Pre-series Super Express Trains cancelled and delay to IEP Programme?

[whole diary]

[willc]

Quote from: willc on February 26, 2010, 08:05:20 PM
come up with frankly bizarre stuff like fitting diesel shunting engines into express electric trains

I actually thought that was quite a sensible idea as it would provide enough power to get the train to the nearest station in the event of overhead power failure, or off of the main line in the event of a power connected train failure, or to be able to move itself within the confines of a non-electrified depot or sidings.

Well if it's such a great idea, why hasn't anyone else built a high-speed electric train like this? Maybe they expect them to run on electric power and can't see the point of lugging around several tonnes of engine and fuel on the off-chance they might be needed now and again in an emergency.

Or maybe once again we're right and everyone else in the rest of the world is wrong.

[Chafford1]

Quote from: willc on February 26, 2010, 08:05:20 PM
come up with frankly bizarre stuff like fitting diesel shunting engines into express electric trains

I actually thought that was quite a sensible idea as it would provide enough power to get the train to the nearest station in the event of overhead power failure, or off of the main line in the event of a power connected train failure, or to be able to move itself within the confines of a non-electrified depot or sidings.

Well if it's such a great idea, why hasn't anyone else built a high-speed electric train like this? Maybe they expect them to run on electric power and can't see the point of lugging around several tonnes of engine and fuel on the off-chance they might be needed now and again in an emergency.

Or maybe once again we're right and everyone else in the rest of the world is wrong.

The Chinese have - the Polaris, at a cost of around ^1 million per carriage, about half the price of a Super Express coach:

http://www.csre.co.uk/intercity.html

http://www.csre.co.uk/files/Download/2009%20Polaris%20Data%20Sheet.pdf

[IndustryInsider]

Well if it's such a great idea, why hasn't anyone else built a high-speed electric train like this?

A small engine and a small fuel tank (or even perhaps a battery supplied system) would be plenty sufficient for a 10mph top speed and enough fuel for, say, a 20 mile range - also the ability to provide emergency lighting and ventilation for a couple of hours in the event of a power failure - whilst appreciating that a diesel engine would not be allowed in the tunnel, how Eurostar passengers would have loved to have that little luxury over the Xmas shambles! 

Power failures cause massive disruption to electric trains, you don't have to do much searching to find plenty of quotes.  Here's a few from around the world:

"On May 25, 2006, Amtrak was hit by a power failure. The electric Acela Express and Acela Regional trains were left stranded wherever they where, including four trains stuck in the North River Tunnel under the Hudson River in New York and one in the B & P Tunnel in Baltimore."

"In Germany, Cologne-Bonn airport lost power and had to rely on an emergency generator, Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported, citing a spokesman for the Cologne city government. The German rail system also suffered, with at least 100 trains stranded carrying more than 1,000 people, Agence France-Presse reported."

"In France, the power cut stopped a dozen high-speed trains for about half an hour, according to SNCF^▸ (Societe Nationale des Chemins de fer Francais - French National Railways), France's national train operator."[/size]

And this one from the Railway Gazette website hints that it's not just a wacky idea we've cooked up...

"Japan's railways are demonstrating how lithium-ion batteries and double-layer capacitors can save energy, reduce diesel emissions, and even keep electric trains moving where there is no power source"


How many thousands of delay minutes might have been saved in Britain over the years?  On the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) especially when the wires once again come down at Sandy, and fully laden trains have to sit there for hours!  In terms of the overall train weight for a full length train the added weight might be worth the sacrifice? 

I think it's a sensible idea to at least look into seriously (it might turn out not to be a great idea, but then that's not what I said).  Just because the rest of the world hasn't done something doesn't always mean it's not a good idea in principle and that we can't be successful innovators and help the evolution of the high speed train (a pretty recent phenomenon, after all) along a little.

Oh, and your increasingly belittling replies to anyone who may have a different opinion to yours, do your well reasoned and sensible arguments on most topics no favours at all!

[John R]

On the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) especially when the wires once again come down at Sandy, and fully laden trains have to sit there for hours! 

As a former resident of Sandy for many years I appreciated your reference. You wouldn't want to sit there for 20 minutes let alone many hours. Though I spent many happy hours at the level crossing just north of the town entertaining two toddlers to give their mother a break. We once saw 13 trains pass without the barriers being lifted, much to the irritation of the waiting motorists.       

[onthecushions]

A few thoughts:

1. Auxilliary diesel power: This wouldn't be usable with the wires down because the route would be physically obstructed by broken wires and queueing trains. Loss of power at the Feeder Station mostly means switching it out and supplying its OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") from adjacent Stations through the neutral sections and operating trains at reduced power.

2. Cancelling(?) IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project. This will offer more capacity on routes, save money, give a consistent and safe service and meet customer requirements. Intended to replace HSTs.): Either we need full TGV^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse) speeds with one of the several alternative train lengths possible or c125mph will do on existing lines. 125mph should be possible now with emu operation - perhaps something like the 442's, ("Wessex Electrics") might be practicable, 2, 5-car units in multiple, if power collection can be solved. That would give 10 cars, 25% more than a 125, for much the same length but much better performance.

OTC

[matt473]

Maybe instead of spending the money on IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project. This will offer more capacity on routes, save money, give a consistent and safe service and meet customer requirements. Intended to replace HSTs.), it is inevitable that the HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) is going to be life extended so why not invest a large amount of the money to allow them to run at 125mph through improving infrastructure. That way in the future when a re-thought IEP programme is actaully going to be fulfilled it can be used to its full potential.

[willc]

Quote from: willc on February 26, 2010, 08:05:20 PM
come up with frankly bizarre stuff like fitting diesel shunting engines into express electric trains

I actually thought that was quite a sensible idea as it would provide enough power to get the train to the nearest station in the event of overhead power failure, or off of the main line in the event of a power connected train failure, or to be able to move itself within the confines of a non-electrified depot or sidings.

Well if it's such a great idea, why hasn't anyone else built a high-speed electric train like this? Maybe they expect them to run on electric power and can't see the point of lugging around several tonnes of engine and fuel on the off-chance they might be needed now and again in an emergency.

Or maybe once again we're right and everyone else in the rest of the world is wrong.

The Chinese have - the Polaris, at a cost of around ^1 million per carriage, about half the price of a Super Express coach:

http://www.csre.co.uk/intercity.html

http://www.csre.co.uk/files/Download/2009%20Polaris%20Data%20Sheet.pdf

No, that's a bi-mode train, like the bi-mode IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project. This will offer more capacity on routes, save money, give a consistent and safe service and meet customer requirements. Intended to replace HSTs.). What we're talking about here is sticking a small diesel engine in the electric version of the IEP for, as Insider says, very short, low-speed moves.

I don't dispute that electric power failures cause disruption, just that if it's such a crippling problem, then surely other railways, with far more extensive electrification, thus far more risk of being disrupted by power failures, would have done this years ago.

And the flawed cost-cutting design of the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) overhead on four-track sections, meaning a dewiring on one line can cripple all the others, is the fundamental problem at Sandy and other places. The money would be better spent on sorting out the overhead than buying diesel engines.

[Electric train]

The current thinking and proposed designs for OHL^▸ (Over-Head Line) is not to use Mk3 headspan (that is the type of OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") used on MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) and ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line)) but to use either portals or single structures to reduce the risk of multi track dewirements

[paul7575]

In view of the acknowledged problems with Mk 3 headspan, is it not technically possible to use the existing uprights to carry different catenary support equipment?

Paul

[Electric train]

In view of the acknowledged problems with Mk 3 headspan, is it not technically possible to use the existing uprights to carry different catenary support equipment?

Paul

Not that easy on an operational railway, measures are being taken to improve the reliability of headspans

[onthecushions]

The current thinking and proposed designs for OHL^▸ (Over-Head Line) is not to use Mk3 headspan (that is the type of OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") used on MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) and ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line)) but to use either portals or single structures to reduce the risk of multi track dewirements

I asked a collegue who worked on the overhead design for the channel tunnel rail link about this. She said that the problem with the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) Mk 3b OLE (that's the wires put up in the 1980's) was that it was lightweight and had poor component quality (HM Treasury again). The French system was therefore used with their spec's. They do still use headspan (wire supports) rather than portals (effectively metal bridges.). The heavier nature can be seen on the similar Heathrow express system.

If NR^» (Network Rail - home page) up-specs to portals, this will probably price electrification out for good.

Still, portals could be roofed over to make a marvellous cycle route from London to Scotland...

OTC