Northern rolling stock changes post electrification

[user15681]

Thanks guys for update

Guess there'll be a few more short-formed formations then until enough 387's are in service (fault-free of course...)

No problem, got all my spreadsheets up to date with fleet updates... including some to come

 

[AM9]

319361 & 319363 have both been out today working one trip each between Allerton Depot and Crewe.
361 passing Runcorn http://mark5812.smugmug.com/Trains2014/September-2014/i-GX6BfxG
363 at Liverpool South Parkway http://mark5812.smugmug.com/Trains2014/September-2014/i-vVWMhrv/A

Mark
http://mark5812.smugmug.com

So did 363 make it to Swanley?

 

[Skimble19]

Looks like 319361 is the only unit in FCC livery to still have the logo on.. Good job it's all the way up there!!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

A piece in October Modern Railways (p16) by Tony Miles paints a troublesome picture for Class 319 introduction in the north west.
Far from the impression of a ready-to-run go-anywhere EMU, there appear to be issues in interfacing them to the new electrical regime they will encounter.
They are not even fully cleared between Liverpool and Crewe (fast lines only south of Winsford).
Allerton depot is not yet fully wired, and depot training has involved Alstom to "assess what modification will be required" for normal operation.
None of this suggests they will appear in squadron service quickly.

 

[westcoaster]

A piece in October Modern Railways (p16) by Tony Miles paints a troublesome picture for Class 319 introduction in the north west.
Far from the impression of a ready-to-run go-anywhere EMU, there appear to be issues in interfacing them to the new electrical regime they will encounter.
They are not even fully cleared between Liverpool and Crewe (fast lines only south of Winsford).
Allerton depot is not yet fully wired, and depot training has involved Alstom to "assess what modification will be required" for normal operation.
None of this suggests they will appear in squadron service quickly.

They won't be going to Crewe in passenger service right? So no need to pass them for every line.

All that is needed to run a 319 in passenger service is to un-modify the door key switch so it reverts to BR1 key operated and not EP key operated via the master controller. Just a couple of hours work and testing.
The issues with wires at allerton is down to infrastructure not 319's.

 

[Class377/5]

A piece in October Modern Railways (p16) by Tony Miles paints a troublesome picture for Class 319 introduction in the north west.

Not really

Far from the impression of a ready-to-run go-anywhere EMU, there appear to be issues in interfacing them to the new electrical regime they will encounter.

That's because its significant change with voltages on the 25kv now allowed to reach 29kv. I doubt any unit would cope with that without some modification.

They are not even fully cleared between Liverpool and Crewe (fast lines only south of Winsford).

Paperwork issue not a thing to do with the 319s themselves.

Allerton depot is not yet fully wired

Hardly a fault of an EMU if NR can't wire a depot up properly.

and depot training has involved Alstom to "assess what modification will be required" for normal operation.

Er that's to do with the fact the overheads are going to higher voltages, nothing else.

None of this suggests they will appear in squadron service quickly.

They require a minor mod to cope with new generation of OHLE. Don't forget this has all been know for months if not years and won't be an issue.

 

[WatcherZero]

Did it actually say that the modification was required though? All it said was they were being modified from the British standard of being able to tolerate 27kv to EU standard of 29kv.

 

[Class377/5]

Did it actually say that the modification was required though? All it said was they were being modified from the British standard of being able to tolerate 27kv to EU standard of 29kv.

Yes it does say the mod is required.

Support for technicians at Allerton...... is being provided by Alstom from its Preston base, where work is also being carried out to assess what modifications will be required to enable them to operate under newer European norms regarding 25kv supply voltage variations

 

[WatcherZero]

Yeah to operate to newer European standards, doesnt say the mods are required for the route.

 

[Class377/5]

Yeah to operate to newer European standards, doesnt say the mods are required for the route.

Phase 2 wiring uses the new standards.

 

[AM9]

Phase 2 wiring uses the new standards.

Other than the feed voltage, what is it about phase 2 wiring that causes the line voltage to rise to 29kV maximum?

 

[HSTEd]

Using EU standards for conventional rail is rather silly IMO, considering that no European trains will ever operate on these lines thanks to loading gauge restrictions.

 

[WatcherZero]

Government got a derogation of the requirements for phase 1, their argument was that the electrification was just maintenence and not upgrade or renewal though in that they say NR were intending it to be compliant. Havent seen a single instance of Energy TSI for other phases being mentioned in any public documentation, the 2015 Network Statement has it in the glossary but it doesnt appear significantly in the actual body.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ata/file/237093/nw-electrification-letter.pdf

I dont see why they would intentionally downgrade the quality of the energy supply, the trains would benefit from being more resilient to spikes but I dont see why it would be required any more than where they currently operate.

 

[AM9]

As I understand the comments here:

The TSI calls for all equipment, (presumably lineside and rolling stock) to operate at a widened tolerance of the 25kV supply, i.e. to a maximum, voltage of 29kV. Presumably, insulation, clearances etc. in the lineside installation would be done on new work as a matter of course unless there were specific legacy structures that would make it impractical. As far as the actual voltage applied from the feed is concerned, surely nothing changes. If previous practice of supplying 25kV with a max. of 27kV was applied all existing equipment would operate as before.
When it comes to rolling stock, stock that runs on UK installations will still do that even if the infrastructure is capable of working with a higher voltage. That rolling stock will also work quite happily alongside equipment that was fully compliant with the TSI, e.g. an updated class 92 type of loco. So what would be the problem with 319s? It's not as if the 319s will operate through the Channel Tunnel again!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Using EU standards for conventional rail is rather silly IMO, considering that no European trains will ever operate on these lines thanks to loading gauge restrictions.

I imagine it's about procurement to common EU standards, so that generic equipment can be supplied across the EU (including trains: 319s might not be relevant but new EMUs built to new standards will be).
We've had long enough of unique GB infrastructure which makes everything bespoke and puts the costs up.
I find it hard to believe that Phase 1 and Phase 2 have different energy standards as they are two halves of the same line, designed at the same time!

I wonder what the situation with the GW wiring is?
You'd expect the same TSI standards to apply.

 

[edwin_m]

Hopefully the equipment on the 319 has been checked to be physically compatible with 29kV and it's just a question of something like adjusting the over-voltage trip so it doesn't cut the power if the voltage goes outside the previous limit. If so then it's not a time-consuming or expensive operation.

Anything more than that and we could be looking at serious cost and even more serious embarrassment.

I would guess a wider tolerance on OLE voltage may allow feeder stations to be larger and further apart, and also permits trains that are capable of regenerative braking to make more use of it. The latter doesn't become possible until all of a train's operating area can tolerate the higher voltage.

 

[AM9]

Hopefully the equipment on the 319 has been checked to be physically compatible with 29kV and it's just a question of something like adjusting the over-voltage trip so it doesn't cut the power if the voltage goes outside the previous limit. If so then it's not a time-consuming or expensive operation.

Anything more than that and we could be looking at serious cost and even more serious embarrassment.

As the experience of the 6.25kV surge problem in the '60s would have been taken on board, I imagine that proof testing of the transformers (the most expensive item) would be pretty robust, (42kV peak?) and flash testing well over 50kV.

I would guess a wider tolerance on OLE voltage may allow feeder stations to be larger and further apart, and also permits trains that are capable of regenerative braking to make more use of it. The latter doesn't become possible until all of a train's operating area can tolerate the higher voltage.

Exactly so why would the NW lines that are all pretty short, have feeds that may raise the voltage to a level that the 319s may not be able to handle? Grid power in the UK is pretty 'stiff' and reliable in terms of overvoltage, - it's the droop during heavy load that is the problem although 19kV should be achievable, and AC traction systems can handle that better anyway (not 319s). The original electrification in the NW had 304s, and later 309s, running on it so it can't be that bad.
I agree that regen. from 350s and 390s could be an issue, but the WCML handles a fairly intensive service so most of the time the regen. power will be gobbled up. In 10 years, the 319s will probably be gone so the problem will disappear.

 

[northwichcat]

They won't be going to Crewe in passenger service right? So no need to pass them for every line.

AFAIK there are currently no plans to use them in passenger service south of the Airport. The service on the Crewe-Liverpool line is provided by LM and I imagine Northern are using it for training purposes because the Liverpool-Earlestown line is not yet fully electrified, while Liverpool-Liverpool South Parkway is too short a distance.

 

[WatcherZero]

Retractioning of the 319's is on the long term wishlist of ATOC, dont think the governmenut would fund it though.

The electrification was specified at least initially with class 333 as the baseline, these are a lot more power hungry about 1.4MW to 319s 1MW, 350's are 1.5MW.

 

[AM9]

Retractioning of the 319's is on the long term wishlist of ATOC, dont think the governmenut would fund it though.

The electrification was specified at least initially with class 333 as the baseline, these are a lot more power hungry about 1.4MW to 319s 1MW, 350's are 1.5MW.

Well at least it errs on the right side.

 

[edwin_m]

Exactly so why would the NW lines that are all pretty short, have feeds that may raise the voltage to a level that the 319s may not be able to handle? Grid power in the UK is pretty 'stiff' and reliable in terms of overvoltage, - it's the droop during heavy load that is the problem although 19kV should be achievable, and AC traction systems can handle that better anyway (not 319s). The original electrification in the NW had 304s, and later 309s, running on it so it can't be that bad.
I agree that regen. from 350s and 390s could be an issue, but the WCML handles a fairly intensive service so most of the time the regen. power will be gobbled up. In 10 years, the 319s will probably be gone so the problem will disappear.

I believe the entire NW electrification only has one new feeder, east of Stalybridge. Perhaps more would have been needed if the maximum line voltage was limited?

And note my previous comment about the maximum voltage needing to be high over the entire route before a train can take advantage of it when regenerating. A 390 will regenerate until line voltage exceeds its defined maximum, and would require a totally new safety-critical system to suppress this function on some parts of the route.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I believe the entire NW electrification only has one new feeder, east of Stalybridge. Perhaps more would have been needed if the maximum line voltage was limited?

There is a feeder at Newton-le-Willows which was originally for the WCML route and the local NLW loop off the main line.
It is sited where the lines cross and feeds both routes.
Phase 1 at least is fed from there, with new Siemens kit going in last year.
A similar feeder seems to be under construction at Wavertree for Phase 2.
The Stalybridge feeder is needed for the Manchester-Huddersfield route (not sure what the arrangements are east of there).

 

[WatcherZero]

Theres crossover between the upgrade of the WCML power supply to autotransformer and North West electrification.

For Phase 1.
Seems an existing feeder station at Parkside was replaced with a new one at Willow Park Newton-Le-Willows, and an additional one was built at Ordsall Lane. Theres a backup feed being built midpoint of the Chat Moss line.

For phase 2
new substation at Edge Hill and Springs Branch Junction possibly WCML upgrade related.

For later phases not sure, think there was going to be one for the Blackpool line and one at Stalybridge for TPE.

 

[Class 170101]

The document below suggests indeed a new feeder Station at Willow Park and a Mid Point Autotransformer Station at Ordsall Lane with Parkside feeder station decommissioned. However it mentions nothing in the middle between the two.

http://www.wjpservices.com/images/pdf/case-study-manchester.pdf

Additionally Stalybridge is to supply OLE power between Manchester and Dewsbury where the existing Ardsley feeder Station will be enhanced to cover lines to York and Selby.

http://www.railperf.org.uk/index/siteforum-list-action?post=1742&highlight=#siteforum-message-1744

 

[IanXC]

For completeness (at the risk of taking us further off topic!) I understand a new feeder point is proposed in Hull as part of the Hull Trains electrification scheme.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The document below suggests indeed a new feeder Station at Willow Park and a Mid Point Autotransformer Station at Ordsall Lane with Parkside feeder station decommissioned. However it mentions nothing in the middle between the two.
http://www.wjpservices.com/images/pdf/case-study-manchester.pdf

There's certainly a new installation at Astley for the autotransformer system, with another similar going in at Huyton Quarry.
The one at Springs Branch Jn is for the WCML scheme.

 

[WatcherZero]

Checked the planning app, the installation is an oil powered backup Switchgear installation rather than a full substation.

 

[W230]

Is the new OHLE actually going to run at 29kV inline with Europe or are they going to apply to same sensibilities and rewrite the maximum parameters like they did when the domestic power supply came in line with Europe and just leave it at 25kV?

I.e. - UK's 240vAC ±6%, it is now 230vAC +10%/-6%. Nothing has actually changed...

 

[deltic08]

There is a feeder at Newton-le-Willows which was originally for the WCML route and the local NLW loop off the main line.
It is sited where the lines cross and feeds both routes.
Phase 1 at least is fed from there, with new Siemens kit going in last year.
A similar feeder seems to be under construction at Wavertree for Phase 2.
The Stalybridge feeder is needed for the Manchester-Huddersfield route (not sure what the arrangements are east of there).

There are two feeder points in Leeds. One at the Skipton/Harrogate lines junction and one at the Doncaster/Bradford/Huddersfield lines junction. both have spare capacity for expansion of overheads so I suppose Leeds-Huddersfield is covered. Leeds-Hull will need another in the Selby area surely unless the ECML will feed to Selby swing bridge and Hull will feed from the east side. I assume the swing bridge will be a dead section.

 

[59CosG95]

I assume the swing bridge will be a dead section.

It could be a similar situation to Trowse Bridge in Norwich (overhead conductor rail) if it has to be live. But it probably will be a dead section.