The Anonymous Widower

Thoughts On High Speed Two

These are a few thoughts about High Speed Two, after the reports of major changes today.

This article on the BBC is entitled HS2 Line Between Birmingham And Crewe Delayed By Two Years.

This is the sub-heading.

The Birmingham to Crewe leg of high speed railway HS2 will be delayed by two years to cut costs.

These are the three opening paragraphs.

Some of the design teams working on the Euston end of the line are also understood to be affected.

Transport secretary Mark Harper blamed soaring prices and said it was “committed” to the line linking London, the Midlands and North of England.

HS2 has been beset by delays and cost rises. In 2010, it was expected to cost £33bn but is now expected to be £71bn.

Delivering The Benefits Of High Speed Two Early

It is my belief that with a large project taking a decade or more , it is not a bad idea to deliver some worthwhile benefits early on.

The Elizabeth Line opened in stages.

  • The new Class 345 trains started replacing scrapyard specials in 2017.
  • The rebuilt Abbey Wood station opened in 2017.
  • Paddington local services were transferred to the Elizabeth Line in 2019.
  • Outer stations reopened regularly after  refurbishment from 2018.
  • The through line opened in May 2022.

There’s still more to come.

Some projects wait until everything is ready and everybody gets fed up and annoyed.

Are there any parts of High Speed Two, that could be completed early, so that existing services will benefit?

In 2020, the refurbishment of Liverpool Lime Street station and the tracks leading to the station was completed and I wrote about the station in It’s A Privilege To Work Here!, where this was my conclusion.

Wikipedia says this about Liverpool Lime Street station.

Opened in August 1836, it is the oldest still-operating grand terminus mainline station in the world.

I’ve used Lime Street station for fifty-five years and finally, it is the station, the city needs and deserves.

I’ve been to grand termini all over the world and Lime Street may be the oldest, but now it is one of the best.

Are there any stations, that will be served by High Speed Two, that should be upgraded as soon as possible to give early benefits to passengers, staff and operators?

Avanti West Cost have solved the problem of the short platforms at Liverpool South Parkway station, by ordering shorter Class 807 trains. Will High Speed Two lengthen the platforms at this station?

A good project manager will need to get all the smaller sub-projects in a row and work out what is the best time to do each.

Digital Signalling

I would assume, as this will be needed for High Speed Two services in the West Coast Main Line to the North of Crewe, this is surely a must for installing as early as possible.

If the existing trains could run for a hundred miles at 140 mph, rather than the current 125 mph, that would save five worthwhile minutes.

Trains could run closer together and there is the possibility of organising services in flights, where a number of trains run together a safe number of minutes apart.

Remove Bottlenecks On Classic Lines, That Could Be Used By High Speed Two

I don’t know the bottlenecks on the West Coast Main Line, but there are two on the East Coast Main Line, that I have talked about in the past.

Could ERTMS And ETCS Solve The Newark Crossing Problem?

Improving The North Throat Of York Station Including Skelton Bridge Junction

Hopefully, the digital signalling will solve them.

Any bottlenecks on lines that will be part of High Speed Two, should be upgraded as soon as possible.

Birmingham And Crewe

I will start by looking at the leg between Birmingham and Crewe.

 

This section of the HS2 map shows High Speed Two between Birmingham and Lichfield.

Note.

  1. The blue circle on the left at the bottom of the map is Birmingham Curzon Street station.
  2. The blue circle on the right at the bottom of the map is Birmingham Interchange station.
  3. The High Speed Two to and from London passes through Birmingham Interchange station.
  4. The branch to Birmingham Curzon Street station connects to the main High Speed Two at a triangular junction.
  5. North of the triangular junction, High Speed Two splits.
  6. The Eastern branch goes to East Midlands Parkway station.
  7. The Northern branch goes to Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Manchester Piccadilly, Preston and Scotland.

At the top of the map, the Northern branch splits and lines are shown on this map.

Note.

  1. The junction where the Northern and Eastern branches divide is in the South-East corner of the map.
  2. To the North of Lichfield, the route divides again.
  3. The Northern purple line is the direct line to Crewe.
  4. The shorter Southern branch is a spur that connects High Speed Two to the Trent Valley Line, which is the current route taken by trains between London Euston and Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Manchester Piccadilly, Preston and Scotland.
  5. Crewe station is in the North-West corner of the map.

The route between the junction to the North of Lichfield and Crewe is essentially two double-track railways.

  • High Speed Two with a routine operating speed of 205 mph.
  • The Trent Valley Line with a routine operating speed of 140 mph.
  • High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains can run on all tracks.
  • High Speed Two Full-Size trains may be able to run on the Trent Valley Line at reduced speed.
  • Eighteen trains per hour (tph) is the maximum frequency of High Speed Two.

I feel in an emergency, trains will be able to use the other route.

Will This Track Layout Allow An Innovative Build?

Suppose the link to the Trent Valley Line was built first, so that High Speed Two trains from London for Crewe, Liverpool Lime Street, Manchester Piccadilly, Preston and Scotland, could transfer to the Trent Valley Line as they do now.

  • All lines used by High Speed Two services North of the junction, where High Speed Two joins the Trent Valley Line would be updated with digital signalling and 140 mph running. This will benefit current services on the line. For instance Euston and Liverpool/Manchester services could be under two hours.
  • The current services would be replaced by High Speed Two services run by High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains.
  • The direct High Speed Two route between Lichfield and Crewe would now be built.
  • When this section of High Speed Two is complete, High Speed Two services would use it between Lichfield and Crewe.
  • As the direct route would be built later, this would delay the building of the Birmingham and Crewe high-speed route.

Currently, trains run the  41.8 miles between Lichfield and Crewe in 28 minutes, which is an average speed of 89.6 mph.

I can build a table of average speeds and times for Lichfield and Crewe.

  • 100 mph – 25.1 minutes – 2.9 minutes saving
  • 110 mph – 22.8 minutes – 5.2 minutes saving
  • 120 mph – 20.9 minutes – 7.1 minutes saving
  • 125 mph – 20.1 minutes – 7.9 minutes saving
  • 130 mph – 19.3 minutes  – 8.7 minutes saving
  • 140 mph – 17.9 minutes – 10.1 minutes saving
  • 160 mph – 15.7 minutes – 12.3 minutes saving
  • 180 mph – 13.9 minutes – 14.1 minutes saving
  • 200 mph – 12.5 minutes – 15.5 minutes saving

Note.

  1. Even a slight increase in average speed creates several minutes saving.
  2. Times apply for both routes.

I believe that a 125 mph average should be possible on the Trent Valley route, which may be enough for Euston and Liverpool/Manchester services to be under two hours.

Improving Classic Lines Used By High Speed Two North Of Lichfield

Real Time Trains shows these figures for a Glasgow Central to Euston service.

  • Glasgow and Lichfield Trent Valley is 298.2 miles.
  • Glasgow and Lichfield Trent Valley takes five hours.

This is an average speed of 59.6 mph.

Note.

  1. The average speed is low considering the trains are capable of cruising at 125 mph and 140 mph with digital signalling.
  2. High Speed Two services between Euston and Glasgow will use the classic network, to the North of Lichfield.

I can build a table of average speeds and times for Glasgow and Lichfield.

  • 100 mph – 179 minutes – 121 minutes saving
  • 110 mph – 163 minutes – 157 minutes saving
  • 120 mph – 149 minutes – 151 minutes saving
  • 125 mph – 143 minutes – 157 minutes saving
  • 130 mph – 138 minutes  – 162 minutes saving
  • 140 mph – 128 minutes – 172 minutes saving

This table illustrates why it is important to improve all or as many as possible of classic lines used by High Speed Two to enable 140 mph running, with full digital signalling. Obviously, if 140 mph is not feasible, the speed should be increased to the highest possible.

Routes that could be updated include.

  • London Euston and Glasgow Central
  • London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street
  • London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly (all routes)
  • London Euston and Blackpool
  • London Euston and Holyhead
  • London Euston and Shrewsbury

Not all these routes will be served by High Speed Two, but they could be served by 140 mph trains.

What Times Would Be Possible?

The InterCity 225 was British Rail’s ultimate electric train and these two paragraphs from its Wikipedia entry, describe its performance.

The InterCity 225 was designed to achieve a peak service speed of 140 mph (225 km/h); during a test run in 1989 on Stoke Bank between Peterborough and Grantham, an InterCity 225 was recorded at a speed of 162 mph (260.7 km/h). Its high speed capabilities were again demonstrated via a 3hr 29mins non-stop run between London and Edinburgh on 26 September 1991. British regulations have since required in-cab signalling on any train running at speeds above 125 mph (201 km/h) preventing such speeds from being legally attained in regular service. Thus, except on High Speed 1, which is equipped with cab signalling, British signalling does not allow any train, including the InterCity 225, to exceed 125 mph (201 km/h) in regular service, due to the impracticality of correctly observing lineside signals at high speed.

The InterCity 225 has also operated on the West Coast Main Line (WCML). In April 1992, one trainset achieved a new speed record of two hours, eight minutes between Manchester and London Euston, shaving 11 minutes off the 1966 record. During 1993, trials were operated to Liverpool and Manchester in connection with the InterCity 250 project.

  • The fastest London Euston and Manchester Piccadilly services appear to be two hours and six minutes tomorrow, with stops at Nuneaton and Stoke-on-Trent.
  • The fastest London King’s Cross and Edinburgh service is four hours seventeen minutes tomorrow.

It does appear that British Rail’s 1980s-vintage InterCity 225 train did very well.

Trains that would be able to run at 140 mph with updated signalling include.

  • Alstom Class 390
  • Hitachi Class 800, 801, 802, 803, 805, 807 and 810
  • British Rail InterCity 225
  • High Speed Two Classic-Compatible.

All are electric trains.

Could High Speed Two, West Coast Main Line and East Coast Main Line Services Be Run By  High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains?

I don’t see why not!

  • They would be able to use short stretches of High Speed Line like Lichfield and Crewe.
  • LNER and CrossCountry could also use the trains.
  • High Speed Two is providing the framework and it’s there to be used, provided the paths are available.

This graphic shows the preliminary schedule.

It only shows ten trains going through Crewe, so there could be up to eight spare high speed paths between Birmingham and Crewe.

Could High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains Be Used To Advantage On The East Coast Main Line?

I published this extract from the Wikipedia entry for the InterCity 225 earlier.

The InterCity 225 was designed to achieve a peak service speed of 140 mph (225 km/h); during a test run in 1989 on Stoke Bank between Peterborough and Grantham, an InterCity 225 was recorded at a speed of 162 mph (260.7 km/h). Its high speed capabilities were again demonstrated via a 3hr 29mins non-stop run between London and Edinburgh on 26 September 1991.

The London and Edinburgh run was at an average speed of around 112 mph.

I wonder what time, one of LNER’s Class 801 trains, that are all-electric could do, once the new digital signalling has been fully installed on the route? I suspect it would be close to three hours, but it would depend on how long the trains could run at 140 mph.

It should be noted that the Selby Diversion was designed for 160 mph, when it was built by British Rail in the 1980s.

In Are Short Lengths Of High Speed Line A Good Idea?, I look at the mathematics of putting in short lengths of new railway, which have higher speeds, where this was part of my conclusion.

I very much feel there is scope to create some new high speed sections on the current UK network, with only building very little outside of the current land used by the network.

I would love to know what some of Network Rail’s track experts feel is the fastest time possible between London and Edinburgh that can be achieved, by selective upgrading of the route.

If some of the trains were High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, with a top speed of 205 mph, provided the track allowed it, there could be some interesting mathematics balancing the costs of track upgrades, new trains with what passengers and operators need in terms of journey times.

Could High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains Be Used To Advantage On The West Coast Main Line?

Much of what I said about the East Coast Main Line would apply to the West Coast Main Line.

But in addition, the West Coast Main Line will be a superb place to test the new High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains.

I believe, that before High Speed Two opens, we’ll see High Speed Two Classic-Compatible Trains, carrying passengers between Euston and Avanti West Coast’s destinations.

Could High Speed Two Be Split Into Two?

Consider.

  • Under earlier plans, the East Coast Main Line to the North of York, will be used by High Speed Two.
  • With digital signalling the East Coast Main Line will support continuous running at 140 mph for long sections of the route.
  • The East Coast Main Line has a recently-rebuilt large Southern terminal at King’s Cross with eleven platforms and good suburban services and excellent connections to the London Underground.
  • The East Coast Main Line has a very large Northern terminal at Edinburgh Waverley with twenty platforms and good local train connections.
  • There are large intermediate stations on the East Coast Main Line at Doncaster, Leeds, Newcastle, Peterborough and York. All these stations have good local train connections.
  • The East Coast Main Line has important branches to Cambridge, Harrogate, Huddersfield, Hull King’s Lynn, Lincoln, Middlesbrough, Nottingham, Scarborough, Sheffield, Skegness and Sunderland.

We are talking about an asset, that needs improving rather than sidelining.

 

Could High Speed Two Be A One-Nation Project?

Over three years ago, I wrote Could High Speed Two Be A One-Nation Project? and tried to answer the question in the title.

But now the core network is better defined, perhaps it is time to look at extending the High Speed network again.

The next few sections look at possible extensions.

Serving Chester And North Wales

I looked at this in Could High Speed Two Trains Serve Chester And North Wales?, which I have updated recently.

This was my conclusion.

It looks to me, that when High Speed Two, think about adding extra destinations, Chester and Holyhead could be on the list.

I also suspect that even without electrification and High Speed Two services, but with the new Class 805 trains, the route could be a valuable one for Avanti West Coast.

These are current and promised times for the two legs to Holyhead.

  • Euston and Crewe – 90 minutes – Fastest Class 390 train
  • Euston and Crewe – 55 minutes – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train from Wikipedia
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 131 minutes – Fastest Class 221 train
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 70 minutes – 90 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 63 minutes – 100 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 57 minutes – 110 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 53 minutes – 120 mph average speed
  • Crewe and Holyhead – 45 minutes – 140 mph average speed

Note.

  1. I have assumed that Crewe and Holyhead is 105.5 miles.
  2. The operating speed of the North Wales Coast Line is 90 mph.
  3. In the following estimates,  I have assumed a change of train at Crewe, takes 6 minutes.

I think there are several options to run fast services to Chester and North Wales.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • The fastest Class 221 train between Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 3 hours 41 minutes.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way, but with perhaps less stops and some track improvement

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 110 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 2 hours 27 minutes.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead uprated largely to 125 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 120 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 2 hours 23 minutes.

Pre-HS2 – Class 805 all the way, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead Crewe and Holyhead electrified and uprated to 140 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest Class 390 train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 140 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 2 hours 15 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, the Class 805 train to Holyhead

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • The fastest Class 221 train between Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 3 hours 12 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, the Class 805 train to Holyhead, but with perhaps less stops and some track improvement

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 110 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 58 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, the Class 805 train to Holyhead, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead uprated largely to 125 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 120 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 54 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe, Class 805 train to Holyhead, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead electrified and uprated to 140 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 140 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 46 minutes.

After-HS2 – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train all the way, but with perhaps less stops and Crewe and Holyhead electrified and uprated to 140 mph

I believe this train will match the following.

  • The fastest High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train between Euston and Crewe.
  • 140 mph train Crewe and Holyhead.

This would give a time of 1 hours 40 minutes.

From these estimates, I have come to these conclusions.

  • A sub-two and a half-hour service can be attained with the new Class 805 trains and some improvements to the tracks along the North Wales Coast Line.
  • A sub-two hour service can be attained with a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train to Crewe and a Class 805 train to Hplyhead along a 140 mph electrified North Wales Coast Line.
  • If the North Wales Coast Line is electrified, the journey from London Euston, Birmingham Interchange, Crewe, Chester, Liverpool and Manchester would be zero-carbon.

We should be looking to building a zero-carbon fast passenger ferry for sailing between Holyhead and Dublin.

  • The current fastest ferries appear to take three hours and 15 minutes, which means that a six-hour low-carbon journey between London Euston and Dublin, should be possible with the new Class 805 trains, prior to the opening of High Speed Two.
  • A five-hour journey after the opening of High Speed Two to Crewe and electrification of the North Wales Coast Line should be possible.

If the advanced zero-carbon ferry could knock an hour off the journey, four hours between London and Dublin along a spectacular coastal railway with a fast sea voyage, would be a route that would attract passengers.

  • High Speed Two would need to be opened to Crewe.
  • The North Wales Coast Line would need to be upgraded to a 140 mph digitally-signalled line.
  • The North Wales Coast Line would need to be electrified.
  • Full electrification may not be needed, as discontinuous electrification will have advanced to provide zero-carbon running, in a more affordable and less disruptive manner.
  • Trains could either be High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains all the way from London or there could be a change at Crewe to Class 805 trains.
  • The ferry would use the best zero-carbon and operational technology.

The improvement and electrification of the North Wales Coast Line could be planned to take place in a relaxed manner, so that journey times continuously got quicker.

I would start the improvement of the North Wales Coast Line, as soon as possible, as all these improvement will be used to advantage by the new Class 805 trains.

Serving West And South West England And South Wales

Suppose you want to go between Glasgow and Cardiff by train, after High Speed Two has opened.

  • You will take one of the half-hourly High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains between Glasgow Central and London.
  • Three and a half-hours later, you will get off the train in one of the below ground platforms at Old Oak Common station.
  • A short ride in an escalator or lift and you will be in the Great Western Railway station at ground level.
  • From here, fifty minutes later, you will be in Cardiff.

The journey will have taken four hours and twenty minutes.

This may seem a long time but currently Glasgow and Cardiff by train takes over seven hours by train.

  • Glasgow and Bristol Temple Meads takes eight hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 5 hours.
  • Glasgow and Cheltenham Spa takes six hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 5 hours and 30 minutes.
  • Glasgow and Penzance takes twelve hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 8 hours and 33 minutes.
  • Glasgow and Swansea takes nearly nine hours, but using High Speed Two and GWR will take 6 hours and 9 minutes.

The High Speed Two route only has one simple change, whereas some routes now have up to four changes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

March 10, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 97 Comments

West Coast Main Line Electro-Diesels On Test

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Railway Gazette.

This is the first paragraph.

The first two of 13 Hitachi Class 805 electro-diesel trainsets ordered for Avanti West Coast services are undergoing testing on the West Coast Main Line ahead of entry into service later this year.

These Class 805 trains will go to places like Chester, Bangor and Holyhead via Crewe.

It is interesting to look at various Crewe to London Euston services this morning.

  • 0740 – Class 390 train – From Liverpool – One Stop – 1 hour 40 minutes
  • 0755 – Class 221 train – From Holyhead – One Stop – 1 hour 40 minutes
  • 0832 – Class 390 train – From Manchester – One Stop – 1 hour 37 minutes
  • 0844 – Class 390 train – From Glasgow – 1 hour 28 minutes

Note.

  1. The first field is the four-figure time that the train left Crewe.
  2. The last field is the journey time between Crewe to London Euston.
  3. The Class 390 and 805 trains will use electricity to run between Crewe and London Euston, whereas the Class 221 train will use diesel.
  4. Crewe and London Euston is 158 miles.
  5. The Glasgow train covers the 158 miles at an average speed of 107.7 mph.

I have some thoughts.

What Will Be The Time For A Class 805 Train Between Crewe And London Euston?

Consider.

  • From Crewe, the Class 805 train will be using the electrification to London Euston.
  • The Class 390 train can tilt, whereas the Class 805 train can’t!
  • The Class 805 train is at least three tonnes lighter per car, than the Class 390 train.
  • The lighter weight and possibly more power of the Class 805 trains, will give better acceleration.
  • There is twenty-one years of difference in the build dates of the two trains. In that time, I also suspect that Network Rail have improved the track between Crewe and London Euston.
  • Norton Bridge junction has been improved to avoid conflicts.
  • It would be very convenient for Avanti West Coast and Network Rail, if the performance under electrification of the two trains were similar.

For these reasons, I believe that the performance of a non-stop Crewe And London Euston service using a Class 805 train will be such that it can match that of a Class 390 train.

I would also expect that with a similar stopping pattern between Crewe And London Euston, there would be little to choose between the two trains.

I can see with its better acceleration and lighter weight that the time between Crewe and London Euston will be perhaps a dozen minutes faster than the current time.

Using the electrification will also save a lot of diesel fuel with all its emissions.

Along The North Wales Coast Line

Consider.

  • Crewe and Holyhead is 105.5 miles and takes two hours and two minutes in a typical service.
  • These figures give an average speed of 52 mph.
  • There are six stops, which are scheduled to take a total of ten minutes.
  • About half the North Wales Coast Line has a maximum operating speed of 90 mph, but through Chester, Llandudno Junction and West of Bangor, the operating speed is 75 mph or less.

I am fairly sure, that with both the current Class 221 trains and the new Class 805 trains, it will be the track, rather than the train that determines the average speed.

It would therefore appear that if the average speed can be raised by track improvements these time savings could be achieved.

  • 60 mph – 105.5 mins – 16.5 mins
  • 70 mph – 90 mins – 32.5 mins
  • 80 mph – 79 mins – 43 mins
  • 90 mph – 70 mins – 52 mins
  • 100 mph – 63 mins – 59 mins
  • 110 mph – 58 mins – 64 mins
  • 120 mph – 53 mins – 69 mins
  • 130 mph – 49 mins – 73 mins
  • 140 mph – 45 mins – 77 mins

Note.

  1. The first column is the average speed.
  2. The second column is the time between Holyhead and Crewe.
  3. The third column is the saving.
  4. I suspect that 90 or 100 mph would be the highest possible practical average speed.
  5. Trains average 100 mph on several long sections of the Great Eastern Main Line.
  6. I put in the higher speeds to show what is possible, if the North Wales Coast Line were to be converted into a 140 mph electrified line with digital signalling.

Even at these relatively slow speeds compared to High Speed Two, there are considerable time savings to be made, just by improving the tracks.

Incidentally, High Speed Two is quoted in Wikipedia as aiming for a Crewe and London Euston time of 56 minutes, so by averaging 100 mph between Crewe and Holyhead, London Euston and Holyhead could be under two hours.

Batteries And Class 805 Trains

I wouldn’t be surprised that soon after the Class 805 trains are delivered, they could be converted to a version of Hitachi’s Intercity Tri-Mode  Battery Train, the specification of which is shown in this Hitachi infographic.

Note.

  1. I suspect that the batteries will be used to handle regenerative braking on lines without electrification, which will save diesel fuel and carbon emissions.
  2. The trains accelerate faster, than those they replace.
  3. The claimed fuel and carbon saving is twenty percent.
  4. It is intended that these trains will be introduced in 2023.

But Hitachi have not given any predictions of the range of these trains on battery power alone.

However, they do claim a battery range of 56 miles for the Hitachi Regional Battery Train, which is based on similar technology.

These trains could help in speeding the stops between Crewe and Holyhead.

  • Batteries would be charged at Holyhead and on the electrification to the South of Crewe.
  • At each stop, trains would use a proportion of the power in the battery to accelerate faster and save fuel and cut emissions.
  • Battery power would be used in stations for train hotel power.
  • Westbound trains would arrive in Holyhead and Southbound trains would arrive in Crewe, with not much power in the battery.

I suspect that, whether diesel or battery power is used, will be controlled by a sophisticated computerised control system.

Electrification Along The North Wales Coast Line

I think this will eventually happen to allow High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains to run to Chester and along the North Wales Coast Line to Llandudno, Bangor and Holyhead.

But there is no benefit to be gained in electrifying until higher speeds are possible, after track improvements.

I believe these times will be possible with track improvements and the opening of High Speed Two.

  • Holyhead and Crewe – Class 805 train and 80 mph average – 79 mins
  • Holyhead and Crewe – Class 805 train and 90 mph average – 70 mins
  • Holyhead and Crewe – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train, electrification and 100 mph average – 63 mins
  • Crewe and London Euston – Class 805 train – 80 mins
  • Crewe and London Euston – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train – 56 mins

Note, electrification will be needed, to run High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains along the North Wales Coast Line.

I am confident that these times will be possible.

  • Holyhead and London Euston – Class 805 train and 90 mph average  along the coast – 2 hours 30 mins
  • Holyhead and London Euston – High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train and 100 mph average  along the coast – 2 hours

The current time between Holyhead and London Euston is over three hours 45 minutes.

Conclusion

These trains will certainly speed up trains to North Wales.

 

February 15, 2023 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

A Thought On Broughton Station

This Google Map shows Hawarden Airport to the West of Chester.

Note.

  1. Airbus make wings for their aircraft at their Broughton factory on this airport.
  2. The wings are flown to Europe for final assembly.
  3. The North Wales Coast Line passes the Northern end of the runway.

When I bought my return ticket between Chester and Holyhead, which was good value at £25.25 with my Senior Railcard, I got chatting with the clerk about Airbus and their Broughton factory.

He felt it needed a station and afterwards I checked and found that the Welsh Government had been trying to build one for some time.

Thinking back, I wonder if he keeps getting asked about getting to the Airbus factory and wishes that the government and Airbus would make his job easier by building a  Broughton station.

A station at Broughton might also cut the factory’s carbon footprint, by allowing more staff to go to work by train.

A Merseyrail Extension To Shotton

Shotton is already served by the Borderlands Line which connects Wrexham and Bidston.

This line is shown on the West side of this map, which shows how the Merseyrail network might look in the future.

Note.

  1. Chester could have services that terminate in the East at Crewe and Runcorn East stations.
  2. Chester already has electric services from Liverpool, which will receive new Class 777 trains in the next few months.
  3. The new trains can be fitted with a battery electric capability.

I just wonder, if a Cross-Chester Metro could be built.

  • Eastern termini would be Runcorn East or possibly Warrington Bank Quay and Crewe.
  • Shotton is only 7.9 miles from Chester.
  • Shotton low-level station used to have four tracks.
  • I suspect that Shotton or even Flint could be the Western terminus.
  • Extra stations could be added as required.

Note.

It would probably be best, if the trains were battery-electric that could use 25 KVAC overhead electrification, as this would allow them to charge at the Eastern termini.

I also feel that Crewe and Chester should be electrified, so that Chester could be reached by the new Class 805 trains running under electric power.

This would also allow Chester to become a High Speed Two destination, that was served by High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains.

I believe that a Cross-Chester Metro is a possibility.

October 12, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

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

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

This is the sub title.

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

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

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

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

This is a paragraph of the article.

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

William Grove was an interesting lawyer and scientist.

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

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

Holyhead Hydrogen Hub

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

High Speed Two To Holyhead

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

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

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

Hydrogen-Powered Catamarans From Holyhead

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

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

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

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

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

I believe I’m not asking for the impossible.

Anglesey Airport As A Zero-Carbon Airport

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

This Google Map shows the runways of RAF Valley.

Note.

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

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

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

Airbus are proposing a hydrogen-powered ZEROe Turbofan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flights could also continue to and from Cardiff.

Reopening The Anglesey Central Railway

This has been proposed as a Beeching Reversal project.

I wrote about it in Reopening The Anglesey Central Railway.

It could be reopened as a zero-carbon railway.

Conclusion

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Could High Speed Two Serve Holyhead?

Why?

It could be a way to create a zero- or low-carbon route between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

Battery-Electric Trains Could Be The Solution

In Will High Speed Two’s Classic-Compatible Trains Have Battery Operation?, I suggested that it might be feasible for High Speed Two’s Classic-Compatible trains to have batteries.

I said this at the start of that post.

I believe it is very likely, that High Speed Two’s new classic-compatible trains will have battery capabilities.

    • Batteries would handle energy generated by regenerative braking.
    • Batteries would give a train recovery capability in case of overhead catenary failure.
    • Batteries would be used for depot movements.
    • Batteries would probably improve the energy efficiency of the trains.

Effectively, the batteries would power the train and would be topped-up by the electrification and the regenerative braking.

Since I wrote that post in February 2020, Hitachi have launched two battery-electric trains, one of which is the Hitachi Intercity Tri-Mode Battery Train, which is described in this Hitachi infographic.

As diesel (or should I say Stuart) engines are so nineteenth-century. any high speed independently-powered train would probably use batteries, have no diesel engines and be a battery-electric train.

So could Hitachi or any other bidder for the High Speed Two Classic-Compatible trains produce a train, that would be capable of handling the long-distance routes from London, that would be difficult or expensive to electrify, by the use of batteries?

  • Batteries will improve dramatically in the next few years.
  • Batteries will also become more affordable.
  • Engineers will also learn how to package them in better and more innovative ways.

I think it is very likely, that a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train could be produced with a reliable range of over eighty miles on batteries.

Holyhead And Crewe By Battery-Electric Classic-Compatible High Speed Train

These are the distances between stops on the route between Holyhead and Crewe

  • Holyhead and Bangor – 25 miles.
  • Bangor and Llandudno Junction – 16 miles
  • Llandudno Junction and Colwyn Bay – 4 miles
  • Colwyn Bay and Rhyl – 10 miles
  • Rhyl and Prestatyn – 4 miles
  • Prestatyn and Flint – 14 miles
  • Flint and Chester – 13 miles
  • Chester and Crewe – 21 miles

Note.

  1. It is a route of only 105 miles.
  2. There is no 25 KVAC electrification, except at Crewe.
  3. It is nearly all double-track.
  4. The operating speed is 90 mph
  5. The route is also generally flat and mainly along the coast.

Suppose the following were to be done.

  • Erect traditional electrification between Chester and Crewe.
  • Hitachi ABB Power Grids build a section of their discontinuous electrification around Llandudno Junction.
  • Install a battery charging system at Holyhead.

An alternative might be to put another section of discontinuous electrification through Bangor, if installing the charging station at Holyhead proved to be difficult.

I believe it would be possible to run a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train equipped with batteries between London Euston and Holyhead.

What Time Would Be Possible?

Consider.

  • High Speed Two are predicting 56 minutes between London Euston and Crewe.
  • Avanti West Coast are showing journey times of one hour and 57 minutes between Crewe and Holyhead.
  • Avanti West Coast are using 125 mph Class 221 trains, but are restricted to a lot less than this speed.
  • The HSC Dublin Swift can sail between Dublin and Holyhead in several minutes under two hours.

I believe that a High Speed Two Classic-Compatible train equipped with batteries could go between London Euston and Holyhead in under three hours.

If this were to be linked to the latest hydrogen-powered fast ferry between Holyhead and Dublin, would  London Euston and Dublin be fast enough to attract passengers from the airlines?

  • The journey time could be under five hours.
  • It would be zero-carbon.
  • By cutting stops to the West of Chester and track improvements train times could be reduced.
  • It would be the sort of adventure, that some families like!

I think that Avanti West Coast and the ferry company could have a rail and ferry service, that would appeal to many travellers.

Would There Be A Path To Euston For Another High Speed Service?

In How Many Trains Are Needed To Run A Full Service On High Speed Two?, I listed the trains that would use the Western leg of High Speed Two.

  • Train 1 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
  • Train 2 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
  • Train 3 – London Euston and Birmingham Curzon Street – 400 metre Full-Size
  • Train 4 – London Euston and Lancaster – Classic Compatible
  • Train 4 – London Euston and Liverpool – Classic Compatible
  • Train 5 – London Euston and Liverpool – Classic Compatible
  • Train 6 – London Euston and Macclesfield – Classic Compatible
  • Train 7 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
  • Train 8 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
  • Train 9 – London Euston and Manchester – 400 metre Full-Size
  • Train 10 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
  • Train 10 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
  • Train 11 – London Euston and Edinburgh – Classic Compatible
  • Train 11 – London Euston and Glasgow – Classic Compatible
  • Train 12 – Birmingham Curzon Street and Edinburgh or Glasgow – Classic Compatible
  • Train 13 – Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester – 200 metre Full-Size
  • Train 14 – Birmingham Curzon Street and Manchester – 200 metre Full-Size

Note.

  1. A lot of the paths into London Euston would appear to be allocated.
  2. Train 4 is a pair of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains, that will split and join at Crewe, with one train going to Liverpool and the other going to Lancaster.
  3. Train 5 is only a single 200 metre long Classic-Compatible train.

I suspect it would be possible to make Train 5 a pair of 200 metre long Classic-Compatible trains, that will split and join at Crewe, with one train going to Liverpool and the other going to Chester and Holyhead.

It does appear that the proposed timetable for High Speed Two has been designed so extra trains can be added if the demand is there.

What Times Would Be Possible Between Holyhead And Crewe?

Consider.

  • I have looked at the route from my virtual helicopter and suspect that much of the route can be upgraded to 100 mph running.
  • The current average speed between Holyhead and Crewe is 54 mph.
  • London Liverpool Street and Norwich is 114.5 miles and is regularly achieved in ninety minutes on a 100 mph line, which is an average speed of 76 mph.
  • The number of stops could be reduced.

I can build a table of times for faster average speeds.

  • 60 mph – One hour and 45 minutes – Two hours and 41 minutes
  • 70 mph – One hour and 30 minutes – Two hours and 26 minutes
  • 80 mph – One hour and 19 minutes – Two hours and 15 minutes
  • 90 mph – One hour and 10 minutes – Two hours and 6 minutes
  • 100 mph – One hour and 3 minutes – One hour and 59 minutes

Note.

  1. The first time is Holyhead and Crewe.
  2. The second time is London and Holyhead.

I am fairly certain, that a substantial time improvement is possible.

Why Not Electrify All The Way Between Holyhead And Crewe?

I am seventy-four and can remember several incidents of serious storms and flooding along the North Wales Coast Line.

There was a warning earlier this year according to this article on the BBC.

Perhaps it would be better to spend the money on improving the resilience and operating speed of the track?

Conclusion

London Euston and Holyhead could be a serious proposition.

With some development and a new fast ferry, it could also open up a practical zero-carbon route between Great Britain and Ireland.

Times of four and a half hours between London Euston and Dublin could be possible.

 

August 21, 2021 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

High-Speed Low-Carbon Transport Between Great Britain And Ireland

Consider.

  • According to Statista, there were 13,160,000 passengers between the United Kingdom and the Irish Republic in 2019.
  • In 2019, Dublin Airport handled 32,907,673 passengers.
  • The six busiest routes from Dublin were Heathrow, Stansted, Amsterdam, Manchester, Birmingham and Stansted.
  • In 2018, Belfast International Airport handled 6,269,025 passengers.
  • The four busiest routes from Belfast International Airport were Stansted, Gatwick. Liverpool and Manchester, with the busiest route to Europe to Alicante.
  • In 2018, Belfast City Airport handled 2,445,529 passengers.
  • The four busiest routes from Belfast City Airport were Heathrow, Manchester, Birmingham and London City.

Note.

  1. The busiest routes at each airport are shown in descending order.
  2. There is a lot of air passengers between the two islands.
  3. Much of the traffic is geared towards London’s four main airports.
  4. Manchester and Liverpool get their fair share.

Decarbonisation of the air routes between the two islands will not be a trivial operation.

But technology is on the side of decarbonisation.

Class 805 Trains

Avanti West Coast have ordered thirteen bi-mode Class 805 trains, which will replace the diesel Class 221 trains currently working between London Euston and Holyhead.

  • They will run at 125 mph between Euston and Crewe using electric power.
  • If full in-cab digital signalling were to be installed on the electrified portion of the route, they may be able to run at 140 mph in places under the wires.
  • They will use diesel power on the North Wales Coast Line to reach Holyhead.
  • According to an article in Modern Railways, the Class 805 trains could be fitted with batteries.

I wouldn’t be surprised that when they are delivered, they are a version of the Hitachi’s Intercity Tri-Mode  Battery Train, the specification of which is shown in this Hitachi infographic.

Note.

  1. I suspect that the batteries will be used to handle regenerative braking on lines without electrification, which will save diesel fuel and carbon emissions.
  2. The trains accelerate faster, than those they replace.
  3. The claimed fuel and carbon saving is twenty percent.

It is intended that these trains will be introduced next year.

I believe that, these trains will speed up services between London Euston and Holyhead.

  • Currently, services take just over three-and-a-half hours.
  • There should be time savings on the electrification between London Euston and Crewe.
  • The operating speed on the North Wales Coast Line is 90 mph. This might be increased in sections.
  • Some extra electrification could be added, between say Crewe and Chester and possibly through Llandudno Junction.
  • I estimate that on the full journey, the trains could reduce emissions by up to sixty percent compared to the current diesel trains.

I think that a time of three hours could be achievable with the Class 805 trains.

New trains and a three hour journey time should attract more passengers to the route.

Holyhead

In Holyhead Hydrogen Hub Planned For Wales, I wrote about how the Port of Holyhead was becoming a hydrogen hub, in common with several other ports around the UK including Felixstowe, Harwich, Liverpool and Portsmouth.

Holyhead and the others could host zero-carbon hydrogen-powered ferries.

But this extract from the Wikipedia hints at work needed to be done to create a fast interchange  between trains and ferries.

There is access to the port via a building shared with Holyhead railway station, which is served by the North Wales Coast Line to Chester and London Euston. The walk between trains and ferry check in is less than two minutes, but longer from the remote platform 1, used by Avanti West Coast services.

This Google Map shows the Port of Holyhead.

I think there is a lot of potential to create an excellent interchange.

HSC Francisco

I am using the high-speed craft Francisco as an example of the way these ships are progressing.

  • Power comes from two gas-turbine engines, that run on liquified natural gas.
  • It can carry 1024 passengers and 150 cars.
  • It has a top speed of 58 knots or 67 mph. Not bad for a ship with a tonnage of over 7000.

This ship is in service between Buenos Aires and Montevideo.

Note.

  1. A craft like this could be designed to run on zero-carbon  liquid hydrogen or liquid ammonia.
  2. A high speed craft already runs between Dublin and Holyhead taking one hour and forty-nine minutes for the sixty-seven miles.

Other routes for a specially designed high speed craft might be.

  • Barrow and Belfast – 113 miles
  • Heysham and Belfast – 127 miles
  • Holyhead and Belfast – 103 miles
  • Liverpool and Belfast – 145 miles
  • Stranraer and Larne – 31 miles

Belfast looks a bit far from England, but Holyhead and Belfast could be a possibility.

London And Dublin Via Holyhead

I believe this route is definitely a possibility.

  • In a few years, with a few improvements on the route, I suspect that London Euston and Holyhead could be fairly close to three hours.
  • With faster bi-mode trains, Manchester Airport and Holyhead would be under three hours.
  • I would estimate, that a high speed craft built for the route could be under two hours between Holyhead and Dublin.

It certainly looks like London Euston and Dublin and Manchester Airport and Dublin would be under five hours.

In A Glimpse Of 2035, I imagined what it would be like to be on the first train between London and Dublin via the proposed fixed link between Scotland and Northern Ireland.

  • I felt that five-and-a-half hours was achievable for that journey.
  • The journey would have used High Speed Two to Wigan North Western.
  • I also stated that with improvements, London and Belfast could be three hours and Dublin would be an hour more.

So five hours between London Euston and Dublin using current technology without massive improvements and new lines could be small change well spent.

London And Belfast Via Holyhead

At 103 miles the ferry leg may be too long for even the fastest of the high speed craft, but if say the craft could do Holyhead and Belfast in two-and-a-half hours, it might just be a viable route.

  • It might also be possible to run the ferries to a harbour like Warrenpoint, which would be eighty-six miles.
  • An estimate based on the current high speed craft to Dublin, indicates a time of around two hours and twenty minutes.

It could be viable, if there was a fast connection between Warrenpoint and Belfast.

Conclusion

Once the new trains are running between London Euston and Holyhead, I would expect that an Irish entrepreneur will be looking to develop a fast train and ferry service between England and Wales, and the island of Ireland.

It could be sold, as the Greenest Way To Ireland.

Class 807 Trains

Avanti West Coast have ordered ten electric Class 807 trains, which will replace some of the diesel Class 221 trains.

  • They will run at 125 mph between Euston and Liverpool on the fully-electrified route.
  • If full in-cab digital signalling were to be installed on the route, they may be able to run at 140 mph in places.
  • These trains appear to be the first of the second generation of Hitachi trains and they seem to be built for speed and a sparking performance,
  • These trains will run at a frequency of two trains per hour (tph) between London and Liverpool Lime Street.
  • Alternate trains will stop at Liverpool South Parkway station.

In Will Avanti West Coast’s New Trains Be Able To Achieve London Euston and Liverpool Lime Street In Two Hours?, I came to the conclusion, that a two-hour journey time was possible, when the new Class 807 trains have entered service.

London And Belfast Via Liverpool And A Ferry

Consider.

  • An hour on the train to and from London will be saved compared to Holyhead.
  • The ferry terminal is in Birkenhead on the other side of the Mersey and change between Lime Street station and the ferry could take much longer than at Holyhead.
  • Birkenhead and Belfast is twice the distance of Holyhead and Dublin, so even a high speed craft would take three hours.

This Google Map shows the Ferry Terminal and the Birkenhead waterfront.

Note.

  1. The Ferry Terminal is indicated by the red arrow at the top of the map.
  2. There are rows of trucks waiting for the ferries.
  3. In the South East corner of the map, the terminal of the Mersey Ferry sticks out into the River
  4. Hamilton Square station is in-line with the Mersey Ferry at the bottom of the map and indicated with the usual red symbol.
  5. There is a courtesy bus from Hamilton Square station to the Ferry Terminal for Ireland.

There is a fourteen tph service between Hamilton Square and Liverpool Lime Street station.

This route may be possible, but the interchange could be slow and the ferry leg is challenging.

I don’t think the route would be viable unless a much faster ferry is developed. Does the military have some high speed craft under development?

Conclusion

London and Belfast via Liverpool and a ferry is probably a trip for enthusiasts or those needing to spend a day in Liverpool en route.

Other Ferry Routes

There are other ferry routes.

Heysham And Barrow-in-Furness

,These two ports might be possible, but neither has a good rail connection to London and the South of England.

They are both rail connected, but not to the standard of the connections at Holyhead and Liverpool.

Cairnryan

The Cairnryan route could probably be improved to be an excellent low-carbon route to Glasgow and Central Scotland.

Low-Carbon Flight Between The Islands Of Great Britain And Ireland

I think we’ll gradually see a progression to zero-carbon flight over the next few years.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel

Obviously zero-carbon would be better, but until zero-carbon aircraft are developed, there is always sustainable aviation fuel.

This can be produced from various carbon sources like biowaste or even household rubbish and disposable nappies.

British Airways are involved in a project called Altalto.

  • Altalto are building a plant at Immingham to turn household rubbish into sustainable aviation fuel.
  • This fuel can be used in jet airliners with very little modification of the aircraft.

I wrote about Altalto in Grant Shapps Announcement On Friday.

Smaller Low-Carbon Airliners

The first low- and zero-carbon airliners to be developed will be smaller with less range, than Boeing 737s and Airbus A 320s. These three are examples of four under development.

I feel that a nineteen seater aircraft with a range of 500 miles will be the first specially designed low- or zero-carbon airliner to be developed.

I believe these aircraft will offer advantages.

  • Some routes will only need refuelling at one end.
  • Lower noise and pollution.
  • Some will have the ability to work from short runways.
  • Some will be hybrid electric running on sustainable aviation fuel.

They may enable passenger services to some smaller airports.

Air Routes Between The Islands Of Great Britain And Ireland

These are distances from Belfast City Airport.

  • Aberdeen – 228 miles
  • Amsterdam – 557 miles
  • Birmingham – 226 miles
  • Blackpool – 128 miles
  • Cardiff – 246 miles
  • Edinburgh – 135 miles
  • Gatwick – 337 miles
  • Glasgow – 103 miles
  • Heathrow – 312 miles
  • Jersey – 406 miles
  • Kirkwall – 320 miles
  • Leeds – 177 miles
  • Liverpool – 151 miles
  • London City – 326 miles
  • Manchester – 170 miles
  • Newcastle – 168 miles
  • Southampton – 315 miles
  • Southend – 344 miles
  • Stansted – 292 miles
  • Sumburgh – 401 miles

Note.

  1. Some airports on this list do not currently have flights from Belfast City Airport.
  2. I have included Amsterdam for comparison.
  3. Distances to Belfast International Airport, which is a few miles to the West of Belfast City Airport are within a few miles of these distances.

It would appear that much of Great Britain is within 500 miles of Belfast City Airport.

These are distances from Dublin Airport.

  • Aberdeen – 305 miles
  • Amsterdam – 465 miles
  • Birmingham – 199 miles
  • Blackpool – 133 miles
  • Cardiff – 185 miles
  • Edinburgh – 208 miles
  • Gatwick – 300 miles
  • Heathrow – 278 miles
  • Jersey – 339 miles
  • Kirkwall – 402 miles
  • Leeds – 190 miles
  • Liverpool – 140 miles
  • London City – 296 miles
  • Manchester – 163 miles
  • Newcastle – 214 miles
  • Southampton – 268 miles
  • Southend – 319 miles
  • Stansted – 315 miles
  • Sumburgh – 483 miles

Note.

  1. Some airports on this list do not currently have flights from Dublin Airport.
  2. I have included Amsterdam for comparison.

It would appear that much of Great Britain is within 500 miles of Dublin Airport.

I will add a few long routes, that someone  might want to fly.

  • Cork and Aberdeen – 447 miles
  • Derry and Manston – 435 miles
  • Manston and Glasgow – 392 miles
  • Newquay and Aberdeen – 480 miles
  • Norwich and Stornaway – 486 miles.

I doubt there are many possible air services in the UK and Ireland that are longer than 500 miles.

I have a few general thoughts about low- and zero-carbon air services in and around the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

  • The likely five hundred mile range of the first generation of low- and zero-carbon airliners fits the size of the these islands well.
  • These aircraft seem to have a cruising speed of between 200 and 250 mph, so flight times will not be unduly long.
  • Airports would need to have extra facilities to refuel or recharge these airliners.
  • Because of their size, there will need to be more flights on busy routes.
  • Routes which are less heavily used may well be developed, as low- or zero-carbon could be good for marketing the route.

I suspect they could be ideal for the development of new routes and even new eco-friendly airports.

Conclusion

I have come to the conclusion, that smaller low- or zero-carbon are a good fit for the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

But then Flybe and Loganair have shown that you can make money flying smaller planes around these islands with the right planes, airports, strategy and management.

Hydrogen-Powered Planes From Airbus

Hydrogen-powered zero-carbon aircraft could be the future and Airbus have put down a marker as to the way they are thinking.

Airbus have proposed three different ZEROe designs, which are shown in this infographic.

The turboprop and the turbofan will be the type of designs, that could be used around Great Britain and Ireland.

The ZEROe Turboprop

This is Airbus’s summary of the design for the ZEROe Turboprop.

Two hybrid hydrogen turboprop engines, which drive the six bladed propellers, provide thrust. The liquid hydrogen storage and distribution system is located behind the rear pressure bulkhead.

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.

It certainly is a layout that has been used successfully, by many conventionally-powered aircraft in the past. The De Havilland Canada Dash 8 and ATR 72 are still in production.

I don’t think the turboprop engines, that run on hydrogen will be a problem.

If you look at the Lockheed-Martin C 130J Super Hercules, you will see it is powered by four Rolls-Royce AE 2100D3 turboprop engines, that drive 6-bladed Dowty R391 composite constant-speed fully-feathering reversible-pitch propellers.

These Rolls-Royce engines are a development of an Allison design, but they also form the heart of Rolls-Royce’s 2.5 MW Generator, that I wrote about in Our Sustainability Journey. The generator was developed for use in Airbus’s electric flight research program.

I wouldn’t be surprised to find the following.

  • , The propulsion system for this aircraft is under test with hydrogen at Derby and Toulouse.
  • Dowty are testing propellers suitable for the aircraft.
  • Serious research is ongoing to store enough liquid hydrogen in a small tank that fits the design.

Why develop something new, when Rolls-Royce, Dowty and Lockheed have done all the basic design and testing?

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the front view of the plane.

From clues in the picture, I estimate that the fuselage diameter is around four metres. Which is not surprising, as the Airbus A320 has a height of 4.14 metres and a with of 3.95 metres. But it’s certainly larger than the fuselage of an ATR-72.

So is the ZEROe Turboprop based on a shortened Airbus A 320 fuselage?

  • The ATR 72 has a capacity of 70 passengers.
  • The ZEROe Turboprop has a capacity of less than a hundred passengers.
  • An Airbus A320 has six-abreast seating.
  • Could the ZEROe Turboprop have sixteen rows of seats, as there are sixteen windows in front of the wing?
  • With the seat pitch of an Airbus A 320, which is 81 centimetres, this means just under thirteen metres for the passengers.
  • There could be space for a sizeable hydrogen tank in the rear part of the fuselage.
  • The plane might even be able to use the latest A 320 cockpit.

It looks to me, that Airbus have designed a larger ATR 72 based on an A 320 fuselage.

I don’t feel there are any great technical challenges in building this aircraft.

  • The engines appear to be conventional and could even have been more-or-less fully developed.
  • The fuselage could be a development of an existing design.
  • The wings and tail-plane are not large and given the company’s experience with large composite structures, they shouldn’t be too challenging.
  • The hydrogen storage and distributing system will have to be designed, but as hydrogen is being used in increasing numbers of applications, I doubt the expertise will be difficult to find.
  • The avionics and other important systems could probably be borrowed from other Airbus products.

Given that the much larger and more complicated Airbus A380 was launched in 2000 and first flew in 2005, I think that a prototype of this aircraft could fly around the middle of this decade.

It may seem small at less than a hundred seats, but it does have a range of greater than a 1000 nautical miles or 1150 miles.

Consider.

  • It compares closely in passenger capacity, speed and range, with the De Havilland Canada Dash 8/400 and the ATR 72/600.
  • The ATR 72 is part-produced by Airbus.
  • The aircraft is forty percent slower than an Airbus A 320.
  • It looks like it could be designed to have a Short-Takeoff-And Landing (STOL) capability.

I can see the aircraft replacing Dash 8s, ATR 72s and similar aircraft all over the world. There are between 2000 and 3000 operational airliners in this segment.

The ZEROe Turbofan

This is Airbus’s summary of the design.

Two hybrid hydrogen turbofan engines provide thrust. The liquid hydrogen storage and distribution system is located behind the rear pressure bulkhead.

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the plane.

ZEROeTurbofan

This screen capture taken from the video, shows the front view of the plane.

The aircraft doesn’t look very different different to an Airbus A320 and appears to be fairly conventional. It does appear to have the characteristic tall winglets of the A 320 neo.

I don’t think the turbofan engines, that run on hydrogen will be a problem.

These could be standard turbofan engines modified to run on hydrogen, fuelled from a liquid hydrogen tank behind the rear pressure bulkhead of the fuselage.

If you want to learn more about gas turbine engines and hydrogen, read this article on the General Electric web site, which is entitled The Hydrogen Generation: These Gas Turbines Can Run On The Most Abundant Element In the Universe,

These are my thoughts of the marketing objectives of the ZEROe Turbofan.

  • The cruising speed and the number of passengers are surprisingly close, so has this aircraft been designed as an A 320 or Boeing 737 replacement?
  •  I suspect too, that it has been designed to be used at any airport, that could handle an Airbus A 320 or Boeing 737.
  • It would be able to fly point-to-point flights between most pairs of European or North American cities.

It would certainly fit the zero-carbon shorter range airliner market!

In fact it would more than fit the market, it would define it!

I very much believe that Airbus’s proposed zero-carbon hydrogen-powered designs and others like them will start to define aviation on routes of up to perhaps 3000 miles, from perhaps 2035.

  • The A 320 neo was launched in December 2010 and entered service in January 2016.  That was just five years and a month.
  • I suspect that a lot of components like the fuselage sections, cockpit, avionics, wings, landing gear, tailplane and cabin interior could be the same in a A 320 neo and a ZEROe Turbofan.
  • Flying surfaces and aerodynamics could be very similar in an A 320 neo and a ZEROe Turbofan
  • There could even be commonality between the ZEROe Turboprop and the ZEROe Turbofan, with respect to fuselage sections, cockpit, avionics and cabin interior.

There also must be the possibility, that if a ZEROe Turbofan is a hydrogen-powered A 320 neo, that this would enable the certification process to be simplified.

It might even be possible to remanufacture a A 320 neo into a ZEROe Turbofan. This would surely open up all sorts of marketing strategies.

My project management, flying and engineering knowledge says that if they launched the ZEROe Turbofan this year, it could be in service by the end of the decade on selected routes.

Conclusion

Both the ZEROe Turboprop and ZEROe Turbofan are genuine zero-carbon aircraft, which fit into two well-defined market segments.

I believe that these two aircraft and others like them from perhaps Boeing and Bombardier could be the future of aviation between say 500 and 3000 miles.

With the exception of the provision of hydrogen refuelling at airports, there will be no need for any airport infrastructure.

I also wouldn’t be surprised that the thinking Airbus appear to have applied to creating the ZEROe Turbofan from the successful A 320 neo, could be applied to perhaps create a hydrogen-powered A 350.

I feel that Airbus haven’t fulling disclosed their thinking.  But then no company would, when it reinvents itself.

T also think that short-haul air routes will increasing come under pressure.

The green lobby  would like airlines to decarbonise.

Governments will legislate that airlines must decarbonise.

The rail industry will increasingly look to attract customers away from the airlines, by providing more competitive times and emphasising their green credentials.

Aircraft manufacturers will come under pressure to deliver zero-carbon airliners as soon as they can.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see a prototype ZEROe Turbofan or Boeing’s equivalent fly as early as 2024.

Short Term Solutions

As I said earlier, one solution is to use existing aircraft with Sustainable Aviation Fuel.

But many believe this is greenwash and rather a cop out.

So we must do better!

I don’t believe that the smaller zero- and low-carbon aircraft with a range of up to 500 miles and a capacity of around 19 seats, will be able to handle all the passengers needing to fly between and around the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

  • A Boeing 737 or Airbus A 320 has a capacity of around two hundred passengers, which would require ten times the number of flights, aircraft and pilots.
  • Airports would need expansion on the airside and the terminals to handle the extra planes.
  • Air Traffic Control would need to be expanded to handle the extra planes.

But the smaller planes would be ideal for the thinner secondary routes.

So I tend to think, that the greens will have to lump it, as Sustainable Aviation Fuel will increasingly be the only viable solution.

This will increase the need for Airbus or Boeing to develop a viable A 320 or 737-sized aircraft as soon as possible.

Air Bridges

I said earlier, that I believe using ferries between Ireland and Holyhead and new bi-mode Class 805 trains between London Euston and Holyhead could be a competitor to airlines.

  • The ferries would be high speed craft capable of Holyhead and Ireland in around 90-100 minutes.
  • The ferries would be zero-carbon.
  • The trains would have a sixty percent reduction in carbon emissions compared to current trains on the route.

If we can skim across the water in a zero-carbon high speed craft, are there any reasons we can’t cross the water in a low- or zero-carbon aircraft.

In the next few sub-sections, I’ll suggest a few air bridges.

Glasgow

Glasgow Airport could be an ideal airport for a  low or zero-carbon air bridge to Northern Ireland.

  • A rail link could eventually be built.
  • There is a reasonable amount of traffic.
  • The distance to Belfast City Airport is only 103 miles.

As the airport serves islands and other places that could be ideal low- and zero-carbon routes, I could see Glasgow becoming a hub for battery and hydrogen-powered aircraft.

Heathrow

Heathrow must prepare itself for an uncertain future.

It will be some years before a third runway is both needed and will have been constructed.

I believe the following will happen.

  • Smaller up to nineteen seat low- or zero-carbon airliners will be in service by 2025.
  • From around 2024, Heathrow will get requests to refuel or charge low- or zero-carbon airliners.
  • Low- or-zero- carbon A 320-size airliners will be in service by 2030.
  • Most ground equipment at Heathrow like tugs and fuel bowsers will be zero-carbon.

If I were Boris or Prime Minister, I would say that Heathrow could have its third runway with the following conditions.

  • All aircraft using the third runway must be zero-carbon
  • All air-side vehicles must be zero-carbon.
  • All vehicles bringing passengers on the last mile to the airport must be zero-carbon.
  • All aircraft using the airport that are not zero-carbon must use sustainable aviation fuel.

I suspect that the conditions would be met by a large margin.

When an airport knows it is effectively going to be closed, it will make sure it survives.

Liverpool

Liverpool Airport could be an ideal airport for a  low or zero-carbon air bridge to the island of Ireland.

  • There is a nearby Liverpool South Parkway station, with frequent services to both the local area and places further away.
  • An improved London train service starts in 2022 or 2023.
  • There would need to be a people mover between the station and the airport.
  • The airport can probably have piped hydrogen from across the Mersey.
  • There is already significant traffic to and from the island of Ireland.
  • Flight times Between Liverpool and Dublin and Belfast would be under an hour.

I also feel that Liverpool could develop lots of other low- and zero-carbon routes to perhaps Cardiff, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Norwich, Southampton and the Isle of Man.

I could even see Liverpool having a Turn-Up-And-Go shuttle service to Dublin and Belfast, with small zero-carbon planes running every fifteen minutes or so.

Manston

I wouldn’t rule out Manston as a low- and zero-carbon airport for flights to the Benelux countries and Northern France and parts of Germany.

These are a few distances from Manston Airport.

  • Amsterdam – 160 miles
  • Brussels – 134 miles
  • Cologne – 253 miles
  • Dusseldorf – 234 miles
  • Frankfurt – 328 miles
  • Geneva – 414 miles
  • Hamburg – 396 miles
  • Le Touquet – 59 miles
  • Lille – 49 miles
  • Luxembourg – 243 miles
  • Ostend – 66 miles
  • Strasbourg – 339 miles

Manston’s position on the tip of Kent gives it an advantage and I think low- and zero-carbon services could reach Cologne, Frankfurt, Geneva, Hamburg and Strasbourg.

The airport also has other advantages.

  • A big electrolyser to produce hydrogen is being built at Herne Bay.
  • The area is rich in wind and solar energy.
  • I suspect the airspace to the East of the airport isn’t very busy and short hops to the Continent could be easy to slot in.

There is a new station being built at Thanet Parkway, which is on the Ashford and Ramsgate Line, which has regular services to London, including some services on High Speed One.

This Google Map shows the location of the airport and the station.

Note.

  1. The runway of Manston Airport.
  2. The Ashford and Ramsgate Line running across the South-East corner of the map.
  3. The station could be built to the West of the village of Cliffsend, which is indicated by the red arrow.
  4. I’m sure, a people mover or a zero-carbon bus could be built to connect the station and the airport.

There would need to be improvements in the frequency of services to and from London, but I’m sure Manston Airport could become an ideal airport for low- and zero-carbon aircraft serving the near Continent.

Southampton

Southampton Airport could be the ideal design for an airport to serve an air bridge.

  • The Southampton Airport Parkway station is connected to the terminal.
  • The station has numerous rail services, including a fast service to and from London.
  • The airport is expanding and could make sure all works are compatible with a low- and zero-carbon future.

Southampton is not ideally placed for services to Ireland, but with low- and zero-carbon aircraft it could be ideal for running services to the Channel Islands and Western France.

Other Airports

I suspect other airports will go the low- and zero-carbon route.

Conclusion

I started this post, with the intention of writing about writing about low- and zero-carbon transport between the islands of Great Britain and Ireland.

But it has grown.

I have now come to the conclusion that there are several low- and zero-carbon routes that could be developed.

The most promising would appear to be.

  • London Euston and Belfast by new Class 805 train to Holyhead and then zero-carbon high speed ferry.
  • London Euston and Dublin by new Class 805 train to Holyhead and then zero-carbon high speed ferry.
  • Glasgow and Belfast by train to Cairnryan and then zero-carbon high speed ferry.
  • Point-to-point air routes using new small nineteen seat low- or zero-carbon airliners with a range of 500 miles.
  • London Euston and Belfast by new Class 807 train to Liverpool Airport and then smaller low- or zero-carbon airliner.
  • London Euston and Dublin by new Class 807 train to Liverpool Airport and then and then smaller low- or zero-carbon airliner.
  • Other air bridges will develop.

But I am fairly certain by the end of the decade, there will be A320-size airlines powered by hydrogen taking us to Ireland and Western Europe.

I believe that the survival and ultimate prospering of Airbus and Boeing depends on the development of a range of zero-carbon airliners.

For this reason alone, they will succeed.

April 22, 2021 Posted by | Hydrogen, Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Are Hitachi Designing the Ultimate Battery Train?

In Sparking A Revolution, a post based on an article of the same name in Issue 898 of Rail Magazine, I repeated this about the specification of Hitachi UK Battery Train Specification.

  • Range – 55-65 miles
  • Performance – 90-100 mph
  • Recharge – 10 minutes when static
  • Routes – Suburban near electrified lines
  • Battery Life – 8-10 years

Does this mean that the train can do 55-65 miles cruising at 90-100 mph?

How Much Energy Is Needed To Accelerate A Five-Car Class 800 Train To Operating Speed?

I will do my standard calculation.

  • Empty train weight – 243 tonnes (Wikipedia for Class 800 train!)
  • Passenger weight – 302 x 90 Kg (Includes baggage, bikes and buggies!)
  • Train weight – 270.18 tonnes

Using Omni’s Kinetic Energy Calculator, the kinetic energy at various speeds are.

  • 60 mph – 27 kWh
  • 80 mph – 48 kWh
  • 90 mph – 61 kWh
  • 100 mph – 75 kWh
  • 125 mph – 117 kWh – Normal cruise on electrified lines.
  • 140 mph – 147 kWh – Maximum cruise on electrified lines.

Because the kinetic energy of a train is only proportional to the weight of the train, but proportional to the square of the speed, note how the energy of the train increases markedly after 100 mph.

Are these kinetic energy figures a reason, why Hitachi have stated their battery train will have an operating speed of between 90 and 100 mph?

A 100 mph cruise would also be very convenient for a lot of main lines, that don’t have electrification in the UK.

What Battery Size Would Be Needed?

In How Much Power Is Needed To Run A Train At 125 mph?, I calculated that a five-car Class 801 electric train, needed 3.42 kWh per vehicle-mile to maintain 125 mph.

For comparison, an InterCity 125 train, had a figure of 2.83 kWh per vehicle-mile.

Hitachi are redesigning the nose of the train for the new Class 810 train and I suspect that these trains can achieve somewhere between 1.5 and 3 kWh per vehicle-mile, if they are cruising at 100 mph.

Doing the calculation for various consumption levels gives the following battery capacity for a five-car train to cruise 65 miles at 100 mph

  • 1.5 kWh per vehicle-mile – 487 kWh
  • 2 kWh per vehicle-mile – 650 kWh
  • 2.5 kWh per vehicle-mile – 812.5 kWh
  • 3 kWh per vehicle-mile – 975 kWh

These figures don’t include any energy for acceleration to line speed from the previous stop or station, but they would cope with a deceleration and subsequent acceleration, after say a delay caused by a slow train or other operational delay, by using regenerative braking to the battery.

The energy needed to accelerate to operating speed, will be as I calculated earlier.

  • 90 mph – 61 kWh
  • 100 mph – 75 kWh

As the battery must have space to store the regenerative braking energy and it would probably be prudent to have a ten percent range reserve, I can see a battery size for a train with an energy consumption of 2 kWh per vehicle-mile, that needed to cruise at 100 mph being calculated as follows.

  • Energy for the cruise – 650 kWh
  • 10% reserve for cruise – 65 kWh
  • Braking energy from 100 mph – 75 kWh

This gives a total battery size of 790 kWh, which could mean that 800 kWh would be convenient.

Note that each of the three MTU 12V 1600 diesel engines, fitted to a Class 800 train, each weigh around two tonnes.

In Innolith Claims It’s On Path To 1,000 Wh/kg Battery Energy Density, I came to these conclusions.

  • Tesla already has an energy density of 250 Wh/Kg.
  • Tesla will increase this figure.
  • By 2025, the energy density of lithium-ion batteries will be much closer to 1 KWh/Kg.
  • Innolith might achieve this figure. But they are only one of several companies aiming to meet this magic figure.

Suppose two of the MTU 12V 1600 diesel engines were each to be replaced by a two tonne battery, using Tesla’s current energy density, this would mean the following.

  • Each battery would have a capacity of 500 kWh.
  • The train would have one MWh of installed battery power.
  • This is more than my rough estimate of power required for a 65 mile trip.
  • The train would have little or no weight increase.
  • I also wouldn’t be surprised to find that the exchange of a diesel engine for a battery was Plug-and-Play.

Hitachi would have an electric/battery/diesel tri-mode train capable of the following.

  • Range – 55-65 miles
  • Out and Back Range – about 20-30 miles
  • Performance – 90-100 mph
  • Recharge – 10 minutes when static
  • Emergency diesel engine.

I feel it would be a very useful train.

Trains That Could Be Fitted With Batteries

The original article in Rail Magazine says this.

For the battery project, positive discussions are taking place with a number of interested parties for a trial, with both Class 385s and Class 800s being candidates for conversion.

So this means that the following operators will be able to use Hitachi’s battery technology o their trains.

  • Avanti West Coast – Class 80x trains
  • First East Coast Trains – Class 80x trains
  • East Midlands Railway – Class 80x trains
  • GWR – Class 80x trains
  • Hull Trains – Class 80x trains
  • LNER – Class 80x trains
  • ScotRail – Class 385 trains
  • TransPennine Express – Class 80x trains

Although, I based my calculations on Class 80x trains, I suspect that the methods can be applied to the smaller Class 385 trains.

Possible Out-And-Back Journeys

These are possible Out-And-Back journeys, that I believe Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains could handle.

  • Edinburgh and Tweedbank – 30 miles from Newcraighall
  • London Paddington and Bedwyn – 30 miles from Reading
  • London Euston and Blackburn – 12 miles from Preston
  • London Kings Cross and Bradford – < 27 miles from Leeds
  • London Euston and Chester – 21 miles from Crewe
  • London Kings Cross and Harrogate – <18 miles from Leeds
  • London Kings Cross and Huddersfield – 17 miles from Leeds
  • London St. Pancras and Leicester – 16 miles from Market Harborough
  • London Kings Cross and Lincoln – 17 miles from Newark
  • London St. Pancras and Melton Mowbray – 26 miles from Corby
  • London Kings Cross and Middlesbrough – 20 miles from Northallerton
  • London Kings Cross and Nottingham – 20 miles from Newark
  • London Paddington and Oxford – 10 miles from Didcot
  • London Kings Cross and Redcar – 29 miles from Northallerton
  • London Kings Cross and Rotherham- 14 miles from Doncaster
  • London Kings Cross and Sheffield – 20 miles from Doncaster
  • London and Weston-super-Mare – 19 miles from Bristol

Note.

  1. Provided that the Out-And-Back journey is less than about sixty miles, I would hope that these stations are comfortably in range.
  2. Leicester is the interesting destination, which would be reachable in an Out-And-Back journey. But trains from the North stopping at Leicester would probably need to charge at Leicester.
  3. I have included Blackburn as it could be a destination for Avanti West Coast.
  4. I have included Melton Mowbray as it could be a destination for East Midlands Railway.
  5. I have included Nottingham, Rotherham and Sheffield as they could be destinations for LNER. These services could prove useful if the Midland Main Line needed to be closed for construction works.
  6. I’m also fairly certain, that no new electrification would be needed, although every extra mile would help.
  7. No charging stations would be needed.

I suspect, I’ve missed a few possible routes.

Possible Journeys Between Two Electrified Lines

These are possible journeys between two electrified lines, that  I believe Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains could handle.

  • London St. Pancras and Eastbourne via Hastings – 25 miles between Ashford and Ore.
  • Leeds and York via Garforth – 20 miles between Neville Hall and Colton Junction
  • London Kings Cross and Norwich via Cambridge – 54 miles between Ely and Norwich.
  • Manchester Victoria and Leeds via Huddersfield – 43 miles between Manchester Victoria and Leeds.
  • Preston and Leeds via Hebden Bridge – 62 miles between Preston and Leeds.
  • Newcastle and Edinburgh – Would battery-electric trains get round the well-publicised power supply problems on this route?

Note.

  1. I am assuming that a range of 65 miles is possible.
  2. If the trains have a diesel-generator set, then this could be used to partially-charge the battery in places on the journey.
  3. Leeds and York via Garforth has been scheduled for electrification for years.
  4. Preston and Leeds via Hebden Bridge would probably need some diesel assistance.
  5. London Kings Cross and Norwich via Cambridge is a cheeky one, that Greater Anglia wouldn’t like, unless they ran it.
  6. As before no new electrification or a charging station would be needed.

I suspect, I’ve missed a few possible routes.

Possible Out-And-Back Journeys With A Charge At The Destination

These are possible Out-And-Back journeys, that I believe Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains could handle, if the batteries were fully charged at the destination.

  • Doncaster and Cleethorpes – 52 miles from Doncaster.
  • London Paddington and Cheltenham – 42 miles from Swindon
  • London Kings Cross and Cleethorpes via Lincoln – 64 miles from Newark
  • London Euston and Gobowen – 46 miles from Crewe
  • London Euston and Wrexham – 33 miles from Crewe
  • London Kings Cross and Hull – 45 miles from Selby
  • London Kings Cross and Shrewsbury – 30 miles from Wolverhampton
  • London Kings Cross and Sunderland 41 miles from Northallerton
  • London Paddington and Swansea – 46 miles from Cardiff
  • London Paddington and Worcester – 67 miles from Didcot Parkway
  • London St. Pancras and Derby – 46 miles from Market Harborough
  • London St. Pancras and Nottingham – 43 miles from Market Harborough

Note.

  1. I am assuming that a range of 65 miles is possible.
  2. If the trains have a diesel-generator set, then this could be used to partially-charge the battery in places on the journey.
  3. I am assuming some form of charging is provided at the destination station.
  4. As before no new electrification would be needed.

I suspect, I’ve missed a few possible routes.

Midland Main Line

The Midland Main Line could possibly be run between London St. Pancras and Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield without the use of diesel.

Consider.

  • The route will be electrified between London St. Pancras and Market Harborough.
  • In connection with High Speed Two, the Midland Main Line and High Seed Two will share an electrified route between Sheffield and Clay Cross North Junction.
  • London St. Pancras and Derby can be run with a charging station at Derby, as Market Harborough and Derby is only 46 miles.
  • London St. Pancras and Nottingham can be run with a charging station at Nottingham, as Market Harborough and Nottingham is only 43 miles.
  • The distance between Clay Cross North Junction and Market Harborough is 67 miles.
  • The distance between Sheffield and Leeds is 38 miles.

It looks to me that the range of East Midlands Railway’s new Class 810 trains, will be a few miles short to bridge the gap on batteries, between Clay Cross North Junction and Market Harborough station, but Leeds and Sheffield appears possible, once Sheffield has been electrified.

There are several possible solutions to the Clay Cross North and Market Harborough electrification gap.

  1. Fit higher capacity batteries to the trains.
  2. Extend the electrification for a few miles North of Market Harborough station.
  3. Extend the electrification for a few miles South of Clay Cross North Junction.
  4. Stop at Derby for a few minutes to charge the batteries.

The route between Market Harborough and Leicester appears to have been gauge-cleared for electrification, but will be difficult to electrify close to Leicester station. However, it looks like a few miles can be taken off the electrification gap.

Between Chesterfield and Alfriston, the route appears difficult to electrify with tunnels and passig through a World Heritage Site.

So perhaps options 1 and 2 together will give the trains sufficient range to bridge the electrification gap.

Conclusion On The Midland Main Line

I think that Hitachi, who know their trains well, must have a solution for diesel-free operation of all Midland Main Line services.

It also looks like little extra electrification is needed, other than that currently planned for the Midland Main Line and High Speed Two.

North Wales Coast Line

If you look at distance along the North Wales Coast Line, from the electrification at Crewe, you get these values.

  • Chester – 21 miles
  • Rhyl – 51 miles
  • Colwyn Bay – 61 miles
  • Llandudno Junction – 65 miles
  • Bangor – 80 miles
  • Holyhead – 106 miles

It would appear that Avanti West Coast’s new AT-300 trains, if fitted with batteries could reach Llandudno Junction station, without using diesel.

Electrification Between Crewe And Chester

It seems to me that the sensible thing to do for a start is to electrify the twenty-one miles between Crewe and Chester, which has been given a high priority for this work.

With this electrification, distances from Chester are as follows.

  • Rhyl – 30 miles
  • Colwyn Bay – 40 miles
  • Llandudno Junction – 44 miles
  • Bangor – 59 miles
  • Holyhead – 85 miles

Electrification between Crewe and Chester may also open up possibilities for more electric and battery-electric train services.

But some way will be needed to charge the trains to the West of Chester.

Chagring The Batteries At Llandudno Junction Station

This Google Map shows Llandudno Junction station.

Note.

  1. It is a large station site.
  2. The Conwy Valley Line, which will be run by battery Class 230 trains in the future connects at this station.
  3. The Class 230 train will probably use some of Vivarail’s Fast Charging systems, which use third-rail technology, either at the ends of the branch or in Llandudno Junction station.

The simplest way to charge the London Euston and Holyhead train, would be to build a charging station at Llandudno Junction, which could be based on Vivarail’s Fast Charging technology or a short length of 25 KVAC overhead wire.

But this would add ten minutes to the timetable.

Could 25 KVAC overhead electrification be erected for a certain distance through the station, so that the train has ten minutes in contact with the wires?

Looking at the timetable of a train between London Euston and Holyhead, it arrives at Colwyn Bay station at 1152 and leaves Llandudno Junction station at 1200.

So would it be possible to electrify between the two stations and perhaps a bit further?

This Google Map shows Colwyn Bay Station,

Note how the double-track railway is squeezed between the dual-carriageway of the A55 North Wales Expressway and the sea.

The two routes follow each other close to the sea, as far as Abegele & Pensarn station, where the Expressway moves further from the sea.

Further on, after passing through more caravans than I’ve ever seen, there is Rhyl station.

  • The time between arriving at Rhyl station and leaving Llandudno Junction station is nineteen minutes.
  • The distance between the two stations is fourteen miles.
  • Rhyl and Crewe is fifty-one miles.
  • Llandudno Junction and Holyhead is forty-one miles.

It would appear that if the North Wales Coast Line between Rhyl and Llandudno Junction is electrified, that Hitachi’s proposed battery trains can reach Holyhead.

The trains could even changeover between electrification and battery power in Rhyl and Llandudno Junction stations.

I am sure that electrifying this section would not be the most difficult in the world, although the severe weather sometimes encountered, may need some very resilient or innovative engineering.

It may be heretical to say so, but would it be better if this section were to be electrified using proven third-rail technology.

West of Llandudno Junction station, the electrification would be very difficult, as this Google Map of the crossing of the River Conwy shows.

I don’t think anybody would want to see electrification around the famous castle.

Electrification Across Anglesey

Llanfairpwll station marks the divide between the single-track section of the North Wales Coast Line over the Britannia Bridge and the double-track section across Anglesey.

From my virtual helicopter, the route looks as if, it could be fairly easy to electrify, but would it be necessary?

  • Llandudno Junction and Holyhead is forty-one miles, which is well within battery range.
  • There is surely space at Holyhead station to install some form of fast-charging system.

One problem is that trains seem to turn round in only a few minutes, which may not be enough to charge the trains.

So perhaps some of the twenty-one miles between Llanfairpwll and Holyhead should be electrified.

London Euston And Holyhead Journey Times

Currently, trains take three hours and forty-three minutes to go between London Euston and Holyhead, with these sectional timings.

  • London Euston and Crewe – One hour and thirty-nine minutes.
  • Crewe and Holyhead – Two hours and four minutes.

The big change would come, if the London Euston and Crewe leg, were to be run on High Speed Two, which will take just fifty-five m,inutes.

This should reduce the London Euston and Holyhead time to just under three hours.

Freight On The North Wales Coast Line

Will more freight be seen on the North Wales Coast Line in the future?

The new tri-mode freight locomotives like the Class 93 locomotive, will be able to take advantage of any electrification to charge their batteries, but they would probably be on diesel for much of the route.

Conclusion On The North Wales Coast Line

Short lengths of electrification, will enable Avanti West Coast’s AT-300 trains, after retrofitting with batteries, to run between Crewe and Holyhead, without using any diesel.

I would electrify.

  • Crewe and Chester – 21 miles
  • Rhyl and Llandudno Junction – 14 miles
  • Llanfairpwll and Holyhead – 21 miles

But to run battery-electric trains between London Euston and Holyhead, only Rhyl and Llandudno Junction needs to be electrified.

All gaps in the electrification will be handled on battery power.

A Selection Of Possible Battery-Electric Services

In this section, I’ll look at routes, where battery-electric services would be very appropriate and could easily be run by Hitachi’s proposed battery-electric trains.

London Paddington And Swansea

Many were disappointed when Chris Grayling cancelled the electrification between Cardiff and Swansea.

I went along with what was done, as by the time of the cancellation, I’d already ridden in a battery train and believed in their potential.

The distance between Cardiff and Swansea is 46 miles without electrification.

Swansea has these services to the West.

  • Carmarthen – 32 miles
  • Fishguard – 73 miles
  • Milford Haven  71 miles
  • Pembroke Dock – 73 miles

It looks like, three services could be too long for perhaps a three car battery-electric version of a Hitachi Class 385 train, assuming it has a maximum range of 65 miles.

But these three services all reverse in Carmarthen station.

So perhaps, whilst the driver walks between the cabs, the train can connect automatically to a fast charging system and give the batteries perhaps a four minute top-up.

Vivarail’s Fast Charging system based on third-rail technology would be ideal, as it connects automatically and it can charge a train in only a few minutes.

I would also electrify the branch between Swansea and the South Wales Main Line.

This would form part of a fast-charging system for battery-trains at Swansea, where turnround times can be quite short.

I can see a network of battery-electric services developing around Swansea, that would boost tourism to the area.

Edinburgh And Tweedbank

The Borders Railway is electrified as far as Newcraighall station and the section between there and Tweedbank is thirty miles long.

I think that a four-car battery-electric Class 385 train could work this route.

It may or may not need a top up at Tweedbank.

The Fife Circle

The Fife Circle service from Edinburgh will always be difficult to electrify, as it goes over the Forth Rail Bridge.

  • The Fife Circle is about sixty miles long.
  • Plans exist for a short branch to Leven.
  • The line between Edinburgh and the Forth Rail Bridge is partly electrified.

I believe that battery-electric Class 385 train could work this route.

London Kings Cross and Grimsby/Cleethorpes via Lincoln

The Cleethorpes/Grimsby area is becoming something of a  renewable energy powerhouse and I feel that battery trains to the area, might be a significant and ultimately profitable statement.

LNER recently opened a six trains per day service to Lincoln.

Distances from Newark are as follows.

  • Lincoln – 17 miles
  • Grimsby – 61 miles
  • Cleethorpes – 64 miles

A round trip to Lincoln can probably be achieved on battery alone with a degree of ease, but Cleethorpes and Grimsby would need a recharge at the coast.

Note that to get to the Cleethorpes/Grimsby area, travellers usually need to change at Doncaster.

But LNER are ambitious and I wouldn’t be surprised to see them dip a toe in the Cleethorpes/Grimsby market.

The LNER service would also be complimented by a TransPennine Express service from Manchester Airport via Sheffield and Doncaster, which could in the future be another service run by a Hitachi battery train.

There is also a local service to Barton-on-Humber, which could be up for improvement.

London Waterloo And Exeter

This service needs to go electric, if South Western Railway is going to fully decarbonise.

But third-rail electrification is only installed between Waterloo and Basingstoke.

Could battery-electric trains be used on this nearly two hundred mile route to avoid the need for electrification.

A possible strategy could be.

  • Use existing electrification, as far as Basingstoke – 48 miles
  • Use battery power to Salisbury – 83 miles
  • Trains can take several minutes at Salisbury as they often split and join and change train crew, so the train could be fast-charged.
  • Use battery power to the Tisbury/Gillingham/Yeovil/Crewkerne area, where trains would be charged – 130 miles
  • Use battery power to Exeter- 172 miles

Note.

  1. The miles are the distance from London.
  2. The charging at Salisbury could be based on Vivarail’s Fast-Charging technology.
  3. The charging around Yrovil could be based on perhaps twenty miles of third-rail electrification, that would only be switched on, when a train is present.

I estimate that there could be time savings of up to fifteen minutes on the route.

 

To Be Continued…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February 18, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments