Future for stored 508s

[Fincra5]

3rd rail is far cheaper to install than OHLE, it makes sence on routes where trains don't need to go over 100mph.

 

[466.networkers]

Well, with a refurb, unreliability might be less of a problem but whilst there may not be a stock shortage on South Eastern, there is a stock shortage elsewhere.

Or is it back to square one - WE NEED MORE THIRD RAIL!!!!!

So an internal and possibly external refresh will somehow make the mechanical parts better and less probe to failure?

Don't think so somehow.

 

[MCR247]

Well, with a refurb, unreliability might be less of a problem but whilst there may not be a stock shortage on South Eastern, there is a stock shortage elsewhere.

So, if we released one 466, who exactly would this help 'elsewhere'?

 

[466.networkers]

One diagram would be 2 carriages better off.
And the Sheerness/MV/BN Line would be worse off.

 

[tbtc]

Yes but quite, the fact is there are at least two routes on the southern which are diesel islands (Hurst Green - Uckfield and Ore - Ashford) plus probably more if you count Redhill - Reading which would simply not make sense on OLE, not to mention Ormskirk - Preston which is self contained and which would make more sense stuck on to Merseyrail. So whilst I agree with efficiency (although not so much safety - I've never heard of the third rail arking!), I would have to catagorically answer my own rhetorical question YES, WE DO NEED MORE THIRD RAIL!!!!!

Agreed.

Instead of spending millions electrifying the MML and GWML we'd be better off electrifying those short gaps that exist on the railway that would allow a much higher number of DMUs to be replaced by EMUs (per mile of track converted).

Uckfield, Redhill, , Ormskirk and Ore all need converting to Third Rail, in the way that the the Manchester/ Liverpool/ Blackpool triangle needs the gaps filling in for overhead wires, similar to the lines around Walsall etc.

A 508 may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it is still a better option than a Pacer! EMUs don't wear out the way DMUs do, so lets add some more electrified miles to make the most of the old EMUs we have

(yeah, in an ideal world we'd be building hundreds of DMUs to replace the Pacers/ Sprinters, but that's not going to happen)

 

[Stonesourscotty]

The idea of electrifying Kirkby-Wigan is foolish as there just isnt the demand going mersey bound from Wigan no one wants to go to merseyside when manchester preston and bolton are cheaper and easier to get to .

The idea of possibley Electrying a proposed Kirky-Skelmersdale branch would be ideal though as alot of skem people travel to liverpool/kirkby via bus or the M58 as there is a natural flow back to merseyside but that just doesnt really exist in wigan because the fares are so high to merseyside.

153's are banned from Wigan WG due to the curves on the platforms at Wigan 155's are also banned but can use Northwestern.

 

[swt_passenger]

3rd rail is far cheaper to install than OHLE, it makes sence on routes where trains don't need to go over 100mph.

No it isn't, and doesn't. There are huge costs associated with having transformers and rectifiers every few miles to produce the DC.

Where significant electrification extensions beyond the SR are being discussed (eg Basingstoke - Salisbury - Exeter), NR have already said it will probably be AC for cost reasons.

 

[MCR247]

Would that mean Dual voltage trains (hopefully more desiros ) would be needed if it went ahead?

 

[swt_passenger]

Would that mean Dual voltage trains (hopefully more desiros ) would be needed if it went ahead?

Yes - but that doesn't really matter because all current and future EMUs are dual voltage under the skin, whether pantograph, shoe gear or both is present.

 

[MCR247]

Yes - but that doesn't really matter because all current and future EMUs are dual voltage under the skin, whether pantograph, shoe gear or both is present.

Yes, but unfortunately it would mean you'd lose the flexibility you'd have if it was DC, but it would be better than it is now I suppose . That is only a really minor thing though

 

[Drsatan]

No it isn't, and doesn't. There are huge costs associated with having transformers and rectifiers every few miles to produce the DC.

Where significant electrification extensions beyond the SR are being discussed (eg Basingstoke - Salisbury - Exeter), NR have already said it will probably be AC for cost reasons.

Not forgetting that AC OHL trains can operate at more than 100mph (the limit for 3rd rail stock to avoid damaging the shoe gear), consequently improving journey times and line capacity. 25kv AC electrification provides more current, which is apparently necessary to operate heavier trains (such as double deck trains) without bringing other trains to a halt due to the draw on current.

Ideally, all 3rd rail lines should be progressively converted to 25kv AC, starting with lines that are easiest to convert. This would allow journey times and capacity to be increased across the board, especially if double deck trains can be used due to the associated gauge enhancements necessary to install the OHL equipment.

 

[Fincra5]

The journey times would only be increased if the the speed limit was increased. Most modern EMUs have a top speed of 100mph. Track would also have to be improved for 125mph operation (etc). Plus the OHLe would ruin the Southern countryside

 

[yorksrob]

So an internal and possibly external refresh will somehow make the mechanical parts better and less probe to failure?

Don't think so somehow.

I'd find it quite surprising if mechanical systems weren't repaired or even improved during a major overhaul.

 

[Drsatan]

The journey times would only be increased if the the speed limit was increased. Most modern EMUs have a top speed of 100mph. Track would also have to be improved for 125mph operation (etc). Plus the OHLe would ruin the Southern countryside

Thanks, forgot to mention that journey times would only be decreased if the speed limits of track and rolling stock were increased simultaneously.

As for the aesthetics of OHL, you'd get used to it. Koln station looks good regardless of the overhead knitting, as does Carlisle.

 

[yorksrob]

Not forgetting that AC OHL trains can operate at more than 100mph (the limit for 3rd rail stock to avoid damaging the shoe gear), consequently improving journey times and line capacity. 25kv AC electrification provides more current, which is apparently necessary to operate heavier trains (such as double deck trains) without bringing other trains to a halt due to the draw on current.

Ideally, all 3rd rail lines should be progressively converted to 25kv AC, starting with lines that are easiest to convert. This would allow journey times and capacity to be increased across the board, especially if double deck trains can be used due to the associated gauge enhancements necessary to install the OHL equipment.

Still a pointless waste of money though. There are far more important things to be paid for than converting one type of electrification to another.

 

[RobShipway]

Still a pointless waste of money though. There are far more important things to be paid for than converting one type of electrification to another.

True, but you can start the change to OHLE by doing that change on the niche diesel routes such as Uckfield and Reading routes as previously mentioned.

 

[yorksrob]

True, but you can start the change to OHLE by doing that change on the niche diesel routes such as Uckfield and Reading routes as previously mentioned.

True - but then they'd be committing themselves to changing the rest in the future. I really can't see anyone stumping up to convert the 3rd rail network, even as a long term aspiration.

 

[jopsuk]

Yes - but that doesn't really matter because all current and future EMUs are dual voltage under the skin, whether pantograph, shoe gear or both is present.

Are they all dual voltage really? All AC capable, yes, but I'd find it hard to believe the 380s (for example) are 3rd-rail capable- I'd bet it would be a heck of a lot more work than just fitting shoe gear. Thought even the 350/2s are not DC capable (just the 350/1 - as they were going to be 450s until an advanced stage of build)

 

[swt_passenger]

Are they all dual voltage really? All AC capable, yes, but I'd find it hard to believe the 380s (for example) are 3rd-rail capable- I'd bet it would be a heck of a lot more work than just fitting shoe gear. Thought even the 350/2s are not DC capable (just the 350/1 - as they were going to be 450s until an advanced stage of build)

They all have a DC link between the AC input and the traction converters - the bit that produces the variable voltage variable frequency for the motors. Assuming there isn't a problem with mounting shoe gear on the relevant bogies, the DC goes in at the DC link. Fitting the necessary cabling and control gear is relatively straightforward AIUI, even if not original fit.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...However, assuming Fratton drivers were signed on them, 508s working in multiple could be used on Portsmouth Harbour - Southampton Central diagrams; the end to end journey time is one hour five minutes, over the one hour maximum journey time for units without toilets.

I was a bit sceptical about the 'one hour maximum' for units without toilets when you posted it, but it seems according to the DfT there is no such rule. At least that's their response to the RMT's complaints about the SN 313 introduction on the coastway services.

The Department for Transport said there were no rules on whether or not toilets should be available on trains.

"We expect rail companies to provide a good service," he added.

"However, it is not for the Government to micromanage the industry."

That last line should be framed and hung up somewhere...