• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What will replace Electrostar/Desiro South of London?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Paul Jones 88

Member
Joined
15 Dec 2020
Messages
446
Location
Headcorn
As the oldest Electrostars and Desiros are now over twenty years old I began to wonder what would replace them, especially on commuter lines into London.
Would it be a sort of Class 700 type of train or maybe a design based on IEP or just a new version of the existing stock.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,914
I can't imagine it would be anything like an IEP with end doors and vestibules. Not really suitable for commuter trains.
But really 20 years is only mid-life. They aren't anywhere near bedding replacement yet.
 

py_megapixel

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2018
Messages
7,527
Location
Northern England
I doubt anyone knows. The oldest Desiros are actually a year or two younger than you seem to think - about 19 years old, and with the right maintenance there's no reason they couldn't last almost that long again. By that time I imagine what's available on the market will have changed completely.
 

TRAX

Established Member
Joined
2 Dec 2015
Messages
1,837
Location
France
You’re twenty years too early ! No one knows what trains will be like then.
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
As others have said, I think that you are twenty years too early. If it is going to be an Hitachi A-Train replacing the likes of Electrostars/Desiros, it would more likely be something like the class 385 units and I suspect would also be BEMU units with the units also replacing the class 158/159/171 Turbostar units, given what is on the market today. But we will have to wait to see what is on the train market and available in twenty years time.
 

py_megapixel

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2018
Messages
7,527
Location
Northern England
As others have said, I think that you are twenty years too early. If it is going to be an Hitachi A-Train replacing the likes of Electrostars/Desiros, it would more likely be something like the class 385 units and I suspect would also be BEMU units with the units also replacing the class 158/159/171 Turbostar units, given what is on the market today. But we will have to wait to see what is on the train market and available in twenty years time.
Doubt it. No point in lugging a diesel engine around when you consider that a vast majority or the services are electric
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
Doubt it. No point in lugging a diesel engine around when you consider that a vast majority or the services are electric
I think that you are misunderstanding the term BEMU, which is Battery - Electric Multiple Unit. There is no diesel to lug around!
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,320
You’re twenty years too early ! No one knows what trains will be like then.
Yes, but it doesn’t seem to stop the steady drip of replacement suggestions - it’s one of the straws clutched at in various threads about the west of England line, Okehampton etc, for some strange reason posters link 159 replacement with 444 replacement. I don‘t quite get it myself…
 

py_megapixel

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2018
Messages
7,527
Location
Northern England
I think that you are misunderstanding the term BEMU, which is Battery - Electric Multiple Unit. There is no diesel to lug around!
My mistake, I misread "BEMU" as "BMU" (where the B would just stand for bimodal, and I assumed you meant diesel).

I still doubt batteries would be fitted to an entire fleet, as they're expensive, heavy and have a limited life (although who knows where the technology will be in 20 years). Building a homogeneous fleet capable of using batteries, and then having a fairly small sub-fleet with them actually fitted, would probably be the way to go.
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
Yes, but it doesn’t seem to stop the steady drip of replacement suggestions - it’s one of the straws clutched at in various threads about the west of England line, Okehampton etc, for some strange reason posters link 159 replacement with 444 replacement. I don‘t quite get it myself…
Well, for instance some of the class 158 units that SWR use where introduced 1990/91. They are about 31 years old. The class 159 units where introduced about 1993 so they are 27/28 years old, so I suspect that these are likely to be replaced by a BEMU unit at some point within the next 20 years. By which time the likes of the class 450/444 will be 38 - 40 years old. But you could could have the class 450/444 working for even more years giving that the class 313 units are still going with Southern after 45 years, if that is being used as an example. But, as has been done with several new fleets coming in over the last few years, these have replaced more than one fleet of trains. A good example of this is class 755 which replaced class 153, 156 and 170 units. If we keep with SWR units, you will have class 701 units replacing class 455, 456, 458 and 707 units.
 

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,914
Doubt it. No point in lugging a diesel engine around when you consider that a vast majority or the services are electric

I think that you are misunderstanding the term BEMU, which is Battery - Electric Multiple Unit. There is no diesel to lug around!
Batteries will be even heavier than engines + fuel! There's an obsession with batteries at the moment but they are by no means suitable for all applications.
Something like the 775s as @Robbies2110 suggests would be eminently suitable. Perhaps with fuel cells instead of diesel engines, or engines running on LNG isntead of diesel.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
114,003
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
As the oldest Electrostars and Desiros are now over twenty years old I began to wonder what would replace them, especially on commuter lines into London.
Would it be a sort of Class 700 type of train or maybe a design based on IEP or just a new version of the existing stock.

Nothing any time soon, they are only mid life.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,997
Batteries will be even heavier than engines + fuel!

that depends how big the battery is, of course. But a battery that weighs the same as a typical turbo star engine, cooler group, transmission, exhaust system and fuel would provide at least an hour of full power. Quite handy in some applications (not all, obviously).
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,320
Nothing any time soon, they are only mid life.
Indeed given the fairly recent 387s etc, (2017?), there could still be Electrostars around for 35 - 40 years from now. I think that will actually encourage some of the slightly older variants to be kept as long as possible.
 

Sm5

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2016
Messages
1,013
Battery operated stock is nothing new, Ive had a ride on Derby lightweight built in 1958 on a few occasions that was wholly battery powered and is still going on its batteries Until recently.

besides, why would Electrostar need a battery powered replacement, its only used on 3rd rail and 25kv today anyway.
 
Last edited:

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
18,686
Location
Northampton
besides, why would Electrostar need a battery powered replacement, its only used on 3rd rail and 25kv today anyway.
1. For lines like Marshlink, Uckfield, North downs and possibly others in future that aren't electrified.
2. In case something goes bang.
 

Sm5

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2016
Messages
1,013
1. For lines like Marshlink, Uckfield, North downs and possibly others in future that aren't electrified.
2. In case something goes bang.
For those lines, whats wrong with any other conventional unit.

Rather than designing 95% of the fleet to carry superfluous and expensive kit that only gets used on 5% of the network ?

171’s do just fine today.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,452
For those lines, whats wrong with any other conventional unit.

Rather than designing 95% of the fleet to carry superfluous and expensive kit that only gets used on 5% of the network ?

171’s do just fine today.
Because HMG has said that the railway will be net carbon zero by 2050.
 

Sm5

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2016
Messages
1,013
Because HMG has said that the railway will be net carbon zero by 2050.
Electrostars arent Carbon neutral ?

replace 171’s with something else, or electrify the line.

There are 2805 Electrostar vehicles, and just 56 class 171 vehicles on Southern…

why afflict 2805 vehicles with heavy battery equipment unlikely ever to be used and consume copious amounts of energy to drag about ?

As it is the 377/5 & 377/7’s have a perfectly cosmetic pantograph with no where to raise it.

it might be more cost effective to build a modern equivalent of an MLV capable of dragging 3/4 cars about, or a Battery pack refurb of remaining spare 73/1s instead of the Diesel engine.
 
Last edited:

trebor79

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2018
Messages
4,914
Electrostars arent Carbon neutral ?

replace 171’s with something else, or electrify the line.

There are 2805 Electrostar vehicles, and just 56 class 171 vehicles on Southern…

why afflict 2805 vehicles with heavy battery equipment unlikely ever to be used and consume copious amounts of energy to drag about ?
Presumably you'd only need to "afflict" 56 vehicles with batteries?
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
18,686
Location
Northampton
Electrostars arent Carbon neutral ?
No, but they help the railway get to net carbon 0 because they use electricity, which is easier to generate 0-Carbon than diesel is to offset.
replace 171’s with something else, or electrify the line.
Replace with a battery-capable unit, perhaps? Electrification would be the ideal end-state but realistically the money just isn't going to be there. Nor is the safety case for 3rd rail likely to improve.
There are 2805 Electrostar vehicles, and just 56 class 171 vehicles on Southern…

why afflict 2805 vehicles with heavy battery equipment unlikely ever to be used and consume copious amounts of energy to drag about ?
Unlikely ever to be used? Are you aware just how often the third rail gets switched off around the network? Also, 377s currently run about with a big concrete block to simulate the load of the AC transformer gear, so you'd be replacing completely useless weight with equipment that could perform a valuable role during disruption for all trains. The energy is already being used, might as well do so usefully!
As it is the 377/5 & 377/7’s have a perfectly cosmetic pantograph with no where to raise it.
These have used the DV-capability on Thameslink and the Milton Keynes Services, and removing it would be somewhat cutting off nose to spite one's face.
it might be more cost effective to build a modern equivalent of an MLV capable of dragging 3/4 cars about, or a Battery pack refurb of remaining spare 73/1s instead of the Diesel engine.
No, building a separate vehicle for push-pull operation would not be more cost-effective this isn't the 1930s any more. Uckfield runs at 10 cars for 171s (equivalent to 12 cars 377), so you'd either need to drop cars to fit the push-pull train behind the signal at London Bridge, or attach/detach at Oxted. You may get away with a 4 or 5 min dwell if suitably fitted with Dellner couplings etc, but you'd need a shunter-driver at Oxted all day to move the 73 into position ready for 2 trains per hour. Batteries require no additional staff, no additional operational costs (depending on charge times etc) and only a minimal amount of training and modification to the units. Germany and Japan already use them on routes longer than any single stretch of running they'd be needed for in the UK.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,418
No, building a separate vehicle for push-pull operation would not be more cost-effective this isn't the 1930s any more.
What about a separate vehicle which can carry passengers and batteries that can then supply the coupled multiple unit via a bus line? As you say this isn't the 1930s so it ought to be possible to have a 'locomotive' which carries passengers.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
18,686
Location
Northampton
What about a separate vehicle which can carry passengers and batteries that can then supply the coupled multiple unit via a bus line? As you say this isn't the 1930s so it ought to be possible to have a 'locomotive' which carries passengers.
Why not just distribute the batteries along the length of the unit? It's better for acceleration, track wear, and passenger accommodation over the full length of the unit?
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,418
Why not just distribute the batteries along the length of the unit? It's better for acceleration, track wear, and passenger accommodation over the full length of the unit?
Just wondering whether, given the experience of the 769s trying to fit a separate power source to an existing vehicle, it is better to try to design something separate while still not losing the passenger capacity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top