Merseyrail new stock

[jopsuk]

how tight on headroom are the Merseyrail tunnels? Is there future scope for 25kV overhead rail electrification?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

how tight on headroom are the Merseyrail tunnels? Is there future scope for 25kV overhead rail electrification?

I don't know for certain, but it looks fairly tight. I'm not sure what the clearances required are for an overhead rail, but I imagine it might make the difference between being able to use 'standard' sized stock or having to build something bespoke with a lower ceiling- Though given the tight corners on the loop, something non-standard might be better anyway, so perhaps Stadler Rail, being specialists in bespoke vehicles, might be able to come up with something...

 

[8J]

Another problem area for overhead wires are the steep drop into Green Lane Station into the cutting. With the reporting that the FCC 313's are to be replaced, I think it makes more and more sense to send them up here for electrification projects. Maybe even some for Northern Rail and they could even run services from Manchester to Southport, Ormskirk or Kirkby via Hunts Cross and Liverpool Central or even Manchester to Ellesmere Port, Chester, West Kirby or New Brighton via the stock interchange line

 

[snowball]

Another problem area for overhead wires are the steep drop into Green Lane Station into the cutting.

Why is a steep drop a problem for overhead wires?

(Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Birkenhead area)

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Another problem area for overhead wires are the steep drop into Green Lane Station into the cutting. With the reporting that the FCC 313's are to be replaced, I think it makes more and more sense to send them up here for electrification projects. Maybe even some for Northern Rail and they could even run services from Manchester to Southport, Ormskirk or Kirkby via Hunts Cross and Liverpool Central or even Manchester to Ellesmere Port, Chester, West Kirby or New Brighton via the stock interchange line

There's been enough moaning about being given 'cast-off' 319s from the late 1980s/early 1990s, let alone stock from the mid 1970s! The 313s are even older than the D-stock which was a few years back proposed to be refurbished for the Harrogate line!

Bringing us back on topic though, perhaps re-engineered D-stock could be a 'low cost' option for Merseyrail?

 

[Techniquest]

Bringing us back on topic though, perhaps re-engineered D-stock could be a 'low cost' option for Merseyrail?

That's actually quite a funky idea fair dos, D stock already cover long routes (Upminster to Richmond/Wimbledon/Ealing Broadway is quite a fair way!) so clearly they are fine for lengthy runs.

How much more life could be dragged out of D stock though? They are getting a bit old now (built 1978 IIRC) so I can't seem them lasting that long, re-engineered or not. Maybe 20 years, but would the cost of re-engineering the D stock to be replaced in 20 years afterwards at the most be worth it compared to replacing the 507s and 508s with brand new trains?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

That's actually quite a funky idea fair dos, D stock already cover long routes (Upminster to Richmond/Wimbledon/Ealing Broadway is quite a fair way!) so clearly they are fine for lengthy runs.

How much more life could be dragged out of D stock though? They are getting a bit old now (built 1978 IIRC) so I can't seem them lasting that long, re-engineered or not. Maybe 20 years, but would the cost of re-engineering the D stock to be replaced in 20 years afterwards at the most be worth it compared to replacing the 507s and 508s with brand new trains?

Well, there's the rub I suppose... I'm not sure what the details of the Harrogate proposal were (other than a promise to fit toilets!), or whether it was costed and researched or drawn up on the back of a fag-packet. But even now the D78s do seem far newer than they actually are, especially now they have paint on them, and no longer have wood-effect flooring and seats that match the Leyland Atlanteans I travelled on as a small child!

 

[Techniquest]

Well, there's the rub I suppose... I'm not sure what the details of the Harrogate proposal were (other than a promise to fit toilets!), or whether it was costed and researched or drawn up on the back of a fag-packet. But even now the D78s do seem far newer than they actually are, especially now they have paint on them, and no longer have wood-effect flooring and seats that match the Leyland Atlanteans I travelled on as a small child!

Aye they do seem much newer than they did when I was first doing London trips thankfully, quite decent they are for older Tube trains fair dos.

Shall be interesting to see what happens over the new few years, although I suspect the 507s and 508s won't be getting replaced for a few years yet at least!

 

[507 001]

Bringing us back on topic though, perhaps re-engineered D-stock could be a 'low cost' option for Merseyrail?

That's actually quite a funky idea fair dos, D stock already cover long routes (Upminster to Richmond/Wimbledon/Ealing Broadway is quite a fair way!) so clearly they are fine for lengthy runs.

How much more life could be dragged out of D stock though? They are getting a bit old now (built 1978 IIRC) so I can't seem them lasting that long, re-engineered or not. Maybe 20 years, but would the cost of re-engineering the D stock to be replaced in 20 years afterwards at the most be worth it compared to replacing the 507s and 508s with brand new trains?

No I'm sorry, some of the suggestions on this thread are silly, but this is just ludicrous.

Why re-engineer trains that are older than what we have and less suitable than what we have?

Sometimes people on here need to give their head a wobble.

 

[joeykins82]

Combined order of 6-car Desiro City for Merseyrail and FCC Moorgate stock. Job done. Next?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

No I'm sorry, some of the suggestions on this thread are silly, but this is just ludicrous.

Why re-engineer trains that are older than what we have and less suitable than what we have?

Sometimes people on here need to give their head a wobble.

To be fair, my suggestion was more than 'slightly' tongue-in-cheek!

Then again, on the face of it is the D78 any less suitable than the 507/508s? Both have no toilets, the D78s are around the same age, but (I think) a more modern design, albeit tailored to a different market at the present time. The cars are around 2m shorter which would reduce track wear on the loop, and it'd be quite interesting to compare the reliability figures for both groups of stock. There's also far more of them, meaning there'd be the option of having a bit more slack in the fleet for maintenance as well as allowing for growth.

Of course, there's a lot wrong with the suggestion which is why I was only making it with my tongue firmly in my cheek, and I'd be as shocked as anyone if an idea along these lines came from the powers that be.

As much as anything, it's just a shame that the D-stock will most likely be scrapped in a few years time when it certainly doesn't seem to be life-expired (though perhaps depot staff could correct me on this!) and even before the refurbishment was the best and most comfortable stock on the SSLs.

 

[transmanche]

As much as anything, it's just a shame that the D-stock will most likely be scrapped in a few years time when it certainly doesn't seem to be life-expired (though perhaps depot staff could correct me on this!) and even before the refurbishment was the best and most comfortable stock on the SSLs.

Lord no, second worst LU stock ever - only beaten by similarly-designed (and thankfully long-scrapped) 1983 stock. The single-leaf doors might have made a bit of sense in a time of falling passenger numbers - but quite frankly are ridiculous for a busy metro service.

The sooner they become Coke cans the better.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

how tight on headroom are the Merseyrail tunnels? Is there future scope for 25kV overhead rail electrification?

The original tunnels were double track and built for steam, so I wouldn't have thought there would be any height problems there.

The 1970s single-track tunnels were built for 3rd rail and I don't know what the clearance situation is, but it looks "generous" to me.
The Moorfields-Central-St James tunnel on the Northern Line is fairly straight and re-uses some of the original Mersey Railway tunnel (now the stock interchange line from Central to James St).
The deep level Loop tunnel on the Wirral line does a 180-degree turn but the bends seem to me to be less pronounced than in some places on the original line (eg either side of Birkenhead Central).
The burrowing junction at Hamilton Square is also single-track.

I would have thought the first challenge is to accommodate full-size stock with a retracted pantograph (like the Thameslink Snow Hill tunnel).
I don't think anybody is contemplating stringing up the existing 3rd rail routes just yet.

 

[Wavertreelad]

The original tunnels were double track and built for steam, so I wouldn't have thought there would be any height problems there.

The 1970s single-track tunnels were built for 3rd rail and I don't know what the clearance situation is, but it looks "generous" to me.
The Moorfields-Central-St James tunnel on the Northern Line is fairly straight and re-uses some of the original Mersey Railway tunnel (now the stock interchange line from Central to James St).
The deep level Loop tunnel on the Wirral line does a 180-degree turn but the bends seem to me to be less pronounced than in some places on the original line (eg either side of Birkenhead Central).
The burrowing junction at Hamilton Square is also single-track.

I would have thought the first challenge is to accommodate full-size stock with a retracted pantograph (like the Thameslink Snow Hill tunnel).
I don't think anybody is contemplating stringing up the existing 3rd rail routes just yet.

I would expect that the Merseytravel planners are thinking about that challenge spurred on by the prospect that at some stage in the life of the new stock the existing third rail network might have to be converted to OHLE especially if network is extended. This could be of course be completed in sections of individual lines spread out over several years.

 

[WatcherZero]

I dont think theres any impetus for Merseyrail 3rd rail being converted, it still has the advantages from the approach without the technical limitation disadvantages by much longer and faster power hungry trains in the South.

 

[baldyman26]

I don't understand all the talk about conversions and overhead cables etc. Merseyrail works fine as it is, any extensions that are required, if ever they so happen to the network can be catered for by third rail.. Personally I can see the current trains being re-engineered, I presume if the 318 refurb program is a success, this will no doubt probably be a deciding factor. The problem is, as a network, Merseyrail works pretty well, and yes while the trains will need replacing, with the hard work put in, they still keep going, are relatively clean and alot of the time, run to schedule. Merseyrail will look to keep costs down if they can. New builds will cost a fortune in design costs alone, re-engineering whilst not ideal, will in effect enhance an already successful product, which can be added to when units down south come free again probably at a lower cost than a complete renewal. This is just my opinion and is probably far off the truth, but for far too long we in Liverpool have had grand ideas about what our rail network should be, when in reality nobody will stump up the cash to make this possible. The public perception and an enthusiast perception is very different and I wouldn't be surprised if many commuters think the new livery being applied, is actually a new train, hence why a rework is being mentioned. Public want reliable trains, and won't have a clue how old they are..

 

[Wavertreelad]

I don't understand all the talk about conversions and overhead cables etc. Merseyrail works fine as it is, any extensions that are required, if ever they so happen to the network can be catered for by third rail.. Personally I can see the current trains being re-engineered, I presume if the 318 refurb program is a success, this will no doubt probably be a deciding factor. The problem is, as a network, Merseyrail works pretty well, and yes while the trains will need replacing, with the hard work put in, they still keep going, are relatively clean and alot of the time, run to schedule. Merseyrail will look to keep costs down if they can. New builds will cost a fortune in design costs alone, re-engineering whilst not ideal, will in effect enhance an already successful product, which can be added to when units down south come free again probably at a lower cost than a complete renewal. This is just my opinion and is probably far off the truth, but for far too long we in Liverpool have had grand ideas about what our rail network should be, when in reality nobody will stump up the cash to make this possible. The public perception and an enthusiast perception is very different and I wouldn't be surprised if many commuters think the new livery being applied, is actually a new train, hence why a rework is being mentioned. Public want reliable trains, and won't have a clue how old they are..

My only reservations on this is are that if Merseyrail wants to operate more six car sets to avoid overcrowding at peak times it will require additional stock, unless some current services are curtailed which seems unlikely. It does have aspirations to extend its operation beyond it's current boundaries which would then require additional stock.

Any increase in train numbers or extensions will require parts of the infrastructure to be upgraded, and whilst this could be achieved using third rail technology, surely it would work out cheaper in the long run to complete this with OHLE as part of a phased conversion of the network. When the present north west electrification is completed there appears to be no current plans to wire the gaps, Kirkby to Wigan, Ormskirk to Preston together with Bidston to Wrexham. If you add the CLC route which Merseyrail has expressed an interest in operating is third rail a viable proposition especially as the Kirkby and Ormskirk lines could offer alternative connections to the WCML for freight traffic? Whilst I can't see electrification coming to these gaps before 2019 anything beyond this date is possible and this fits nicely with the replacement of the current fleet.

The 507/508's are currently due to be returned in 2019/2020 when they will be 40 years old so whether re-engineering would be viable may be questionable especially if they had to be upgraded to OHLE as well, and numbers wise this would still not the solve the problem. Interesting I note from Wikipedia that 313003/005/013/063 were tested on the Northern Line back in the 1970's before the 507/508's were ordered implying the clearance in the new tunnels could be sufficient for them and other similar stock to operate on the network. If this is the case, perhaps the options for cascading replacement stock to Merseyrail could grow solving the numbers problem initially and providing the network with additional flexibility, that is assuming sufficient new stock is not ordered in the first place.

 

[transmanche]

Interesting I note from Wikipedia that 313003/005/013/063 were tested on the Northern Line back in the 1970's before the 507/508's were ordered implying the clearance in the new tunnels could be sufficient for them and other similar stock to operate on the network.

Not surprising, since the 313s and the 507/508s have exactly same body.

 

[HSTEd]

The problems of third rail in the south east are due to the shear power demand associated with very intensive 12 car workings.
Merseyrail does not have this and likely never will do.

At low power draws 750V infrastructure is easily cheaper than 25kV infrastructure - which is why light rail installations almost universally opt for the former, even in segregated applications.

There is little reason to replace the core network with 25kV, especially as the core tunnel essentially eliminates any possibility of the 750V operation being removed entirely.
Extensions might have 25kV but that would primarily to ease trackwork complications at the ends - for instance a third rail Preston approach might prove problematic even if it can be held to signle track from the WCML junction into the station.

 

[TheKnightWho]

There are a few problems that haven't been addressed, though:

a) Merseyrail may want to extend over rails that NR will at some point want to electrify with 25kV AC (or over lines that already are). Dual voltage stock would be all very well, and I'm sure whatever replaces the current stock will have at least the provision for AC, but the point is that the stock will probably require it at some point.

b) NR and various other bodies are loathe to extend any 3rd rail networks because of the safety factor, which makes it expensive and time-consuming to get the permission. The initial capital outlay might be more expensive for OHLE, but with the inflated costs of third rail it might be worth it.

c) It's not just the power draw that makes OHLE preferable, but the fact that only ~2% of the energy going through the wires is wasted, as opposed to ~27% for third rail due to the increased surface area third rail has and the lower efficiency of high wattage DC vs. AC. Therefore it's wrong to assume it's cheaper to have third rail over time simply because maintenance costs are lower.

 

[Wavertreelad]

There is also political angle in the future. The Halton, Knowsley, Liverpool, St Helens, Sefton and Wirral Combined Authority, or what could become the Greater Liverpool Combined Authority (LCA) will take over strategic transport planning for the area. Although the area is only slightly larger than the present Merseytravel area, speaking as one voice should enable it to formulate plans with neighbouring authorities, ie Lancashire, Cheshire and Manchester much easier as well as with the Welsh Government. Whilst this might not affect directly any order for new Merseyrail stock, it could have a bearing on any further extensions of the network. This also means that these neighbouring authorities are unlikely to want a third rail line in their area when the rest in their area will eventually be OHLE for all the technical difficulties and practical problems this creates.

 

[Nym]

c) It's not just the power draw that makes OHLE preferable, but the fact that only ~2% of the energy going through the wires is wasted, as opposed to ~27% for third rail due to the increased surface area third rail has and the lower efficiency of high wattage DC vs. AC. Therefore it's wrong to assume it's cheaper to have third rail over time simply because maintenance costs are lower.

I'm sorry, wha?

One does need to consider that the rail network is one system, and inefficencies of transforming, rectifying and controling or inverting on the train adds significant weight to the unit itself.

DC tends to be used for frequent stop networks and continues to be used on new builds (Manchester, Croydon etc.) as the transformers (heavy peices of equipment) can be located off the train.

The changes in %ge losses you quote, for one I don't know where the numbers are coming from there, it looks nothing like what I'd seen at a recent IMechE confrence but the 27% figure does seem accurate(ish), but this does indicate the massive problem of siloing problems away from the responsibility of the company for that part of the system. Simply because the losses are on the Network Rail side rather than the TOC side doens't mean they do or don't exist.

This figure around 27% is also only really applicable in the southern reigon where losses are significantly higher, as the power draw is significantly higher than merseyrail will ever be.

Finally, the reason why the reason for changes to the efficeney are nothing to do with surface area, it's all to do with ohms law. Transmitting at 25kV RMS rather than 750V RMS requires 33.33 times less current per unit power, so for the same power draw, the 'losses' are in fact 1111.11 times less per unit cross sectional area of the conductor, of course, the 3rd rail conductors are much larger, and tend to be being replaced with ULL ConRail made of Aluminium and Steel composite in place of the standard carbon steel.

I say 'losses' as there are differences between resistive and inductive losses.

 

[northwichcat]

a) Merseyrail may want to extend over rails that NR will at some point want to electrify with 25kV AC (or over lines that already are). Dual voltage stock would be all very well, and I'm sure whatever replaces the current stock will have at least the provision for AC, but the point is that the stock will probably require it at some point.

Apparently any new DC stock 3rd rail stock ordered for National Rail will allow conversion to be able to use AC overheads. The 350/1s were originally built as 450s.

 

[Techniquest]

Should definitely get more trains, the 507s and 508s were all rammed on the Northern line on Saturday. The Wirral line lot were also getting very busy by 1100 too. All 3-car trains too, made for some less than comfortable journeys. As did the lack of facilities on the 507s and 508s, especially when you've got lengthy waits at places like Little Sutton and Capenhurst which are unstaffed!

 

[Leylandlad]

Should definitely get more trains, the 507s and 508s were all rammed on the Northern line on Saturday. The Wirral line lot were also getting very busy by 1100 too. All 3-car trains too, made for some less than comfortable journeys. As did the lack of facilities on the 507s and 508s, especially when you've got lengthy waits at places like Little Sutton and Capenhurst which are unstaffed!

Next Thurs-Saturday will be far busier still on the Northern Line, especially if the weather is nice. It's usually 6 car trains on the regular Liverpool Central-Ormskirk line and a few extras as far as Aintree.

Anyone got any tips for Saturday by the way?

 

[Nym]

They could look at purchasing some D78s from SSL Nominee Ltd...?

Wouldn't be much work for TMU or somewhere similar to convert them to 3rd rail running...

 

[Techniquest]

Next Thurs-Saturday will be far busier still on the Northern Line, especially if the weather is nice. It's usually 6 car trains on the regular Liverpool Central-Ormskirk line and a few extras as far as Aintree.

Anyone got any tips for Saturday by the way?

According to the posters, there's services which call at Central, Moorfields and Aintree only, with a 7.5 minute frequency of trains calling there (obviously including the normal Ormskirk trains) during the Aintree festival.

Thankfully I'm nowhere near Aintree for it, and in all fairness I daresay the Northern line would have been far busier if Liverpool had been playing at home (or indeed Everton) with football passengers to/from Sandhills.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

According to the posters, there's services which call at Central, Moorfields and Aintree only, with a 7.5 minute frequency of trains calling there (obviously including the normal Ormskirk trains) during the Aintree festival.

Thankfully I'm nowhere near Aintree for it, and in all fairness I daresay the Northern line would have been far busier if Liverpool had been playing at home (or indeed Everton) with football passengers to/from Sandhills.

Do the FA not normally avoid any games at Anfield or Goodison on Grand National Saturday?

 

[Wavertreelad]

Do the FA not normally avoid any games at Anfield or Goodison on Grand National Saturday?

Yes whichever team has the home match that weekend usually plays on a Sunday or Monday night.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Yes whichever team has the home match that weekend usually plays on a Sunday or Monday night.

I thought that was the case, I know it always was 10 years or so ago when I lived in Ormskirk.