Potential use for battery 379 / 387 units

[Mzzzs]

Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-379’s-departure-from-greater-anglia.226784/


Why don't they convert them into Battery-Electric Multiple Units and send them up north?

They have shown that they can be converted into a battery train through the trial in 2013 send them up north for use on services like the Cumbria to Manchester airport services, since these run under the wires for most of the way, or even the manchester to Buxted line.

Alternatively, they can keep them south and use them on Oxford to London services or extend the Corby to London services around the loop to Leicester.

Surly an opportunity to get a bi-mode train at a reduced cost considering you don't have to get a new train.

 

[Magdalia]

Why don't they convert them into Battery-Electric Multiple Units and send them up north? they have shown that they can be converted into a battery train through the trial in 2013

I think that experiment is widely regarded as a failure.

 

[Mamorin]

Why don't they convert them into Battery-Electric Multiple Units and send them up north? they have shown that they can be converted into a battery train through the trial in 2013 send them up north for use on services like the Cumbria to Manchester airport services since these run under the wires for most of the way or even the manchester to Buxed line. Alternatively, they can keep them south and use them on Oxford to LDN services or extend the Corby to LDN services around the loop to Leicester.
Surly an opportunity to get a bi-mode train at a reduced cost considering you don't have to get a new train.

I think the battery trial was a failure as while the 379s can work on batteries the batteries only last one hour and require 2 hours of charging via over head wires.

 

[JonathanH]

I think that experiment is widely regarded as a failure.

Maybe, but 'Bald Rick' has also posted that battery technology has moved on a lot since then.

Allusions elsewhere appear to be that if the price is right, GWR will use the 379s as straight electrics, convert the 387s to battery units and have no need for Turbos and 769s in the Thames Valley (subject to the issue that 80 metre trains can't go to Marlow)

 

[Magdalia]

Maybe, but 'Bald Rick' has also posted that battery technology has moved on a lot since then.

Absolutely, and that makes the 2013 class 379 trial doubly irrelevant.

 

[Mzzzs]

It's surely worth a try again since the amount of Battery-Electric Multiple Units across Europe as increased showing that it is a viable idea. It looks like it will be at a reasonable cost considering the lack of investment they can a quick fix to get rid of a few ageing diesel trains and give a better experience to the people.

 

[Mamorin]

Given battery technology has improved since 2013 I agree that a new trial is in order.

If a new battery trail is a success then maybe the 379s could go to Northern, could replace the 769s and some DMUs, this is also assuming the 379s would not have gauging issues which would prevent them working in the North.

If not sent to Northern just use battery 379s to replace DMUs elsewhere on the network.

 

[A0]

Why don't they convert them into Battery-Electric Multiple Units and send them up north? they have shown that they can be converted into a battery train through the trial in 2013 send them up north for use on services like the Cumbria to Manchester airport services since these run under the wires for most of the way or even the manchester to Buxed line. Alternatively, they can keep them south and use them on Oxford to LDN services or extend the Corby to LDN services around the loop to Leicester.
Surly an opportunity to get a bi-mode train at a reduced cost considering you don't have to get a new train.

BIB - there is precisely no demand for this - as a London - Leicester time it is ridiculously slow, for Oakham and Melton it's quicker to change at Leicester or Peterboro and there's negligible passenger demand for Kettering / Corby to Oakham / Melton and vice versa.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Given battery technology has improved since 2013 I agree that a new trial is in order.

If a new battery trail is a success then maybe the 379s could go to Northern, could replace the 769s and some DMUs, this is also assuming the 379s would not have gauging issues which would prevent them working in the North.

If not sent to Northern just use battery 379s to replace DMUs elsewhere on the network.

ScotRail are seeking tenders for BEMU's see https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/haymarket-to-dalmeny-electrification.225171/post-5687176

 

[D365]

I think that experiment is widely regarded as a failure.

It wasn’t a failure; the IPEMU was a demonstrator unit, not a proposal for full-scale conversion.

 

[43102EMR]

It wasn’t a failure; the IPEMU was a demonstrator unit, not a proposal for full-scale conversion.

That being said, most of its time during the trial was spent using its pantograph…

 

[D365]

That being said, most of its time during the trial was spent using its pantograph…

That was the idea. 60-70% of miles on OHLE, 30-40% on battery.

 

[Magdalia]

It wasn’t a failure; the IPEMU was a demonstrator unit, not a proposal for full-scale conversion.

The experiment did not demonstrate that a full scale conversion was worthwhile.

But I'm forgetting the wise words of one of my great management mentors: there's no such thing as failure, only learning!

 

[D365]

The experiment did not demonstrate that a full scale conversion was worthwhile.

But I'm forgetting the wise words of one of my great management mentors: there's no such thing as failure, only learning!

At the risk of going round in circles, the IPEMU was only a one-off learning project and never stood to serve a demonstrator for conversion. Any Electrostar conversion (379 or otherwise) would be starting entirely from scratch.

 

[hwl]

At the risk of going round in circles, the IPEMU was only a one-off learning project and never stood to serve a demonstrator for conversion. Any Electrostar conversion (379 or otherwise) would be starting entirely from scratch.

Agreed - it was designed as a cheap learning experiment.

The battery supplier later went bust because of poor quality batteries.

Much has changed in the interim.

 

[Chiltern006]

Given battery technology has improved since 2013 I agree that a new trial is in order.

If a new battery trail is a success then maybe the 379s could go to Northern, could replace the 769s and some DMUs, this is also assuming the 379s would not have gauging issues which would prevent them working in the North.

If not sent to Northern just use battery 379s to replace DMUs elsewhere on the network.

Northern won’t want another sub-fleet

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Given battery technology has improved since 2013 I agree that a new trial is in order.

If a new battery trail is a success then maybe the 379s could go to Northern, could replace the 769s and some DMUs, this is also assuming the 379s would not have gauging issues which would prevent them working in the North.

If not sent to Northern just use battery 379s to replace DMUs elsewhere on the network.

We don't need a trial the technology is well proven with several fleets in use in Japan and Europe already. What we need is a rolling stock engineering organisation that can work with battery suppliers to find the best retrofit solution to the fleet that can maximise operational duration off wires.

 

[pompeyfan]

There’s a lot of speculation floating around after GWR issued their document for 30x EMUs. Some ideas regarding BEMU / cascades make sense, others not so much.

Personally I think any cascade will see off the 313s however one idea I did have, would be for the 379s to see off the 387s, put some battery’s on 387 and run them as 750v / battery / 25KV on the Portsmouth Cardiff services running them in 4 car formations with the odd 8 car. ASDO would oversee any complications with short platforms (I don’t think there’s anywhere that a 160m unit would overhang point work)

 

[D365]

We don't need a trial the technology is well proven with several fleets in use in Japan and Europe already. What we need is a rolling stock engineering organisation that can work with battery suppliers to find the best retrofit solution to the fleet that can maximise operational duration off wires.

It's down to the ROSCOs to lead that...

 

[JonathanH]

I somehow suspect that the DfT already have a plan which doesn't correspond with these suggestions.

4-car battery 387 probably wouldn't given enough capacity for the Portsmouth to Cardiff line at its busiest moments and 8-car is too long to be practical (even if it doesn't overhang pointwork)

 

[Wyrleybart]

It's down to the ROSCOs to lead that...

But the Roscos are reluctant to invest given DfT's previous "expertise" at handling long term rolling stock contracts. Would you invest millions after seeing the utter waste expended on the 442s ?

We all know the Manchester - Windermere service should have been a handful of battery fitted 331s, but it was apparently just a tad too difficult and we saw extra 195s instead.

 

[Rich McLean]

The 4 Car battery/25kv/750dc is an idea for the North Downs line, not Cardiff-Portsmouth. The tender is an exercise just to see what kind of price it would be to lease 30 units (doesn't have to be 379s)

 

[Minstral25]

379’s need refitment for any line, so under GBR give Southern operation of the North Downs, refit 379’s with SDO, third rail and batteries to utilise on Uckfield, Marshlink and North Downs. Any excess units can act as standard 4 car units to drop into standard Southern service rotated round these lines.

Alternate use GWRs 387 with similar upgrade.

 

[317 forever]

Maybe 379s could be converted to bi-mode, a bit like 319s becoming 769s, and replace Sprinters on Northern? Many Northern routes have electric sections now. They could even be renumbered class 793, an "anagram" of 379.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think that experiment is widely regarded as a failure.

The APT was a failure, hence we don’t have tilting trains
The deHavilland Comet was a failure, hence we don’t have Jet airliners
etc.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Bombardier will not offer a battery version of a 379/387.

The Anglia trial wasn’t a massive success and whilst the units themselves might only be a few years old they are a 20 year old design and there’s a risk you could just recreate the 319/769 challenge, a risk Bombardier do not wish to face.

 

[JonathanH]

On the other hand, Porterbrook need to find a way out of the 769 debacle which isn't just saying "Sorry, tough luck, stick with the Turbos" to GWR. If they were able to prove that putting batteries under a 387 worked, it might be a suitable way out.

 

[swt_passenger]

Bombardier will not offer a battery version of a 379/387.

The Anglia trial wasn’t a massive success and whilst the units themselves might only be a few years old they are a 20 year old design and there’s a risk you could just recreate the 319/769 challenge, a risk Bombardier do not wish to face.

I think even if Siemens and Alstom/Bombardier both declared themselves against battery mods to existing fleets they‘d still be proposed regularly as some sort of ideal solution…

 

[43096]

Bombardier will not offer a battery version of a 379/387.

The Anglia trial wasn’t a massive success and whilst the units themselves might only be a few years old they are a 20 year old design and there’s a risk you could just recreate the 319/769 challenge, a risk Bombardier do not wish to face.

Bombardier won't be offering anything, as they no longer have a railway business.

 

[D365]

The Anglia trial wasn’t a massive success and whilst the units themselves might only be a few years old they are a 20 year old design and there’s a risk you could just recreate the 319/769 challenge, a risk Bombardier do not wish to face.

As I’ve said on another thread recently - the IPEMU was never intended to be representative of a mass-scale conversion.