Class 350 BatteryFlex

[absolutelymilk]

Porterbrook are suggesting that the Class 350 could have batteries added that would allow it to match or outperform diesel trains on non-electrified routes, such as the Windermere branch. They are in discussions to create a demonstrator unit.

https://www.porterbrook.co.uk/news/...unces-batteryflex-in-green-great-britain-week

Porterbrook has completed an engineering assessment that makes a positive case for the conversion of one of the UK’s most reliable trains into a battery/electric bi-mode.

The class 350 Electric Multiple Unit is Britain’s most reliable train, with Porterbrook’s 350/2 version recording 100,420 Miles per Technical Incident (Moving Annual Average).

With the addition of the latest battery technology, Porterbrook is confident that the 350/2 BatteryFLEX would be able to match, or outperform, diesel trains on existing non-electrified routes, particularly in key corridors across the North of England.

 

[rebmcr]

batteries added that would allow it to match or outperform diesel trains on non-electrified routes

Not just that, it also indicates that the additional power could boost acceleration on electrified mainlines.

I am skeptical, however. Why wouldn't a similar boost be available from the OHLE? It's not as if a 350/2 guzzles nearly as much as a 92 — unless it's the transformer that is the bottleneck (rather than the IGBTs & motors)?

 

[mullac30]

Maybe those destination boards on the '350/2 to Scotland' thread yesterday weren't so mental after all....

 

[Bornin1980s]

The boost on OHLE doesn't matter to me. What matters is that the train can now go anywhere.

 

[td97]

It's good to see that at least one of the soon-to-be off-lease EMU fleets is being considered for a second chance. Could also be inferred that they aren't going to be used on Corby services, given Porterbrook is doing feasibility studies on batteries for them.

Seems like they could be contenders for (with a full refurbishment):
Grand Central (Sunderland, Bradford Interchange services)
Northern (as mentioned in the link)
TPE (Hull, once TP electrification is complete)
West Coast Partnership (Chester, North Wales if range suffices)
CrossCountry (Manchester - Bristol)
EMT (Nottingham - London services)

 

[js1000]

Arriva Northern won't be interested in 37 spare 350s though. The leasing costs will be prohibitive unless Porterbrook are going to be realistic and reasonable and it's yet another unit for the franchise to juggle.

They'll be interested in the 100+ surplus 321s as bi-modes which could replace all of the dated Sprinters (150s-156s) in tandem with some further cascades. I suspect Eversholt are keen and can modernise the interiors to those like the Renatus units which look like a brand new train. They could run until 2035-40 if managed right.

Rather than the 15 differents units they operate now, the franchise needs to consolidate its rolling stock so that the need for driving training is minimised and savings from integrated maintenance can be maximised. It's unrealistic this can be achieved with one rolling stock order given the size of the franchise and meagre growth so they need to get creative and think outside of the box.

158 / 170 / 195
319 (ultimately replaced by the more modern 323s) / 331
321 Flex

 

[absolutelymilk]

It's good to see that at least one of the soon-to-be off-lease EMU fleets is being considered for a second chance. Could also be inferred that they aren't going to be used on Corby services, given Porterbrook is doing feasibility studies on batteries for them.

How many units would Corby services need?

 

[td97]

How many units would Corby services need?

A half hourly service would require 10 units (if I've worked it out right) if it's 2.5 hours to do a return journey; comprising 15 minutes layover at each end and a journey of 1 hour.
A reasonable suggestion could actually be 10-12 pure EMUs for Corby, and then the BatteryFlex version used for Nottingham services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course they could have offered LNR a sensible price and I’m sure they’d have stayed where they were...

 

[43096]

Of course they could have offered LNR a sensible price and I’m sure they’d have stayed where they were...

How do you know they didn't?

Interesting to note that the Class 172s - which were ordered at the same time by the same TOC from the same ROSCO - are being retained. Are they over expensive too? And if they are, why has the new franchise not replaced them as well?

 

[gazthomas]

Maybe a topic of another thread, but are Porterbrook winding down their interests in leasing new units and just focussing on sweating their BR/early privatisation era assets to maximise revenue? I see on their website that they are still committed to new lease deals, but I know that other players have come into the market more recently, such as Rock Rail.

Why not a battery powered Pacer (Porterbrook own 143s and 144s not 142s) - now that should go a long way between charges!

 

[HLE]

Because the pacers are knackered 30 year old units. The 350/2’s are still relatively new.

Must need big batteries to get those things to keep to the same acceleration times etc. if it were to happen.

 

[gazthomas]

Because the pacers are knackered 30 year old units. The 350/2’s are still relatively new.

Must need big batteries to get those things to keep to the same acceleration times etc. if it were to happen.

It didn't stop them punting the Pacer Evolution, but yes, sense prevailed. I was joking originally BTW

 

[Halifaxlad]

They would be ideal for the Harrogate Line.

What I find interesting is that this time they haven't chosen a 319 like the 'tri-flex' and 'hydro-flex' that I do think is a bit of a shame. Surely for marketing purposes having all three types of the same class would be beneficial.

I do get the sneaky feeling that these will be used on the Airevalley line once the Skipton to Colne has been reopened, as I can't imagine it will be electrified to Colne or Rosegrove as SELRAP aspires, unless of course it is electrified all the way to Preston, but when the government is trying to convince people of bio-modes what better line could they choose?

 

[modernrail]

Could it be something like this:

- PB have realised the 319 is a pain in the ass and is already old tech with diesel;
- PB have written down the 319's and so are already in bonus territory with new leasing income from northern;
- The 350's are nowhere near written down and so they need to find a new home for them;
- They would rather convert more modern trains with an easier fix than older trains with a tricky fix;
- They will offer to swap the 319's out for the 350's and the lower running costs will offset any higher leasing costs?

 

[PomWombat]

I wonder what proportion of the time these would have to spend under the wires in order to survive the off-grid portion, and what range that off-grid portion would be.

 

[twpsaesneg]

Interesting to compare to the Class 379 IPEMU trials in 2015 - these ran between Harwich and Manningtree in Anglia under battery power.

As I recall the trials were a success but the battery life (i.e. years between changing batteries) wasn't quite there yet with the technology then.

 

[WatcherZero]

The equipment had a very limited range in that battery trial. It had a maximum range of 50km on batteries with an intended work cycle of 30km battery followed by a minimum of 50km wires to recharge.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Maybe those destination boards on the '350/2 to Scotland' thread yesterday weren't so mental after all....

I did say when "Yorkie" came over on direct messages that 2 TOCs were spotted at Northampton...

 

[hwl]

Interesting to compare to the Class 379 IPEMU trials in 2015 - these ran between Harwich and Manningtree in Anglia under battery power.

As I recall the trials were a success but the battery life (i.e. years between changing batteries) wasn't quite there yet with the technology then.

The reckoning was that the batteries were being worked harder than modelled and for trial purposes they were being pushed a bit harder than you would production wise. Hence the lesson learned was more battery to prevent battery damage. Another rolling stock manufacturer than kept an eye on the trial wasn't surprised by the "learnings", it is much easier to fit sufficient batteries on the new Aventra/Desiro City units than Electrostar etc. due to more usable space underneath and weight reduction elsewhere. (ditto Diesel Aventra units)

 

[Bletchleyite]

How do you know they didn't?

Well, all the other 350s stayed, and new stock was ordered. I doubt that would have happened had keeping all the 350s been cheaper. Pretty sure I read here it was because too high a price was being asked.

 

[hwl]

Well, all the other 350s stayed, and new stock was ordered. I doubt that would have happened had keeping all the 350s been cheaper. Pretty sure I read here it was because too high a price was being asked.

All the other 350s are Angel. With Porterbrook there could also be fall out from not using the 323s...

another issues is that they would still needed some new EMUs and there is probably a minimum sensible fleet size and that came into it too.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With Porterbrook there could also be fall out from not using the 323s...

A family business might work like that, but large companies do not.

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder what proportion of the time these would have to spend under the wires in order to survive the off-grid portion, and what range that off-grid portion would be.

The way they are sometimes given as the answer to everywhere’s problems?
They probably have a battery range of about 99% of any route, and can be recharged while the driver changes ends...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Of course they could have offered LNR a sensible price and I’m sure they’d have stayed where they were...

I think WMT wanted to go to a 5/10-car railway on many services, and the 350s couldn't be extended (out of production).
That's at least one reason for dumping the 350/2s.
They were also not on a Section 54 agreement (unlike the 350/1s), so WMT were not obliged to take them on.
But it might have been price in the end.

 

[LOL The Irony]

What's Porterbrook's obsession with Flex?

 

[DarloRich]

It's good to see that at least one of the soon-to-be off-lease EMU fleets is being considered for a second chance. Could also be inferred that they aren't going to be used on Corby services, given Porterbrook is doing feasibility studies on batteries for them.

Seems like they could be contenders for (with a full refurbishment):
Grand Central (Sunderland, Bradford Interchange services)
Northern (as mentioned in the link)
TPE (Hull, once TP electrification is complete)
West Coast Partnership (Chester, North Wales if range suffices)
CrossCountry (Manchester - Bristol)
EMT (Nottingham - London services)

Not sure a 350 is suitable for Sunderland/Bradford to London services!

The 350's are good trains and hardly require a "second chance".

 

[43096]

Well, all the other 350s stayed, and new stock was ordered. I doubt that would have happened had keeping all the 350s been cheaper. Pretty sure I read here it was because too high a price was being asked.

I’ll take that as you don’t know so are guessing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think WMT wanted to go to a 5/10-car railway on many services, and the 350s couldn't be extended (out of production).
That's at least one reason for dumping the 350/2s.
They were also not on a Section 54 agreement (unlike the 350/1s), so WMT were not obliged to take them on.
But it might have been price in the end.

You know a 10 car Aventra is the same length as a 12 car Desiro?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’ll take that as you don’t know so are guessing.

There have been other threads on the matter. Do you have some evidence otherwise?