Do we have enough diesel locos and DMUs to last until decarbonisation?

[eldomtom2]

With ever-increasing warnings over the need to abandon fossil fuels, it seems inadvisable to order any more diesel locos/DMUs that aren't at least bi-modes. Is using the existing stock until they can be replaced by electrification or battery/hydrogen units practical?

 

[randyrippley]

Not if the ROSCOs carry on scrapping at the current rate

 

[D365]

Not if the ROSCOs carry on scrapping at the current rate

There's not been a lot of diesel scrapple recently, as far as I can tell.

 

[randyrippley]

There's not been a lot of diesel scrapple recently, as far as I can tell.

Just the Pacers, 153/155, HST, much of the mk3/4 fleets (which could be diesel hauled), a start on 150 within the next two years, uncertainty over 185
it soon adds up

 

[Trainbike46]

With ever-increasing warnings over the need to abandon fossil fuels, it seems inadvisable to order any more diesel locos/DMUs that aren't at least bi-modes. Is using the existing stock until they can be replaced by electrification or battery/hydrogen units practical?

For Scotland, yes. The Scottish decarbonisation plan requires no diesel trains beyond what is already in service

For England and Wales, it will mostly depend on how fast new electrification gets deployed. At current rates, I don't think existing DMU are enough. If however, electrification gets sped up significantly, as is really necessary, combined with some strategic deployment of battery EMUs, we could even end up scrapping some of the most recent DMUs before their 40th birthday.

 

[RobShipway]

If anything in the last 32 plus years, I would say that we have seen the introduction of quite a few diesel trains since the introduction of the class 165 units in 1991.

The issue you have is how to be replacing the class 150, 153, 156, 158 and 159 units, plus within the next 10 years the class 165/166 units. Here lies the issue. If these are not replaced, then we do not have enough to get us to the point of decarbonisation. That having been said, the year for decarbonisation is forever changing depending on who you talk too. Some say that it should 2040, some 2050 and others 2060.

The likes of HST, MK3 and Mk4 coaches have pretty much been replaced by class 180, 220, 221, 222, 800, 802 etc...... But there is uncertainty as to whether the TOC's need to be keeping the amount of units that they have in their fleets currently. Which may mean newer diesel fleets get scrapped as well.

For Scotland, yes. The Scottish decarbonisation plan requires no diesel trains beyond what is already in service

For England and Wales, it will mostly depend on how fast new electrification gets deployed. At current rates, I don't think existing DMU are enough. If however, electrification gets sped up significantly, as is really necessary, combined with some strategic deployment of battery EMUs, we could even end up scrapping some of the most recent DMUs before their 40th birthday.

I think even Scotland may need more diesel trains than they currently have or those to be replaced by bi or tri-mode trains as per my comment below. Specifically, I am think of the class 156, 158 and the HST Inter7City trains. Otherwise you will be having no trains to Dundee or Aberdeen.

As commented by eldomtom2, any future trains should be bi or tri-mode trains where possible to replace class 150, 156, 158 and 159 units. If it is bi-mode than it should be battery/electric power, rather than including diesel in any form. Diesel should be included if the distance being covered is such that it is took long for a battery or Hydrogen to keep the train going.

A good example is the class 170 units used by Cross Country on the Cardiff to Nottingham services. If we start off at Cardiff, you have OHLE from there to Severn Tunnel junction at which point, it should be battery power all the way to Bromsgrove, where we can use OHLE. The issue that you have though between Bromsgrove and Birmingham New Street, is where it is four tracks, the fast tracks do not have overhead electrification.

If electrification was across all tracks between Bromsgrove to Birmingham New Street, then you would have enough charge in the batteries I would suspect to get you from Birmingham New Street to Nottingham and return back again to Birmingham New Street.

 

[Sm5]

Just keep building 800’s.

 

[XAM2175]

I think even Scotland may need more diesel trains than they currently have or those to be replaced by bi or tri-mode trains as per my comment below. Specifically, I am think of the class 156, 158 and the HST Inter7City trains. Otherwise you will be having no trains to Dundee or Aberdeen.

Yes, the underlined bit is already in the plan. By 2035 everything is meant to have been replaced either by pure EMUs, battery EMUs, or - for the Far North/Kyle/West Highland/Stranraer bits - some form of bionic duckweed arrangement.

It does seem virtually certain that the HSTs won't actually make it to 2035, but for the purposes of this thread it doesn't matter because the odds of new diesel units being ordered to temporarily replace them are effectively nil.

 

[tomuk]

Just buy some more CAF Civities, fitted with Hybrid Powerpacks if you want a bit of greenery. The emissions from rail are less than 2% continuing to run diesel powered trains is irrelevant and easily outweighed by reducing emissions elsewhere, electric cars and vans, electric heating from a grid using more renewables and nuclear and reducing manufacturing emissions like converting Port Talbot and Scunthorpe to electric arc furnaces.

 

[Trainbike46]

Just buy some more CAF Civities, fitted with Hybrid Powerpacks if you want a bit of greenery. The emissions from rail are less than 2% continuing to run diesel powered trains is irrelevant and easily outweighed by reducing emissions elsewhere, electric cars and vans, electric heating from a grid using more renewables and nuclear and reducing manufacturing emissions like converting Port Talbot and Scunthorpe to electric arc furnaces.

If you are buying new diesels, they should really be DEMUs that can be changed over to electric operation later in life, like the 231, rather than DMMUs that cannot be adapted in this way. So more 231s rather than 19Xs, I'd say

 

[dosxuk]

There should have been a concerted effort to replace and cascade the 158/159 fleet about 10 years ago, with a new build DMU for all the express routes that are unlikely to see full electrification for many decades.

We now seem to be in the unfortunate position that there is no desire to buy a diesel only replacement, but there is no diesel-free bi-modal option that is capable of running those routes even on the drawing board, and the stock is heading into it's 4th decade of heavy usage, and the only option seems to be give them an overhaul and hope something comes up before they corrode too much.

 

[Trainbike46]

There should have been a concerted effort to replace and cascade the 158/159 fleet about 10 years ago, with a new build DMU for all the express routes that are unlikely to see full electrification for many decades.

We now seem to be in the unfortunate position that there is no desire to buy a diesel only replacement, but there is no bi-modal option that is capable of running those routes even on the drawing board, and the stock is heading into it's 4th decade of heavy usage, and the only option seems to be give them an overhaul and hope something comes up before they corrode too much.

Why would a 755 not be suitable to replace a 158?

And I'm sure other manufacturers could come up with designs that could replace them, they just haven't yet, because the 158s have life left in them.

 

[Ken H]

Or we could look to some low hanging fruit electrification
Oxenholme - Windermere
Neville Hill - Church Fenton
3rd rail infill.

All can run with existing stock.

A few less DMUs to replace.

 

[dosxuk]

Why would a 755 not be suitable to replace a 158?

And I'm sure other manufacturers could come up with designs that could replace them, they just haven't yet, because the 158s have life left in them.

For clarity, I meant there are no fossil-fuel-free bimode designs suitable for replacing the stock on the long distance 158/159 routes.

However, in the cast of the 755's, they have the issue with their tiny fuel tanks - I'm not sure they'd be able to do a return run Norwich - Liverpool without a refuelling stop. GA had to rearrange all of their diagrams to keep their daily trips inside the fuel tank range. Sure you could just fit bigger tanks, but would that fit in the loading gauge? Would that then be light enough to be able to be run under the sprinter differential speeds?

158's should have been cascaded to secondary routes by now. At the time they were built, 30 years was the normal design life for a DMU, and they've already been doing thousands of miles a day for 33 years. Certainly my experience with the EMR examples does not suggest they have all that much life left in them.

 

[Trainbike46]

For clarity, I meant there are no fossil-fuel-free bimode designs suitable for replacing the stock on the long distance 158/159 routes.

However, in the cast of the 755's, they have the issue with their tiny fuel tanks - I'm not sure they'd be able to do a return run Norwich - Liverpool without a refuelling stop. GA had to rearrange all of their diagrams to keep their daily trips inside the fuel tank range. Sure you could just fit bigger tanks, but would that fit in the loading gauge? Would that then be light enough to be able to be run under the sprinter differential speeds?

158's should have been cascaded to secondary routes by now. At the time they were built, 30 years was the normal design life for a DMU, and they've already been doing thousands of miles a day for 33 years. Certainly my experience with the EMR examples does not suggest they have all that much life left in them.

@dk1 may be able to clarify how far 755s can get on a full tank, but while their fuel tanks are relatively small, I don't think they are "needs refuelling within a single journey" small.
On top of that, it would of course run electric on the already electrified sections of the route, such as Peterborough-Grantham, so would not need to cover the full distance on diesel.

On top of that, battery flirts (and other BEMUs) are available that are suitable on some 158 routes, depending on the distance of the route that is already electrified

In any case, the 158s will not be anywhere near the first DMUs to go

Or we could look to some low hanging fruit electrification
Oxenholme - Windermere
Neville Hill - Church Fenton
3rd rail infill.

All can run with existing stock.

A few less DMUs to replace.

Getting some electrification in is exactly what we should be doing

 

[JonathanH]

There should have been a concerted effort to replace and cascade the 158/159 fleet about 10 years ago, with a new build DMU for all the express routes that are unlikely to see full electrification for many decades.

There was an effort to cascade some of the 158 fleet 15 years ago, and another more recently. They were displaced off primary routes to secondary routes by the introduction of 185s in 2008, which released a large number of 158s, and then again by the introduction of 195s more recently.

The introduction of 197s in Wales will also cascade 158s to other parts of the network.

 

[dk1]

755s need refuelling on an almost daily basis unlike previous DMUs that went 1500 miles (roughly 3 days) between visits to the fuel point. I don’t personally know the mileage range used.

 

[AM9]

An ideal solution would be to prevent any more stupid purchases of diesel-only stock, thereby forcing either electrification or battery-electric or electric with limited carbon diesel support hybrids, (i.e. limited diesel power and range).

 

[sprinterguy]

Just keep building 800’s.

Looking forward to seeing them on the Rose Hill Marple branch then. Plenty of seats, but lousy door positions for the all-stations stoppers.

Given Northern's desperate former use of 180s on services to Hazel Grove it wouldn't be without precedent, but more seriously there needs to either be a focused push on more urban electrification or consideration of pragmatic alternatives, such as light rail where appropriate, that'll allow the rugged but ageing 150s to be retired.

 

[RobShipway]

Out of interest, how far can the Hydrogen powered class 168 go before changing permanently back to diesel power?

An ideal solution would be to prevent any more stupid purchases of diesel-only stock, thereby forcing either electrification or battery-electric or electric with limited carbon diesel support hybrids, (i.e. limited diesel power and range).

I have to agree with your point or if diesel only stock is obtained then as Trainbike46 has said it should be stock like the class 231 units, that can be converted later. Personally, I think the class 230 units with TFW is also showing the way with being BDEMU trains. It is just now train manufacturers have to develop that into a new train from scratch, rather than re - develop an existing train.

Not sure if it is correct, but if it is then the Hybrid Train wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_train, shows that many countries not just the UK are looking at Hybrid power.

You also have Wabtec's FLXDrive as per the Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...freight-train-wabtec-rail-transport-emissions. The thing that concerns me though, is as per the details https://www.wabteccorp.com/locomotive/alternative-fuel-locomotives/flxdrive the duration of the battery power is only 30 - 40 minutes and only being able to a top speed of 75mph. That admittedly, I think is in a big US freight locomotive, so you maybe able to get longer time and possibly higher speed if it was put into a passenger train such as something similar to a class 150.

Given Northern's desperate former use of 180s on services to Hazel Grove it wouldn't be without precedent, but more seriously there needs to either be a focused push on more urban electrification or consideration of pragmatic alternatives, such as light rail where appropriate, that'll allow the rugged but ageing 150s to be retired.

I know many people will say that it is going down a similar path to what created the pacer trains with using bus parts, but I do think that the replacement for class 150's should be tram-trains such as the class 399 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_399). In many ways Merseyrail have gone along this path with the class 777 trains, 7 of which have been configured to be BEMU units. Now imagine doing that with either class 231/755/756 units where the diesel engines go replaced by battery packs and the class 231 units being given pantographs so that they can work in OHLE sections to enable recharge of the battery packs.

 

[D365]

Out of interest, how far can the Hydrogen powered class 168 go before changing permanently back to diesel power?

I'm not aware of a Class 168 hydro/diesel 'flex'.

 

[sprinterguy]

I know many people will say that it is going down a similar path to what created the pacer trains with using bus parts, but I do think that the replacement for class 150's should be tram-trains such as the class 399 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_399). In many ways Merseyrail have gone along this path with the class 777 trains, 7 of which have been configured to be BEMU units. Now imagine doing that with either class 231/755/756 units where the diesel engines go replaced by battery packs and the class 231 units being given pantographs so that they can work in OHLE sections to enable recharge of the battery packs.

As long as they're not running services of more than 30 - 40 minutes, then that seems entirely sensible. The Rose Hill Marple example I used should certainly be within scope. Plenty of opportunity for battery units to recharge through the pantograph during layovers at Manchester Piccadilly.

The 231s/756s, whichever they are, that I've experienced with TfW on Penarth services have been marvellous things, a whole world of improvement on the 150s they've replaced and probably suitable for some longer journeys that have traditionally seen 150s (e.g. Hope Valley, Buxton).

 

[eldomtom2]

You also have Wabtec's FLXDrive as per the Guardian article https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...freight-train-wabtec-rail-transport-emissions. The thing that concerns me though, is as per the details https://www.wabteccorp.com/locomotive/alternative-fuel-locomotives/flxdrive the duration of the battery power is only 30 - 40 minutes and only being able to a top speed of 75mph. That admittedly, I think is in a big US freight locomotive, so you maybe able to get longer time and possibly higher speed if it was put into a passenger train such as something similar to a class 150.

Any discussing of battery and hydrogen locomotives in America has to take into account that the American private railroads are explicitly opposed to electrification, and so there is more than a hint of bionic duckweed about stuff like the FLXDrive.

 

[AM9]

Any discussing of battery and hydrogen locomotives in America has to take into account that the American private railroads are explicitly opposed to electrification, and so there is more than a hint of bionic duckweed about stuff like the FLXDrive.

Precisely, Europe is the nearest rail operating model to ours, and their aspirations for decarbonisation closest match ours.

 

[HSTEd]

Ultimately the electrification of the car fleet will put diesel railway operations in a very difficult position politically.

The railway (and associated bureaucracy) is current not fully cognisant of this and I worry if they will realise early enough to prepare.

 

[RobShipway]

Ultimately the electrification of the car fleet will put diesel railway operations in a very difficult position politically.

The railway (and associated bureaucracy) is current not fully cognisant of this and I worry if they will realise early enough to prepare.

Well, hopefully people in the railways read forums such as these and see that people are showing concerns as to how future fleets aware from electrification will be powered. Hopefully, with TOC's such as Chiltern as per the Modern Railways article https://www.modernrailways.com/article/hybrid-168-first-step-chiltern-decarbonisation making steps towards decarbonisation, then hopefully changes can be made with existing fleets from class 168 up to the more recent class 195, 196 and 197 fleets.

I personally would not include the likes of the class 150, 153, 156, 158 and 159 as they will most likely be retired within the next 10 - 20 years.

However, even if any new car will be electric come 2030 if that is reached, you will still have diesel and petrol cars on the road I would say until at least 2060. So there is still time perhaps for the likes of the diesel engine trains, but I do feel that it should be the railways showing the way rather than the roads.

 

[AM9]

I personally would not include the likes of the class 150, 153, 156, 158 and 159 as they will most likely be retired within the next 10 - 20 years.

Add the BR designed turbos to that list (classes 165 & 166).

However, even if any new car will be electric come 2030 if that is reached, you will still have diesel and petrol cars on the road I would say until at least 2060. So there is still time perhaps for the likes of the diesel engine trains, but I do feel that it should be the railways showing the way rather than the roads.

You cannot compare a private vehicle with a commercial one that is used in a profit making role. The public will be controlled largely by restrictions and cost disincentives, major businesses have to comply with specific environmental legislation.

 

[12LDA28C]

With ever-increasing warnings over the need to abandon fossil fuels, it seems inadvisable to order any more diesel locos/DMUs that aren't at least bi-modes. Is using the existing stock until they can be replaced by electrification or battery/hydrogen units practical?

I can see further new fleets of DMUs being ordered - the 196s for example have only recently entered traffic and I don't think they'll be the last. A brand new DMU will be rather more environmentally friendly in terms of fuel economy and emissions than a 30+ year-old unit.

 

[Trainbike46]

I can see further new fleets of DMUs being ordered - the 196s for example have only recently entered traffic and I don't think they'll be the last. A brand new DMU will be rather more environmentally friendly in terms of fuel economy and emissions than a 30+ year-old unit.

the problem is that, unless you go for a design that is meant for changing over to electric/battery/hydrogen, buying new DMUs either locks you into using diesel for a long time, or will require scrapping them early. Neither is desirable, so trying to avoid having to buy more diesel-only trains is a good strategy

 

[RailWonderer]

An ideal solution would be to prevent any more stupid purchases of diesel-only stock, thereby forcing either electrification or battery-electric or electric with limited carbon diesel support hybrids, (i.e. limited diesel power and range).

How were the CAF Civity purchases stupid? There is little electrification on the Northern, WMR and TfW routes they operate. Sure more of the network should have been electrified but the reality is, it isn't. As said upthread as long as future conversion to electric is prebuilt (i.e. pantograph wells) on DEMUs that will do for now.

This costcutting and the economic uncertainty won't last forever and I'm sure once the politics and econmmics change we'll be seeing more electrification in the next decade.