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

[Bantamzen]

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

Its only a good strategy if the units you procure can actually where they can be used now, and 30-40 years down the line. Take the 230s as an example, if as initially speculated they had been bought in numbers for Northern can you imagine the chaos on Northern's network right now? In the green rush we don't want to start chasing untried or unproven solutions just because they might replace diesel. They have to work before they can be rolled out on any scale, which could take decades still. So there's going to be DMUs for quite some time yet.

 

[Trainbike46]

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.

The point is that 19x civities are a type of DMU that can't be converted to electric, so if the government sticks to decarbonisation, they'll have to be retired early.

They should have bought a DEMU prepared for conversion or bimode option, which CAF does offer, but wasn't ordered

 

[RailWonderer]

The point is that 19x civities are a type of DMU that can't be converted to electric, so if the government sticks to decarbonisation, they'll have to be retired early.

They should have bought a DEMU prepared for conversion or bimode option, which CAF does offer, but wasn't ordered

The order as I understood it was done on the cheap. All new non-EMU stock should be mandated to be either bi-mode or DEMU, and the CAF order was shortsighted in my view.

 

[Trainbike46]

Its only a good strategy if the units you procure can actually where they can be used now, and 30-40 years down the line. Take the 230s as an example, if as initially speculated they had been bought in numbers for Northern can you imagine the chaos on Northern's network right now? In the green rush we don't want to start chasing untried or unproven solutions just because they might replace diesel. They have to work before they can be rolled out on any scale, which could take decades still. So there's going to be DMUs for quite some time yet.

I mean, ordering DEMUs prepared for conversion or bimodes is hardly an unproven solution. Examples currently in service include all 80x bimodes, as well as the 231s, 755s and 756s. CAF also offers a variant of the civity that would meet the "can be converted to electric or battery operation easily" spec.

Buying new DMUs that can't easily be converted to electric or battery operation isn't thinking about what can be used 30-40 years down the line, it's either locking in diesel for the next 40 year, or committing to retiring stock early.

230s aren't new rolling stock, so I don't see how they're relevant?

But in any case, you'd hope northern would be doing the maintenance in-house, or found a contractor other than vivarail for maintenance. It's only on LNWR where the 230s were withdrawn, because vivarail did the maintenance and was the leasing company. On the island line and TfW the 230s/484s are still going, and I would suggest that Northern would have been more similar to TfW/Island Line with regards to maintenance arrangements

 

[MattRat]

Under managed decline, we would.

 

[Bantamzen]

I mean, ordering DEMUs prepared for conversion or bimodes is hardly an unproven solution. Examples currently in service include all 80x bimodes, as well as the 231s, 755s and 756s. CAF also offers a variant of the civity that would meet the "can be converted to electric or battery operation easily" spec.

That's a fair point but even so could they currently meet the levels of demand, route capability & specification, if not then alternatives will be sourced as TfW did. Otherwise you risk ending up with fleet shortages when, say your 175s or 230s insist on setting on fire....

Buying new DMUs that can't easily be converted to electric or battery operation isn't thinking about what can be used 30-40 years down the line, it's either locking in diesel for the next 40 year, or committing to retiring stock early.

Diesel units are already baked in for the foreseeable future. I know politicians say we are committed to decarbonisation by 2030/40/50/60*, but what politicians say, mean & do are usually three very separate things. Their numbers will diminish as electrification grows and alternative power units become more readily available, but I'd put money on them being around in 2060.

(* select one option depending on which politician you are talking to).

230s aren't new rolling stock, so I don't see how they're relevant?

But in any case, you'd hope northern would be doing the maintenance in-house, or found a contractor other than vivarail for maintenance. It's only on LNWR where the 230s were withdrawn, because vivarail did the maintenance and was the leasing company. On the island line and TfW the 230s/484s are still going, and I would suggest that Northern would have been more similar to TfW/Island Line with regards to maintenance arrangements

My point is that there would have been a large number of units falling over. It doesn't matter how much resource you put into maintenance, if the product isn't up to scratch then you've serious problems. Northern would not have been able to cope with the performance of these units as it currently is.

 

[Mikey C]

If the CAF units last in service until 2050, they'll have had an acceptable life.

 

[Trainbike46]

That's a fair point but even so could they currently meet the levels of demand, route capability & specification, if not then alternatives will be sourced as TfW did. Otherwise you risk ending up with fleet shortages when, say your 175s or 230s insist on setting on fire....

None of the new units have that problem though? I don't see how the problems of the 175s (not exactly new units) are relevant here?

Are you implying that between FLIRTS, 80x, the CAF DEMU and Bimode civities, and whatever other manufacturers could undoubtedly deliver, the varying needs across the UK rail network could not be met? If so, why not? if not, what did you mean?

Personally, I see the FLIRT as the ideal replacement for 150s and a bit further away, the other 15Xs: Bimode, level boarding, great passenger comfort (obviously dependent on how it's specced), good performance, meets sprinter differentials and good route capability

Diesel units are already baked in for the foreseeable future. I know politicians say we are committed to decarbonisation by 2030/40/50/60*, but what politicians say, mean & do are usually three very separate things. Their numbers will diminish as electrification grows and alternative power units become more readily available, but I'd put money on them being around in 2060.

(* select one option depending on which politician you are talking to).

so you're going for the committing to diesel for 40 years option I see.

Still, you must see how the risk of early retirement is greater for units that aren't prepared for conversion or bimode already, depending on decisions taken over the next 20-30 years. Units set up for conversion (and bimodes) are a de-risking strategy.

My point is that there would have been a large number of units falling over. It doesn't matter how much resource you put into maintenance, if the product isn't up to scratch then you've serious problems. Northern would not have been able to cope with the performance of these units as it currently is.

I thought you were referencing the LNWR 230s being withdrawn due to vivarail's insolvency. If not, sorry for misunderstanding.

I am aware that the reliability of the 230s isn't exactly were it should be. I still fail to see how problems with a rather ambitious conversion programme of 30 year old units is relevant to new orders though.

 

[Bantamzen]

None of the new units have that problem though? I don't see how the problems of the 175s (not exactly new units) are relevant here?

Are you implying that between FLIRTS, 80x, the CAF DEMU and Bimode civities, and whatever other manufacturers could undoubtedly deliver, the varying needs across the UK rail network could not be met? If so, why not? if not, what did you mean?

Personally, I see the FLIRT as the ideal replacement for 150s and a bit further away, the other 15Xs: Bimode, level boarding, great passenger comfort (obviously dependent on how it's specced), good performance, meets sprinter differentials and good route capability

Woaha there! Don't take it so personally. The Flirts look like really good units, and hopefully in time their concept will become the norm. But TfW did also order the CAF DMUs and there must have been a reason for that. And it is perfectly possible this scenario may occur again. Given the options of wait until DEMUs become available and risk fleet shortages, and ordering pure DMUs for quicker delivery I know what I would prefer as a passenger.

so you're going for the committing to diesel for 40 years option I see.

I'm not committing anything, unless my job role changed radically over the Easter Weekend. I'm just telling you how it will likely be. Zero carbon is a very, very long way off. But that's for another thread.

Still, you must see how the risk of early retirement is greater for units that aren't prepared for conversion or bimode already, depending on decisions taken over the next 20-30 years. Units set up for conversion (and bimodes) are a de-risking strategy.

As above, I don't think we will ever reach a situation where DMUs have to be retired early based simply on their traction. Hard & fast deadlines for things like decarbonisation will get dialled further and further back.

I thought you were referencing the LNWR 230s being withdrawn due to vivarail's insolvency. If not, sorry for misunderstanding.

I am aware that the reliability of the 230s isn't exactly were it should be. I still fail to see how problems with a rather ambitious conversion programme of 30 year old units is relevant to new orders though.

No sorry if I wasn't clear, I was referencing their general overall performance. Even LNWR had their fair share of issues with their micro-fleet of them, so imagine the same problems magnified for the kind of numbers that were talked about for Northern before Arriva killed the idea off. And that's were the relevance comes in, Northern wouldn't have ordered the 195s if they had gone for the 230s, and perhaps TfW wouldn't have ordered the 197s.

 

[Trainbike46]

Woaha there! Don't take it so personally. The Flirts look like really good units, and hopefully in time their concept will become the norm. But TfW did also order the CAF DMUs and there must have been a reason for that. And it is perfectly possible this scenario may occur again. Given the options of wait until DEMUs become available and risk fleet shortages, and ordering pure DMUs for quicker delivery I know what I would prefer as a passenger.

Don't worry, I didn't take it personally! sorry if it came across that way.

I'm not sure CAF civity DEMUs would have taken longer to deliver than the CAF civity DMMUs (which were ordered), but then again, I don't work for CAF so maybe it would have

I'm not committing anything, unless my job role changed radically over the Easter Weekend. I'm just telling you how it will likely be. Zero carbon is a very, very long way off. But that's for another thread.

Didn't you know? you're the new secretary of state for transport

As above, I don't think we will ever reach a situation where DMUs have to be retired early based simply on their traction. Hard & fast deadlines for things like decarbonisation will get dialled further and further back.

I really hope you're wrong about this one, but I guess time will tell!

No sorry if I wasn't clear, I was referencing their general overall performance. Even LNWR had their fair share of issues with their micro-fleet of them, so imagine the same problems magnified for the kind of numbers that were talked about for Northern before Arriva killed the idea off. And that's were the relevance comes in, Northern wouldn't have ordered the 195s if they had gone for the 230s, and perhaps TfW wouldn't have ordered the 197s.

Fair enough!

 

[Greybeard33]

I mean, ordering DEMUs prepared for conversion or bimodes is hardly an unproven solution. Examples currently in service include all 80x bimodes, as well as the 231s, 755s and 756s. CAF also offers a variant of the civity that would meet the "can be converted to electric or battery operation easily" spec.

A diesel-electric or bi-mode powertrain needs more space than the diesel-mechanical transmission squeezed under the floor of the CAF 195/6/7. It is not easy to find enough space for diesel generators, with emissions control equipment to current requirements, within the British loading gauge. Hitachi managed to get them underfloor in the 80x by having an unusually high floor, but this would not work with doors at thirds. The Stadler FLIRTs have brought the engines above floor in the add-on Power Pack vehicle, but this wastes platform length.

I believe existing CAF Civity DEMUs/bi-modes are low floor articulated units similar to continental versions of the FLIRT, with roof mounted engines. This configuration would not fit in the British loading gauge. I suspect a British version would be based on the 331, with the engines above floor. Likely significantly more costly than the 195/6/7 and a longer unit to provide the same capacity.

 

[Bantamzen]

Didn't you know? you're the new secretary of state for transport

Blumming heck, I knew I'd be promoted recently but wasn't expecting this. Right, I'm building a HS Bradford from my house to Valley Parade Bradford, calling at all my favourite pubs...

 

[Benjwri]

so you're going for the committing to diesel for 40 years option I see.

The idea that in 40 years there won't be areas of the network that still require diesel is fanciful. There will always are areas, such as perhaps Cornwall, which aren't even touched by electrification, and almost inevitably the government will decide in the end it is too tricky to electrify or use fast charging on, and that they might as mell just leave on diesel.

Even if tomorrow the government announced a legal commitment to deliver nationwide electrification by 2050, I would be sceptical of that happening. There isn't the workforce or skill to get such a large amount of the country electrified at once, without spending a huge amount on either skilled engineers from abroad or training, plus acquisition of the needed extra equipment. By the time they've spent so much on actually quickly electrifying the network, the loss of retiring a few diesel trains early will be a drop in the pond.

Plus this doesn't consider any possible opportunities for use elsewhere. If the UK did electrify totally there will always be places abroad which aren't and I'm sure would be happy to buy fairly new trains for a cheaper price.

 

[AM9]

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.

That's the problem, since Arriva first odered the 195, the UK has ordered in total 359 diesel-only DMU cars (the total for the 195/196/197 fleets), that don't have any provision for conversion to hybrid or EDMUs: because they don't have any pantograph wells, and have non-trailing bogies with no provision to fit electric motors. And that is a farce given that the original justification for the 195s over other units was the commonality of maintenance with the class 331 EMUs.
So their proud owners are committed to these mobile particulate generators for up to 40 years, by which time they will have become an environmental embarrassment.

 

[Benjwri]

So their proud owners are committed to these mobile particulate generators for up to 40 years, by which time they will have become an environmental embarrassment.

Willing to bet in 40 years time there will be far more embarrassing mobile particulate generators still trundling around on the rail network, having to have their service lives stretched to the absolute limit after the government fails to meet it's electrification targets by some probably stunning margin, refuses to order trains to make up for it and instead orders TOC's to further extend the life of ageing units.

 

[AM9]

The idea that in 40 years there won't be areas of the network that still require diesel is fanciful. There will always are areas, such as perhaps Cornwall, which aren't even touched by electrification, and almost inevitably the government will decide in the end it is too tricky to electrify or use fast charging on, and that they might as mell just leave on diesel.

Even if tomorrow the government announced a legal commitment to deliver nationwide electrification by 2050, I would be sceptical of that happening. There isn't the workforce or skill to get such a large amount of the country electrified at once, without spending a huge amount on either skilled engineers from abroad or training, plus acquisition of the needed extra equipment. By the time they've spent so much on actually quickly electrifying the network, the loss of retiring a few diesel trains early will be a drop in the pond.

Plus this doesn't consider any possible opportunities for use elsewhere. If the UK did electrify totally there will always be places abroad which aren't and I'm sure would be happy to buy fairly new trains for a cheaper price.

Your first statement would be better worded as: "The idea that in 40 years there won't be areas of the network that still aren't electrified is fanciful".
Of course there will be unelectrified lines, mainly branches and very long regional lines with limited traffic. However your suggestion of Cornwall isn't necessarily the best as it is only the western 80 miles of an over 300 mile arterial mainline. So the branches would be better served by EDMUs or similar hybrid traction which at least would in part justify the continued running of diesel prime movers into the second half of the 20th century.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2023 ==

Willing to bet in 40 years time there will be far more embarrassing mobile particulate generators still trundling around on the rail network, having to have their service lives stretched to the absolute limit after the government fails to meet it's electrification targets by some probably stunning margin, refuses to order trains to make up for it and instead orders TOC's to further extend the life of ageing units.

Two wrongs don't make a right, and I doubt that there will be anywhere near the 359 cars of all other diesel only rolling stock running around the byways of UK railways.

 

[Benjwri]

However your suggestion of Cornwall isn't necessarily the best as it is only the western 80 miles of an over 300 mile arterial mainline. So the branches would be better served by EDMUs or similar hybrid traction which at least would in part justify the continued running of diesel prime movers into the second half of the 20th century.

I suggested Cornwall because at least as far as I see it it is a not too unlikely home for these diesel trains at the end of their lives. Obviously DMUs wouldn't be justified by the long distance services, however there is also the Plymouth to Penance service, and the multitude of branches, many of which do not have long enough dwell times for a fast changing battery. Rather than spending a quite large sum of money installing fast chargers and upgrading these lines to allow more than one train to work them at once, the Government may instead see it as reasonable to send some DMUs down there to live out their final days, and instead kick the can down the road, to a point when battery technology, which is in it's infancy now, and will still not have matured in a few decades, is cheaper, more reliable, faster and longer lasting.

 

[AM9]

I suggested Cornwall because at least as far as I see it it is a not too unlikely home for these diesel trains at the end of their lives. Obviously DMUs wouldn't be justified by the long distance services, however there is also the Plymouth to Penance service, and the multitude of branches, many of which do not have long enough dwell times for a fast changing battery. Rather than spending a quite large sum of money installing fast chargers and upgrading these lines to allow more than one train to work them at once, the Government may instead see it as reasonable to send some DMUs down there to live out their final days, and instead kick the can down the road, to a point when battery technology, which is in it's infancy now, and will still not have matured in a few decades, is cheaper, more reliable, faster and longer lasting.

I wasn't necessarily talking about battery. The mainline to Plymouth may according to some commentators be electrified, so the remaining mailine may also get the investment, - not only for passenger traffic but also to make haulage of minerals including Lithium from Cornwall viable. The current state of the world might mean that what is considered a backwater in not only rail traffic has a second period of industrial investment.

 

[tomuk]

The point is that 19x civities are a type of DMU that can't be converted to electric, so if the government sticks to decarbonisation, they'll have to be retired early.

They should have bought a DEMU prepared for conversion or bimode option, which CAF does offer, but wasn't ordered

19x could be converted to electric if you really wanted to. It wouldn't be cheap but I would suggest an.other DEMU with passive provision would also not be cheap either in additional upfront costs now and in conversion costs in 15 years time. 19x could also be converted to a battery Hybrid tomorrow if there was a desire to spend the money.

Secondly there will still be routes that HOWL, Cambrian Coast, WHL where retaining diesels would have an infinitesimally small impact on emissions so at least some of the 19x could be used there.

 

[Benjwri]

Two wrongs don't make a right, and I doubt that there will be anywhere near the 359 cars of all other diesel only rolling stock running around the byways of UK railways.

The government electrified just over 0.5% (A hugely impressive 2.2 track km) of its own minimum target to reach zero carbon by 2050. To reach net zero by 2050, in 2021, Network Rail needed to electrify 418km of track per year, a target they haven't met in the past 10 years at least, and they aren't currently on track to meet any year in the future. Considering how long any major project will take to results, having to go through planning, tender, construction, testing, by the time any new scheme yielded fruit you'll be looking at double that number. I find that happening hugely unlikely. The fact the government are currently building EWR with no electrification, and if the Cambridge stage goes ahead will very likely announce that with no electrification, that should show you they have no plans to meet their net zero commitment.

 

[RobShipway]

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



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.

I was unsure whether to add class 165 & 166 as I think that they have at least another 15 - 20 years of life left in them, whereas as the 15X classes could really do with being replaced within the next 5 - 10 years.

Whilst I can agree with your point about not comparing private vehicle with a commercial vehicle, I kinda disagree as well. As it is not only the private individuals that would be only able to buy brand new electric cars from 203, it will also be commercial businesses. So on that basis, why would the not include the TOC's and ROSCO's when buying trains after 2030? Whether it is private or commercial we will be having to live with the same legislation. If not then there is no hope for decarbonisation of the planet.

A diesel-electric or bi-mode powertrain needs more space than the diesel-mechanical transmission squeezed under the floor of the CAF 195/6/7. It is not easy to find enough space for diesel generators, with emissions control equipment to current requirements, within the British loading gauge. Hitachi managed to get them underfloor in the 80x by having an unusually high floor, but this would not work with doors at thirds. The Stadler FLIRTs have brought the engines above floor in the add-on Power Pack vehicle, but this wastes platform length.

I believe existing CAF Civity DEMUs/bi-modes are low floor articulated units similar to continental versions of the FLIRT, with roof mounted engines. This configuration would not fit in the British loading gauge. I suspect a British version would be based on the 331, with the engines above floor. Likely significantly more costly than the 195/6/7 and a longer unit to provide the same capacity.

Does CAF not have a power pack vehicle that could be added to the 195/6/7 and possibly the class 331 trains? If it does, then it would not work any different than the Stadler Flirt trains.

Willing to bet in 40 years time there will be far more embarrassing mobile particulate generators still trundling around on the rail network, having to have their service lives stretched to the absolute limit after the government fails to meet it's electrification targets by some probably stunning margin, refuses to order trains to make up for it and instead orders TOC's to further extend the life of ageing units.

Your first statement would be better worded as: "The idea that in 40 years there won't be areas of the network that still aren't electrified is fanciful".
Of course there will be unelectrified lines, mainly branches and very long regional lines with limited traffic. However your suggestion of Cornwall isn't necessarily the best as it is only the western 80 miles of an over 300 mile arterial mainline. So the branches would be better served by EDMUs or similar hybrid traction which at least would in part justify the continued running of diesel prime movers into the second half of the 20th century.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Apr 2023 ==


Two wrongs don't make a right, and I doubt that there will be anywhere near the 359 cars of all other diesel only rolling stock running around the byways of UK railways.

I wasn't necessarily talking about battery. The mainline to Plymouth may according to some commentators be electrified, so the remaining mailine may also get the investment, - not only for passenger traffic but also to make haulage of minerals including Lithium from Cornwall viable. The current state of the world might mean that what is considered a backwater in not only rail traffic has a second period of industrial investment.

I have to agree with AM9's comments, that there is still likely to be lines unelectrified, if you work on the basis the time it is taking the GWML to be completely electrified. However, I think there is many sections of the route to Plymouth that will not be electrified ever and that any train instead of using diesel power, will be using battery or hydrogen power to be filling the gaps. If it is battery, then the power will come from the OHLE both while stationery and while on the move, plus power being generated to the battery with regenerative braking.

 

[Bantamzen]

Just veering slightly OT, 40 years ago the number one worry & political driver was the nuclear threat. So we really have no idea what will be driving the political landscape in another 40. Maybe the man made climate change will be the number one worry, and people will be campaigning against the remaining diesel powered vehicles. Or we could be in the midst of another Cold War & climate change has been all but forgotten. Or maybe aliens will have landed and given us the technology to build our own green flying craft.

The point here is not to assume that arbitrary targets set in the 2020s will apply 40 or even 20 years from now. We may not give two hoots in a few decades that some aging DMUs are still running around the network. I firmly suspect that oil will still be playing a part in public transport for a long time to come.

 

[RailWonderer]

19x could be converted to electric if you really wanted to. It wouldn't be cheap but I would suggest an.other DEMU with passive provision would also not be cheap either in additional upfront costs now and in conversion costs in 15 years time. 19x could also be converted to a battery Hybrid tomorrow if there was a desire to spend the money.

Secondly there will still be routes that HOWL, Cambrian Coast, WHL where retaining diesels would have an infinitesimally small impact on emissions so at least some of the 19x could be used there.

I would also nominate Barrow - Carlisle - Newcastle and the Settle - Carlisle. Northern could get the remaining Civities and EMR could get the rest to replace 158s and 170s in time.

I was unsure whether to add class 165 & 166 as I think that they have at least another 15 - 20 years of life left in them, whereas as the 15X classes could really do with being replaced within the next 5 - 10 years.

The Turbos are over 30 years old, they have less than a decade left of their service life.

 

[RobShipway]

I would also nominate Barrow - Carlisle - Newcastle and the Settle - Carlisle. Northern could get the remaining Civities and EMR could get the rest to replace 158s and 170s in time.

The Turbos are over 30 years old, they have less than a decade left of their service life.

In that case, the 15x units should have been replaced 5 - 10 years ago, as some like the class 150 units have been around 39 years, whereas the class 165/166 are 30 - 32 years old this year. I suspect that the class 165/166 units to be going for another 15 - 20 years, as the routes they serve the stock is difficult to replace without knowing what is going to happen with the routes that they serve. If those routes where to be electrified in the next 5 to 10 years, then yes they should be included. If not, then the class 165/166 units will need to be used for a lot longer until an answer is found. That answer could be in a similar train to the class 755/756 Stadler Flirt trains. However, I think that the trains would need to be built here in the UK to replace the number of units from class 150 to class 166.

 

[Mikey C]

Just veering slightly OT, 40 years ago the number one worry & political driver was the nuclear threat. So we really have no idea what will be driving the political landscape in another 40. Maybe the man made climate change will be the number one worry, and people will be campaigning against the remaining diesel powered vehicles. Or we could be in the midst of another Cold War & climate change has been all but forgotten. Or maybe aliens will have landed and given us the technology to build our own green flying craft.

The point here is not to assume that arbitrary targets set in the 2020s will apply 40 or even 20 years from now. We may not give two hoots in a few decades that some aging DMUs are still running around the network. I firmly suspect that oil will still be playing a part in public transport for a long time to come.

Agreed. The Scottish policy may have changed by then for example

 

[HSTEd]

By 2040 the railway will be competing with other forms of surface transport that will have been overwhelmingly electrified.
That's the reality.

The railway won't be able to hide it's diesel use behind environmentalist credentials.
There will be little political will to subsidise diesel railway operations which are competing with electrified transport options.

It will be electrification, batteries or closure.

 

[Class 317]

Stadler have a Flirt AKKU which is a battery overhead AC version able to charge off overheads or run as a straight electric entering service in Germany.

It has a 160kmh top speed, battery range of 150km (100 km assumed for operating range) and a 15 min charge time off overheads.

3 orders placed in Germany so far. Stadler estimates 80% of German diesel routes could be converted with limited station platform electrification at the ends of routes or mid route ranging from a few hundred metres to a few kilometres.

Assuming a UK guage version with similar range a large number of branch lines and secondary routes would be covered.

As a practical example electrifying all platforms at Norwich would allow all greater Anglia class 755 routes to be operated except maybe Ipswich to Peterborough to be converted. Also Newark to Lincoln or Doncaster to Hull.

With 15min charge times and electrification at turnaround locations routes such as Holyhead to Crewe become possible with Holyhead station electrified.

Given the vast amount of R&D funding going into batteries ranges will continue to improve over the coming years and costs come down.

Yes we may have a limited number of routes like the far north etc which will be difficult to cover in the medium term but outside of this I can't see many other use cases.

The straight DMU's we have should be enough to see us through.

 

[Greybeard33]

Does CAF not have a power pack vehicle that could be added to the 195/6/7 and possibly the class 331 trains? If it does, then it would not work any different than the Stadler Flirt trains.

AFAIK the Power Pack concept is unique to the Stadler FLIRTs. It relies on the articulated design of the unit, with Jacobs bogies shared between cars, and so could not be retrofitted to the British CAF units, which have conventional bogies. In any case the 195/6/7 have mechanical transmission, with Cardan shaft drive to the bogies. It would be unaffordable to replace this with bogie mounted electric traction motors as per the 331 and 397. Pretty much all that would remain of the original vehicle would be the bodyshell, and even that would need modification.

 

[eldomtom2]

The government electrified just over 0.5% (A hugely impressive 2.2 track km) of its own minimum target to reach zero carbon by 2050.

I don't think per year figures are very helpful, since it's not like they fully electrify one mile then move onto the next. While our electriification progress is much slower than it should be, we at least do have two major electrification projects in progress.

 

[Bevan Price]

Its only a good strategy if the units you procure can actually where they can be used now, and 30-40 years down the line. Take the 230s as an example, if as initially speculated they had been bought in numbers for Northern can you imagine the chaos on Northern's network right now? In the green rush we don't want to start chasing untried or unproven solutions just because they might replace diesel. They have to work before they can be rolled out on any scale, which could take decades still. So there's going to be DMUs for quite some time yet.

With a maximum speed of only 60 mph, Class 230 would not have suitable performance ability for many Northern routes.