The thread on pollution levels at Birmingham New Street are a prime reason we need to kill diesels of any type when there's wires available. I'm hopeful of seeing greater deployment of bi-modes as we move into the 2020's, in particular on regional routes that will have part wires in the future, but suspect that will only happen once we get to the stage when the old 80's DMU's are really no longer fit for purpose and someone like the DfT make a firm long term commitment as was done with IEP to give manufacturers the confidence to invest in getting a local train type solution working in the UK - as things stand, TOC's haven't really got any other option but to use pure DMU or EMU solutions.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
New TPE Train Discussion
- Thread starter andyb2706
- Start date
- Status
The thread on pollution levels at Birmingham New Street are a prime reason we need to kill diesels of any type when there's wires available. I'm hopeful of seeing greater deployment of bi-modes as we move into the 2020's, in particular on regional routes that will have part wires in the future, but suspect that will only happen once we get to the stage when the old 80's DMU's are really no longer fit for purpose and someone like the DfT make a firm long term commitment as was done with IEP to give manufacturers the confidence to invest in getting a local train type solution working in the UK - as things stand, TOC's haven't really got any other option but to use pure DMU or EMU solutions.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I disagree - CAF already offer a bi-mode, Northern didn't choose it, presumably because the DMU was cheaper.
Greybeard33
Established Member
The CAF Civity range includes (at least in the UIC loading gauge) bi-mode and diesel-electric models as well as the DMU and EMU options Arriva has chosen. Considering that the DMUs are for use on Northern Connect routes that will involve substantial mileage under the wires, surely Arriva will have carefully evaluated the bi-mode option before concluding that the DMU has better overall operating economics?
So is it not likely that, if First is considering a Civity order, it will come to the same conclusion as Arriva? Especially since the DMU would now be "off the shelf", whereas the bi-mode would require CAF to invest in additional design and development work to adapt it to British requirements.
No, not quite - diesel and electric are pretty much bread and butter for any manufacturer, doing both is much more difficult - CAF have a bi-mode option, but haven't done that in a UK loading gauge - that's going to need a lot of development work, which costs money.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
I think the ROSCOs would have had an influence as well. In the long term rolling stock strategy it recommended that if new trains were ordered for regional routes that they should be suitable to cascade down to rural routes which may never be electrified. I imagine that's so that the DMUs have the potential to remain in service for 30 years even if the routes they are ordered for are electrified.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
The IEP bi-modes have a 25m bodyshell with doors in each corner and raised floors in between to make room for the diesel engine. We don't know how much the design would have to change for a shorter bodyshell, or whether TPE is even willing to accept doors in each corner.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Underneath, it's all about the traction package.
Getting NR approval for bi-mode or electric operation over classic lines for a new train type is not trivial.
So far we have heard nothing about how the IEP trials are going.
Have any of these Hitachi trains been seen at 125mph on the ECML in normal traffic yet?
I'm not aware the 395s have left HS1 under OHLE, happy to be corrected.
It's asking a lot of the TPE AT300s to run under the wires Liverpool-Manchester and York-Newcastle by Dec 2017, when the GWR versions will barely be operational out of Paddington by then.
We don't even know where the TPE bi-modes will be based.
And another thing (off topic, sorry) - what traction package comes with the CAF EMUs for Northern?
They have built trains with Siemens and Alstom electrics in the past, as well as their own.
Reputations have been trashed in the past after getting approvals wrong.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
It's been suggested as the GW wiring is behind schedule and TPE ones can use the existing wires that the TPE ones will jump to the front of the queue.
If the whole bi-mode concept was really going to take off and have massive fleets of them I would have expected the likes of Siemens or Bombardier to have started development of a bi-mode product for the UK. The only to TOC to order any are First group and that's not surprising considering their relationship with Hitachi. Until another manufacturer starts development of a bi-mode train or another TOC orders some from Hitachi I would say your hopes of a vast fleet of bi-modes is not likely.
coppercapped
Established Member
There was a presentation to the Railways Division of the IMechE on the approvals process a few months ago.
NR is no longer directly involved with approvals - it is now a European-specified process which involves lots of documents.
In addition, there are no 'Approvals' letters any more - only certificates which confirm that the approvals body concerned has 'no objection' to a particular point in the tests and the conclusions drawn from them.
Not in normal traffic - but the 5-car trains has run at 125mph on diesel, switched to 25kV overhead at full speed and continued at full speed. I don't have my notes to hand, but I think it also made the reverse change to diesel at speed.
Snipped the rest as I don't have any useful information to contribute
TheKnightWho
Established Member
This is pretty fantastic, actually. Does this mean we'll be likely to be seeing traction-change boards before junctions (such as that south of York for TPE) rather than simply switching at the station?
Clarence Yard
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 3,263
It should be activated by trackside balise with the backup being manual intervention.
The traction changeover on the move is pretty spectacular. I have experienced it switching from Diesel/Electric and vice versa at speed on the test track and it was very smooth.
The traction changeover on the move is pretty spectacular. I have experienced it switching from Diesel/Electric and vice versa at speed on the test track and it was very smooth.
The is another TOC going to be using them, Virgen East Coast. Between them and the two franchises that First will be running them on there will be quite a few units.
All the 22x's come in at 104 units (of various lengths but mostly 4 or 5 - I reckon about 495 coaches), before any announcement from TPE I make it 93 bi-modal trains (mostly 5 coaches but with 20 sets with 9 coaches - I reckon getting on for 550 coaches).
That puts them (just the bi-modal trains we know about for certain) havibg more coaches than the 22x's which given there are more orders likely (I.e. TPE) which will also likely push the total number of units higher too.
I wouldn't be surprised if we saw more in due course, either to allow for growth in the "current" fleet or from another TOC using them.
Virgin East Coast did not order them, DFT did. Apart from that initial deal with the DFT, First are the only TOC to order any. And there is no sign of Bombardier or Siemens designing bi-modes so clearly they do not see a big market for them to even bother. Apart from the initial order the DFT made, the follow up orders haven't exactly been massive. Even if TPE do order 25 of them that's still a micro fleet. And purely by the fact First will be running a fleet of them and IEP's on GW means it's not surprising they have gone for more of the same for TPE. If Bombardier or Siemens start designing bi-modes or someone other than First order bi-modes then I would start believing there will be a huge fleet of them. Wonder how much power they will be drawing from the overheads accelerating all the weight of those Diesel engines and fuel.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Come on now, your letting hard facts get in the way of a good moan
Nope just a reality check for your dream of the whole network being dominated by bi-modes. Were you cursing the fact Northern didn't order any?
Last edited:
It's inevitable Dave, running diesel power under wires just isn't environmentally sound, especially in urban areas - not a dream, the reality of wiring not providing full routes.
No dear, that was Neil
Neither is wasting electricity accelerating the weight of heavy dead Diesel engines under the wires, or accelerating the weight of the AC kit when in diesel mode but never mind, we have argued about this loads on other threads.
TPE are only ordering 25, so a micro fleet. And why aren't Bombardier or Siemens designing any if there are going to be huge fleets of them everywhere?
Last edited:
No, you've stamped your feet saying it's bad bad bad and dozens of sensible posting members have given up trying to have a reasoned debate with you. You have failed to offer a reasonable working alternative to bi-modes that firstly allows quick changes from wired to diesel and also gives flexibility for rapid diversion route deployment when things go wrong with the overhead power
It's the 21st century, loco hauled is over, multiple units are here to stay, ultimately wired power is the end goal, but realistically speaking it's going to take a while to get there. The Northern franchise didn't ask for bi-modes, thus the winning bid from Arriva didn't offer them, oddly though, First without external influence from the DfT went out and bought some, because they thought, hey, great idea and these work in our economic model. No one else has done so yet because there hasn't been a solution for UK rail... Until now...
There's several franchises coming up that may evaluate the option, some may head down the new (or existing) DMU under wires route, some may head down the bi-mode route and some may not have to because they have the freedom in the franchise to just run straight DMU/EMU's logically on unwired and wired lines, either way, Bombardier, Siemens, Alstom etc will be peddling their bi-mode solutions on each and every opportunity they get, not to wind you up, but because the economics work - after all, that's what companies like First, Arriva, Stagecoach are all about - Making money for shareholders as efficiently as possible.
NotATrainspott
Established Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2013
- Messages
- 3,304
I'm sorry, but how many LDHS franchises have been re-tendered recently? It's hardly surprising that the number of franchises ordering AT300s is low given that the only one in any real position to do so was TransPennine Express. That the only one who could have ordered them appears to have done so only vindicates the bi-mode idea. First thought that Hull Trains would be a useful place to send more AT300s as well, so clearly the design is doing something right.
ScotRail isn't in the same boat because there's not going to be enough wiring to justify the extra cost of new trains of any type. Abellio worked out that the HSTs would be fine until the wires are up to Aberdeen and Inverness, and so they will be able to be replaced by new electric-only trains when the time comes. ScotRail has no need for 125mph running and 2+4/5 HSTs will have more than enough oomph to keep up with the new electric AT200s on the limited amount of track that they will share.
The next franchises where AT300s make sense are the MML and XC. MML will be electrified but it will need extra capacity and accessibility compliance before the wires are up, and so AT300s will definitely be a candidate. We won't know until the franchising process is complete the details of the winning bid are announced but no one would really be that surprised if AT300s were the order of the day. What XC will do will depend upon the amount of 125mph diesel rolling stock there will be sloshing around - if the entire set of 22xs are no longer required by anyone else, then it's quite likely that no new train design of any type could compete against a much cheaper option of continuing to use those not-old diesel trains.
So someone disagrees with your ideology and you call it "stamping feet":roll: and no a had a handful of people who on in love with the concept preaching to me that only there opinion is in anyway valid and because they love the idea it means its definitely wonderful. There should be no reason for bi-modes if electrification is planned properly and emu's are brought in as it is complete. And again the idea you love wastes energy constantly! So really environmentally friendly eh!
Once TPE has ordered just 25 of them we will see how many more are ordered. With the high floors don't see how on earth a mid door version is even possible without 2 or 3 steps up into the carriage.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Who says anything about LDHS? That was what many very well respected journalists said was the best and cheaper solution for GW than IEP. Sorry but if bi-mode was the next big thing then all the big manufacturers would be designing them and orders galore would be going in. Hitachi have actually got only a handful of orders so far for the AT300 and they are all from the same TOC.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Anyway shall we not turn this into another 100 odd pages of arguments about bi-modes? And just agree to disagree?
gimmea50anyday
Established Member
Where has this magic figure of 25 come from when 44 5 car units have been announced. Nothing has yet been confirmed, by all means we can guess and speculate but internally even we arent being told anything!
FWIW, 44 5 cars does mean one thing, they wont all be 442's in push pull mode. Theres only 24 of them.....
FWIW, 44 5 cars does mean one thing, they wont all be 442's in push pull mode. Theres only 24 of them.....
TheKnightWho
Established Member
2 or 3 steps into the carriage?!? You do realise the raise is hardly noticeable, right?
Come on now, your letting hard facts get in the way of a good moan
Sorry, I'll try not to let it happen again!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The thing is there will only ever be a limited number of bi-modal trains needed, as such once one company gets a design to market with a substantial order (I.e. IEP) then it is going to be more difficult for another company to get a design to market that can compete on price. As such there will be limited players in the market.
There will, for some time yet be routes where a pure DMU will still be running substantial distances off the wires and so there is little advantage in having only bi-modal and EMU trains.
Even with all the 22x's potential becoming spare we could still see XC ordering bi-modal trains as the 222's will not be freed up soon enough and the ICWC 221's may not all be released. As such (depending on what SWT do for the WofE services) you could see the 22x's going to Chiltern, Scotrail and possibly SWT in the mid 2020's as longer sets (scraping end coaches).
You have to bear in mind that we are currently needing to order a lot more units than we are getting rid of just to keep up with passenger demand, as such there could well be need for a lot of bi-modal, DMU and EMU trains over the next 10 years.
You also have to remember that very few people have traveled on a bi-modal train and so TOC's may be cautious about having them.
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
It must be borne in mind that there is not an always-overflowing pot of finance to enable full electrification and the monies that are actually there have to be managed in a way that other infrastructural projects too benefit from the said finance.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Why would a passenger care about a bimode?
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
There are thirty two units being ordered for North TPE services, broken down as 19 trains for Edinburgh/Newcastle and 13 for Middlesbrough/Scarborough services. It is assumed that all of these will be bi-modes; if 25 units are, then I'd be astonished if the other 7 weren't.
Also, for comparison, there are thirty four class 220s, twenty three 222s (plus the four later ordered by Hull Trains) or twenty nine 395s, and even the HSTs were authorised in batches of typically 20 - 30 trains at a time for different groups of routes, so I don't subscribe to your view that around thirty trains constitutes a "micro-fleet".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I've seen no evidence that there will be more than one step up into the carriage: From the platform to the train, like just about any other train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'm not sure why you feel it necessary to separate out DfT sanctioned and TOC ordered Bi-modes. In total, 545 carriages worth of bi-mode trains have been ordered, either as part of the IEP deal or subsequently by First (that's not including any prospective TPE order, as we don't know for sure yet). That's not so far away from the total number of 723 production HST carriages that were originally constructed. In total, over a thousand AT-300 vehicles, of bi-mode and electric variants, have been ordered to date (not including the earlier 395s).
Even looking just at the Bi-mode sets that have been ordered by First, 7 x 9-car, 22 x 5-car and 5 x 5-car trains is a bigger order than Bombardier fulfilled in providing 222s for the Midland Mainline or Hitachi in building 395s for HS1, so hardly "a handful".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
19 units would be sufficient for the Newcastle/Edinburgh trains.
Class 68 for the diesel section, pantograph car for the ECML, uprate the bogies for 125mph running and you're away. 
Last edited:
Electrification is a huge investment, waiting until a full route is finished over a period of 4-5 years locks out the economic benefits of the electrification until the end. Use of bi-modes allows for part wired use from day one of operations, extending the benefits as electrification spreads. You don't have wasteful single-mode locos or multiple units, you have a multiple unit fleet that can gradually evolve with the diagrams that become possible via phased electrification. This phased approach is tried and tested in every part of industry, we do it on smart motorways, putting central barriers in first on one section, moving that process onto the next section, then you bring in verge works, then comms, then testing and introduction, a phased rolling process. At the end of the electrification Civil's works, some bi-modes get cascaded to other franchises or networks, some get retained, some get converted to full EMU's - simples !
Last edited:
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 13,161
Oh but with bi-modes they'll have the excuse to give up halfway!
...or the option to focus on other lines where it is needed more.
For instance would it be better to wire up the line to allow EMU's to replace bimodals running Oxford to Worcester or wire up sections of TPE?
With bi-modal you can run as an EMU to Oxford then as a DMU beyond it and then allow your wiring teams to move on to another project (to wire up more of TPE in this case).
Once enough of TPE is done then the wiring teams can then move onto another line which needs doing.
Yes we should electrify the whole network but we do not have the time or resources to do enough of it in any lump to be able to do away with the need for bimodal units.
D365
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 13,161
That's a much fairer way of putting it without sounding dramatic... like some
- Status