GWR battery train procurement suggestions & predictions

[Roast Veg]

Desperately clawing for any possible bidders that aren't Vivarail (not that I dislike their product) - are there any tram builders with a suitable high floor product?

 

[Mordac]

Desperately clawing for any possible bidders that aren't Vivarail (not that I dislike their product) - are there any tram builders with a suitable high floor product?

Would something similar to the Manchester trams work?

 

[43096]

Desperately clawing for any possible bidders that aren't Vivarail (not that I dislike their product) - are there any tram builders with a suitable high floor product?

No-one is going to bid a new train/tram/whatever for a 12 month trial contract.

 

[Roast Veg]

Would something similar to the Manchester trams work?

Well it's high floor, but are there any battery versions? I don't know of a battery high floor product in circulation.

 

[swt_passenger]

Yes West Ealing LMD has flush and tank capabilities already

I don’t think it has access from the branch or bay though? So I guess that just means the start and end of service runs via P4?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well it's high floor, but are there any battery versions? I don't know of a battery high floor product in circulation.

The TfW Stadler Citylink is 25kV capable and can have batteries fitted. It would basically be a drop-in solution if they hadn't cheaped out on wiring the bay, though I suppose they could do a version that charged off 750VDC overhead which would be easier to install at the Greenford end (remember, Stadler's bread and butter is small, customised orders from their modular platforms). Though I do think the tender has been set up specifically for Vivarail to win it, most probably using their already-built prototype battery unit.

 

[swt_passenger]

The TfW Stadler Citylink is 25kV capable and can have batteries fitted. It would basically be a drop-in solution if they hadn't cheaped out on wiring the bay, though I suppose they could do a version that charged off 750VDC overhead which would be easier to install at the Greenford end (remember, Stadler's bread and butter is small, customised orders from their modular platforms). Though I do think the tender has been set up specifically for Vivarail to win it, most probably using their already-built prototype battery unit.

The relatively newly installed bay is not accessible from the main lines. Why would it ever have needed wiring?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The relatively newly installed bay is not accessible from the main lines. Why would it ever have needed wiring?

To charge battery trains.

 

[swt_passenger]

To charge battery trains.

Even if thats not how it will actually work?

 

[Horizon22]

TBH I'd wire all the Thames Valley branches. Not doing so was cheaping out (just like not going to Bristol Temple Meads) - the cost would be negligible, and they're all just mini Windermeres in that regard.

That would indeed be the ideal solution and solve this nonsense of running a micro-fleet of Turbos on the branches.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That would indeed be the ideal solution and solve this nonsense of running a micro-fleet of Turbos on the branches.

Indeed. They are basically all like St Albans, which was worthwhile because it meant it could just be worked using the main south WCML fleet (or North London Line fleet as it used to be).

 

[Horizon22]

Indeed. They are basically all like St Albans, which was worthwhile because it meant it could just be worked using the main south WCML fleet (or North London Line fleet as it used to be).

True, but I just don't see it happening in the short-term unfortunately, so might as well run a short trial. If it's successful it might be a solution for the other branches, especially Windsor and Henley. But ultimately its a bit of a fudge to the obvious solution.

 

[A0]

That does have the added bonus of bringing back some of the peak time continuations into London (although I suppose that could hypothetically happen anyway were they to use 769s). It may be worth having a look at Windsor to London services in the peaks too.

Except it's a lousy use of capacity on a busy mainline - at a time when they need to be running 8 or 12 car services you'll be sending out 4 cars to go to Windsor or Henley on Thames or wherever else.

And in the case of a Windsor service that effectively leaves an 'empty' path west beyond Slough, again, not a good use of capacity.

 

[Bald Rick]

They are basically all like St Albans, which was worthwhile because it meant it could just be worked using the main south WCML fleet (or North London Line fleet as it used to be).

Not quite, as the abbey line can take a standard length train from the local fleet (some of the few branches can’t). Also, battery train technology didn’t exist in 1988, at least not as we know it now.

 

[swt_passenger]

That does have the added bonus of bringing back some of the peak time continuations into London (although I suppose that could hypothetically happen anyway were they to use 769s). It may be worth having a look at Windsor to London services in the peaks too.

So it looks as though GWR will be getting 230s or similar after all, albeit maybe not in the places we were expecting.

Windsor is on the wrong side of the mains to have through trains, but in any case the few peak through services from the branches were all removed in favour of Crossrail. Whether wired or not, or operated with 769s, through trains will not return, it’s been noted in many prior discussions.

 

[A0]

Indeed. They are basically all like St Albans, which was worthwhile because it meant it could just be worked using the main south WCML fleet (or North London Line fleet as it used to be).

The Abbey Flyer wasn't wired until 20 or so years after the mainline it attached to such was the lack of priority. And at that time there were other DMU branches in the London area.

I'd say although not a branch, these actually have more in common with Marston Vale - there is relatively low usage (compared to the mainline), problems with infrastructure which makes things like electrification more problematic, mainly Marlow on that, but Greenford is also problematic. And it needs more stock than the Abbey Flyer does (1 unit). *edit* BaldRick got there just before me !

 

[Snow1964]

I know 466 or motor cars from 465 fitted with batteries has already been suggested

But don’t the 456s also come free in a few months, so could you also convert one of those. The drive package and motors were all updated recently (and I am sure a 455 motor bogie could be used if needed)

 

[NSEFAN]

I know 466 or motor cars from 465 fitted with batteries has already been suggested

But don’t the 456s also come free in a few months, so could you also convert one of those. The drive package and motors were all updated recently (and I am sure a 455 motor bogie could be used if needed)

Some 465/466 units are being stored, having been displaced by 707s. But I imagine these will be the most janky units going for store, so I'm not sure if they will be welcome, even after the work and inspection to put batteries in them.

Is the Greenford bay really so much of a challenge that 25kV OLE and SDO couldn't be used on this route? Battery projects are interesting but I do wonder if this is a good use of money.

 

[matt_world2004]

Some 465/466 units are being stored, having been displaced by 707s. But I imagine these will be the most janky units going for store, so I'm not sure if they will be welcome, even after the work and inspection to put batteries in them.

Is the Greenford bay really so much of a challenge that 25kV OLE and SDO couldn't be used on this route? Battery projects are interesting but I do wonder if this is a good use of money.

Don't the greenford branch have level crossrings which limit ohle?

 

[43096]

I know 466 or motor cars from 465 fitted with batteries has already been suggested

But don’t the 456s also come free in a few months, so could you also convert one of those. The drive package and motors were all updated recently (and I am sure a 455 motor bogie could be used if needed)

The 456s still have good old fashioned DC EE507 motors. It was the 455 fleet that was given AC motors. It’s not as simple as using a 455’s motors either.

I’m not sure why people are looking for alternative solutions (other than it’s traditional on railway forums) when given the timescales (start 2022 for 12 month trial) it’s pretty clearly aimed at one particular supplier.

 

[NotATrainspott]

If nothing else, the Greenford branch gives you the opportunity to test out both 25kV AC and 750V DC rapid charging. A good proportion of the lines suitable for battery trains have one of them available at one end. The GWML wiring probably wouldn't notice a small EMU doing a rapid charge, but the LUL 750V supply might be more interesting. If it could supply a burst of current it could simulate the sort of isolated DC charging stations you'd fit to the rural ends of battery train lines. These would have a lineside battery trickle fed from the grid which would then rapidly discharge into the train, and would be deliberately disconnected from the rest of the electrified network.

 

[NSEFAN]

Don't the greenford branch have level crossrings which limit ohle?

There is a crossing near West Ealing on the curve into the station, which might indeed be a limitation, depending on what goes in and out. The line is low speed at this point, so I'm not sure if this helps for a change in wire height. Possibly the footbridge would need some work/replacement?

 

[Flinn Reed]

What's stopping a 2-car 769 being built?

Also, regardless of what type is chosen for the Greenford branch, I think enough should be ordered to cover the Windsor, Marlow and Henley branches.

Would make a lot more sense than keeping a small fleet of turbos in the Thames Valley area - and could allow all 165s/166s to be used around Bristol and Exeter. 4-car 769s can cover other routes around Reading, including Oxford, Redhill/Gatwick and Basingstoke. Bi-modes seem far more suitable for this area with parts of the network electrified, even if just used to/from the depot.

Also seems strange to order such a small number of trains, just for a short little-used branch line. Looking at 230s elsewhere for example, TfW ordered them for more than one branch line, while SWR's 484s will cover a unique route separated from the main rail network (and with height restrictions). The LNR examples were perhaps in-part a trial, and could have continued using diesels from the WMR fleet, such as the ex-Overground 172s on the Coventry-Nuneaton line (though the 230s might be a short term measure anyway until the east-west rail link opens). But then like the Bletchley-Bedford line, perhaps the Greenford services will be used as a trial route for the technology?

 

[Gloster]

...while SWR's 484s will cover a unique route separated from the main rail network (and with height restrictions)...

Anything used on the Isle of Wight is going to be separated from the main network.

 

[Energy]

What's stopping a 2-car 769 being built?

Quite a lot, one of which is that the 319 motor car is one of the centre cars.

 

[XAM2175]

What's stopping a 2-car 769 being built?

The fact that the two motored bogies are under one of the trailers that you'd be removing, and the compressor and motor alternator are under the other trailer that you'd also be removing. And the toilets are in that trailer too.

 

[Domh245]

The drive package and motors were all updated recently (and I am sure a 455 motor bogie could be used if needed)

456s retain their original traction equipment (of similar vintage and general configuration to the 319s) - they weren't retractioned along with the 455s

 

[Bob Price]

TfW proposed running the 230's on Chester - Crewe and the Conway Valley line but both proved impractical. They are running regular training runs on the Borderlands now. The fact is if they want an out of the box solution it's either Vivarail or a tram such as the ones in the Midlands. Reengineering an old train takes a lot of time and there is no guarantee of success.

 

[WarrenTManager]

Desperately clawing for any possible bidders that aren't Vivarail (not that I dislike their product) - are there any tram builders with a suitable high floor product?

Why? Because of the choice of shell? As companies go to deal with, I have a lot of time for Vivarail. Refreshing even compared to the usual, they are customer focussed rather than this is what we can do and nothing else, like it or lump it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well it's high floor, but are there any battery versions? I don't know of a battery high floor product in circulation.

The Stadler Citylink as specced for TfW would provided you could provide the charging at the Greenford end. A short length of 750VDC OHLE would probably do it.