
  • The trains would need a battery capability as Grand Central’s routes are not fully electrified.
  • They could copy Lumo’s green marketing philosophy, ticketing and catering offering.

As to the trains, I’m sure that Hitachi could offer a version of their Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, the specification of which is shown in this Hitachi infographic.

The trains would need a range of fifty miles on battery-power.

I have some other thoughts.

Financing

If you look at the finances of decarbonising Grand Central, they would need a new fleet of ten trains, which as Lumo’s fleet of five trains are reported to be costing £100 million, so that figure can be at least doubled.

There would also be costs for the two charging systems at Bradford Interchange and Sunderland. But at least there are several possible solutions for charging systems, so the price will probably not be more than a few million, if that.

Will Deutsche Bahn be prepared to stump up the extra finance?

A Service To Cleethorpes

In the Wikipedia entry for Grand Central, there is a section which is entitled London Kings Cross to Cleethorpes, which outlines a proposed service.

  • It would split and join with the London King’s Cross and Bradford service at Doncaster.
  • It would call at Crowle, Scunthorpe, Barnetby, Habrough and Grimsby.
  • Doncaster and Cleethorpes is 52.1 miles and should be in range of a Battery-electric train with a charging system at Cleethorpes.

Using current times from LNER and TransPennine Express, I estimate that Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Trains could travel between London and Cleethorpes in around two hours and twenty minutes.

With digital signalling on the East Coast Main Line to the South of Doncaster, the overall time could be much closer to two hours.

This could be a very viable service with battery-electric trains capable of running at 140 mph on the East Coast Main Line and for sixty miles at 100 mph on battery power.

Maximising The Use Use Of Train Paths By The Use Of Splitting And Joining

The proposed service to Cleethorpes is a classic use of splitting and joining, which enables two separate services to run a large part of their routes together.

  • On the East Coast Main Line, it means that maximum use can be made of the paths available.
  • Splitting and joining is part of the specification for the Hitachi trains and they do it automatically in under two minutes.
  • LNER are already talking about using the technique to serve various destinations from Leeds.

I wouldn’t rule out Grand Central’s two services working as a pair between London King’s Cross and Doncaster, where they would split and join.

Conclusion On Grand Central Trains

Decarbonisation with high-speed battery-electric trains could ensure the future of Grand Central Trains.

Hull Trains

Hull Trains is another well-established Open Access operator.

  • They run services between London King’s Cross and Hull and Beverley.
  • They have a fleet of five bi-mode Class 802 trains.
  • The company is part of First Group.

Hull Trains don’t have the decarbonisation problem of Grand Central Trains, as I suspect Hitachi will come up with a solution to turn Class 802 trains into a battery-electric train with a range of perhaps seventy miles on battery power.

  • Beverley and Temple Hirst junction is a distance of 44.3 miles and is the only section of the route without electrification.
  • Charging of the batteries will be needed at the Eastern end and probably would be best handled by a short length of electrification in Hull station or between Hull and Brough stations.

The Class 802 trains are also ready for updating to run under the new digital signalling of the East Coast Main Line.

First Harrogate Trains

First Harrogate Trains was a subsidiary of Hull Trains, which hoped to run the following services.

  • London King’s Cross and Harrogate via York
  • London King’s Cross and Cleethorpes via Peterborough, Spalding and Lincoln

Both these services could be run in conjunction with the current service with an appropriate split and join.

Conclusion On Hull Trains

As both Hull Trains and Lumo share London King’s Cross and are both owned by First Group, I would expect that both train operators would share some services, methods and ideas.

There may be advantages if Hull Trains’s Class 802 trains and Lumo’s Class 803 trains could run each other’s services.

Grand Union

Grand Union is a prospective open access operator who are proposing to operate train services from England to Wales and Scotland.

They are proposing two services.

London Paddington and Cardiff Central via Reading, Bristol Parkway, Severn Tunnel Junction, Newport and Cardiff Parkway, with a possible extension later to Swansea andLlanelli or Carmarthen.

London Euston and Stirling via Milton Keynes Central, Nuneaton, Crewe, Preston, Carlisle, Lockerbie, Motherwell, Whifflet, Greenfaulds and Larbert.

Note.

  1. London Paddington and Cardiff Central is fully electrified, but there is no electrification West of Cardiff Central.
  2. Cardiff Central and Swansea are 45.7 miles apart.
  3. London Euston and Stirling is fully electrified.

Currently, the rolling stock for both services is proposed to be a tri-mode Class 93 locomotive hauling a rake of Mark 4 coaches and a driving van trailer.

The locomotive should be capable of handling the routes to Stirling and Cardiff using the electrification alone.

When the Cardiff route is extended, Grand Union would intend to use Class 802 trains, which could be fitted with batteries to serve Swansea, where the batteries would be charged.

There is no sign as yet, that the Office of Rail and Road have approved any of their possible services, but both services might be improved with some Lumo-style thinking.

Alliance Rail Holdings

Alliance Rail Holdings, which is a sister company to Grand Central, is ultimately owned by Deutsche Bahn, seems to have several ideas for new services, but only seems to have got approval to one.

They were given approval some years ago to run a service between London Euston and Blackpool North.

  • Calls would be made at Poulton-le-Fylde, Kirkham and Wesham, Preston, Nuneaton and Milton Keynes Central.
  • There will be six trains per day.
  • Trains would be InterCity 225 trains.
  • The approval is for seven years from 2018.

But because of the pandemic it hasn’t run.

Conclusion

The Lumo model will affect all these services.

 

 

 

September 12, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Was The Queen’s Locomotive Acting As A Thunderbird?

I took these pictures of 67006 Royal Sovereign at Kings Cross when I arrived in Platform 0 from Peterborough today at 15:45.

Note.

  1. Normally, 67006 is assigned to the Royal Train.
  2. The locomotive is in Platform 1.
  3. The Class 67 Locomotive was definitely coupled to the InterCity 225.
  4. It does appear that the next movement out of Platform 1 was a diesel-hauled empty coaching stock movement to Neville Hill Depot in Leeds at 19:40.
  5. It looks like the train arrived in Kings Cross at 12:55 from Skipton, nearly three hours late.

It does look as though the train was towed to London by the Queen’s Locomotive and then pushed all the way back to Leeds.

 

September 8, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , | 2 Comments

A New Elizabethan

I can remember The Elizabethan, which was a steam-hauled non-stop express between London and Edinburgh between 1953 and 1961.

  • The steam-hauled train took six-hours-and-a-half.
  • It used to be the longest non-stop railway service in the world.
  • Today, the service could be run by the current or refurbished Azumas or perhaps a new flagship train, built for the service.
  • It could be easily under four hours.

It could be an interesting concept, to increase capacity between London and Edinburgh.

The Fastest Rail Journey Between London King’s Cross And Edinburgh

This section in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive is entitled Speed Record. This is the first paragraph.

A Class 91, 91010 (now 91110), holds the British locomotive speed record at 161.7 mph (260.2 km/h), set on 17 September 1989, just south of Little Bytham on a test run down Stoke Bank with the DVT leading. Although Class 370s, Class 373s and Class 374s have run faster, all are EMUs which means that the Electra is officially the fastest locomotive in Britain. Another loco (91031, now 91131), hauling five Mk4s and a DVT on a test run, ran between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh Waverley in 3 hours, 29 minutes and 30 seconds on 26 September 1991. This is still the current record. The set covered the route in an average speed of 112.5 mph (181.1 km/h) and reached the full 140 mph (225 km/h) several times during the run.

Seconds under three-and-a-half-hours was an amazing time nearly thirty years ago, from a short-formation InterCity 225, that went on to become the mainstay of the services on the route.

It makes High Speed Two’s proposed time of three hours and forty-eight minutes appear to lack ambition.

But to be fair to High Speed Two, train services have historically been faster on the the East side of Great Britain.

What Time Could Be Possible Between London King’s Cross And Edinburgh?

In What Is Possible On The East Coast Main Line?, I took a hard look at times on the route, taking into account improvements of the last thirty years and those that will happen in the next few.

This was my conclusion.

I started by asking what is possible on The East Coast Main Line?

As the time of three-and-a-half hours was achieved by a short-formation InterCity 225 train in 1991 before Covids, Hitchin, Kings Cross Remodelling, Power Upgrades, Werrington and lots of other work, I believe that some journeys between Kings Cross and Edinburgh could be around this time within perhaps five years.

To some, that might seem an extraordinary claim, but when you consider that the InterCity 225 train in 1991 did it with only a few sections of 140 mph running, I very much think it is a certainly at some point.

As to the ultimate time, earlier I showed that an average of 120 mph between  King’s Cross and Edinburgh gives a time of 3:16 minutes.

Surely, an increase of fourteen minutes in thirty years is possible?

I believe that timings will decrease significantly on the East Coast Main Line with the current trains.

Extra Paths For LNER

In the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, there is an article, which is entitled LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes.

This is the last paragraph.

Infrastructure upgrades are due to prompt a timetable recast in May 2022 (delayed from December 2021), from which point LNER will operate 6.5 trains per hour out of King’s Cross, compared to five today. As an interim measure  LNER is retaining seven rakes of Mk. 4 coaches hauled by 12 Class 91 locomotives to supplement the Azuma fleet and support its timetable ambitions until new trains are delivered.

There would certainly appear to be a path available if LNER wanted to increase the frequency of trains between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh from the current two trains per hour (tph) to three.

What Would Be The Route?

I feel there could be three possible simple routes.

  1. A direct non-stop London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service.
  2. A London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service with a single stop at Newcastle.
  3. A London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service with stops at Leeds and Newcastle.

Each route would have its own advantages and drawbacks.

Route 1

My thoughts about Route 1.

  • This would be the fastest route.
  • It would be a serious challenge to the airlines on the London and Edinburgh route.

It would be a marketing man’s dream.

Route 2

My thoughts about Route 2.

  • This would be the second fastest route.
  • It would be a serious challenge to the airlines on the London and Edinburgh route.
  • It would give Newcastle a third hourly service to the capital.
  • It would give Newcastle a non-stop train to London every hour.
  • It would probably be the fastest train between King’s Cross and Newcastle.
  • It would beef up the challenge to the airlines on the London and Newcastle route.

Serving Newcastle may generate extra passengers.

Route 3

My thoughts about Route 3.

  • This would be the slowest route as it is 23 miles longer.
  • It would be a challenge to the airlines on the London and Edinburgh route.
  • It would give Newcastle and Leeds a third hourly service to the capital.
  • It would give Leeds a non-stop train to London every hour.
  • It would probably be the fastest train between London and Leeds.
  • It would beef up the challenge to the airlines on the London and Newcastle and London and Leeds routes.
  • There could be an extra call at York

Serving Leeds and Newcastle may generate extra passengers.

Obviously, passenger numbers will determine the best route.

Conclusion

I very much feel that properly thought through, this service could be a success.

 

 

May 16, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , | 4 Comments

What Is Possible On The East Coast Main Line?

In the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive, there is an amazing story.

This picture shows one of these locomotives at Kings Cross.

Note.

  1. They have a design speed of 140 mph.
  2. They have a power output of 4.8 MW.
  3. They were built around 1990 by British Rail at Crewe.

They were designed to run services between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh as fast as possible, as the motive power of the InterCity 225 trains.

This section in the Wikipedia entry for the Class 91 locomotive is entitled Speed Record. This is the first paragraph.

A Class 91, 91010 (now 91110), holds the British locomotive speed record at 161.7 mph (260.2 km/h), set on 17 September 1989, just south of Little Bytham on a test run down Stoke Bank with the DVT leading. Although Class 370s, Class 373s and Class 374s have run faster, all are EMUs which means that the Electra is officially the fastest locomotive in Britain. Another loco (91031, now 91131), hauling five Mk4s and a DVT on a test run, ran between London King’s Cross and Edinburgh Waverley in 3 hours, 29 minutes and 30 seconds on 26 September 1991. This is still the current record. The set covered the route in an average speed of 112.5 mph (181.1 km/h) and reached the full 140 mph (225 km/h) several times during the run.

Note.

  1. For the British locomotive speed record, locomotive was actually pushing the train and going backwards, as the driving van trailer (DVT) was leading.
  2. How many speed records of any sort, where the direction isn’t part of the record, have been set going backwards?
  3. I feel that this record could stand for many years, as it is not very likely anybody will build another 140 mph locomotive in the foreseeable future. Unless a maverick idea for a high speed freight locomotive is proposed.

I have a few general thoughts on the record run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh in three-and-a-half hours.

  • I would assume that as in normal operation of these trains, the Class 91 locomotive was leading on the run to the North.
  • For various reasons, they would surely have had at least two of British Rail’s most experienced drivers in the cab.
  • At that time, 125 mph InterCity 125 trains had been the workhorse of East Coast Main Line for well over ten years, so British Rail wouldn’t have been short of experienced high speed drivers.
  • It was a Thursday, so they must have been running amongst normal traffic.
  • On Monday, a typical run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh is timetabled to take four hours and twenty minutes.
  • High Speed Two are predicting a time of three hours and forty-eight minutes between Euston and Edinburgh via High Speed Two and  the West Coast Main Line.

The more you look at it, a sub-three-and-and-a-half hour time, by 1980s-technology on a less-than-perfect railway was truly remarkable.

So how did they do it?

Superb Timetabling

In Norwich-In-Ninety Is A Lot More Than Passengers Think!, I talk about how Network Rail and Greater Anglia created a fast service between Liverpool Street and Norwich.

I suspect that British Rail put their best timetablers on the project, so that the test train could speed through unhindered.

Just as they did for Norwich-in-Ninety and probably will be doing to the East Coast Main Line to increase services and decrease journey times.

A Good As ERTMS Signalling

Obviously in 1991, there was no modern digital in-cab signalling and I don’t know the standard of communication between the drivers and the signallers.

On the tricky sections like Digswell Viaduct, through Hitchin and the Newark Crossing were other trains stopped well clear of any difficult area, as modern digital signalling can anticipate and take action?

I would expect the test train got a signalling service as good as any modern train, even if parts of it like driver to signaller communication may have been a bit experimental.

There may even have been a back-up driver in the cab with the latest mobile phone.

It must have been about 1991, when I did a pre-arranged airways join in my Cessna 340 on the ground at Ipswich Airport before take-off on a direct flight to Rome. Air Traffic Control had suggested it to avoid an intermediate stop at say Southend.

The technology was arriving and did it help the drivers on that memorable run North ensure a safe and fast passage of the train?

It would be interesting to know, what other equipment was being tested by this test train.

A Possible Plan

I suspect that the plan in 1991 was to use a plan not unlike one that would be used by Lewis Hamilton, or in those days Stirling Moss to win a race.

Drive a steady race not taking any chances and where the track allows speed up.

So did British Rail drive a steady 125 mph sticking to the standard timetable between Kings Cross and Edinburgh?

Then as the Wikipedia extract indicated, at several times during the journey did they increase the speed of the train to 140 mph.

And the rest as they say was an historic time of 3 hours, 29 minutes and 30 seconds. Call it three-and-a-half-hours.

This represented a start-to-stop average speed of 112.5 mph over the 393 miles of the East Coast Main Line.

Can The Current Trains Achieve Three-And-A-Half-Hours Be Possible Today?

Consider.

  • The best four hours and twenty minutes timings of the Class 801 trains, represents an average speed of 90.7 mph.
  • The Class 801 trains and the InterCity 225 trains have similar performance.
  • There have been improvements to the route like the Hitchin Flyover.
  • Full ERTMS in-cab signalling is being installed South of Doncaster.
  • I believe ERTMS and ETC could solve the Newark Crossing problem! See Could ERTMS And ETCS Solve The Newark Crossing Problem?
  • I am a trained Control Engineer and I believe if ERTMS and ETC can solve the Newark Crossing problem, I suspect they can solve the Digswell Viaduct problem.
  • The Werrington Dive Under is being built.
  • The approaches to Kings Cross are being remodelled.

I can’t quite say easy-peasy. but I’m fairly certain the Kings Cross and Edinburgh record is under serious threat.

  • A massive power supply upgrade to the North of Doncaster is continuing. See this page on the Network Rail web site.
  • ERTMS and ETC probably needs to be installed all the way between Kings Cross and Edinburgh.
  • There may be a need to minimise the number of slower passenger trains on the East Coast Main Line.
  • The Northumberland Line and the Leamside Line may be needed to take some trains from the East Coast Main Line.

Recent Developments Concerning the Hitachi Trains

There have been several developments  since the Hitachi Class 800 and Class 801 trains were ordered.

  • Serious engineers and commentators like Roger Ford of Modern Railways have criticised the lugging of heavy diesel engines around the country.
  • Network Rail have upgraded the power supply South of Doncaster and have recently started to upgrade it between Doncaster and Edinburgh. Will this extensive upgrade cut the need to use the diesel power-packs?
  • Hitachi and their operators must have collected extensive in-service statistics about the detailed performance of the trains and the use of the diesel power-packs.
  • Hitachi have signed an agreement with Hyperdrive Innovation of Sunderland to produce battery-packs for the trains and two new versions of the trains have been announced; a Regional Battery Train and an Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train.
  • East Coast Trains have ordered five five-car Class 803 trains, each of which will have a small battery for emergency use and no diesel power-packs.
  • Avanti West Coast have ordered ten seven-car Class 807 trains, each of which have no battery or diesel power-packs.

And these are just the ones we know about.

The Class 807 Trains And Liverpool

I find Avanti West Coast’s Class 807 trains the most interesting development.

  • They have been partly financed by Rock Rail, who seem to organise train finance, so that the train operator, the train manufacturer all get the best value, by finding good technical solutions.
  • I believe that these trains have been designed so they can run between Euston and Liverpool Lime Street stations in under two hours.
  • Does the absence of battery or diesel power-packs save weight and improve performance?
  • Euston and Liverpool Lime Street in two hours would be an average of only 96.8 mph.
  • If the Class 807 trains could achieve the same start-stop average of 112.5 mph achieved by the InterCity 225 test run between Kings Cross and Edinburgh, that would mean a Euston and Liverpool Lime Street time of one hour and forty-three minutes.
  • Does Thunderbird provision on the West Coast Main Line for the Class 390 trains mean that the Class 807 trains don’t need emergency power?
  • Have diesel power-packs been rarely used in emergency by the Hitachi trains?

I believe the mathematics show that excellent sub-two hour times between Euston and Liverpool Lime Street are possible by Avanti West Coast’s new Class 807 trains.

The Class 803 Trains And Edinburgh

East Coast Trains ordered their Class 803 trains in March 2019,  nine months before Avanti West Coast ordered their Class 807 trains.

In Trains Ordered For 2021 Launch Of ‘High-Quality, Low Fare’ London – Edinburgh Service, I outlined brief details of the trains and the proposed service.

  • FirstGroup is targeting the two-thirds of passengers, who fly between London and Edinburgh.
  • They are also targeting business passengers, as the first train arrives in Edinburgh at 10:00.
  • The trains are five-cars.
  • The trains are one class with onboard catering, air-conditioning, power sockets and free wi-fi.
  • Stops will be five trains per day with stops at Stevenage, Newcastle and Morpeth.
  • The trains will take around four hours.
  • The service will start in Autumn 2021.

I also thought it would be a successful service

As I know Edinburgh, Liverpool and London well, I believe there are similarities between the Euston-Liverpool Lime Street and Kings Cross-Edinburgh routes.

  • Both routes are between two cities known all over the world.
  • Both routes are fully-electrified.
  • Both routes have the potential to attract passengers from other transport modes.

The two services could even be run at similar speeds.

  • Euston-Liverpool Lime Street in two hours will be at 96.8 mph
  • Kings Cross-Edinburgh in four hours will be at 98.3 mph.

Does this explain the similar lightweight trains?

Could Lightweight Trains Help LNER?

There is one important factor, I haven’t talked about in detail in this post. Batteries and diesel power-packs on the Hitachi trains.

I have only mentioned them in the following circumstances.

  • When trains are not fitted with battery and/or diesel power-packs.
  • When battery developments are being undertaken.

Let’s consider the LNER fleet.

  • LNER has thirteen nine-car Class 800 trains, each of which has five diesel power-packs
  • LNER has ten five-car Class 800 trains, each of which has three diesel power-packs
  • LNER has thirty nine-car Class 801 trains, each of which has one diesel power-pack
  • LNER has twelve five-car Class 801 trains, each of which has one diesel power-pack

There are sixty-five trains, 497 coaches and 137 diesel power-packs.

And look at their destinations.

  • Aberdeen – No Electrification from Edinburgh
  • Alnmouth – Fully Electrified
  • Berwick-upon-Tweed – Fully Electrified
  • Bradford Forster Square – Fully Electrified
  • Darlington – Fully Electrified
  • Doncaster – Fully Electrified
  • Durham – Fully Electrified
  • Edinburgh – Fully Electrified
  • Glasgow – Fully Electrified
  • Grantham – Fully Electrified
  • Harrogate – No Electrification from Leeds – Possible Battery Destination
  • Huddersfield – No Electrification from Leeds – Possible Battery Destination – Probable Electrification
  • Hull – No Electrification from Temple Hirst Junction – Possible Battery Destination
  • Inverness – No Electrification from Stirling
  • Leeds – Fully Electrified
  • Lincoln – No Electrification from Newark North Gate – Possible Battery Destination
  • Middlesbrough – No Electrification from Northallerton – Possible Battery Destination
  • Newcastle – Fully Electrified
  • Newark North Gate – Fully Electrified
  • Northallerton – Fully Electrified
  • Peterborough – Fully Electrified
  • Skipton – Fully Electrified
  • Retford – Fully Electrified
  • Stevenage – Fully Electrified
  • Stirling – Fully Electrified
  • Sunderland – No Electrification from Northallerton – Possible Battery Destination
  • Wakefield Westgate – Fully Electrified
  • York – Fully Electrified

The destinations can be summarised as followed.

  • Not Electrified – 2
  • Possible Battery Destination – 6
  • Fully Electrified – 20

This gives a total of 28.

Could the trains be matched better to the destinations?

  • Some routes like Edinburgh, Glasgow, Newcastle and Stirling could possibly be beneficially handled by lightweight trains without any diesel or battery power-packs.
  • Only Aberdeen and Inverness can’t be reached by all-electric or battery-electric trains.
  • In LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes, I proposed a hydrogen-electric flagship train, that would use hydrogen North of the existing electrification.

There certainly appear to be possibilities.

Example Journey Times To Edinburgh

This table shows the various time for particular start-stop average speeds between Kings Cross and Edinburgh.

  • 80 mph – 4:54
  • 85 mph – 4:37
  • 90 mph – 4:12
  • 98.2 mph – 4:00
  • 100 mph – 3:56
  • 110 mph – 3:34
  • 120 mph – 3:16
  • 125 mph – 3:08

Note.

  • Times are given in h:mm.
  • A few mph increase in average speed reduces journey time by a considerable amount.

The figures certainly show the value of high speed trains and of removing bottlenecks, as average speed is so important.

Decarbonisation Of LNER

LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes was based on an article in the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, with the same title. These are the first two paragraphs of the article.

LNER has launched the procurement of at least 10 new trains to supplement its Azuma fleet on East Coast main line services.

In a Prior Information Notice published on 27 October, the operator states it is seeking trains capable of operating under 25kW overhead power with ‘significant self-power capability’ for operation away from overhead wires. ‘On-board Energy Storage for traction will be specified as a mandatory requirement to reduce, and wherever practical eliminate, diesel usage where it would otherwise be necessary, although LNER anticipates some degree of diesel traction may be required to meet some self-power requirements. Suppliers tendering are asked to detail their experience of designing and manufacturing a fleet of multi-mode trains with a range of traction options including battery-electric, diesel-electric, hydrogen-electric, battery-diesel, dual fuel and tri-mode.

From this, LNER would appear to be serious about decarbonisation and from the destination list I published earlier, most services South of the Scottish Central Belt can be decarbonised by replacing diesel-power packs with battery power-packs.

That last bit, sounds like a call for innovation to provide a solution to the difficult routes to Aberdeen and Inverness. It also looks as if it has been carefully worded not to rule anybody out.

This press release from Hitachi is entitled Hitachi And Eversholt Rail To Develop GWR Intercity Battery Hybrid Train – Offering Fuel Savings Of More Than 20%.

It announces the Hitachi Intercity Tri-mode Battery Train, which is described in this Hitachi infographic.

As the Hitachi press release is dated the 15th of December 2020, which is after the publication of the magazine, it strikes me that LNER and Hitachi had been talking.

At no point have Hitachi stated what the range of the train is on battery power.

To serve the North of Scotland these gaps must be bridged.

  • Aberdeen and Edinburgh Haymarket – 130 miles
  • Inverness and Stirling – 146 miles

It should also be noted that distances in Scotland are such, that if these gaps could be bridged by battery technology, then probably all of the North of Scotland’s railways could be decarbonised. As Hitachi are the major supplier of Scotland’s local and regional electric trains, was the original Prior Information Notice, written to make sure Hitachi responded?

LNER run nine-car Class 800 trains on the two long routes to Aberdeen and Inverness.

  • These trains have five diesel power-packs under coaches 2,3, 5, 7 and 8.
  • As five-car Class 800 trains have diesel power-packs under coaches 2, 3 and 4, does this mean that Hitachi can fit diesel power-packs under all cars except for the driver cars?
  • As the diesel and battery power-packs appear to be interchangeable, does this mean that Hitachi could theoretically build some very unusual trains?
  • Hitachi’s trains can be up to twelve-cars in normal mode and twenty-four cars in rescue mode.
  • LNER would probably prefer an all Azuma fleet, even if a few trains were a bit longer.

Imagine a ten-car train with two driver and eight intermediate cars, with all of the intermediate cars having maximum-size battery-packs.

Supposing, one or two of the battery power-packs were to be replaced with a diesel power-pack.

There are a lot of possibilities and I suspect LNER, Hitachi and Hyperdrive Innovation are working on a train capable of running to and from the North of Scotland.

Conclusion

I started by asking what is possible on The East Coast Main Line?

As the time of three-and-a-half hours was achieved by a short-formation InterCity 225 train in 1991 before Covids, Hitchin, Kings Cross Remodelling, Power Upgrades, Werrington and lots of other work, I believe that some journeys between Kings Cross and Edinburgh could be around this time within perhaps five years.

To some, that might seem an extraordinary claim, but when you consider that the InterCity 225 train in 1991 did it with only a few sections of 140 mph running, I very much think it is a certainly at some point.

As to the ultimate time, earlier I showed that an average of 120 mph between  King’s Cross and Edinburgh gives a time of 3:16 minutes.

Surely, an increase of fourteen minutes in thirty years is possible?

 

 

 

May 15, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

ORR Rejects Grand Union’s London Paddington To Cardiff Train Service Bid

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

I wrote about this service in Grand Union Seeks ’91s’ To Cardiff and this was my conclusion.

I like this proposal.

    • The important Paddington and Cardiff route gets a fifty percent increase in train frequency.
    • There could be genuine competition on the route.
    • Grand Union would be using five of the thirty InterCity225 sets, which are in good condition, judging by my recent journeys.
    • Could we see a customer service and catering war between the two operators?

If Grand Union Railway runs to Cardiff, I’ll give it a go.

I can see a revised proposal being successful.

February 11, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , | 1 Comment

Roger Ford’s Cunning Plan

In the February 2020 of Modern Railways, there is an article called LNER Procurement, which has been written by Roger Ford.

It is Roger’s reply to an article in the December 2020 Edition of Modern Railways, which was entitled LNER Seeks 10 More Bi-Modes.

He starts by describing the requirement and then says this.

Would any fleet engineer in his or her right mind want to add a unique sub-fleet of 10 high speed trains to an existing successful fleet, even if they were hydrogen-electric tri-modes from the respected Kim Chong t’ae Electric Locomotive Works?

In my analysis of the December 2020 article, I wrote this post with the same name, where I said this, under a heading of More Azumas?

Surely, It would require a very innovative train at perhaps a rock-bottom price from another manufacturer, for LNER to not acquire extra Azumas.

So it would appear that Roger and myself are vaguely in agreement on the subject of more Azumas.

The last section of the article has a title of Cunning.

Roger puts forward, the view that the procurement process, as well as being compatible with EU law, could be a warning to Hitachi, to make sure that LNER get a good deal.

It certainly could be, and I remember a similar maneuver by ICI around 1970.

The company was buying a lot of expensive IBM 360 computers.

ICI needed a new computer to do scientific calculations at their Central Instrument Research Establishment (CIRL) at Pangbourne in Berkshire.

  • English Electric had just released a clone of an IBM 360 and were keen to sell it to ICI.
  • As it would do everything that ICI wanted, they bought one.
  • It worked well and did everything that CIRL wanted at a cheaper price.

IBM’s reaction was supposedly quick and dramatic. The salesman who dealt with ICI, was immediately fired!

But as ICI had about a dozen large IBM computers, there wasn’t much they could do to one of the most important and largest UK companies.

IBM also made sure, that ICI got their next computer at a good price.

I’m with Roger that all the shenanigans are a warning to Hitachi.

Roger finishes the article with these two paragraphs.

A genuine bluff would have been to seek bids for the long-term deployment of remanufactured IC225s. Which in these straitened times could still turn out to be a more viable option.

I rather fancy the idea of a hydrogen-electric Class 91. Owner Eversholt Rail might even have played along on the understanding that it funded the inevitable hybrid Azumas.

Note that IC225s are InterCity 225 trains.

  • The 31 trains, were built for  British Rail in the 1980s.
  • They are hauled by a 4.83 MW Class 91 locomotive, which is usually at the Northern end of the train.
  • Nine Mark 4 coaches and a driving van trailer complete the train.
  • As with the Hitachi Azumas (Class 800 and Class 801 trains), they are capable of operating at 140 mph on lines where digital in-cab ERTMS signalling has been installed.

I just wonder, if a Class 91 locomotive could be to the world’s first 140 mph hydrogen-electric locomotive.

Consider the following.

Dynamics

The wheels, bogies and traction system were designed by British Rail Engineering Ltd, who were the masters of dynamics. This is a sentence from the locomotive’s Wikipedia entry.

Unusually, the motors are body mounted and drive bogie-mounted gearboxes via cardan shafts. This reduces the unsprung mass and hence track wear at high speeds.

That is a rather unique layout. But it obviously works, as otherwise these locomotives would have been scrapped decades ago.

I believe the quality dynamics are because BREL owned a PACE 231R for a start, which was an analogue computer, that was good enough for NASA to use two computers like this to calculate how to put a man on the moon.

London and Edinburgh is a slightly shorter distance, run at a somewhat slower speed.

Space

This picture shows a Class 91 locomotive.

What is in the space in the rear end of the nearly twenty metre-long locomotive?

This sentence from the Wikipedia entry for the locomotive gives a clue.

The locomotive also features an underslung transformer, so that the body is relatively empty compared to contemporary electric locomotives.

It also states that much of the layout came from the APT-P, which was a version of the tilting Advanced Passenger Train.

Would the space be large enough for a tank of hydrogen and some form of generator that used the hydrogen as fuel?

It should be noted that one version of the APT used a gas-turbine engine, so was the locomotive designed for future use as a bi-mode?

Fuel Cells

I’ve ignored fuel cells, as to get the amount of power needed, the fuel cells could be too large for the locomotive.

Class 91 Locomotive Performance

The performance of a Class 91 locomotive is as follows.

  • Power output – 4.83 MW
  • Operating speed – 140 mph
  • Record Speed – 161 mph

Not bad for a 1980s locomotive.

Required Performance Using Hydrogen Fuel

If the locomotives were only needed to use hydrogen to the North of the electrification from London, the locomotive would need to be able to haul a rake of coaches twice on the following routes.

  • Aberdeen and Edinburgh Haymarket – 130 miles
  • Inverness and Stirling – 146 miles

A range of three hundred miles would be sufficient.

The locomotive would need refuelling at Aberdeen and Inverness.

The operating speed of both routes is nowhere near 140 mph and I suspect that a maximum speed of 100 mph on hydrogen, pulling or pushing a full-size train, would probably be sufficient.

When you consider that a nine-car Class 800 train has five 560 kW diesel engines, that give a total power of 2.8 MW, can carry 611 passengers and an InterCity 225 can only carry 535, I don’t think that the power required under hydrogen will be as high as that needed under electricity.

Rolls-Royce

Rolls-Royce have developed a 2.5 MW generator, that is the size of a beer keg. I wrote about it in Our Sustainability Journey.

Could one of these incredibly-powerful generators provide enough power to speed an InterCity 225 train, through the Highlands of Scotland to Aberdeen and Inverness, at speeds of up to 100 mph.

I would give it a high chance of being a possible dream.

Application Of Modern Technology

I do wonder, if the locomotive’s cardan shaft drive could be improved by modern technology.

These pictures show Joseph Bazalgette’s magnificent Abbey Mills Pumping station in East London.

A few years ago, Thames Water had a problem. Under the pumping station are Victorian centrifugal pumps that pump raw sewage to Beckton works for treatment. These are connected to 1930s electric motors in Dalek-like structures on the ground floor, using heavy steel shafts. The motors are controlled from the control panel in the first image.

The shafts were showing signs of their age and needed replacement.

So Thames Water turned to the experts in high-power transmission at high speed – Formula One.

The pumps are now connected to the electric motors, using high-strength, lower-weight carbon-fibre shafts.

Could this and other modern technology be used to update the cardan shafts and other parts of these locomotives?

Could The Locomotives Use Regenerative Braking To Batteries?

I’ll start by calculating the kinetic energy of a full InterCity 225 train.

  • The Class 91 locomotive weighs 81.5 tonnes
  • Nine Mark 4 coaches weigh a total of 378 tonnes
  • A driving van trailer weighs 43.7 tonnes.
  • This gives a total weight of 503.2 tonnes.

Assuming that each of the 535 passengers, weighs 90 Kg with babies, baggage, bikes and buggies, this gives a passenger weight of 48.15 tonnes or a total train weight of 551.35 tonnes.

Using Omni’s Kinetic Energy Calculator, gives the following values at different speeds.

  • 100 mph – 153 kWh
  • 125 mph – 239 kWh
  • 140 mph – 300 kWh

I think, that a 300 kWh battery could be fitted into the back of the locomotive, along with the generator and the fuel tank.

With new traction motors, that could handle regenerative braking, this would improve the energy efficiency of the trains.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel

Sustainable aviation fuel produced by companies like Altalto would surely be an alternative to hydrogen.

  • It has been tested by many aerospace companies in large numbers of gas turbines.
  • As it has similar properties to standard aviation fuel, the handling rules are well-known.

When produced from something like household waste, by Altalto, sustainable aviation fuel is carbon-neutral and landfill-negative.

ERTMS Signalling And Other Upgrades

Full ERTMS digital signalling will needed to be fitted to the trains to enable 140 mph running.

Conclusion

I believe it is possible to convert a Class 91 locomotive into a hydrogen-electric locomotive with the following specification.

  • 4.83 MW power on electricity.
  • 140 mph on electrification
  • 2.5 MW on hydrogen power.
  • 100 mph on hydrogen
  • Regenerative braking to battery.

If it were easier to use sustainable aviation fuel, that may be a viable alternative to hydrogen, as it is easier to handle.

 

February 3, 2021 Posted by | Hydrogen, Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

!40 mph Electric Trains At Kings Cross Station

This picture shows LNER’s old and new 140 mph electric trains at Kings Cross station.

On the left is a nine-car Class 801 train.

  • Introduced into service in 2019
  • 234 metres long
  • Capacity – 510 Standard and 101 First
  • One diesel engine for emergency power.

On the right is an InterCity 225.

Both trains are designed for 140 mph and will be able to attain this speed, when in-cab digital signalling is available.

It looks like LNER will have the following full-size electric fleet.

  • Thirty Class 801 trains
  • Seven InterCity 225 trains and spare coaches, driving van trailers and locomotives.

Both trains will be able to work any route with full electrification.

Changes In The Future To LNER Services

I predict that the following will happen.

140 mph Running Between Woolmer Green And Doncaster

This will happen and the following trains will take advantage.

The odd ones out will be Grand Central’s Class 180 trains, which are diesel and only capable of 125 mph.

How long will the other train operating companies accept slow trains on the 140 mph railway?

Digital In-Cab Signalling And 140 mph Running Will Speed Up Services

In Thoughts On Digital Signalling On The East Coast Main Line, I said that following train times would be possible., in addition to a London Kings Cross and Leeds time of two hours.

  • London Kings Cross and Bradford Forster Square – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Harrogate – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Huddersfield – two hours and twenty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Hull – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Middlesbrough – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Scarborough – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Skipton – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and York – two hours

Note.

  1. All timings would be possible with Hitachi Class 80x trains.
  2. Timings on Fully-electrified routes would be possible with InterCity 225 trains.

It appears that Grand Central will be stuck in the slow lane.

Grand Central Will Acquire Hitachi Trains Or Give Up

Grand Central‘s destinations of Bradford Interchange and Sunderland can’t be reached by all-electric trains, so will either have to follow Hull Trains and purchase Hitachi bi-mode trains or give up their routes.

The Diesel Engines In The Class 801 Trains Will Be Replaced By Batteries

East Coast Trains’ Class 803 trains have a slightly different powertrain to LNER’s Class 801 trains, which is explained like this in Wikipedia.

Unlike the Class 801, another non-bi-mode AT300 variant which despite being designed only for electrified routes carries a diesel engine per unit for emergency use, the new units will not be fitted with any, and so would not be able to propel themselves in the event of a power failure. They will however be fitted with batteries to enable the train’s on-board services to be maintained, in case the primary electrical supplies would face a failure.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see a similar battery system fitted to the Class 801 trains.

The Diesel Engines In Hull Trains Class 802 Trains Will Be Replaced By Batteries

In Hull Issues New Plea For Electrification, I showed how Hitachi’s Class 802 trains with batteries instead of diesel engines could work long-distance services to and from Hull.

This will happen, as electric trains to London, would be a dream for a marketing man or woman.

Will The InterCity 225 Trains Lose Some First Class Seats?

This may happen, so that the seating layout in both trains is almost identical.

I’m certain, that it could be arranged, that seat numbers in both trains could have a similar position.

This would mean that if an InterCity 225 train replaced a Class 801 train, there wouldn’t need to be a seat reallocation.

Could InterCity 225 Trains Be Fitted With Emergency Batteries?

If LNER thought they were needed, I’m sure that this would be possible and Hyperdrive Innovation would oblige!

Conclusion

British Rail last hurrah, is giving Hitachi’s latest trains, a run for their money!

 

September 17, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , | 8 Comments

Thoughts On Digital Signalling On The East Coast Main Line

I came up to Doncaster yesterday on a new Hull Trains Class 802 train.

According to my pocket dynamometer car, the train seemed to be at or nearly at 125 mph, most of the time I looked from possibly around Stevenage to just South of Doncaster.

I came back today on an LNER Class 801 train and the train’s performance seemed very similar.

I also noted the following.

  • The two stops at Newark and Peterborough, took seven and nine minutes respectively from the start of slowing for the station until back up to speed.
  • Between Peterborough and Stevenage the train kept below a maximum of 110 mph.
  • The train went through the two tunnels before Welwyn North station and the station itself at 75 mph.
  • I timed the train at 100 mph over the Digswell Viaduct, when it reached the South side after accelerating on the viaduct.
  • 90 mph was maintained between Potters Bar and New Southgate stations.
  • Speed gradually reduced from New Southgate into Kings Cross.

Note.

  1. 125 mph is the maximum allowable speed of the train.
  2. The 110 mph running was probably to be compatible with the Class 387 trains.
  3. I will do the trip again and get some accurate figures.

It appears to me, that the driver was obeying a simple but fast plan.

The Wikipedia entry for the East Coast Main Line, says this about the opiating speed of the line, with the new trains.

Increasing maximum speeds on the fast lines between Woolmer Green and Dalton-on-Tees up to 140 mph (225 km/h) in conjunction with the introduction of the Intercity Express Programme, level crossing closures, ETRMS fitments, OLE rewiring and the OLE PSU – est. to cost £1.3 billion (2014). This project is referred to as “L2E4” or London to Edinburgh (in) 4 Hours. L2E4 examined the operation of the IEP at 140 mph on the ECML and the sections of track which can be upgraded to permit this, together with the engineering and operational costs

It also says this about the implementation of digital signalling.

A new Rail operating centre (ROC), with training facilities, opened in early 2014 at the “Engineer’s Triangle” in York. The ROC will enable signalling and day-to-day operations of the route to be undertaken in a single location. Signalling control/traffic management using ERTMS is scheduled to be introduced from 2020 on the ECML between London King’s Cross and Doncaster – managed from the York ROC.

The signalling could probably work in one of two ways.

  • The signalling tells the driver the required speed and they drive the train accordingly.
  • The signalling drives the train and the driver monitors what is happening.

Both methods are used in the UK.

A Possible London Kings Cross and Leeds Service

The combined affect of both track and signalling improvements is illustrated by this simple calculation.

  • As Dalton-on-Tees is North of Doncaster, the route between Woolmer Green and Doncaster should be possible to be run at 140 mph
  • Woolmer Green and Doncaster stations are 132.1 miles apart.
  • Non-stop York and London Kings Cross trains are currently timed at 70 minutes between Doncaster and Woolmer Green stations.
  • This is an average speed of 113.2 mph.

If 140 mph could be maintained between Doncaster and Woolmer Green, the section of the journey would take 56.6 minutes, which is a saving of 13.4 minutes.

Consider.

  • The fastest current trains between London Kings Cross and Leeds take between two hours and twelve minutes and two hours and fifteen minutes.
  • I suspect that the extra tracks into Kings Cross, that are currently being built will save a few minutes.
  • There must be some savings to be made between Doncaster and Leeds
  • There must be some savings to be made between London Kings Cross and Woolmer Green.
  • There could be a rearrangement of stops.

I think it is highly likely that in the future, there will be at least one train per hour (tph) between London Kings Cross and Leeds, that does the trip in two hours.

  • There is no reason why all London Kings Cross and Leeds trains could not take two hours.
  • London Kings Cross and Doncaster could be several minutes under an-hour-and-a-half.
  • High Speed Two is predicting one hour and twenty-one minutes for their future service  between London Euston and Leeds, which is a saving of 38 minutes.
  • London and Leeds in two hours will attract passengers.

There will be serious competition between London and Leeds.

Other Timing Improvements

I also think these times would be possible

  • London Kings Cross and Bradford Forster Square – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Harrogate – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Huddersfield – two hours and twenty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Hull – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Middlesbrough – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Scarborough – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and Sheffield – two hours
  • London Kings Cross and Skipton – two hours and thirty minutes
  • London Kings Cross and York – two hours

I would be fairly certain that London Kings Cross and Huddersfield could be slowed by ten minutes, which would give the London Kings Cross and Yorkshire a certain symmetry.

  • London Kings Cross and Leeds and York would take two hours.
  • London Kings Cross and all the others would take two hours and thirty minutes.

It would probably make arrangement of a fast timetable easier.

 

 

September 15, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Overhauls for LNER’s Remaining Class 91s And Mk 4s

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

This is the introductory paragraph.

Eversholt Rail, which owns the trains, has confirmed that 12 London North Eastern Railway Class 91s and the remaining Mk 4 coaches will undergo overhauls at Wabtec Rail, Doncaster.

It had been expected, that LNER would purchase more trains, as I wrote about in More New Trains On LNER Wish List.

The article gives more details of the trains to be retained.

  • Twelve Class 91 locomotives, seven rakes of Mark 4 coaches and two spare coaches will be retained.
  • They will be confined to routes between London Kings Cross and Bradford, Leeds, Skipton and York.

How many trains will be needed to cover these routes?

  • Trains take two hours and fifteen minutes between London Kings Cross and Leeds and run at a frequency of two trains per hour (tph)
  • Trains take two hours and twenty-one minutes between London Kings Cross and York and run hourly.
  • I suspect that a round trip to Leeds or York can be five hours.

So a crude analysis says, that will mean fifteen trains will be needed,

But some of these trains will be extended past Leeds.

These are, electrification status and the times and distances between Leeds and the final destinations.

  • Bradford – Electrified – 22 minutes – 13.5 miles
  • Harrogate – Not Electrified – 40 minutes – 18 miles
  • Huddersfield – Not Electrified – 33 minutes – 17 miles
  • Skipton – Electrified  – 45 minutes – 26 miles

It appears that the following is true.

  • Trains serving Harrogate and Huddersfield must be worked by bi-mode Class 800 trains.
  • Trains serving Bradford and Skipton could be worked by InterCity 225 trains or an all-electric nine-car Class 801 train.

Note.

  1. Some times are those taken by LNER services and some are estimates from TransPennine Express.
  2. I have assumed 8-10 minutes for the Split-and-Join at Leeds and included it in the times.
  3. Class 800 trains seem to take around ten minutes to turnround at Harrogate.
  4. Times between London Kings Cross and Doncaster will decrease by a few minutes, with the addition of digital in-cab signalling on the route, which will allow 140 mph running by InterCity 225s, Class 800 trains and Class 801 trains.

I estimate that it will be possible for an InterCity 225, Class 800 train or Class 801 train to do a round trip between London Kings Cross and Bradford, Harrogate, Huddersfield or Skipton in six hours.

The round trip between London Kings Cross and York will be the five hours, I estimated earlier.

Wikipedia also says this.

LNER expects to introduce two-hourly services to Bradford and a daily service to Huddersfield in May 2020 when more Azuma trains have been introduced.

So would the pattern of trains to Leeds/York be as follows?

  • One tph – One pair of five-car Class 800 trains to Leeds, of which some or all split and join at Leeds, with one train going to and from Harrogate and the other going to and from Huddersfield.
  • One tph per two hours (tp2h) – An InterCity 225 or nine-car Class 801 train to Leeds, of which some or all are extended to Bradford.
  • One tp2h – An InterCity 225 or nine-car Class 801 train to Leeds, of which some or all are extended to Skipton.
  • One tph – An InterCity 225 or nine-car Class 801 train to York.

I estimate that it will be possible for an InterCity 225, Class 800 train or Class 801 train to do a round trip between London Kings Cross and Bradford, Harrogate, Huddersfield or Skipton in six hours.

This would need the following trains.

  • Six pairs of five-car Class 800 trains for the Harrogate and Huddersfield services.
  • Six full size all electric trains, which could be an InterCity 225, a nine-car Class 801 train or a pair of five Class 801 trains, for Bradford and Skipton services.
  • Five full size all electric trains, which could be an InterCity 225, a nine-car Class 801 train or a pair of Class 801 trains, for York services.

So why have LNER changed their mind and are retaining the InterCity 225?

Are InterCity 225 Trains Already Certified For 140 mph Running?

I wouldn’t be surprised, if a large part of the certification work for this had been done for 140 mph running and for it to be allowed, it needs digital in-cab signalling to be installed on the East Coast Main Line.

The Wikipedia entry for the InterCity 225 says this about the train’s performance.

The InterCity 225 has a top service speed of 140 mph (225 km/h); during a test run in 1989 on Stoke Bank between Peterborough and Grantham an InterCity 225 reached 162 mph (260.7 km/h). However, except on High Speed 1, which is equipped with cab signalling, British signalling does not allow trains to exceed 125 mph (201 km/h) in regular service, due to the impracticality of correctly observing lineside signals at high speed.

The Wikipedia entry for the East Coast Main Line says this about the future signalling.

A new Rail operating centre (ROC), with training facilities, opened in early 2014 at the “Engineer’s Triangle” in York. The ROC will enable signalling and day-to-day operations of the route to be undertaken in a single location. Signalling control/traffic management using ERTMS is scheduled to be introduced from 2020 on the ECML between London King’s Cross and Doncaster – managed from the York ROC.

A small fleet of InterCity 225 trains could be the ideal test fleet to find all the glitches in the new signalling.

Are InterCity 225 trains Already Certified To Run To Bradford and Skipton?

If they are, then that is another problem already solved.

A Fleet Of Seven Trains Would Cover Bradford And Skipton Services

Six trains are needed to run a one tp2h service to both Bradford and Skipton, so they could fully cover one tp2h to Bradford and occasional trains to Skipton with a spare train and one in maintenance.

Using InterCity 225s To Bradford and Skipton Would Not Require A Split-And-Join At Leeds

The number of trains that would Split-and-Join at Leeds would be only two tph instead  of four tph, which would be simpler with less to go wrong.

Not Enough Five-Car Bi-Mode Class 800 Trains

LNER’s full fleet of Azumas will be as follows.

  • 13 – Nine-car bi-mode Class 800 trains.
  • 10 – Five-car bi-mode Class 800 trains.
  • 30 – Nine-car electric Class 801 trains.
  • 12 – Five-car electric Class 801 trains.

This would appear to be a major problem, if Harrogate and Huddersfield were to be served hourly by Class 800 trains, existing services are to be maintained or even increased to Hull and Lincoln and extra services are to be added to Middlesbrough and perhaps Nottingham and other destinations.

The InterCity 225s only help indirectly, if they provided the London Kings Cross and Bradford and Skipton services.

Conversion Of Class 800 and Class 801 Trains To Regional Battery Trains

Hitachi have launched the Regional Battery Train, which is described in this Hitachi infographic.

For LNER, they will be useful for any Journey under about 90 kilometres or 56 miles.

The trains should be able to serve these routes.

  • Leeds and Harrogate and back – 36 miles
  • Leeds and Huddersfield and back – 34 miles
  • Newark and Lincoln and back – 33 miles
  • Northallerton and Middlesbrough and back – 42 miles

Whilst Class 800 trains and Class 801 trains are converted, the InterCity 225 trains would act as valuable cover on services like London to Leeds and York.

Conclusion

I think it is a good plan.

September 14, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Existing Stations Where High Speed Two Trains Will Call

The June 2020 Edition Of Modern Railways has an article called HS2 Minister Backs 18 tph Frequency, which gives a detailed diagram of the route structure of High Speed Two and it is possible to summarise the stations, where High Speed Two trains will call.

  • Carlisle – 3 tph – 400 metres – Split/Join
  • Chesterfield – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • Crewe – 2 tph – 400 metres – Split/Join
  • Darlington – 2 tph – 200 metres
  • Durham – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • East Midlands Hub HS2 – 7 tph – 400 metres – Split/Join
  • Edinburgh Haymarket – 2.5 tph – 200 metres
  • Edinburgh Waverley – 2.5 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
  • Glasgow Central – 2.5 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
  • Lancaster – 2 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
  • Leeds HS2 – 5 tph – 400 metres
  • Liverpool Lime Street – 2 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
  • Lockerbie – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • Macclesfield – 1 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
  • Manchester Airport HS2 – 5 tph – 400 metres
  • Manchester Piccadilly HS2 – 5 tph – 400 metres
  • Motherwell – 0.5 tph – 200 metres
  • Newcastle – 3 tph – 200 metres – Terminal
  • Oxenholme – 0.5 tph – 200 metres
  • Penrith – 0.5n tph – 200 metres
  • Preston – 4 tph – 400 metres
  • Runcorn – 2 tph – 200 metres
  • Sheffield – 2 tph – 200 metres
  • Stafford – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • Stoke-on-Trent – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • Warrington Bank  Quay – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • Wigan North Western – 1 tph – 200 metres
  • York – 4 tph – 200 metres

Note.

  1. HS2 after the station name indicates a new station for High Speed Two
  2. tph is trains per hour
  3. 0.5 tph is one train per two hours (tp2h).
  4. 200/400 metres is the maximum length of trains that will call.
  5. Terminal indicates that trains will terminate at these stations.
  6. Split/Join indicates that trains will split and join at these stations.

These are more detailed thoughts on how existing stations will need to be modified.

Train Lengths

Before, I look at the individual stations, I’ll look at the train lengths.

  • High Speed Two train – Single – 200 metres
  • High Speed Two train – Pair – 400 metres
  • Class 390 train – 11-car – 265.3 metres
  • Class 390 train – 9-car – 217.5 metres
  • Class 807 train – 7-car – 182 metres
  • Class 810 train – 5-car – 120 metres
  • Class 810 train – Pair of 5-car – 240 metres
  • InterCity 125 – 2+8 – 220 metres
  • InterCity 225 – 9-car – 245 metres
  • Class 222 train – 4-car – 93.34 metres
  • Class 222 train – 5-car – 116.16 metres
  • Class 222 train – 7-car – 161.8 metres
  • Class 222 train – 4-car+5-car – 209.5 metres
  • Class 222 train – 5-car+5-car – 232.32 metres

These are the thoughts on the individual stations.

Carlisle

Carlisle station will need two 400 metre through platforms, so each can accommodate a pair of 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

 

I estimate the platforms are about 380 metres, but it looks like, they could be lengthened, without too much difficulty.

As High Speed Two trains to the North of Carlisle will be 200 metres long, there would probably be no need for platform lengthening North of Carlisle, as these trains are shorter than the Class 390 trains, that currently work the routes to Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Carlisle station is step-free, has good secondary rail connections and is within walking distance of the city centre.

The only thing it needs, is a connection to Edinburgh on a rebuilt Borders Railway.

Chesterfield

Consider.

  • Chesterfield station will need to handle 200 metre trains.
  • Chesterfield station may be rebuilt for High Speed Two.
  • Chesterfield station can handle an InterCity 125, which is 220 metres.
  • It will need to handle a pair of Class 810 trains, which would be 240 metres.

This Google Map shows Chesterfield station.

Note.

  1. The slow lines passing the station on the Eastern side.
  2. There are two long through platforms and a third bi-directional platform on the down slow line.

There is space to build two long platforms for High Speed Two, but is it worth it, when one one tph will stop?

  • According to High Speed Two’s Journey Time Calculator, trains will take just twelve minutes between Sheffield and Chesterfield stations.
  • This compares with 12-15 minutes for the current diesel trains.
  • The distance between the two stations is 14 miles, which means that a twelve minute trip has an average speed of 70 mph.
  • If there are still two tph to St. Pancras, there will be four tph, that run fast between the Sheffield and Chesterfield stations, of which three will stop at Chesterfield.

I think this could result in a simple and efficient design for the tracks between Sheffield and South of Clay Cross, where High Speed Two joins the Erewash Valley Line.

Chesterfield station is step-free.

Crewe

Crewe station will need two 400 metre through platforms, so each can accommodate a pair of 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

There have been references to rebuilding of Crewe stations, but it does appear that some platforms are over 300 metres long.

Darlington

Darlington station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Durham

Durham station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Edinburgh Haymarket

Edinburgh Haymarket station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Edinburgh Waverley

Edinburgh Waverley station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Glasgow Central

Glasgow Central station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Currently, Avanti West Coast runs the following services to Glasgow Central.

  • One tph from London Euston calling at Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme Lake District (1tp2h), Penrith (1tp2h) and Carlisle.
  • One tp2h from London Euston calling at Milton Keynes Central, Coventry, Birmingham International, Birmingham New Street, Sandwell and Dudley, Wolverhampton, Crewe, Warrington Bank Quay, Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme Lake District (1tp2h), Penrith (1tp2h) and Carlisle.

High Speed Two is proposing to run the following trains to Glasgow Central.

  • Two tph from London Euston calling at Old Oak Common, Preston and Carlisle.
  • One tp2h from Birmingham Curzon Street calling at Wigan North Western, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme (1tp2h), Penrith (1tp2h), Carlisle, Lockerbie and Motherwell (1tp2h)

If the current services to Glasgow Central  were to be replaced by the High Speed Two services, most travellers would get a similar or better service.

But if Avanti West Coast decide to drop their classic services to Glasgow via Birmingham, will travellers starting between Milton Keynes and Crewe, be a bit miffed to lose their direct services to Glasgow?

Glasgow Central station would appear to be ready for High Speed Two.

Lancaster

I was initially surprised, that on High Speed Two, one tph would terminate at Lancaster station.

This Google Map shows the station.

Note.

  1. There are two bypass lines without any platforms on the Western side of the tracks, where trains can speed through.
  2. The station has five platforms.
  3. Some Avanti West Coast services terminate at Lancaster station.
  4. 265 metre, eleven-car Class 390 trains, stop in Lancaster station.

As High Speed Two services will use 200 metre trains, which are shorter than all Class 390 trains, I would suspect that High Speed Two services will be able to be turned at Lancaster station, without too much difficulty.

Liverpool Lime Street

Liverpool Lime Street station will need to be able to turn two 200 metre High Speed Two tph.

  • The remodelling of the station in 2018, probably allowed for two tph between London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street station.
  • From 2022-2023, it will be turning two Class 807 trains per hour, which will probably be 182 metres long.

Liverpool Lime Street station may well be ready for Phase One of High Speed Two. It’s also very much step-free.

There are also alternative plans for a new High Speed station in Liverpool.

  • It would be alongside the current Liverpool Lime Street station.
  • The station would have a route to High Speed Two at Crewe via Warrington and a junction at High Legh.
  • Northern Powerhouse Rail would start in the station and go to Manchester via Warrington, High Legh and Manchester Airport.
  • It would enable six tph between Liverpool and Manchester, in a time of just 26 minutes.

I talked about this plan in Changes Signalled For HS2 Route In North, where I included this map.

High Legh Junction is numbered 5 and 6.

Nothing published about High Speed Two, would appear to rule this plan out.

Lockerbie

Lockerbie station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Macclesfield

I was initially surprised, that on High Speed Two, one tph would terminal at Macclesfield station.

This Google Map shows the station.

Wikipedia says this about the platforms in the station.

There are three platforms but only two are in regular use, the up platform for services to Manchester and the down platform to Stoke-on-Trent and Birmingham. Platform 3 sees a small number of services. Evidence of a fourth platform can be seen, on which a Network Rail building now exists.

As the station has a regular Avanti West Coast service every hour, the platforms must be over 200 metres long and they will be long enough for the 200 metre High Speed Two trains.

So why would High Speed Two want to terminate a train at Macclesfield, rather than at Manchester Piccadilly as they do now?

Currently, Avanti West Coast runs these services between London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly.

  • One tph via Milton Keynes Central, Stoke-on-Trent and Stockport.
  • One tph via Stoke-on-Trent, Macclesfield and Stockport
  • One tph via Stafford, Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport

The diagram in the Modern Railways article shows these High Speed Two services to Manchester Piccadilly.

  • One tph from London Euston via Old Oak Common, Birmingham Interchange and Manchester Airport
  • Two tph from London Euston via Old Oak Common and Manchester Airport
  • Two tph from Birmingham Curzon Street via Manchester Airport.

Note.

  1. None of these five tph serve Macclesfield, Milton Keynes Central, Stockport, Stoke-on-Trent or Wilmslow.
  2. All five proposed services are shown to call at Manchester Airport.
  3. It is likely, that a tunnel will be bored between Manchester Airport and Manchester Piccadilly stations.
  4. The High Speed Two station at Manchester Piccadilly might even be in a tunnel under the current Manchester Piccadilly station or central Manchester.
  5. A below-ground High Speed Two station for Manchester could also serve Northern Powerhouse Rail services to Leeds and the East.
  6. According to the plans, I talked about under Liverpool Lime Street earlier, there could also be up to six tph running between Liverpool and Manchester via Manchester Airport, as part of Northern Powerhouse Rail.

Plans need to be developed to serve the towns and cities, that will not be served by High Speed Two’s current proposals.

  • It appears Stafford, Stoke-on-Trent and Macclesfield will be served by an independent High Speed Two service from London Euston.
  • Terminating one tph at Macclesfield station doesn’t appear to be challenging.
  • A rail route between Macclesfield and Manchester Airport to link up with the proposed tunnel could be very difficult.
  • Manchester Piccadilly and Macclesfield stations have a frequent rail connection, with most trains calling at Stockport station.
  • Perhaps during construction work for High Speed Two in the centre of Manchester, Macclesfield station can be used as an alternative route into the city, using the existing Manchester Piccadilly station.

The London Euston and Macclesfield service via Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent could be a pragmatic solution to part of the problem, but what about Milton Keynes, Wilmslow and Stockport?

According to the title of the Modern Railways article, High Speed Two will have a maximum frequency of 18 tph.

When fully-developed, the current proposed timetable shows the following.

  • A frequency of 17 tph between London Euston and Birmingham Interchange stations.
  • A frequency of 11 tph between Birmingham and Crewe.
  • A frequency of 9 tph through East Midlands Hub station.

It would appear that if there is a capacity bottleneck, it is between London and Birmingham.

However if classic services to Manchester Piccadilly are replaced by the High Speed Two services to the city via the new tunnel from Manchester Airport to a new station in the City Centre, there will be spare capacity on the Crewe and Manchester Piccadilly route via Wilmslow and Stockport stations.

This could lead to a number of solutions.

  • A direct High Speed Two service runs using the spare path, between London and the current Manchester Piccadilly station.
  • Similar to the previous service, but the service splits and joins at Crewe, with one individual train going to Manchester Piccadilly and the other somewhere else. Blackpool?
  • One service between London and Liverpool is planned to split and join at Crewe with individual trains going to Lancaster and Liverpool. The other Liverpool service could split at Crewe with individual trains going to Liverpool and Manchester Piccadilly.
  • The service between London and Macclesfield is run by a pair of trains, that split at Birmingham Interchange, with individual trains going to Macclesfield and Manchester Piccadilly. The advantage of this service, is that if you got into the wrong train, you’d still be going to roughly the same destination.
  • Wikipedia says “At peak times, the current Avanti West Coast services may additionally call at one or more of: Watford Junction, Rugby, Nuneaton, Tamworth, Lichfield Trent Valley.” So why not run classic services on the West Coast Main Line between Euston and Manchester Piccadilly via Milton Keynes using suitably fast trains. Perhaps, the new Class 807 trains would be ideal.

Note.

  1. All services serving the current Manchester Piccadilly station would call at Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport stations.
  2. Passengers going to or from Manchester Airport would change at Crewe.

The more I look at Macclesfield, the more I like using it as a High Speed Two destination.

Motherwell

Motherwell station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Newcastle

Newcastle station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Oxenholme

Oxenholme station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Penrith

Penrith station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Preston

Preston station will need two 400 metre through platforms, so each can accommodate a pair of 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

 

I estimate that the main through platforms aren’t much short of the required 400 metres.

But something must be done to make the station step-free.

Runcorn

Runcorn station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 217 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also step-free.

Sheffield

Sheffield station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

As the station can already handle a 220 metre InterCity 125, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also substantially step-free.

Stafford

Stafford station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also step-free.

Wikipedia says this about Stafford station and High Speed Two.

Under current proposals, Stafford will be a part of the High Speed 2 network, via a ‘Classic Compatible’ junction, which will allow HS2 trains to operate to Stafford, and further on towards Liverpool. This would shorten journey time from Stafford to London, to an estimated 53 minutes. Under current proposals it is expected that an hourly services will operate in both directions, however it is currently unclear if these services will terminate at Stafford, or Liverpool.

This does appear to be rather out of date with High Speed Two’s latest proposals as disclosed in the Modern Railways article, which say that Stafford is served by the following service.

  • One tph between London Euston and Macclesfield.
  • Calls at Old Oak Common, Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent.
  • A 200 metre train.

One possibility must surely be to run a pair of 200 metre trains to and from Stafford, where they would split and join.

  • One could go as currently proposed to Stoke-on-Trent and Macclesfield.
  • The second train could go to Liverpool via Crewe and Runcorn or Manchester Piccadilly via Crewe, Wilmslow and Stockport.
  • The recent works at Norton Bridge Junction will have improved the route for the second train.

There would need to be platform lengthening at Stafford to accommodate the 400 metre pair of trains.

A split and join at Stafford does show the possibilities of the technique.

Another possibility is mentioned for Stafford in Wikipedia.

There is also been proposals to reintroduce services to Stafford to terminate on the Chase Line which was cutback to Rugeley Trent Valley in 2008. The Key Corridors states “Extension of Chase Line services to Stafford”. This is proposed to be in development.

It will surely connect a lot of people to Stafford for High Speed Two.

The extract from Wikipedia, that I used earlier, mentions a Classic Compatible junction, which will allow High Speed Two trains to reach Stafford.

This map clipped from the High Speed Two web site, shows the junction North of Lichfield, where High Speed Two connects to the Trent Valley Line through Stafford.

Note.

  1. High Speed Two runs North-South across the map.
  2. After the Junction by Fradley South,
  3. High Speed Two to Crewe and the North, is the branch to the East.
  4. The other branch connects to the Trent Valley Line, which can be picked out North of Lichfield, where it passes through Lichfield Trent Valley station.

The Trent Valley Line is no Victorian double-track slow-speed bottleneck.

  • Most of the route between Rugby and Stafford is three or four tracks.
  • The speed limit is generally 125 mph.
  • I wouldn’t be surprised to see Avanti West Coast’s Class 390 and Class 807 trains running at 140 mph on the route.
  • This speed would probably be attained by High Speed Two trains.

London Euston and Stafford would only have under twenty miles of slower line and that could be 140 mph, so High Speed Two  times on the route could be very fast. High Speed Two is quoting 54 minutes on their Journey Time Calculator.

Stoke-on-Trent

Stoke-on-Trent station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

This Google Map shows the station.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem. The station is also step-free.

Warrington Bank Quay

Warrington Bank Quay station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 265 metre Class 390 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Wigan North Western

Wigan North Western station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

In Is Wigan North Western Station Ready For High Speed Two?, I said this.

Wigan North Western station would accept a single-train now, but the platforms would need lengthening to handle a double-train.

As all trains through Wigan North Western station will only be 200 metre single trains and the station is step-free, the station appears to be ready for High Speed Two.

York

York station will need to accommodate 200 metre trains.

As it already accommodates 245 metre InterCity 225 trains, there shouldn’t be too much of a problem.

Conclusion

I have come to these conclusions.

  • Because most of these stations have been rebuilt in the last few decades to accommodate the 200-plus metre InterCity 125s, InterCity 225s and Class 390 trains, all the stations can handle a 200 metre High Speed Two train without significant lengthening.
  • Some stations like Carlisle, Crewe, Preston and Stafford may need a small amount of platform lengthening to accommodate a pair of trains, but most of the improvements needed for a world-class High Speed railway will be more refurbishment than a complete rebuild.
  • Using existing platforms at Lancaster and Macclesfield stations as terminal platforms is an elegant and a much more affordable solution than building new stations or even platforms.
  • Because all five tph into the High Speed Two station at Manchester Piccadilly go via Manchester Airport, I would envisage that this will be in a tunnel, that can be part of a future Northern Powerhouse Rail.

I also think that the plan has been devised with the Project Management and minimising disruption to travellers in mind.

 

 

June 13, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments