Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum [home] and [about]
November lockdown advice
Forum in and beyond Coronavirus
DfT Covid Travel Advice
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 tomorrow - Tuesday Club - ONLINE
04/12/20 - TWSW AGM - ONLINE
09/12/20 - Community Rail Network Awards
13/01/21 - Melksham RUG - ONLINE
Random Image
Train Running Polls Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
November 23, 2020, 09:22:24 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[122] RMT Demands withdrawal of patronising GWR hi vis cleaning vest...
[102] Network Rail fined for allowing trains to use storm-damaged vi...
[70] HS2 - Government proposals, alternative routes and general dis...
[44] NR/RIBA competiton "Re-Imagining Railway Stations: Connec...
[42] Expansion of SWR services to Swindon and Okehampton?
[38] Great Western Railway offers free travel to women fleeing dome...
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3]
  Print  
Author Topic: Qn.2 for Mark Hopwood: Decarbonising local railways  (Read 8349 times)
chuffed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1372


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: August 06, 2019, 03:03:16 pm »

Thank you Mark for providing that link. Much appreciated.
Logged
MarkHopwood
Full Member
***
Posts: 80


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: August 06, 2019, 04:58:38 pm »

The Severn Beach issues were also caused by crew, infrastructure and some other issues as well as fleet. Fundamentally the Turbo was the same train that had worked reliably in the Thames Valley.

The Class 230 has Ford Transit engines underneath that are failing in a terminal manner.

The scenarios are quite different.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8371


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: August 06, 2019, 05:20:51 pm »

I think the point is lots of things may be possible but they haven’t happened yet and I am not keen to have my services used as a testbed - that should be done when customers won’t be put at risk of service disruption.

Let's hope the 769s don't prove to have reliability and performance issues if and when they come out of their very prolonged testing period.
Logged

To view my GWML Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3449



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: August 06, 2019, 06:18:33 pm »

A battery powered train SHOULD be more reliable than a diesel powered one.
Batteries are inherently modular and means are readily available to automatically bypass a failed battery, allowing the train to proceed with almost unaltered performance.

Lithium iron phosphate batteries are the most likely technology, these are no longer new or exotic or untried technology, and are safer than lithium polymer batteries.

A 12 volt 100 AH lithium iron phosphate battery costs about £500 retail, less than half that much in bulk.
1,000 such batteries would cost in the region of £250,000 and would store over 1,000 Kwh of energy.
The total weight of these batteries is about 12 Kg each, or about 12 tons for 1,000 such.
That would power a 4 car train for a very considerable distance, silently and with zero pollution at the point of use.
Regenerative braking is easy with a battery train.
Charging could be fully automatic via a short length of conductor rail that for safety reasons is only rendered live when the train is over it.
Fast charging would be possible anywhere with an 11Kv mains supply available.
Slower charging anywhere with mains electricity.
Charging from existing OHLE is an alternative on routes that are partially electrified.
Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 822



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: August 06, 2019, 10:31:27 pm »

One of the things you become used to on this forum are the foibles of its members. It seems the class 230 is to Mark what the catering on IETs is to Broadgage!

However the continuing delays in the class 769 programme are of concern, as this must be messing up the cascade of units. It would be good to have some openness about the problems that clearly are being experienced. From what I have gleaned it appears that the OHL/diesel bi-modes have problems to be resolved. Have any "tri-mode" versions been completed and are any yet being tested?

Logged
MarkHopwood
Full Member
***
Posts: 80


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: August 13, 2019, 06:44:48 pm »

I don’t feel obsessed about 230s. I just don’t understand the enthusiasm to bring super-annuated LUL trains to GWR which would make performance more challenging but I accept the 769s have to show decent performance!
« Last Edit: August 16, 2019, 03:56:14 am by MarkHopwood » Logged
Celestial
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 620


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: August 13, 2019, 06:55:39 pm »

I don’t feel obsessed about 230s. I just don’t understand the enthusiasm to bring super-animated LUL trains to GWR which would make performance more challenging but I accept the 769s have to show decent performance!

Given how long overdue the ones for TfW and Northern are, I think the first hurdle is that they show up at all.  Maybe you can beat the other two in getting yours in service first!  I see there have been some more failures of the 230 in the last few days, so whilst I was the one to suggest them, I do agree that the jury is still out on them, especially the diesel versions.
Logged
Rhydgaled
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1413


View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: November 09, 2019, 11:34:19 pm »

A battery powered train SHOULD be more reliable than a diesel powered one.
Batteries are inherently modular and means are readily available to automatically bypass a failed battery, allowing the train to proceed with almost unaltered performance.

Lithium iron phosphate batteries are the most likely technology, these are no longer new or exotic or untried technology, and are safer than lithium polymer batteries.

A 12 volt 100 AH lithium iron phosphate battery costs about £500 retail, less than half that much in bulk.
1,000 such batteries would cost in the region of £250,000 and would store over 1,000 Kwh of energy.
The total weight of these batteries is about 12 Kg each, or about 12 tons for 1,000 such.
That would power a 4 car train for a very considerable distance, silently and with zero pollution at the point of use.
Regenerative braking is easy with a battery train.
Charging could be fully automatic via a short length of conductor rail that for safety reasons is only rendered live when the train is over it.
Fast charging would be possible anywhere with an 11Kv mains supply available.
Slower charging anywhere with mains electricity.
Charging from existing OHLE is an alternative on routes that are partially electrified.
But what is "a very considerable distance"? I don't suppose a battery train would have the range necessary to do something like Wolverhampton to Aberystwyth and back (with a turnaround of only 10 minutes I doubt much recharging would happen at Aberystwyth), Crewe to Swansea (one way, as there might be time to charge at Swansea before heading back), Bristol to Plymouth, Exeter to Penzance or Swansea to Pembroke Dock. Sadly, I can see no alternative to diesel for those routes in the medium term. Reducing the fuel consumption is therefore key.

A class 230 would be completely unsuitable in terms of comfort/quality for such long journeys but surely the hybrid concept can be applied to better-quality rolling stock too. Angel Trains have even proposed converting existing DMUs with mechanical/hydrolic transmission (class 165 and class 175 if I recall correctly) which must be a much bigger technical challange than providing an alternative source of power for trains that already have electric motors.

So, my question is this, if 1,000 batteries are needed for an IPEMU (Independantly Powered Electric Multiple Unit) how many would you need for a new-build diesel-electric multiple unit with 2 or 3 23-24m vehicles? The batteries would be charged both by the diesel engine and with regenerative braking.
Logged

----------------------------
Don't DOO it, keep the guard (but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the driver unlocked the doors on arrival at calling points).
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 2 [3]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page