Vineyard Wind To Deploy US-Based Supplier’s Bubble Curtain During Foundation Installation
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
Vineyard Wind, a joint venture between Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners (CIP) and Avangrid building the first large-scale offshore wind farm in the US, has signed an agreement with the US company ThayerMahan for a pilot programme to deploy and test a secondary bubble curtain during the installation of foundations
This is the first paragraph.
A bubble curtain mitigates noise created during foundation installation by absorbing and dampening sound. First, the curtain’s large, perforated hoses are placed on the seafloor around the monopile. Then, the hoses are filled with compressed air which, once the hoses are inflated, escapes through the perforations and creates a barrier of bubbles that reduce noise.
Nothing is said, as to how the bubbles cut the noise.
I’m fairly certain that I know why.
- The speed of sound in air on a standard day at sea level static conditions, is about 340 metres/second.
- In water it’s about 1500 metres/second.
So what would the speed of sound in a bubbly mixture of air and water be?
I asked this question of Google and got this answer.
Surprisingly, in a two- fluid mixture, the measured speed of sound can be one order of magnitude smaller than that of its constituents. For example for water and air in normal conditions the speed of sound in the mixture can be about 23m/s while it is 1500m/s in water and 330m/s in air.
I even made money out of this phenomena, by backing two guys, who used it to develop an aerosol valve that used nitrogen as a propellant.
This research indirectly led to the development of the Respimat inhaler for asthma drugs.
So how does it cut the noise?
I’m not sure of this, but we do know the noise of the piling will have to go through areas of water with different speeds of sound. So is the sound attenuated as it passes through the bubble curtain by the slow speed?
I have other ideas for this interesting phenomenon and if anybody is interested please contact me. One use may have applications in mixing dissimilar fluids.
Riding In A Train Designed To Run On Battery Power
Today, I had my first ride in a train, that has been designed to be able to run on battery power.
- Merseyrail’s Class 777 trains run normally using third-rail electrification.
- But they are also designed to run on battery power.
- I took these pictures of the train as it went from Liverpool Central station to Kirkby station and back to Moorfields station, from where I took a train back to Liverpool Lime Street station.
I took these pictures on the route.
Note.
- Every seat has access to a power and USB socket.
- Every head-rest has leather facings.
- The end lights change from white for front, to red for back, when the train changes direction.
- Door lights are green when it is safe to enter.
- There is a lot of attention to detail in the design.
If there is a better suburban train in Europe, I’ve yet to see or ride in it.
Noise And Vibration
Consider.
- I have ridden in two trains converted to battery-electric operation and both were very quiet.
- This train was also very quiet, but it has been designed for battery operation.
- I suspect that the train is very frugal with electricity.
- I wonder, if the small battery, that is carried on the train for depot movements, is also used for regenerative braking.
- It might not be a traditional battery, but a supercapacitor, some of which are made from curved graphene.
This train certainly sets new standards in noise and vibration.
World’s First Offshore Wind Farm Using 16 MW Turbines Enters Construction In China
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
China Three Gorges Corporation (CTG) has started construction of the second phase of its offshore wind farm Zhangpu Liuao. The project will be both China’s and the world’s first wind farm to comprise 16 MW wind turbines.
I hope the Chinese have done all their calculations, research and testing. The dynamics of large wings are tricky and there are a lot of square law factors involved. I’d always be worried that at a particular wind speed a dangerous vibration will be setup.
How many Chinese engineers have seen videos of Galloping Gertie?
As the video says, no one was injured or killed, when the Tacoma Narrows Bridge fell into the river, but we nearly had a very similar disaster in the UK. I used to work at ICI in Runcorn and at the time, I lived in Liverpool, so every day, I went to work I crossed the Silver Jubilee Bridge twice.
One day, after a party in Cheshire, I even got so drunk, I had to stop the car on the bridge and was sick into the Mersey. It was before C and myself were married and she always claimed she nearly called the marriage off, after the incident.
But have you ever wondered, why that bridge is a through arch bridge rather than a suspension bridge as over the Forth, Hmber and Severn, which were all built around the same time?
Wikipedia has a section, which describes the Planning of the bridge.
The new bridge had to allow the passage of shipping along the Manchester Ship Canal. Many ideas were considered, including a new transporter bridge or a swing bridge. These were considered to be impractical and it was decided that the best solution was a high-level bridge upstream from the railway bridge. This would allow the least obstruction to shipping and would also be at the narrowest crossing point. The first plan for a high-level bridge was a truss bridge with three or five spans, giving an 8 yards (7 m) dual carriageway with a cycle track and footpaths. This was abandoned because it was too expensive, and because one of the piers would be too close to the wall of the ship canal. The next idea was for a suspension bridge with a span of 343 yards (314 m) between the main towers with an 8 yards (7 m) single carriageway and a 2-yard (2 m) footpath. However aerodynamic tests on models of the bridge showed that, while the bridge itself would be stable, the presence of the adjacent railway bridge would cause severe oscillation.
The finally accepted design was for a steel through arch bridge with a 10-yard (9 m) single carriageway. The design of the bridge is similar to that of Sydney Harbour Bridge but differs from it in that the side spans are continuous with the main span rather than being separate from them. This design feature was necessary to avoid the problem of oscillation due to the railway bridge. The main span measures 361 yards (330 m) and each side span is 83 yards (76 m).
But that misses out part of the story that I learned about at ICI.
I developed a very simple piece of electronics for ICI Runcorn’s noise and vibration expert. The equipment allowed the signals from two noise meters to be subtracted. This meant that if they were pointed in different directions, the noise generated by an object or piece of equipment could be determined.
The noise and vibration expert had tremendous respect from his fellow engineers, but his involvement in the design of the Runcorn bridge had elevated him to a legend.
The designers of the suspension bridge, that is detailed in the Wikipedia extract, presented their design to the ICI (Merseyside) Scientific Society.
The noise and vibration expert was at the meeting and questioned the design and said it would collapse due to oscillations caused by the presence of the railway bridge. He advised aerodynamic tests should be done on the bridge.
His back of the fag packet calculations were shown by tests to be correct and the bridge was built as a through arch bridge.
These pictures show the bridge.
They were taken from a train on the railway bridge.
My First Ride In A Hydrogen-Powered Double-Deck Bus
Today, I had my first ride in a hydrogen double-deck bus.
I took these pictures.
Note.
- I took the No 7 bus in London between Ladbroke Grove tube station and Oxford Circus.
- There were still some of the older Volvo hybrid buses on the route.
- The current fleet is around twenty buses.
This article on edie.net, is entitled England’s First Hydrogen Double-Decker Buses Hit The Road In London.
I note this paragraph in the article with interest.
Hydrogen used to fuel the new London buses is being produced at Air Liquide’s facility in Runcorn, Cheshire, which processes waste hydrogen from the industrial chemical industry. From 2023, the facility will be converted to produce only green hydrogen – a term used to describe hydrogen produced using electrolysis powered by renewable electricity.
It sounds, that at present the hydrogen could be coming from the old Castner-Kellner plant at ICI’s Runcorn complex. where I had my first job after leaving Liverpool University in the late 1960s.
These are my thoughts.
Refuelling
The edie article says the buses are refuelled once a day, at a facility at Perivale in Ealing.
Interior Design
Londoners will feel at home in these buses, as they have the same look and feel as London’s other double-deck buses.
But they do have some features, borrowed from other means of transport.
- They have a set of four family seats.
- Are those two yellow bars in front of where I sat a foot rest?
- There were a lot of USB- charger sockets.
It is certainly a well-designed interior.
Battery Or Hydrogen?
In A Trip On An Electric Double Deck Bus On Route 212 Between Chingford And St. James Street Stations, I described a trip on an electric double-deck bus.
I would go for the hydrogen, rather than electric.
A friend who runs a bus company in London, says fleets of battery buses are a nightmare to recharge.
The Edie article says once a day is fine.
The battery bus has a higher environmental footprint.
Hydrogen can fuel trucks, cars, vans and semblances, at the same charging station.
But the big problem is most battery buses are Chinese and Transport for London’s hydrogen buses have been built in Northern Ireland.
Performance
\\\thr performance of the bus was spritely!
Conclusion
This was a good bus!
HS2 Way Out In Front In Tunnel Design For High-Speed Rail
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Rail Engineer.
The article describes how Arup and Birmingham University are using physical and computer modelling to obtain the ultimate profiles of both tunnel portal and train nose to both increase train performance and reduce train noise as the trains enter tunnels.
They are even using a huge shed at the former British Rail Research Centre in Derby!
The biggest problem, is that there are aerodynamic effects, as the trains enter the tunnels at very high speeds, which result in what are inevitably called sonic booms, that disturb the local residents.
Because the new trains and tunnel portals are being developed together, there must be a greater chance, they will meet the objectives.
Collateral Benefits
Get the design right and there will be other benefits.
Lower Power In The Cruise
In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?, I said this.
I have found this on this page on the RailUKForums web site.
A 130m Electric IEP Unit on a journey from Kings Cross to Newcastle under the conditions defined in Annex B shall consume no more than 4600kWh.
This is a Class 801 train.
- It has five cars.
- Kings Cross to Newcastle is 268.6 miles.
- Most of this journey will be at 125 mph.
- The trains have regenerative braking.
- I don’t know how many stops are included
This gives a usage figure of 3.42 kWh per vehicle mile.
This figure is not exceptional and I suspect that good design of the train’s nose will reduce it, especially as the design speed of High Speed Two will be 360 kph or 224 mph.
Reduced Noise
Stand on a Crossrail platform at say Southall or West Drayton stations and listen to the Class 801 trains passing.
They are only doing about 100 mph and they are certainly not quiet! Noise comes from a variety of sources including aerodynamics, overhead wires and running gear.
Could the nose and profile of high speed trains also be designed to minimise noise, when cruising at high speeds?
Reduced Pantograph Noise
Travelling at up to 360 kph, pantograph noise could be a serious problem.
The only way to cut it down, would be to lower the pantograph in sensitive areas and run the train on battery power.
But if the trains energy consumption could be cut to a much lower level, it might be possible for the cruise to be maintained on battery power alone.
Consider a journey between Euston and Birmingham.
- The train would accelerate away from Euston and go in a tunnel to Old Oak Common.
- Batteries could be charged whilst waiting at Euston and in the run to Old Oak Common.
- Accelerating away from Old Oak Common would bring the train to 360 kph as fast as possible.
- It would now cruise virtually all the way to Birmingham Interchange at 360 kph.
- At the appropriate moment the pantograph would be lowered and the train would use the kinetic energy to coast into Birmingham Interchange.
- There would probably be enough energy in the batteries to take the train into Birmingham Curzon Street station after the stop at Birmingham Interchange.
One technology that will massively improve is the raising and lowering of the pantograph at speed.
So could we see much of the long non-stop intermediate section being run on batteries with the pantograph down. If power is needed, it would raise to power the train directly. If the raising and lowering was efficient, then it might be able to use the pantograph only in tunnels.
Could It Be Possible To Dispence With Wires Outside Of Tunnels?
Probably not on the first phase of High Speed Two, but consider.
- High Speed Two is designed to have a lot of tunnels.
- Arup and Birmingham may come up with even better aerodynamic designs.
- Pantograph raising and lowering will get faster and extremely reliable.
- Battery technology will hold more electricity for a given weight and volume.
- Dispensing with visible wires could reduce the problems of getting planning permissions.
- Noise and visible intrision will be reduced.
I believe there will come a time, when high speed railways could be built without visible overhead electrification.
The only places, where electrification would be used would be in tunnels and stations.
Are There Any Other Applications Of This Research?
These are a few thoughts.
Hitachi Trains For The Midland Main Line
I’m suspicious, that the research or similar research elsewhere, might have already produced a very handy result!
In an article in the October 2019 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled EMR Kicks Off New Era, more details of the new Hitachi bi-mode trains for East Midlands Railway (EMR) are given.
This is said.
The first train is required to be available for testing in December 2021 with service entry between April and December 2022.
The EMR bi-modes will be able to run at 125 mph in diesel mode, matching Meridian performance in a step-up from the capabilities of the existing Class 80x units in service with other franchises. They will have 24 metre vehicles (rather than 26 metres), a slightly different nose to the ‘800s’ and ‘802s’, and will have four diesel engines rather than three.
Could the new nose have been designed partly in Birmingham?
Consider.
- Hitachi’s bi-modes for EMR InterCity could be running at up to 225 kph in a few years.
- The Midland Main Line between Derby and Chesterfield goes through a number of tunnels in a World Heritage Site.
- Hitachi have collaborated with UK research teams before, including on the Hyabusa.
- Hitachi and Bombardier are submitting a joint bid for High Speed Two trains, which is based in Birmingham.
It should be noted that when the Tōkaidō Shinkansen opened in 1964 between Tokyo and Osaka average speed was 210 kph.
So are Hitachi aiming to provide EMR InterCity with almost Shinkansen speeds on a typical UK main line?
Arup and Birmingham University, certainly have the capability to design the perfect nose for such a project.
Aventras
Did the research team also help Bombardier with the aerodynamics of the Aventra?
I’m pretty certain, that somebody did, as these trains seem to have a very low noise signature, as they go past.
Talgo
Tsalgo are building a research centre at Chesterfield.
Will they be tapping in to all the rail research in the Midlands?
Conclusion
It looks to me, that there is some world-class research going on in Birmingham and we’ll all benefit!
Leaves On The line? AI Signals End To Commuters’ Train Pain
The title of this article is the same as that of an article, that was on the front page of yesterday’s copy of The Times.
It talks about a system being developed by Hack Partners, that uses a camera to record lineside trees and then a computer using AI directs tree cutting gangs to the right places.
This is one of several systems that are to be funded by the Government. This paragraph summarised the grants.
The DfT and Innovate UK, the government’s technology agency, will announce today that up to £7.8 million is being invested in 24 trials of projects to boost performance on the railway. Each will receive between £250,000 and £350,000.
I particularly like a system from a Dutch company called 4Silence, which is designed to cut the noise of trains, which is described like this.
other schemes being funded include a noise barrier only 1m high topped by a steel grid, developed by the Dutch company 4Silence, which can deflect the sound of passing trains, improving the quality of life for residents near by.
I wonder what percentage of these trials will be winners.
I hope those who judge the success of these schemes, except that not all innovation succeeds.
Vivarail Units Take Over Marston Vale Services
The title of this post is the same asw this article on Railway Gazette.
The article contains an informative video of Adrian Shorter talking about the Class 230 train.
Much of the article and the video is information that has already been well reported.
Adrian Shooter does mention that the diesel-electric-battery versions of the Class 230 train for Transport for Wales will incorporate geo-fencing.
This would mean that in sensitive areas, the diesel engines would be cut out and only battery power would be used.
The process would be controlled automatically using the train’s position from GPS.
This technique has been used on hybrid buses to lower emissions and noise levels in sensitive areas.
Will We See More Slab Track On UK Railways?
I ask this question, as I’ve just read this article on Rail Engineer, which is entitled Slab Track Austria: Now A Serious Contender?
Slab track or ballastless track has a Wikipedia entry.
This is said under Characteristics.
In ballastless tracks, the rails are rigidly fastened to a special type of concrete ties/sleepers that are themselves set in concrete. Ballastless tracks therefore offer a high consistency in track geometry, the adjusting of which is not possible after the concreting of the superstructure. Therefore, ballastless tracks must be concreted within a tolerance of 0.5 millimetres. The elasticity of the ballast in the traditional railway superstructure is replaced by flexibility between either the rails and the concrete ties/sleepers or the ties/sleepers and the concrete or asphalt slab as well inherent elasticity within the conglomerate of the tie/sleeper, whereas the concrete or asphalt slab is usually inelastic.
Applications in the UK recently include.
- Tunnels on Merseyrail, Crossrail and other routes.
- Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
- Borders Railway.
- Edinburgh to Glasgow Line at Glasgow Queen Street station and the Winchburgh Tunnel.
This picture shows some of the slab track on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.
I suspect, that slab track was used here mainly because of limited clearance. But low maintenance and long life, must have improved the financial case.
Returning to the Rail Engineer article, it would appear that the engineers behind the slab track, have rethought a lot of the process of building a railway.
Slab Track Austria, which used to be called PORR-STA, seems to offer the following.
- Factory-build or one-site fabrication.
- Ease of installation.
- Accurate alignment
- Switches and crossing can be fabricated.
- Transition solutions to ballasted track.
- Low noise and vibration.
- Ease of maintenance
- Sixty year life.
Slab Track Austria would also appear to have worked extensively with Austrian Railways, to get everything as right as possible.
It just shows how much improvement can be squeezed out of some traditional industrial and construction processes.
HS2
TheSlab Track Austria track has also been used extensively on the new Berlin to Munich high speed line, that I wrote about in From Berlin To Munich In Four Hours By Train. This is said about the use of the track on that line, in the Rail Engineer article.
PORR was contracted to design and build three major sections of the railway route. Its patented slab track, STA, was installed over a total length of 320km, in tunnels, on bridges and in open sections. Operations started successfully in December 2015 on the VDE 8.2 section, from Erfurt to Leipzig and Halle. Since December 2017, the sections VDE 8.1.2, from Coburg to Illmenau, and VDE 8.1.3, from Bad Staffelstein to Coburg, have been in operation. Trains have been running on the STA slab track layout at speeds of 300km/h. Prior to commissioning, this slab track was tested at 330 km/h.
So it would appear to be suitable for the 400 kph, that is quoted for HS2, with perhaps a bit of tweaking.
The article also says this about using the track on HS2.
Cost analysis research suggests that the savings made from the reduced maintenance required for STA track will equate to a payback of within 15 to 20 years when compared to ballasted track systems. The opportunity for significant savings, as well as increased network availability due to the reduced maintenance requirement, has to mean that this system is a serious contender for any new railway route, one of which, of course, is HS2.
A dedicated factory producing the slabs would surely increase quality.
But whatever happens, with its numerous, bridges, tunnels and viaducts, I suspect that HS2 will be built using slab track.
In the last quote, a payback time of fifteen to twenty years is suggested, if the track is used on a new railway.
So where else could slab track be used to advantage?
East-West Rail Link
I feel that the East West Rail Link, could be a possibility.
Consider.
- It will not be initially electrified.
- It is through terrain that is not very challenging
- It is fairly close to HS2 and a possible slab track factory.
Building the line with slab track, could help make the East West Rail Link a low-energy and low-noise line for battery or hydrogen trains.
West Anglia Main Line Four-Tracking
Adding two extra tracks to the West Anglia Main Line between Coppermill Junction, which is just South of Tottenham Hale station, and Broxbourne station will be a difficult project.
The line is hemmed in on both sides by housing and slab track might give advantages.
- Ease to squeeze the tracks in the limited space available.
- Reduced noise.
- Speedier construction.
If Crossrail 2 is built, this four-tracking will have to be done.
Calder Valley Line
The Calder Valley Line should be updated to create a quality roue across the Pennines from Preston to Leeds.
Parts of the line would be challenging to improve to say the least, with lots of heritage features around the track.
Using slab track in places, has has been done on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line, might help with the following.
- The construction works needed.
- Increasing line speed.
- Lowering noise.
- Reduced maintenance.
The Wikipedia entry for the Calder Valley Line has a section called Holme Tunnel Engineering Work. This is said.
Holme Tunnel, which lies between Hebden Bridge and Burnley Manchester Road, was closed for 20 weeks from November 2013 until March 2014. This was to allow for major engineering work to fix the distorted shape of the tunnel, caused by movement of the ground through which it passes. The project was budgeted to cost £16.3million. During the works, buses replaced train services. Trains can now pass through at 45 mph.
I don’t think slab track was used in the work in this tunnel, but do we need 45 mph speed limits on Trans Pennine routes? After reading this article on Rail Engineer, it would appear that 75 mph will be possible in the future.
But this project does show some of the major problems on Trans Pennine routes!
It will be interesting to see what happens on this line.
Other Trans Pennine Routes
The other two Trans Pennine routes, the Huddersfield Line and the Hope Valley Line both have similar characteristics.
- Twisting routes.
- Several tunnels.
- Lots of bridges.
They are also busy with passenger and freight traffic.
When the plans for the updating of these lines is published, I suspect that slab track will feature, especially in some of the tunnels.
Across Chat Moss
George Stephenson had difficulty building the Liverpool to Manchester Railway across Chat Moss in 1829. Wikipedia says this about his solution.
Chat Moss threatened the completion of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, until George Stephenson, with advice from East Anglian marshland specialist Robert Stannard, succeeded in constructing a railway line through it in 1829; his solution was to “float” the line on a bed of bound heather and branches topped with tar and covered with rubble stone. The M62 motorway, completed in 1976, also crosses the bog, to the north of Irlam.
I have talked to drivers, who drive Class 319 trains along the now-electrified line across Chat Moss. They told me, that the soft suspension gives an interesting ride.
Under Timings And Line Speeds in the Wikipedia entry for the Liverpool-Manchester Lines, this is said.
The fastest recorded run was from Manchester Exchange to Liverpool Lime St in 30 minutes 46 seconds by a 1936 built Jubilee 5707 with 7 coaches. An 1882-built compound steam locomotive was timed on the same route in 38 minutes 18 seconds. Until 1968 trains from Liverpool to Manchester by all 3 routes were scheduled to take 40 minutes and often took less. The southern route via Warrington is now restricted to 85 mph and the northern route via Earlestown to 90 mph, with 75 mph over Chat Moss.
It would appear that something needs to be done to get timings between Liverpool and Manchester, back to those of the 1930s.
Would slab track across Chat Moss be part of the solution?
Tunnels
Various tunnel upgrades have shown how using slab track in tunnels is a very helpful technique.
Many tunnels will need to be updated to increase clearance for freight trains and overhead wires and also to solve structural problems caused by anno domini.
I believe we’ll see a lot more slab track in tunnels on the UK rail network.
Noise Reduction
The Rail Engineer article, says this about Slab Track Austria’s slab track.
The elastomeric layer also helps to reduce vibration and structure-borne noise, thus offering protection to supporting structures and reducing the noise created by passing trains – an important feature in built-up areas and tunnels.
So will we see increasing use of slab track in areas, where noise asnd vibration is a problem?
Other Lines
I see the Gospel Oak to Barking Line, as an example use of slab track that will be very much copied.
Slab track has been used successfully in sections, where clearance is limited and noise is a problem.
The use of slab track, might have meant that several bridges didn’t need to be rebuilt.
How many places in the UK have similar needs.
Conclusion
The rethinking of how we build railways by Slab Track Austria, will benefit our rail network and all those who use it.
We’ll be seeing a lot more slab track!
Will The Third Runway At Heathrow Be Actually Built In The Near Future?
If nothing else the 25th ofSeptember 2026 statement by the Government, stated that the UK is going to build another runway in the South-East.
But I have my doubts, that a third runway will be open at Heathrow in the near future.
Building The Third Runway
As I said in Building The Third Runway At Heathrow, I don’t believe that the actual construction of the Airport would present any problems for any large construction company or more likely consortium. This is illustrated today, by this article on the BBC, which is entitled New Heathrow runway may be built above the M25, which says to me that engineers are looking for easier and more affordable ways to build the new runway.
Rebuilding The Current Terminals
Heathrow are also disclosing a master-plan, for rebuilding a lot of the airport to make it more efficient and up with the best.
- There will be two main terminals; Heathrow West and Heathrow East with satellites in between handling the actual planes.
- These two terminals and the satellites will be between the two existing runways, with a passenger and baggage transport system beneath.
- Terminal Five will become Heathrow West.
- An extended Terminal Two will become Heathrow East.
- Crossrail, Heathrow Express and the Underground will serve both main terminals.
- A Terminal Six would be mainly for the third runway, would effectively be part of Heathrow West.
I believe that this rebuilding could start well before the third runway is even given the go-ahead, as many of the works will be within the current Airport boundary.
Rail Links To The Airport
Part of the master-plan is extensive rail links to the Airport.
- Crossrail, Heathrow Express and the Underground will serve London.
- There will be rail links to both the West and South.
- There will be a rail link to both HS1 and HS2.
- Could we even see a rail-based cargo transport system running under all the terminals, bringing in supplies for the terminals and the planes?
This map from carto.metro.free.fr shows the current rail links at Heathrow.
Rail Lines At Heathrow
Note.
- The Piccadilly Line is shown in blue.
- The lines going South lead to Terminal Four.
- Crossrail has Terminal Four as its terminus
- The Heathrow West and Heathrow East concept fits the rail lines well.
- Terminal Five station is ready for access from the West.
I think just as Gatwick are embracing rail with a vengeance, rail can be a major force in the development of Heathrow.
We could even be seeing the current rail line through Terminals Two and Five becoming a high-capacity rail line connecting all the terminals to the West, East and South.
A Greener Airport
If as many of the traffic movements in and around the airport could be moved from polluting road transport to electric trains, Heathrow’s pollution footprint could be reduced.
As an example, you could envisage a factory in a low cost area by a rail line to the West of Heathrow creating airline meals. These would be packaged by flight number and then taken by electric cargo train direct to the appropriate terminal or satellite, ready for loading onto the plane.
Could we even see an airport, where very few trucks and service vehicles, use the runways and aprons? You certainly see a lot less vehicles on an airport, than you did decades ago.
I found this page on the Heathrow web site, which is entitled Our Vehicle Fleet Is Making The Switch.
This is a paragraph.
850 vehicles in the airside fleet at Heathrow are electric, making it one of the largest fleets of electric airside vehicles in Europe. As well as electric tugs that move baggage around the airfield, we use electric cars and vans to transport our people. We are trialling electric specialist ground support vehicles such as belt loaders, cargo loaders and push back tractors.
I was surprised to see pushback tractors mentioned, as some weigh up to fifty tonnes. But according to the Wikipedia entry for pushback, there are interesting developments in this field. This is said about robotic push back tractors.
The Lahav Division of Israel Aerospace Industries has developed a semi-robotic towbarless tractor it calls Taxibot that can tow an aircraft from the terminal gate to the take-off point (taxi-out phase) and return it to the gate after landing (taxi-in phase). The Taxibot eliminates the use of airplane engines during taxi-in and until immediately prior to take-off during taxi-out potentially saving airlines billions of dollars in fuel that is used. The Taxibot is controlled by the pilot from the cockpit using the regular pilot controls.
Even as a trained Control Engineer and a private pilot with over a thousand hours in command, I can’t help but wonder at the concept.
As a final thought, surely if all unnecessary vehicles could be removed from air-side, this must improve safety and security.
What too, would low or even zero carbon operations, do for the image of the airport?
Travelling To The Airport
One consequence of the rebuilding of the terminals with rail links to both London and the West, will be a reduction in the number of travellers, who drive or are driven to to the airport.
In the London Olympics every event ticket came with a London Travelcard, so that you used public transport. Could we see public transport tickets bundled in with air tickets to cut the need for vehicles to drive to and from the airport?
I certainly think, that we’ll see rail-connected parking to the airport, just because land close to an airport is so expensive.
Local Transport To The Airport
I suspect that a lot of journeys to and from the airport are quite local, as they concern local residents, employees or travellers perhaps spending a night after or before a flight close to the airport.
These journeys have not been forgotten in the master-plan, as it talks of improving bus services.
But the most interesting development is the ULTra PRT system, I talked about in A Visit To Heathrow Terminal 5.
A Heathrow-wide system has been proposed. This is said in Wikipedia.
In May 2013 Heathrow Airport Limited announced as part of its draft five year (2014-2019) master plan that it intended to use the PRT system to connect terminal 2 and terminal 3 to their respective business carparks. The proposal was not included in the final plan due to spending priority given to other capital projects and has been deferred.
There have been suggestions that they will extend the service throughout the airport and to nearby hotels using 400 pods.
The system at Heathrow may not be built, but expect something like it at an airport near you.
Imagine turning up in a convenient car park or train station, with family and baggage, ready to travel on holiday. You scan your pre-printed boarding pass or click one on your phone and a pod arrives, which takes you to the satellite your flight will use.
As they travelled, passengers could scan passports and they would be given up-to-date flight information.
Flying is a total pain, best summed up by the old pilot’s moto.
Time to spare, go by air!
A decent system to bring people to the airport, could make flying more of a pleasure.
Integration With Thameslink
I believe that it would be possible to have a direct Thameslink connection into Heathrow using the |Dudding Hill Line to link to Crossrail.
In Could Thameslink Connect To Heathrow?, I show how it would be possible to create a four tph service between Heathrow and Thameslink.
This could create an easy link to and from Gatwick and Luton Airports and Kings Cross, St. Pancras and London Bridge stations.
Integration With HS2
I’m taking this first, as it’s probably easier than linking to HS1
When Phase 2 of HS2 opens, services Northward from Old Oak Common station are proposed to be.
- Birmingham – 3 tph
- Edinburgh – 2 tph
- Glasgow – 2 tph
- Leeds – 3 tph
- Liverpool – 2 tph
- Manchester – 3 tph
- Newcastle – 2 tph
- Preston – 1 tph
- Sheffield – 2 tph
- York – 1 tph
I estimate that Heathrow to Old Oak Common will be about 20 minutes by Crossrail and Heathrow Express.
As changing planes at Heathrow, according to the Airport takes between 75 and 90 minutes, using HS2 would be competitive.
,Especially if the interchange at Old oak Common was well-designed.
Leeds will be about ninety minutes from Old Oak Common. so if the interchange timings are right, a passenger could be in the centre of Leeds around two hours after coming through Arrivals at Heathrow. A chauffeur-driven Ferrari couldn’t do that legally.
Integration With HS1
This is more difficult, as neither Crossrail nor Heathrow Express serves St. Pancras.
There are a choice of routes.
- Crossrail to Farringdon and then Thameslink or the Metropolitan Line to Kings Cross St. Pancras.
- Heathrow Express to Paddington and then a taxi.
- Heathrow Express to Paddington and then the Metropolitan Line
- Piccadilly Line to Kings Cross St. Pancras.
Interchange could have been designed to be a lot better.
I seem to remember that original plans for the Heathrow Express envisaged St. Pancras as a second London terminal, using the Dudding Hill Line.
But this route is probably impossible owing to there not being enough platforms at St. Pancras, which is A Fur Coat And No Knickers Station.
As there are other operators, who need extra platform space at St. Pancras, perhaps a couple of extra platforms could be built.
But I doubt it!
If Heathrow were to be linked to Thameslink, as I indicated earlier, this would solve the problem.
Terminals And The Third Runway
Extra terminal capacity, will be able to handle more passengers, but will the runways be able to handle the extra planes?
I suspect there are various strategies, that will keep the number of flights within the capacity of a two-runway airport.
- Larger aircraft with more capacity, will make better use of slots. 737s and A320s are carrying more passengers.
- Quieter aircraft, linked to better air traffic control, might givenoise and capacity advantages. Thuis page on the Heathrow web site, is entitled Steeper approach trial report.
- Reorganisation of air cargo to release slots.
- Use of Crossrail and/or Heathrow Express to connect to HS1 and HS2.
The more Heathrow use their intelligence, the further into the future the date for the third runway will recede.
Looking At The Cash Flow
Obviously, I don’t have any figures, but sorting out the terminals early and creating extra passenger capacity, may give Heathrow better cash flow to generate the vast sums needed to build the completely new Terminal Six and the third runway.
I’d love to see their full cash flow, but I suspect that the third runway, will only be needed when to expand the traffic, they need m the slots it will deliver.
The early costs would and could be.
- Fighting the protestors and the politicians.
- Obtaining Planning Permission.
- Buying up the private .properties in the way.
- Rolling out an anti-pollution philosophy.
- Creating Heathrow West (Terminal Five) and Heathrow East (An Extended Terminal Two)
- Extending the rail network.
- Professional fees.
Perhaps by the early 2020s, they would have a strong cash flow and ownership of all the land they might need.
Then at an appropriate time, they would build the new runway and any terminals needed, in the space they had acquired.
As today’s article on the BBC indicated, they wouldn’t even have to build a tunnel for the M25.
It would hopefully be a large, but reasonable straightforward construction operation.
The Opposition Is Gathering
This article in the Independent is entitled Heathrow expansion: Airlines react to Government’s airport decision.
- Stewart Wingate of Gatwick of Gatwick is quoted as being disappointed and saying he’ll read the Government’s reasons in detail.
- Dame Carolyn McCall of easyJet, said their planned move to Heathrow is contingent on the right deal.
- Willie Walsh of BA’s parent said he was pleased a decision had been made.
- Craig Kreeger of Virgin Atlantic, said: “We support expansion, provided it delivers for our customers.”
- Nick Burton of Luton Airport said that we must now focus on demand before the new runway is built in 10-15 years time.
- Charlie Cornish, chief executive of Stansted’s owner, Manchester Airports Group, said that we should make the best use of the runways we’ve got.
That doesn’t sound like a vote of confidence to me.
And I haven’t included all those who will lose their homes, the environmental protesters and those like me who don’t like Heathrow’s attitude.
The statistics are also not on Heathrow’s side either, as traffic is growing fast and another runway is needed soon, with a second one perhaps ten years later, to satisfy rising demand for air travel.
So What Could Happen?
Much of this is speculation, but Nostradamus couldn’t predict this one.
- In The Planemakers’ View On The South East’s New Runway, I quoted from an article in The Times, which said that Heathrow’s hub model is superseded by the views of the planemakers, who think it’s all about point-to-point flights in appropriate aircraft.
- Gatwick could probably apply for permission for a second runway in 2019.
- Luton, Southend and Stansted Airports are ambitious and want to expand.
- Better rail services to Stansred Airport have been announced.
- Luton Airport wants a better rail service.
- Birmingham Airport gets a connection to HS2 in the mid-2020s.
- Eurostar and other companies will increasingly add rail services to Europe.
These and other factors will eat into Heathrow’s market share, thus delaying that crucial point, where the third runway needs to be built.
But that doesn’t really solve the short term problem The only way to satisfy that is to create a runway in the South-East as soon as possible.
And the only place that can be built is Gatwick.
The growth in air traffic will continue and a few years later, Heathrow will get its runway.
The Anonymous Widower 