Getting the most out of the new Alstom units for TPE?

[hwl]

Well per metre it is, yes.

But in the battery era I'm not sure how much cost per metre matters. I think the better metric is seconds of pantograph up per pound spent.

A kilometre of track on a 100mph railway only charges each train for something like 23 seconds. At 20mph it is 115 seconds, the 20mph section could be treble the price per metre and still be the better choice.

A station platform is great because it gets you the dwell time almost for free. The tracks around Sheffield are heavily utilised and at low speeds, especially between dore and Totley and meadowhall, I think they could be extremely expensive per metre and still be the best choice of charging location

I personally think Sheffield needs a total rebuild more than anything, but I doubt one is forthcoming.
In the absence I'm not sure the BEMU programme can afford to get scope creeped into non charging infrastructure improvements.

You metric of "seconds of pantograph up per pound spent" is certainly heading in the right direction but probably need to include elements of needing reasonable lengths of contiguous wiring (outside of termini with long layovers), not having monster gaps and aiming to cover high power draw sections e.g. acceleration and up hill to make battery specification less demanding.

 

[Killingworth]

Well per metre it is, yes.

But in the battery era I'm not sure how much cost per metre matters. I think the better metric is seconds of pantograph up per pound spent.

A kilometre of track on a 100mph railway only charges each train for something like 23 seconds. At 20mph it is 115 seconds, the 20mph section could be treble the price per metre and still be the better choice.

A station platform is great because it gets you the dwell time almost for free. The tracks around Sheffield are heavily utilised and at low speeds, especially between dore and Totley and meadowhall, I think they could be extremely expensive per metre and still be the best choice of charging location

I personally think Sheffield needs a total rebuild more than anything, but I doubt one is forthcoming.
In the absence I'm not sure the BEMU programme can afford to get scope creeped into non charging infrastructure improvements.

Quite. Although running a BEMU from Liverpool to Sheffield might work, stabling overnight in a wired platform maybe to be first westbound and last eastbound of the day.

 

[eldomtom2]

aiming to cover high power draw sections e.g. acceleration and up hill to make battery specification less demanding.

"High power draw sections" would also include sections of high (100mph+) speed, am I right in assuming that?

 

[SomeTrainboy]

"High power draw sections" would also include sections of high (100mph+) speed, am I right in assuming that?

Probably not as much power required as the other two, and there probably won't be much non electrified 100+mph running on their route.

 

[3RDGEN]

So in the case of engineering works, you split the service at Leeds – no big deal. You could have both trains use the same platform to make it really easy for passengers to just walk along the platform to change trains. It's still better than pretty much any of the usual alternatives. Passengers from Hull and Scarborough regularly have to change at Leeds or York in those circumstances, this would just switch around which passengers retain through services and which don't. It's not a big enough issue to be the deciding factor in any procurement exercise.

They split the Hull and Scarborough services because they have the least passengers on them so it means fewer passengers are disrupted than if you split the Newcastle service, can't see why you would want to change what current works well. The important TPE passenger flow is Liverpool - Manchester - Leeds - York - Newcastle, Saltburn / Scarborough / Hull are just convenient places to send the trains since they need a train service providing.

The 802's can do the Calder Valley diversions and the BEMU's used from Leeds / York as is now the case.

 

[eldomtom2]

there probably won't be much non electrified 100+mph running on their route.

If we're talking about the UK as a whole there's quite a lot - electrifying 100mph or above lines would mean doing the GWML (via both routes) up to about Starcross, the MML, and the Cross Country Route.

Of course if we're talking about TPE specifically there isn't much, but it could benefit from electrification done for other services.

 

[hwl]

"High power draw sections" would also include sections of high (100mph+) speed, am I right in assuming that?

Yes and DfT have recognised that 100mph+ needs electrification.

 

[Kite159]

Would these units work on the south TPE route between Liverpool and Cleethorpes? Use Electric from Lime Street to Hazel Grove, Battery over the Hope Valley (could use regenerative braking on the downhill section from Edale), charge a bit at Doncaster (depending on charge times) and battery along the [mostly] flat route all the way to Cleethorpes. Would probably need charging facilities at Cleethorpes.

There is a slight gap in the overhead wiring between the Liverpool South Parkway area & the Old Trafford area. Unless you are proposing routing the services via Chat Moss

 

[SomeTrainboy]

There is a slight gap in the overhead wiring between the Liverpool South Parkway area & the Old Trafford area. Unless you are proposing routing the services via Chat Moss

Oh I didn't realise, my mistake.

 

[Class 317]

Well per metre it is, yes.

But in the battery era I'm not sure how much cost per metre matters. I think the better metric is seconds of pantograph up per pound spent.

A kilometre of track on a 100mph railway only charges each train for something like 23 seconds. At 20mph it is 115 seconds, the 20mph section could be treble the price per metre and still be the better choice.

A station platform is great because it gets you the dwell time almost for free. The tracks around Sheffield are heavily utilised and at low speeds, especially between dore and Totley and meadowhall, I think they could be extremely expensive per metre and still be the best choice of charging location

I personally think Sheffield needs a total rebuild more than anything, but I doubt one is forthcoming.
In the absence I'm not sure the BEMU programme can afford to get scope creeped into non charging infrastructure improvements.

I love cost per second a pantograph is up versus cost!

Think it should be charging time versus cost to account through.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There is a slight gap in the overhead wiring between the Liverpool South Parkway area & the Old Trafford area. Unless you are proposing routing the services via Chat Moss

But a BEMU service on the Lime St-Oxford Road stopper looks feasible with the TPE-specced units.
The wiring gap on the CLC route is 25 miles from Liverpool South Parkway to Trafford Park West Jn, and there is charging under the wires at both ends (though finding somewhere to pan-up east of Trafford Park might be tricky).
After charging via Oxford Road, such trains could also reach, say, Buxton on the 17-mile gap from Hazel Grove.
I could easily see Northern (or DfT/DfTO) adding to the TPE order for some of its BEMU requirement.
However, it seems to want a DMU/EMU/BEMU platform with conversion options for each, which the Adessia doesn't address.