Ideas for future battery-electric (BEMU) units based on GWR Class 230 technology

[The exile]

Could tbe 769/9's have been equipped with batteries instead of the diesel engines and used that way on the north downs line?

Probably not at the time the idea was in gestation.

 

[CdBrux]

Have any of those systems been trialed in a real railway environment though? that's my point, ideally there needs to be a test unit, that can have one of these systems fitted, and trialed to see how it copes with real time use, I thought using 230 body shells, because they are available and at scrap value,

Ideally it would need 2 test bed units, one with the Siemens system, one with the ABB system, to see which works best, and is the most reliable before any production of a new design of BEMU, incorporating either system

Is there not a BEMU working somewhere in the world so that UK development and testing does not need to start from scratch?

 

[AlexSJW]

Have you got a source for the issue being carriage length as I thought the main problem was the dislike of having diesel trains and so fuel in the Mersey tunnel.

I was also under the impression that the the 230s carriages were shorter than the previous 507 & 508 units that worked through the tunnel so I did not think that carriage length was an issue.

EDIT
End doors also required for the tunnels and the TfW 230s do not have them !.

Yes, the end doors as well. The underground Liverpool loop was too tight a curve wearing out wheels and rails prematurely with pre-777 trains. The 777s are shorter, eight cars in a full length train designed specifically for the loop, putting far less stress on rails and wheels. The 230s carriages are longer than the 777s.

If the 230s terminate at James St they do not use the loop - which would upset TfW as they would want to access all four underground stations on the loop. But Merseyrail are reluctant to have them at all in the tunnels, in case of breakdowns, etc, as they are a non-standard train. Merseyrail maintenance and callout men only know the 777s, with an adequate parts stock - Stadler's UK HQ is in Liverpool. They do not want a 230 blocking the tunnels for any length of time. Merseyrail were unimpressed with the 230s reliability, with constant breakdowns.

 

[hwl]

Is there not a BEMU working somewhere in the world so that UK development and testing does not need to start from scratch?

Yes plenty in Germany which has seen the biggest deployment so far and quite a few in other countries.
Part of the problems is that the whole industy is learning but everyone seems to want to repeat learning the basics and not focussing effort on moving on from that.

 

[AlexSJW]

Yes plenty in Germany which has seen the biggest deployment so far and quite a few in other countries.
Part of the problems is that the whole industy is learning but everyone seems to want to repeat learning the basics and not focussing effort on moving on from that.

A battery train build by Stadler from Kiel to Rendsburg in Schleswig-Holstein in northern Germany is in operation. The line is about the same length of Wrexham to Liverpool which is being considered for battery operation. In April 2024 Siemens Mobility launched the first of 27 Mireo Plus B battery-electric trains in the Ortenau region of Baden-Württemberg. Two-car trains with a range of over 120 km on battery power and a top speed of 140 km/h. The Black Forest Railway also operates battery trains.

 

[Cravens]

I got in a quick ride on it today, having run out of Class 455's to bash. I think it could be a good innovation; while the D78 Stock is a little rough and ready as platforms go, I think they could have a future on the quieter branch lines of the GWR network. Cheap to deliver and now a well-tested concept, they should be good for 10-15 years in service to prove it further.

 

[Alpine Rider]

Hmm - I generally agree with the "well tested concept" observations as any flaws like the previous Saturday have been swiftly resolved.

As for "Cheap to deliver..."

I have yet to see published costings regarding the costs incurred by VivaRail to modify D Stock trains to Class 230 standards. OK some of the raw material will effectively be free by drawing down the residual D Stock inventory, but the former VivaRail production site has been lost so any additional Class 230 units will entail incurring many of the costs of producing brand new BEMUs with a longer potential service life.

OK There is a handful of former Marston Vale units somewhere which might be slightly cheaper to renovate and adapt to the 230001 spec but the GWR trial was always about proving the fast charging system - not the train. If we see new BEMUs the most likely solution will be orders for new build BEMUs and the residual D Stock inventory will soon be harvested for spares with the rest sent for recyling.

 

[martin butler]

Hmm - I generally agree with the "well tested concept" observations as any flaws like the previous Saturday have been swiftly resolved.

As for "Cheap to deliver..."

I have yet to see published costings regarding the costs incurred by VivaRail to modify D Stock trains to Class 230 standards. OK some of the raw material will effectively be free by drawing down the residual D Stock inventory, but the former VivaRail production site has been lost so any additional Class 230 units will entail incurring many of the costs of producing brand new BEMUs with a longer potential service life.

OK There is a handful of former Marston Vale units somewhere which might be slightly cheaper to renovate and adapt to the 230001 spec but the GWR trial was always about proving the fast charging system - not the train. If we see new BEMUs the most likely solution will be orders for new build BEMUs and the residual D Stock inventory will soon be harvested for spares with the rest sent for recyling.

As a stop gap possibly, a small fleet of 230,Battery units, to replace Turbos, on some branch lines, and new order of a new design class of battery electric trains, to follow in say 10 to 15 years ?

 

[JamesT]

As a stop gap possibly, a small fleet of 230,Battery units, to replace Turbos, on some branch lines, and new order of a new design class of battery electric trains, to follow in say 10 to 15 years ?

GWR have been working on the procurement of replacements for the Sprinters/Networkers for some time, see other threads regarding 'Project Churchward'. There isn't a gap for further 230s to fit into.

 

[DavidGrain]

The Marston Vale units (230003/4/5) are diesels. I do not believe that anyone can make a business case for converting them to anything else. So their future is only for an operator prepared to use them as a small fleet and I do not see that happening. They have not run for several years and no one knows what state they are now in.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The Marston Vale units (230003/4/5) are diesels. I do not believe that anyone can make a business case for converting them to anything else. So their future is only for an operator prepared to use them as a small fleet and I do not see that happening. They have not run for several years and no one knows what state they are now in.

They will be easier than your average diesel to convert to battery as it is the swap of an engine raft for a battery raft. Obviously I suspect software and wiring will need to change but they are not that different from the GWR 230. Obviously all converted from the same D78 base model - so to speak.

@Woods can give a better idea of the work required to convert a diesel 230 to an electric 230 but the basic fact is that it can and has effectively been done before.

 

[35B]

They will be easier than your average diesel to convert to battery as it is the swap of an engine raft for a battery raft. Obviously I suspect software and wiring will need to change but they are not that different from the GWR 230. Obviously all converted from the same D78 base model - so to speak.

@Woods can give a better idea of the work required to convert a diesel 230 to an electric 230 but the basic fact is that it can and has effectively been done before.

Going back to the observation of @Cravens about being cheap and proven, I'll just note that it's 9 years since the D Stock was withdrawn from service. The various D-stock derivatives have taken a great deal of time and effort to deliver, and fleet use is extremely limited.

 

[Thirteen]

I know the Island Line doesn't have the space but I wonder if it'd be worth sending 1 or 2 230s there in the future?

 

[DelW]

Going back to the observation of @Cravens about being cheap and proven, I'll just note that it's 9 years since the D Stock was withdrawn from service. The various D-stock derivatives have taken a great deal of time and effort to deliver, and fleet use is extremely limited.

That isn't necessarily a reflection on the 230s or their ancestry. SWR's 701s are straightforward DC EMUs based on a pre-existing design, yet they've only recently got more than half the fleet into use. They were ordered almost 9 years ago (June 2017).

 

[35B]

That isn't necessarily a reflection on the 230s or their ancestry. SWR's 701s are straightforward DC EMUs based on a pre-existing design, yet they've only recently got more than half the fleet into use. They were ordered almost 9 years ago (June 2017).

Your description of the 701s omits that the pre-existing design isn't a DC one, and that SWR chose to make some changes that have caused issues.

More specifically, I've no issue with the D78 stock per se. What I notice is that the technology to be implemented in them has suffered many problems, most of which appear to be design development issues of the sort that also occur in new units. When other retrofitting projects have also gone awry (cl. 769, anyone), it suggests to me that the gains from reworking existing units, especially when nearing retirement, is neither a cheap nor an effective way to deliver quick changes in the manner suggested by @Peter Sarf.

 

[DelW]

Your description of the 701s omits that the pre-existing design isn't a DC one, and that SWR chose to make some changes that have caused issues.

More specifically, I've no issue with the D78 stock per se. What I notice is that the technology to be implemented in them has suffered many problems, most of which appear to be design development issues of the sort that also occur in new units. When other retrofitting projects have also gone awry (cl. 769, anyone), it suggests to me that the gains from reworking existing units, especially when nearing retirement, is neither a cheap nor an effective way to deliver quick changes in the manner suggested by @Peter Sarf.

Well, the Aventra is meant to be a configurable platform, though indeed SWR's unwise (at least in hindsight) ideas did cause problems too.

Really my point is that both 230 or 769 type conversions *and* new trains seem to be liable to extensive delays before they make it into service. The 701s were supposed to all be in use by the end of 2020 - no doubt Covid caused some of the delay, but certainly not all. TfW's new train fleets have also suffered some heavy and continuing delays. Either manufacturers are too optimistic in their timescales, or modern trains are simply too complicated for their own good - software problems seems to be frequent. I don't think it's just a British issue either, both European railways and the USA have had major problems with new passenger stock.

But this is getting rather far away from the future of the 230's battery technology, so I'll shut up now

 

[eldomtom2]

I know the Island Line doesn't have the space but I wonder if it'd be worth sending 1 or 2 230s there in the future?

The Island Line has the 484s, what would the point be of the 230s?

 

[D365]

The Island Line has the 484s, what would the point be of the 230s?

Specials to Newport?

 

[martin butler]

The Island Line has the 484s, what would the point be of the 230s?

There wouldn't be, as long as the transformer stations remain in full working order, there would be no need for anything other than the 484's, If however the traction equipment were to fail, and it was uneconomic to repair/ replace, then the 484's could in theory be retro fitted as battery units, with charging stations most likely at Shanklin, and possibly at Ryde pier head

 

[Peter Sarf]

Your description of the 701s omits that the pre-existing design isn't a DC one, and that SWR chose to make some changes that have caused issues.

More specifically, I've no issue with the D78 stock per se. What I notice is that the technology to be implemented in them has suffered many problems, most of which appear to be design development issues of the sort that also occur in new units. When other retrofitting projects have also gone awry (cl. 769, anyone), it suggests to me that the gains from reworking existing units, especially when nearing retirement, is neither a cheap nor an effective way to deliver quick changes in the manner suggested by @Peter Sarf.

Given that the GWR 230 is doing well it would seem to me to be very low risk to make more of them by converting more D78s. Certainly using those D78s that are mostly already converted - the three Marston Vale 230s. So I do not think there is much risk left BUT I do wonder will it be worth the effort to convert some more ?.

 

[martin butler]

Given that the GWR 230 is doing well it would seem to me to be very low risk to make more of them by converting more D78s. Certainly using those D78s that are mostly already converted - the three Marston Vale 230s. So I do not think there is much risk left BUT I do wonder will it be worth the effort to convert some more ?.

Might the Loe branch in Cornwall be suitable location for a further trial self-contained, servicing can be done at the depot at Plymouth,
Charging can be done either at Loe, or Liscard during the lay over, or both,

 

[RPI]

Might the Loe branch in Cornwall be suitable location for a further trial self-contained, servicing can be done at the depot at Plymouth,
Charging can be done either at Loe, or Liscard during the lay over, or both,

Out of all the Cornish branches, it's probably the most suitable, would be interesting how well it coped with a full load up the gradient from Coombe to Liskeard! I'm not sure whether a three car would fit in the platform at Looe? It currently only just about fits a two car 150 and it's quite tight.