Future Merseyrail stock: Stadler selected as manufacturer

[Skie]

I think the pis relies upon timetable data for the cars indicator and the trains that haven't yet started service but gets live updates from the various bits of kit on the railway that monitor train movements. The delay information they show is spot on with the various websites and apps that get data from the NR feed. Each station has its own pattern of when the train as shown as "here" but they are always consistently like that, so it's most likely determined by when the train arrives in that section of track.

 

[prod_pep]

The board on the Southport platform of Hightown is possibly the worst offender. It shows 'here' at least two minutes before the train arrives; in fact, you can't even see it in the distance when the 'here' is first displayed.

Showing the wrong number of carriages is unfortunately quite common. This summer, there were a few instances of both. Showing a six car as a three on the boards isn't a problem, but the opposite causes a lot of confusion and passengers scrambling for the train.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The invitation to tender was published Wednesday, though they've deferred technical and service specifications, also a pretty tight turnaround of just over a month. Winners will then be invited to negotiate, there is also an industry day scheduled for the 12th.

Full ITT: http://england.unitedkingdom-tenders.co.uk/91760_Merseytravel_Rolling_Stock_Programme_2015_Liverpool

Not sure of the terminology here.
I think what has been published is the start of a pre-qualification process, with the real ITT published in January to the pre-qualified "short list".
It is also using the North West local government procurement process rather than Whitehall's.

 

[po8crg]

Speed limits, no. London third rail lines handle 100mph trains down to the south coast. Speed anyway is never going to be an issue for Merseyrail.

Merseyrail is never going to have a problem with the speed limitations of third rail, but that doesn't mean there aren't any. 100 mph is the practical limit for third rail. The all-time record speed is 108.

There is some consideration of upgrading some of the faster mainlines around London from third rail to overhead; this is mostly to permit electric freight (most freight locos are overhead AC only), but also to allow for more frequent long (12-car) trains and to possibly increase speeds to 110mph, which the trains are actually capable of when being run on AC overhead power.

Given the cost (bridges and tunnels works) and the fact that for the same money a non-electrified line can be made electric with much larger benefits, it seems unlikely that this will ever be a priority, but Southampton-London has been looked at a few times.

 

[pemma]

Merseyrail is never going to have a problem with the speed limitations of third rail, but that doesn't mean there aren't any. 100 mph is the practical limit for third rail. The all-time record speed is 108.

There is some consideration of upgrading some of the faster mainlines around London from third rail to overhead; this is mostly to permit electric freight (most freight locos are overhead AC only), but also to allow for more frequent long (12-car) trains and to possibly increase speeds to 110mph, which the trains are actually capable of when being run on AC overhead power.

Given the cost (bridges and tunnels works) and the fact that for the same money a non-electrified line can be made electric with much larger benefits, it seems unlikely that this will ever be a priority, but Southampton-London has been looked at a few times.

Without a crystal ball we don't know what might happen in 50 years time. By then someone might have reinstated Birkenhead to London services (which did once exist) or might be running Birmingham to Southport via Liverpool Central services. Just because all services on the network are all or most stops local services doesn't mean it'll remain that way forever.

 

[MarkyT]

Given the cost (bridges and tunnels works) and the fact that for the same money a non-electrified line can be made electric with much larger benefits, it seems unlikely that this will ever be a priority, but Southampton-London has been looked at a few times.

The Southampton - Basingstoke section, in particular, looks good as part of the electric spine heading north from the port to the midlands and north, one of Britain's most significant rail freight flows.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The Southampton - Basingstoke section, in particular, looks good as part of the electric spine heading north from the port to the midlands and north, one of Britain's most significant rail freight flows.

In these austere times, I can't see the "Electric Spine" actually happening until electric locomotives with "last mile" diesel engines become commonplace. Even if the whole route is wired, chances are the terminals at either end probably won't be.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

In these austere times, I can't see the "Electric Spine" actually happening until electric locomotives with "last mile" diesel engines become commonplace. Even if the whole route is wired, chances are the terminals at either end probably won't be.

You really only need a loop in a terminal to be wired, the diesel shunter in a depot could bring/take away the trains to the loop from where the electric loco couples/uncouples from the train

 

[Nym]

Or a last mile generator fitted to your electric loco, since people are allergic to coupling locomotives nowadays...

 

[MarkyT]

In these austere times, I can't see the "Electric Spine" actually happening until electric locomotives with "last mile" diesel engines become commonplace. Even if the whole route is wired, chances are the terminals at either end probably won't be.

You really only need a loop in a terminal to be wired, the diesel shunter in a depot could bring/take away the trains to the loop from where the electric loco couples/uncouples from the train

Many things need to be arranged for the scheme including:

1. Logistics of how the SWT Desiro fleet is converted to dual voltage and who pays for that

2. How DC-only Southern trains from the Brighton direction could continue to serve Southampton

Whilst the Desiros, like the various Bombardier classes were built with space and a weight allocation for a pantograph and HV transformer, actually fitting the fleet is not a case of simply 'getting a ready made kit from Siemens and fitting it over a weekend'. There would be detailed engineering design, software updates, a prototype and testing etc. Once that's done then rollout may be quite fast and economical, but the preliminaries are likely to be fairly expensive and drawn out.

Extensive areas of dual electrified railway are seriously frowned on due to conflicts in the way return current and safety bonding are implemented. With dual electrification limited to short changeover zones, some Southern units would also have to be dual fitted in addition to the Desiros to work through an AC only Southampton station and port area or the same area could remain DC only and new electric freight locos could be specified for dual voltage capability (ideally as well as a small last mile diesel generator set for local low-speed trips and shunting). Freights would trundle through the low speed and flat urban areas before switching power systems and engaging warp drive only once beyond St Denys, or Eastleaigh, wherever the short boundary was best placed.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Would it even be worth SWT making their Desiros dual voltage anyway? The any given 444 has an equal chance of being used on either the Waterloo-Weymouth route or the Waterloo-Portsmouth route and the 450s have an squal chance of being on the same routes or the Waterloo-Reading routes?

Wasn't there a section of the old NLL where even though AC was available the units stayed on DC?

 

[MarkyT]

Would it even be worth SWT making their Desiros dual voltage anyway? The any given 444 has an equal chance of being used on either the Waterloo-Weymouth route or the Waterloo-Portsmouth route and the 450s have an squal chance of being on the same routes or the Waterloo-Reading routes?

I think they'd all have to be modified for flexibility, and they all visit Northam periodically for certain maintenance tasks so would be handy if they could all continue to get there via Basingstoke.

Wasn't there a section of the old NLL where even though AC was available the units stayed on DC?

Yes but not any more. Stray current leakage was a major problem in the area under mixed electrification. With DC that can cause severe corrosion to metal structures, including underground utilities and the foundations of OHLE masts, even parts of metal bridge structures. This is because with HV AC, for safety you have to bond the rails to earth and any other metalwork nearby to avoid dangerous touch potentials. That is something avoided completely normally with lower voltage DC systems where the running rails should remain insulated, floating independent of earth so the much higher traction return current is encouraged as much as possible to use only the rails to get back to the substation. With AC, although leakage is also a phenomenon, currents are much lower for a given power load and AC current does not cause the corrosion effects of DC. In mixed areas the safety requirement for earth bonding must take precedence, even though that actually promotes the DC stray current phenomenon with all its drawbacks. It is prudent to minimise the areas of dual electrification as much as possible, although practically there are always going to be some changeover and overlapping areas.

 

[HSTEd]

About the only thing you can do to reduce the stray currents in such areas is absolutely enormous aluminium busbars connected regularly in parallel with the running rails.

Busbars of similar cross section to the rails I imagine.

 

[Nym]

About the only thing you can do to reduce the stray currents in such areas is absolutely enormous aluminium busbars connected regularly in parallel with the running rails.

Busbars of similar cross section to the rails I imagine.

That, and also trying to insulate the running rails as well as you can, but that will never really work.

One could always adopt a four rail running system...

 

[Hophead]

Many things need to be arranged for the scheme including:

1. Logistics of how the SWT Desiro fleet is converted to dual voltage and who pays for that

2. How DC-only Southern trains from the Brighton direction could continue to serve Southampton

When I queried your point 2 on this forum, the response was that St. Denys to Central would be dual-voltage equipped.

As for the likelihood of electric freight trains through the area, I would have thought that the operators would like to have an alternative route available before they commit themselves in any numbers.

Although it's fair to say that the provision of AC electrification in Hampshire is unlikely to be of great concern to Merseyrail and their acquisition of new rolling stock.

 

[Townsend Hook]

Many things need to be arranged for the scheme including:

2. How DC-only Southern trains from the Brighton direction could continue to serve Southampton

Extensive areas of dual electrified railway are seriously frowned on due to conflicts in the way return current and safety bonding are implemented. With dual electrification limited to short changeover zones, some Southern units would also have to be dual fitted in addition to the Desiros to work through an AC only Southampton station and port area or the same area could remain DC only and new electric freight locos could be specified for dual voltage capability (ideally as well as a small last mile diesel generator set for local low-speed trips and shunting). Freights would trundle through the low speed and flat urban areas before switching power systems and engaging warp drive only once beyond St Denys, or Eastleaigh, wherever the short boundary was best placed.

The simplest option would logically be to roster the dual-voltage 377/2s on the Southampton services (most of them are working Thameslink services at the moment, with South Croydon-Milton Keynes mainly worked by the 377/7s, not sure if the Thameslink /2s are being returned to Southern when the 700s are introduced or not?) with change over at St Denys. Obviously the 450s working the Portsmouth stoppers would also need to be fitted for dual-voltage working. A downside of this would mean stopping all the Southern services at St Denys, which few of them do at the moment, with the resultant impact on journey times.

Of course the other option is dual-electrified lines from St Denys into, say, platforms 2 and 3 at Central. According to the sectional appendix that is somewhere around 2m 9ch. That isn't a massive distance in the grand scheme of things, I'm sure a technical solution could be worked out if needed. I'm fairly sure there are/were longer stretches of the North London line than that fitted with OHLE and a juice rail. If the SWT Desiro fleet wasn't entirely converted to dual voltage, third rail access would need to be maintained for the mile or so from St Denys to Northam anyway, to enable third rail-only units to access the Siemens depot.

I think changing switching power at Eastleigh or (especially) St Denys would be a bit of a non-starter, because it would mean a) stopping all the fast passenger trains and more or less negating any speed advantage and b) freights either chugging the last few miles at significantly reduced speed on diesels, massively reducing capacity, or construction of dual-voltage locos which would completely defeat the object of converting to OHLE in the first place. If the locos are going to have third-rail capacity anyway, they might as well just change over at Basingstoke.

 

[Camden]

Think this needs to be on its own thread.

 

[D365]

The simplest option would logically be to roster the dual-voltage 377/2s on the Southampton services (most of them are working Thameslink services at the moment, with South Croydon-Milton Keynes mainly worked by the 377/7s, not sure if the Thameslink /2s are being returned to Southern when the 700s are introduced or not?) with change over at St Denys.

The intention is for the returning 377/2s (and 4 377/5s?) to work enhanced 8-car services on the South Croydon-Milton Keynes route, with the displaced 377/7s to bolster the metro fleet. The dual-voltage equipped Class 377s are all accounted for.

 

[Townsend Hook]

The dual-voltage equipped Class 377s are all accounted for.

I suspected that that might be the case. In any case, diagramming specific units for the Southampton portions of the Victoria trains would always be problematic, especially when trains start being switched around and diverted to Bognor and Littlehampton when things go wrong.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I suspected that that might be the case. In any case, diagramming specific units for the Southampton portions of the Victoria trains would always be problematic, especially when trains start being switched around and diverted to Bognor and Littlehampton when things go wrong.

Wouldn't it make sense for SWTs to take over the Southampton Central-Portsmouth section of the Southern route? How many units would Southern need to be made dual voltage to cover the Southampton Central-Portsmouth Harbour section once Basingstoke eventually gets converted to AC?

 

[po8crg]

This has got quite a distance from Merseyrail rolling stock, but I think there are some relevant points.

Conversion of existing track from third-rail to overhead might make sense if:

1. The third-rail equipment is life-expired and:
2. There is a need for more power than third-rail can reasonably supply (either for freight or for lots of 200m+ services) or
3. There is a need or desire to run trains above 100mph

In that case, replacing with OHLE will still be more expensive than renewing the 3RE, but much less so than replacing 3RE that has significant remaining life.

For Merseyrail, the 3RE is a long way from end-of-life, and there's no freight nor any prospect of any, and the platforms aren't long enough to run 200m+ trains on any part of the network - and the PSRs are well below 100mph, so any desire to run faster trains can be met in the foreseeable future with faster third-rail trains.

The only argument for converting parts of the network would be if there was a desire to run overhead-only electric trains into some Merseyrail stations without needing to equip those trains with dual-mode power supplies, and I can't see many places that would be interesting, as overhead-only trains would never be able to run into the Merseyrail tunnels (so only into outer parts of the network, not into Liverpool). The only even distant potential I could see would be possibly extending a London-Chester train to Hooton if Crewe-Chester gets electrified at some future date.

On the other hand, there are plenty of places that Merseyrail trains could be extended onto track that is or could be electrified with overhead power, so having the ability to run onto AC overhead makes a lot of sense.

For instance:

• Bidston-Wrexham, if ever electrified, is likely to be AC overhead.
• Extending Northern Line beyond Ormskirk/Kirby (though I think that should be third rail as far as Wigan Wallgate)
• Ellesmere Port-Helsby if overhead is safer through the refinery than third-rail
• If the CLC route from South Parkway to Deansgate Junction is electrified, then extending Merseyrail trains from Hunts Cross into Warrington would require dual-power
• A curve at South Parkway to allow WCML trains to run into Northern Line might allow Merseyrail to run via Halton Curve to Chester.

 

[47802]

This has got quite a distance from Merseyrail rolling stock, but I think there are some relevant points.

Conversion of existing track from third-rail to overhead might make sense if:

1. The third-rail equipment is life-expired and:
2. There is a need for more power than third-rail can reasonably supply (either for freight or for lots of 200m+ services) or
3. There is a need or desire to run trains above 100mph

In that case, replacing with OHLE will still be more expensive than renewing the 3RE, but much less so than replacing 3RE that has significant remaining life.

For Merseyrail, the 3RE is a long way from end-of-life, and there's no freight nor any prospect of any, and the platforms aren't long enough to run 200m+ trains on any part of the network - and the PSRs are well below 100mph, so any desire to run faster trains can be met in the foreseeable future with faster third-rail trains.

The only argument for converting parts of the network would be if there was a desire to run overhead-only electric trains into some Merseyrail stations without needing to equip those trains with dual-mode power supplies, and I can't see many places that would be interesting, as overhead-only trains would never be able to run into the Merseyrail tunnels (so only into outer parts of the network, not into Liverpool). The only even distant potential I could see would be possibly extending a London-Chester train to Hooton if Crewe-Chester gets electrified at some future date.

On the other hand, there are plenty of places that Merseyrail trains could be extended onto track that is or could be electrified with overhead power, so having the ability to run onto AC overhead makes a lot of sense.

For instance:

• Bidston-Wrexham, if ever electrified, is likely to be AC overhead.
• Extending Northern Line beyond Ormskirk/Kirby (though I think that should be third rail as far as Wigan Wallgate)
• Ellesmere Port-Helsby if overhead is safer through the refinery than third-rail
• If the CLC route from South Parkway to Deansgate Junction is electrified, then extending Merseyrail trains from Hunts Cross into Warrington would require dual-power
• A curve at South Parkway to allow WCML trains to run into Northern Line might allow Merseyrail to run via Halton Curve to Chester.

Given Dual Voltage trains isn't difficult, and most modern units are either built dual voltage or can be converted later, any extensions should be Overhead given that's the standard now.

 

[swt_passenger]

Wouldn't it make sense for SWTs to take over the Southampton Central-Portsmouth section of the Southern route? How many units would Southern need to be made dual voltage to cover the Southampton Central-Portsmouth Harbour section once Basingstoke eventually gets converted to AC?

Southern don't run over a route to/from Southampton via Portsmouth. They use the direct route between Havant and Cosham, over the north side of the Farlington triangle. The SN service along the 'west coastway' splits at Havant, 3 tph to Portsmouth and 2 tph to Southampton.

(Disregarding very rare isolated SN services operated during engineering works.)

 

[Townsend Hook]

Wouldn't it make sense for SWTs to take over the Southampton Central-Portsmouth section of the Southern route? How many units would Southern need to be made dual voltage to cover the Southampton Central-Portsmouth Harbour section once Basingstoke eventually gets converted to AC?

As to how many units, if dual voltage units did become a requirement for Southampton services, enough to provide one four car per hour from Victoria and another four car from Brighton. You're probably looking at a requirement for eight or nine units in service per day, from a quick back-of-envelope calculation, so a total fleet of ten or so. It might even be easier to end Southern's Southampton services altogether, with the main problem that Southampton would lose its direct connection to Gatwick.

This really could do with it's own thread methinks.

 

[po8crg]

Given Dual Voltage trains isn't difficult, and most modern units are either built dual voltage or can be converted later, any extensions should be Overhead given that's the standard now.

I'd agree in general, but not for Wigan Wallgate to Kirkby/Southport.

The argument for third-rail to Wigan Wallgate isn't a particular technology preference; it's the WCML - the line from Kirkby/Southport passes under the WCML without enough clearance for overhead wires, and the track can't be lowered under the bridge (because of the junctions and stations either side). That leaves the option of raising the bridge, which would mean a closure of the West Coast Main Line.

Strikes me that third-rail could be put in for that (fairly short) stretch from Kirkby to Wigan and that will avoid the clearance issue, especially in that the trains going through will have to have shoes for the Kirkby-Liverpool third-rail section anyway, so there wouldn't be any single-voltage overhead trains forced to go dual-voltage anyway.

 

[MarkyT]

I think changing switching power at Eastleigh or (especially) St Denys would be a bit of a non-starter, because it would mean a) stopping all the fast passenger trains and more or less negating any speed advantage and b) freights either chugging the last few miles at significantly reduced speed on diesels, massively reducing capacity, or construction of dual-voltage locos which would completely defeat the object of converting to OHLE in the first place. If the locos are going to have third-rail capacity anyway, they might as well just change over at Basingstoke.

There's no reason why both freight and passenger could not changeover on the move as 92s and 395s can in Kent. Having a DC capability on a new electric freight locomotive doesn't 'defeat the purpose', it actually makes them even more flexible, probably at fairly small incremental cost. The big advantage of 25kV north of St Denys/Eastleigh is that's where the higher speed running and hill climbing takes place, where using DC 3rd rail would limit the locomotive's performance just as it does with the current passenger trains. I agree using a 'last mile' diesel capability for such heavy trains through Northam and Southampton station would be painful. Just like a shunter, whilst such a loco configured to produce an awful lot of tractive effort at starting with a small engine, the lack of power (less than a quarter of the AC rating for the DRS Vossloh units on order according to: http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...-electro-diesel-locomotives-from-vossloh.html) means it could not maintain that beyond the low-speed range. A Dual voltage capability added to such a loco however could allow it to develop maybe half or two-thirds of its AC output on DC which wouldn't be too limiting in the remaining Southampton area 3rd rail in my scenario, giving sufficient oomph to get through that relatively low speed and flat area at a reasonable speed. Performance on DC could be similar to the current diesel locomotives, whilst once out on the AC main line, where it really counts, power might easily be doubled.

 

[Camden]

Given Dual Voltage trains isn't difficult, and most modern units are either built dual voltage or can be converted later, any extensions should be Overhead given that's the standard now.

Why is that important to you?

The tube is a four rail system. It's not a case of OHLE being "standard". You use the right tech for the right job, simples.

 

[swt_passenger]

As to how many units, if dual voltage units did become a requirement for Southampton services, enough to provide one four car per hour from Victoria and another four car from Brighton. You're probably looking at a requirement for eight or nine units in service per day, from a quick back-of-envelope calculation, so a total fleet of ten or so. It might even be easier to end Southern's Southampton services altogether, with the main problem that Southampton would lose its direct connection to Gatwick.

This really could do with it's own thread methinks.

I'd tend to agree, but it has already been discussed to death two or three times in its own specific threads, since the 'electric spine' was first announced. A number of posters keep repeating exactly the same questions...

 

[HSTEd]

Assuming teh sleepers haven't all been changed for steel ones - a minimum spec third rail installation that is more than sufficient for a Merseyrail extension will cost a tiny fraction of a 25kV system.

 

[47802]

Why is that important to you?

The tube is a four rail system. It's not a case of OHLE being "standard". You use the right tech for the right job, simples.

Its not particularly important to me but is not the Network rail standard?