Ideas for E-DMU possibilities?

[willc789]

Given that the E-Voyager project has been kicked into the long-grass, what is the scope for other diesel units to have an added pantograph in the future? Tubostars or Meridians etc...would it be physically possible? Where would it be used best? Was just a thought anyway!

Cheers

 

[Manchester77]

Only units numbered 2XX can because they're diesel electric units. 1XX can't because they're diesel mechanical/hydraulic (although i think these were Western Region only and went out years ago) units. It would be physically impossible to bi-mode a turbostar without rebuilding and new engines etc. To bi-mode a voyager you'd need 2 transformer vehicles and a pantograph vehicle so an additional 3 carriages. The only trains in service you could so this with are the voyagers (220 - 222) and since as you said e-Voyager has been scrapped the only thing I could see is that the 222s are bi-moded to operated the MML post electrification or to replace the HSTs being kept on the GWML. I think it'd be best in one of those two routes either to serve the none electrified northern extremities of the new electrified MML or to fully replace HSTs to save running them under the wires. I'd like to see project Thor resurrected as most of XC is to be electrified and also it'd add a few extra carriages onto IC services.

 

[jopsuk]

I'd correct you there- as far as I know, the 15x, 16x, 17x and 18x (apart form Class 172) have hyrdaulic transmissions. As far as I can find out, the 142s were built with mechanical but converted to hydraulic- anyone know about the 143 and 144s?

The Western Region Hyrdaulics were locomotives that were unusual as all other locos being built were diesel-electric.

In theory, you could convert a 1xx unit to an EDMU. It would be hilariously expensive though, involving replacing the transmission and the bogies.

 

[route:oxford]

Given that the E-Voyager project has been kicked into the long-grass, what is the scope for other diesel units to have an added pantograph in the future? Tubostars or Meridians etc...would it be physically possible? Where would it be used best? Was just a thought anyway!

Cheers

There would be a benefit, but probably better with a unit that is planned as an electro-diesel from the very outset.

I could see a particular benefit in Scotland where, say services in future, could be powered from the wires from Glasgow to Larbert/Stirling/Dunblane/Perth then switch to Diesel power for the trip to Inverness/Aberdeen.

 

[tbtc]

If the maths don't work for the dozens of Voyagers then I sadly can't see conversion of 222s being justified

 

[starrymarkb]

I'd say you'd be better off with New Build rather then converting existing.

Wonder why Bombardier don't look over channel at their French Factory's AGC - A Bi Mode Bi Voltage regional unit. (Diesel, 1500V DC, 25kV AC)

 

[DDB]

I would still like to see project Thor go ahead to both reduce the amount of under the wires diesel running and also to quickly increase capacity. on the cross country routes.

For more regional services I think that new build bi-mode is the way to go. We almost certainly need more diesel units as although electrification of some lines will release some DMUs for cascade I would question of they will be enough to cope with the withdrawal of the pacers and the growth in demand as well as the rumoured reforming of 153s into two car units.

Other people have said that there isn't room under the floor in a UK loading gauge for a diesel-electric dmu so maybe something like the class 201-210 with the diesel in the cabin but with a pantograph and transformer fitted to one of the other coaches to allow it to run from overhead wire where available. I would future proof it by designing the engine compartment such that it could be removed and replaced by more seating to converted into a plain emu later in life as more lines are completely electrified.

DDB

 

[starrymarkb]

I would future proof it by designing the engine compartment such that it could be removed and replaced by more seating to converted into a plain emu later in life as more lines are completely electrified.

DDB

Though not a Bi-Mode how about the Stadler GTW. Either Twin MAN diesels or an AC traction pack mounted in a separate module between the passenger coaches. Of course what do you do with the diesels when you swap out the modules?

 

[Surreyman]

I would question of they will be enough to cope with the withdrawal of the pacers and the growth in demand as well as the rumoured reforming of 153s into two car units.



DDB

Er what withdrawal of Pacers?
I thought it had been clearly established that the Pacers are staying, well at least
until the mid 2020s following DDA upgrading.

 

[Haydn1971]

Er what withdrawal of Pacers?
I thought it had been clearly established that the Pacers are staying, well at least
until the mid 2020s following DDA upgrading.

Until we see these prospective recycled razor blades rolling into the depots for DDA upgrading, no, it's not clearly established.

 

[ainsworth74]

As far as I'm aware we've seen a proposal for a DDA compliant 143(?) in Modern Railways but no-one as yet has actually committed to such an upgrade. My gut feeling is that at least some pacers (144s and probably some 143s) are going to get either upgraded or exempted. But I suspect 142s will be scrapped around the deadline.

 

[Manchester77]

Porterbrook released this detailing possible refurbishment of 143s and 144s
http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/14x Brochure.pdf

 

[dubscottie]

Other than the 22X there is no chance any other DMU/DEMU would be made "dual power"..

It cant be rocket science though..In the case of the 22X DEMU..
The class 306 and 307 were converted to AC from DC.. All the extra bits were slung under another coach and the panto moved..

Ok that was when we had "trailer" cars.. Everything has to have an engine now.. Got us by in the old days..... Stick a 101 trailer in a 108. 110 trailer in a 107. etc.....

But that would be a stupid idea now, like couplers.. too much money to be made..

 

[Kali]

*Technically* you could bimode any DMU, if you insert an electric motor coach ( think 317, all it's gear is in one coach iirc ) and the more awkward part, can make the motor coach compatible with whatever system the DMU is using to control itself. Practically... yeah. Fun with adhesion too.

 

[Haydn1971]

Porterbrook released this detailing possible refurbishment of 143s and 144s
http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/14x Brochure.pdf

Porterbrook would be keen of course - they wouldn't be forced into either scrapping about 140 assets that their rental costumers would desperately need a replacement for

 

[WatcherZero]

Though not a Bi-Mode how about the Stadler GTW. Either Twin MAN diesels or an AC traction pack mounted in a separate module between the passenger coaches. Of course what do you do with the diesels when you swap out the modules?

I think ive seen that one before, it works because of the wider clearance and the corridor past the engines is narrow even in that loading gauge so couldnt work in the UK's gauge?

 

[DDB]

Though not a Bi-Mode how about the Stadler GTW. Either Twin MAN diesels or an AC traction pack mounted in a separate module between the passenger coaches. Of course what do you do with the diesels when you swap out the modules?

My understanding is that a diesel engines life is less than the train that it is in so you would probably just scrap them as life expired.

However I still favour a bi-mode over easily converted trains as there are a lot of minor routes operated by sprinters/pacers that spend some time travelling on main lines that either have been or will be electrified. I would design a bi-mode sprinter/pacer replacement to have the same 75mph top speed running on diesel as the current classes but a higher speed on the overhead wires so they can keep up with the rest of the traffic when on the main electrified lines.

DDB

 

[jon0844]

Porterbrook released this detailing possible refurbishment of 143s and 144s
http://www.porterbrook.co.uk/downloads/brochures/14x Brochure.pdf

IF that can be done, I think users would actually get a pretty good train.

 

[ainsworth74]

IF that can be done, I think users would actually get a pretty good train.

A pretty good train, but one with only 90 seats, which would compound the main problem with Pacers. The lack of capacity due to the vehicles being 15m long.

 

[tbtc]

IF that can be done, I think users would actually get a pretty good train.

If its possible then it would mean virtually no DMUs would be built in the next couple of decades (as patched up 143/144s would probably be sufficient to see us through the pinch point between accessibility regulations coming in on 1 January 2020 and the CP6 electrification which I expect to fill in the gaps of CP5 electrification which will replace the need for most 75mph DMUs).

 

[Surreyman]

Until we see these prospective recycled razor blades rolling into the depots for DDA upgrading, no, it's not clearly established.

'no, it's not clearly established'
True but what's going to replace them?
Even if there was sufficient funding available, I doubt there is the time or resources to electrify sufficient lines to enable their replacement before 2020.
When passenger numbers keep on increasing, keep them running until corrosion or mechanical obsolescence forces them into the scrapyard.
(ditto for 150/153/155/156/313/315/317/318/455/507/508).
Yes build lots of new stock, but use it to increase overall seats across the network.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A pretty good train, but one with only 90 seats, which would compound the main problem with Pacers. The lack of capacity due to the vehicles being 15m long.

I have always assumed that the Pacers in South Wales & FGW would (post 2019) be moved to Northern where they would be semi permanently coupled up
to form 4 car units?

 

[jopsuk]

A pretty good train, but one with only 90 seats, which would compound the main problem with Pacers. The lack of capacity due to the vehicles being 15m long.

Aye. If they were rebuilt into three (45m) (a two-car 156) or four (60m) (a three car 150), apart from a small number to replace 153s re-reformed into 155s, it wouldn't be so bad, as you could have one or two carriages configured just with seating- no loo, no disabled space. As it is, if rebuilt as shown, in two car formations that will often work as fours, that's hugely wasted capacity.

 

[Surreyman]

I'd say you'd be better off with New Build rather then converting existing.

Wonder why Bombardier don't look over channel at their French Factory's AGC - A Bi Mode Bi Voltage regional unit. (Diesel, 1500V DC, 25kV AC)

The original Electrification plan pretty much highlights most of the (Non-Electified parts) of Cross-Country as high in priority after the routes approved for CP5.
Obviously you would need (Electric) rolling stock to displace the Voyagers and given that the extreme ends of XC routes won't be electrified, you would need 'Bi-mode capability' - Sounds like an order for more IEPs would be needed!!

 

[cjmillsnun]

The original Electrification plan pretty much highlights most of the (Non-Electified parts) of Cross-Country as high in priority after the routes approved for CP5.
Obviously you would need (Electric) rolling stock to displace the Voyagers and given that the extreme ends of XC routes won't be electrified, you would need 'Bi-mode capability' - Sounds like an order for more IEPs would be needed!!

That might be one of the few instances where an IEP might make sense.

I for one won't mourn the day when voyagers are cascaded away from XC and ICWC services and onto secondary routes. Nor will I miss the Meridians on the MML. I will on the other hand be very sad when the last HST runs on an intercity route. Likewise with the Skodas and the 91's

 

[rebmcr]

Skodas?

 

[HSTEd]

Skodas?

Class 90s have acquired the nickname "Skoda"... apparently because they have reliability issues.

Frankly I miss the Flying Badger more than I will ever miss HSTs.

 

[Kneedown]

Only units numbered 2XX can because they're diesel electric units. 1XX can't because they're diesel mechanical/hydraulic (although i think these were Western Region only and went out years ago) units. It would be physically impossible to bi-mode a turbostar without rebuilding and new engines etc.

Excuse my lack of advanced mechanical nous, but would it really be impossible? I mean, a diesel engine turns a crankshaft attached to the transmission and then the final drive. Why cant an electric motor turn transmission and final drive? I realise it wouldnt be the most efficient way of doing it, but is it impossible, and if so why?

 

[ainsworth74]

Excuse my lack of advanced mechanical nous, but would it really be impossible? I mean, a diesel engine turns a crankshaft attached to the transmission and then the final drive. Why cant an electric motor turn transmission and final drive? I realise it wouldnt be the most efficient way of doing it, but is it impossible, and if so why?

It's not impossible just expensive. By the time you've made the modifications you might as well buy an EMU.

The 22x conversions for example 'worked' because the set up is diesel engine -> generator -> traction motor -> wheels turn. The proposed alternative was pantograph -> transformer -> traction motor -> wheels turn. The pantograph and transformer would be part of a new vehicle meaning that the only significant change on the rest of the train would be new wiring to the traction motors.

Whereas on a Diesel Mechanical/Hydraulic set you still need to fit traction motors for every powered bogie as well as develop a bespoke (I doubt there's anything like this 'off the shelf') transmission that could take power either from the diesel engines or traction motors. A complex transmission like that sounds like it's begging to be a maintenance nightmare. Also by having diesel engines, traction motors and this hybrid electric and mechical/hydraulic transmission your're going to end up with a very heavy train. Whilst the 22x has simply a new vehicle and some new wiring.

It's certainly not impossible. It's just almost certainly not economic.

 

[Kneedown]

It's not impossible just expensive. By the time you've made the modifications you might as well buy an EMU.

The 22x conversions for example 'worked' because the set up is diesel engine -> generator -> traction motor -> wheels turn. The proposed alternative was pantograph -> transformer -> traction motor -> wheels turn. The pantograph and transformer would be part of a new vehicle meaning that the only significant change on the rest of the train would be new wiring to the traction motors.

Whereas on a Diesel Mechanical/Hydraulic set you still need to fit traction motors for every powered bogie as well as develop a bespoke (I doubt there's anything like this 'off the shelf') transmission that could take power either from the diesel engines or traction motors. A complex transmission like that sounds like it's begging to be a maintenance nightmare. Also by having diesel engines, traction motors and this hybrid electric and mechical/hydraulic transmission your're going to end up with a very heavy train. Whilst the 22x has simply a new vehicle and some new wiring.

It's certainly not impossible. It's just almost certainly not economic.

Cheers for that.
Like i said, i'm sure it's not the most efficient way of doing things, just wondered if it was possible

 

[ainsworth74]

Like i said, i'm sure it's not the most efficient way of doing things, just wondered if it was possible

Throw enough money at it and just about anything possible. Whether or not it's a good use of that money