Rail electrification scrapped / 'suspended'?

[HSTEd]

Railway Service will destroy batteries inside a couple of years

 

[dgl]

Railway Service will destroy batteries inside a couple of years

And if they are charged at a high rate I think even that is optimistic.

 

[AndrewE]

... but given the recent technological advances and if they are correctly specified I don't see why they shouldn't work. Anyway, the expected battery life can be factored in to the whole life cost of a vehicle, plus they might well be fully recyclable.

We don't complain that a car's fuel tank has to be refilled,or that respirator filters and lots of other things have a limited working life and have to be replaced periodically. I like things that last, but some things just cannot be made to!

 

[furnessvale]

At the front of the current issue of Rail magazine is a description of a Hitachi 80x doing it smoothly at 100mph, electric to diesel, seen from the cab.

I sincerely hope that will be the case.

I had visions of doing it the "British" way. Dead stand, in a platform, all passengers detrained and at least 3 supervisors from different disciplines present!

 

[JamesRowden]

... but given the recent technological advances and if they are correctly specified I don't see why they shouldn't work. Anyway, the expected battery life can be factored in to the whole life cost of a vehicle, plus they might well be fully recyclable.

We don't complain that a car's fuel tank has to be refilled,or that respirator filters and lots of other things have a limited working life and have to be replaced periodically. I like things that last, but some things just cannot be made to!

Electrification lasts. Oil and batteries don't. Electrification is the cheapest long term solution unless the railways become redundant/destroyed or a substantially cheaper form of electrification or alternative energy supply is developed soon.

 

[Senex]

I sincerely hope that will be the case.

I had visions of doing it the "British" way. Dead stand, in a platform, all passengers detrained and at least 3 supervisors from different disciplines present!

Don't paint the devil on the wall!

 

[squizzler]

Is it conceivable that the Irish Railways (both flavours) might take advantage of the sudden availability of electrification teams to string up wires on their Cork - Dublin - Belfast mainlines? If only this happened it would exercise their skills till a more enlightened attitude prevails on the mainland. It would be poetic justice to British shortsightedness if the skilled labourers seeking work started crossing the Irish sea in the other direction!

I understood that they were looking to upgrade their class 201 diesels so how about a fleet of Stadler Bi-mode locos instead?

 

[DerekC]

Electrification lasts. Oil and batteries don't. Electrification is the cheapest long term solution unless the railways become redundant/destroyed or a substantially cheaper form of electrification or alternative energy supply is developed soon.

But of course bi-modes have the great advantage to the Treasury of not being a capital cost out of the public purse - and the additional leasing, operating and maintenance costs can be hidden in the costs of the next franchise. Oh, and of course the Hitachi ones are "built in Britain" so there are some wonderful photo-ops. Electrification is expensive, doesn't look sexy and upsets Tory constituents.

There is a more important issue, though, which is why our electrification is so expensive. It's easy to blame NR, but NR reflects the kind of society we are - where there is no room for judgement of acceptable risk because the moment there is a downside the blame game kicks in. Clearances are only one part of this - but can you imagine the tabloid headlines if some commuter did get electrocuted by holding his brolly up to high? The hunt would be on for the wicked people who allowed the scandal of reduced clearances to go on for 50 years. So NR takes the "minimum risk" path at every decision point, irrespective of cost.

 

[daikilo]

Railway Service will destroy batteries inside a couple of years

Why is that statement true for say an operation such as Windermere to Manchester Airport where, depending on the battery installation, a medium charge rate could be used from the OHLE. Its not like a bus on fast recharge every 30 minutes. Clearly this is not valid for the shuttle ops only on the branch for which diesel probably makes sense.

Anyone know what the result of the GA battery conversion test train is/was?

 

[Mikey C]

It will be 10 years before diesel motor transport starts dying out in London. By then you will have trains, trucks buses and trams using zero emission batteries or super capacitors.

10 years is nothing in the bigger picture, indeed I imagine Chiltern will be looking to replace the 165s within that time frame

 

[mr_jrt]

The costs of raising bridges for 25kv would be fantastic. And what would be the benefit? A trivial saving in elecrricity and a minor performance gain.

It would only be worth doing if you were going after increasing the loading gauge for double deck trains. But the cost would still be fantastic. At Queenstown Rd Battersea all of the Victoria lines cross over the SWML on a metal Viaduct. Imagine the disruption involved tackling that!

It's not a minor performance gain -the amount of current you can supply over AC is significantly higher than over DC, enabling you to have more trains, and have those trains all drawing more power at the same time, meaning longer trains with better acceleration. As the sections are larger, you can also make practical gains from regenerative braking in non-metro areas.

On lines with a lot of freight then clearing to W12 gauge generally has resulted in bridges being suitable for OHLE anyway due to the need for clearance for high containers.

 

[HSTEd]

It's not a minor performance gain -the amount of current you can supply over AC is significantly higher than over DC, enabling you to have more trains, and have those trains all drawing more power at the same time, meaning longer trains with better acceleration. As the sections are larger, you can also make practical gains from regenerative braking in non-metro areas.

Advances in DC substation technology may eventually allow regeneration to the grid. It is only not available now due to the conservatism in traditional substation designs.

On lines with a lot of freight then clearing to W12 gauge generally has resulted in bridges being suitable for OHLE anyway due to the need for clearance for high containers.

Was that at the old or new electrification spacing

 

[najaB]

It is a demonstration that the conditions on the British Isles are so different from the Continent that it is almost pointless attempting to compare them.

I wasn't aware that Ohm's Law worked differently on the Continent.

 

[HSTEd]

I wasn't aware that Ohm's Law worked differently on the Continent.

Ohm's law is almost entirely irrelevant in this case, considering that electrification infrastructure and railway vehicle costs wash out electrical costs in most projections.

25kV might be good when you don't have to spend titanic sums of money providing huge electrical clearances on an infrastructure that simply doesn't have the space to spare.

 

[furnessvale]

Was that at the old or new electrification spacing

Give it 20 months or so and we can go back to our old specifications.

Maybe that's the idea. Restart electrification just before the next election.

 

[najaB]

Ohm's law is almost entirely irrelevant in this case...

You know perfectly well the point I was making: the laws of physics aren't any different because our trains are slightly smaller. That's not the reason why third-rail mainline electrification is an almost uniquely British concept.

 

[spongsdad]

The title of this thread is "Rail Electrification scrapped/suspended".This week, those with a keen eye will also have noticed that the government has brought forward the date from which the state pension age will rise to 68, thereby further picking the pockets of those currently in their forties. What connects these two announcements? Simply this;that there is a moral from them. Never but never trust the government-any government-on any matter whatsoever. As individuals and especiolly as corporate bodies contractual obligations can apply and are generally enforceable in law. The government, however, can change the status quo by means of an announcement and there is precious little remedy. I fear that the Windermere branch will have to make do with whatever crumbs fall from the table. Bi-mode? Possibly. Battery power? No chance;the technology is insufficiently advanced to meet the needs of this branch. DMU shuttle? Almost certainly. What is the old saying; it isn't over until the fat lady sings. In this case it isn't even going to start.

 

[coppercapped]

... but given the recent technological advances and if they are correctly specified I don't see why they shouldn't work. Anyway, the expected battery life can be factored in to the whole life cost of a vehicle, plus they might well be fully recyclable.

We don't complain that a car's fuel tank has to be refilled,or that respirator filters and lots of other things have a limited working life and have to be replaced periodically. I like things that last, but some things just cannot be made to!

Wrong analogy.

Recharging the battery = refilling the fuel tank.

Replacing the battery = replacing the fuel tank.

I've no objection to re-charging the battery or re-filling the tank, but having to spend several thousands of pounds every few years to replace the tank strikes me as daft.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Give it 20 months or so and we can go back to our old specifications.

Maybe that's the idea. Restart electrification just before the next election.

you cynic - but I just have a teensy weensy feeling you maybe right .

 

[Chester1]

Give it 20 months or so and we can go back to our old specifications.

Maybe that's the idea. Restart electrification just before the next election.

But electrification will be ongoing during the next general election under the new plan. It has to be by June 2022 and will probably be earlier (although I very much doubt until after brexit). Transpennine electrification should (theoretically ) be finishing towards the end of 2022. MML to Kettering / Corby won't be completed until at least December 2019. Somewhere in England there should be electrification works ongoing for the next 5 years. I can see your point though. By 2022 I can see new commuter service electrification schemes being planned in cities with Combined Authorities prepared to take on part of risk and reward.

 

[AndrewE]

Wrong analogy.

Recharging the battery = refilling the fuel tank.

Replacing the battery = replacing the fuel tank.

I've no objection to re-charging the battery or re-filling the tank, but having to spend several thousands of pounds every few years to replace the tank strikes me as daft.

True, but in the time available I couldn't think of a better analogy. Anyway, I suspect that battery car owners might find themselves in the same situation: scrap/trade-in/return-for-recycling the current storage and fit a new one after a few years, which will probably perform better anyway.

As I said, if you consider occasional battery replacements as part of the whole-life cost it isn't a problem!

 

[paul1609]

This (bold) is purely a symptom of the problem, rather than a justification for not addressing it with third rail. Were it not for the lack of diesel stock, they would never consider splitting the highly successful through service. Infact, with the impending surplus of third rail electric stock, third rail would allow them to extend the whole through service with four or more carriages. HS1 could switch to third rail as it does with all the other routes East of Ashford.

In terms of the wider situation, halting electrification and switching to bi-modes is a mistake on many levels.

As a resident of Marshlink you'll not be surprised to find that I share your disappointment that the through Ashford to Brighton service is being truncated but....
a) a through service to St Pancras is more beneficial for the local economy
b) 15 years after the Thumpers were replaced by inadequate 2 car trains there is still no prospect of them being increased to the now necessary 4 cars
c) combination of the Ore tunnel closures and the various industrial Southern disputes has caused the lines revenue to collapse and is probably back to pre 171 days.

As i see it:
a) responsibility for the line resting with Southeastern is likely to be a positive in securing the Marshlink HS. The rail industry is quite anti this scheme when it could be introduced within a few years with one crossover at Ashford and a follow on order of bi mode trains.
b) the cost of the crossover could be mitigated by removing unnecessary through lines at Tonbridge, Paddock Wood, Headcorn and Ashford. Ashford needs alterations to the signalling to support LZB for the Eurostar services anyway.
c) the obvious lines to start a transfer from dc to ac are in any case in Kent not Hampshire with a marshland ac scheme as an add on because the existing rolling stock is compatible and there are easily accessible feds from the national grid.
The Ashford to Brighton service needs a bid from an open access operator, it needs to start back from at least Canterbury West (if not Margate) to capture the student market and it needs to have enough coaches on to stop at Falmer and probably not Polegate!

 

[coppercapped]

True, but in the time available I couldn't think of a better analogy. Anyway, I suspect that battery car owners might find themselves in the same situation: scrap/trade-in/return-for-recycling the current storage and fit a new one after a few years, which will probably perform better anyway.

As I said, if you consider occasional battery replacements as part of the whole-life cost it isn't a problem!

For cars it is. The first owner will want to sell the car before, after five or so years, he has to fork out £5000 or so on a new battery.

As a result the trade-in values of four year old battery cars will be near zero.

Puts the cost of motoring up hugely. (Or perhaps that is what it is all about?)

 

[Ploughman]

Wrong analogy.

Recharging the battery = refilling the fuel tank.

Replacing the battery = replacing the fuel tank.

I've no objection to re-charging the battery or re-filling the tank, but having to spend several thousands of pounds every few years to replace the tank strikes me as daft.

For the Windermere branch.
How many "Tanks" will be liable to need to be changed?
Surely more than 2 trainsets worth.

 

[HSTEd]

As i see it:
a) responsibility for the line resting with Southeastern is likely to be a positive in securing the Marshlink HS. The rail industry is quite anti this scheme when it could be introduced within a few years with one crossover at Ashford and a follow on order of bi mode trains.

There is only one 140mph bi-mode train, and I can't see IEPs being used for commuter work with the ever escalating price of the contract.

c) the obvious lines to start a transfer from dc to ac are in any case in Kent not Hampshire with a marshland ac scheme as an add on because the existing rolling stock is compatible and there are easily accessible feds from the national grid.

There will be no Marshlink AC scheme, and there will no transfer to AC.
The total collapse of the AC electrification programme has blown a huge hole in the always rather suspect costings - to the point that even Network Rail doesn't believe the stuff about third rail being more expensive than AC any more [as we see from the report into the Southern catastrophe].

 

[coppercapped]

There is only one 140mph bi-mode train, and I can't see IEPs being used for commuter work with the ever escalating price of the contract.

Snipped Marshlink stuff

IEPs won't be used for commuter work as the Intercity Express Programme is intended to supply trains for the ECML and some GW routes.

You will find, however, that the purchase price and maintenance costs of the Class 802 trains being bought by Eversholt for use on other routes and services on the GW are entirely reasonable.

 

[edwin_m]

IEPs won't be used for commuter work as the Intercity Express Programme is intended to supply trains for the ECML and some GW routes.

You will find, however, that the purchase price and maintenance costs of the Class 802 trains being bought by Eversholt for use on other routes and services on the GW are entirely reasonable.

A big chunk of the cost of a train fleet is normally for design and approval. Most of these costs were chargeable to IEP, excepting the relatively minor mods to engine rating, fuel capacity and braking system for the ones intended to run longer distances on diesel. Hence the price of the later builds is significantly less, which incidentally makes it relative unlikely that anyone else will develop a competing unit.

 

[coppercapped]

A big chunk of the cost of a train fleet is normally for design and approval. Most of these costs were chargeable to IEP, excepting the relatively minor mods to engine rating, fuel capacity and braking system for the ones intended to run longer distances on diesel. Hence the price of the later builds is significantly less, which incidentally makes it relative unlikely that anyone else will develop a competing unit.

I appreciate that, as in most examples of product development, the R&D costs (including any necessary approvals) are written off as early as possible in the production run. But as has been stated, practically ad nauseam, is that Hitachi has had to cover all these costs using equity and borrowed money until the first scheduled passenger diagram has been run. Until that point it receives no payment. Amortising the cost incurred in design, development, testing and production of all the trains that have been built up to the point of entry into service is what has made the IEP contract so expensive.

So the difference in the leasing costs of the Class 802s compared to the Train Service Provision contract payments for the IEP trains is much larger than can be explained by the 802s simply not having to carry the design and development costs.

I am agreeing with you, it's just that the difference in payments is much larger than would normally be expected. Any other developer of bi-modes wouldn't be shackled by such an onerous contract and would be likely to base a new train on the design of an existing one.

 

[jimm]

I am agreeing with you, it's just that the difference in payments is much larger than would normally be expected. Any other developer of bi-modes wouldn't be shackled by such an onerous contract and would be likely to base a new train on the design of an existing one.

While another supplier would not be affected by anything like the IEP contract, alternative designs are effectively non-existent right now.

Bombardier has talked about building an Aventra bi-mode but until someone actually asks for one, I doubt they will do much by way of detailed engineering design - and their bi-modes for SNCF in France aren't much of a basis for a UK gauge train, as lots of the equipment is placed up on the roof, thanks to the higher loading gauge. Same goes for Alstom units supplied to SNCF.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Stadler have a design, not 125mph but I'm sure adaptable.