Suggestions for future use of Class 332s post-HEx

[jdxn]

Anecdotally, the reliability has dipped massively over the past 2-3 years. 332s used to be virtually bullet-proof, major failures in traffic simply didn’t happen. More recently there’s been at least 2 major failures on the mainline in the past few months, short-forms seem to be becoming more common, there was the “recall” issue last spring with the bogies, and they didn’t want to come out and play in the recent snow. The fleet is worked very hard, and it’s starting to show.

Technology. The trains are not fitted with TPWS or GSM-R. Both of which would be required for the units to be productive elsewhere. The interior-fit is very “luxury-Airport-express”, again very few places they would be useful. They’re also not particularly quick off the mark by modern EMU standards.

The Class 332 have never been good in snow.

They are now fitted with GSM-R although it is not used due to staff training/contractual issues. So CSR is still used.

 

[Southsider]

Well Eversholt knows where 19 of them will be

Where would that be? There’s a hope that Scotrail are in for some.

 

[D365]

Where would that be? There’s a hope that Scotrail are in for some.

Exactly where they are right now, Great Northern.

 

[TheWalrus]

Anyone else thinking we need a bit more electrification to make use of the surplus of EMUs?

 

[hexagon789]

Anyone else thinking we need a bit more electrification to make use of the surplus of EMUs?

I think we at least need the cancelled electrification to be un-cancelled as it were, but I definitely support more electrification. The ultimate goal would be total electrification of passengers lines like Switzerland, but many rural branches probably don't warrant that.

 

[gingertom]

I think we at least need the cancelled electrification to be un-cancelled as it were, but I definitely support more electrification. The ultimate goal would be total electrification of passengers lines like Switzerland, but many rural branches probably don't warrant that.

probably didn't warrant it in Switzerland either but the Swiss govt showed clear forward thinking by doing it anyway. We have a lot to learn from our neighbours.

 

[hexagon789]

probably didn't warrant it in Switzerland either but the Swiss govt showed clear forward thinking by doing it anyway. We have a lot to learn from our neighbours.

True but then even the least used branch has an hourly service, even on Sundays usually. Electrifying the Far North or West Highland is probably not worth it for the frequencies.

 

[gingertom]

True but then even the least used branch has an hourly service, even on Sundays usually. Electrifying the Far North or West Highland is probably not worth it for the frequencies.

this is where hydrogen powered trains come into their own.
Wrong thread I know but the "Rolling Programme of Electrification" in Scotland is committed to completing Shotts and Stirling-Alloa-Dunblane. Many schemes have been touted to continue the roll out but nothing has been committed as yet. Unless someone knows different?

 

[hexagon789]

this is where hydrogen powered trains come into their own.
Wrong thread I know but the "Rolling Programme of Electrification" in Scotland is committed to completing Shotts and Stirling-Alloa-Dunblane. Many schemes have been touted to continue the roll out but nothing has been committed as yet. Unless someone knows different?

A battery powered train might do the Alloa branch quite well.

Back to the 332s, a "fantasy" idea would be to convert them to dual overhead/battery EMUs for use on electric routes which run into short unelectrified branches/sections.

 

[gingertom]

A battery powered train might do the Alloa branch quite well.

Back to the 332s, a "fantasy" idea would be to convert them to dual overhead/battery EMUs for use on electric routes which run into short unelectrified branches/sections.

or even as far as Dunblane too. However the wires are going up. Had a battery option been viable at the time the decision was taken then we might have had a different solution.
Windermere branch comes to mind too. There are many.

 

[gingertom]

Anyone else thinking we need a bit more electrification to make use of the surplus of EMUs?

I think you have hit the nail right on the head.

 

[D365]

Anyone else thinking we need a bit more electrification to make use of the surplus of EMUs?

I've always considered MML and EWR electrification to be ideal for soaking up some of the refurbished 321s.

GWep should really have taken place a decade earlier, but that's history now.

 

[hexagon789]

or even as far as Dunblane too. However the wires are going up. Had a battery option been viable at the time the decision was taken then we might have had a different solution.
Windermere branch comes to mind too. There are many.

Windermere is a very strong candidate for battery trains.

 

[gingertom]

Windermere is a very strong candidate for battery trains.

agreed but means having a microfleet to service the requirement.

 

[hexagon789]

agreed but means having a microfleet to service the requirement.

I was thinking more of a fleet of dual 25kV overhead + battery trains that would operate a wide range of services in the area.

 

[gingertom]

I was thinking more of a fleet of dual 25kV overhead + battery trains that would operate a wide range of services in the area.

then we have the much-debated carting around heavy battery packs where not required, similar to the arguments against bi-mode units carrying heavy diesel engines and fuel tanks for that last-mile.

 

[hexagon789]

then we have the much-debated carting around heavy battery packs where not required, similar to the arguments against bi-mode units carrying heavy diesel engines and fuel tanks for that last-mile.

Well, you can't win 'em all. Full electrification is the ideal but that's just not happening now and a battery-electric train seems a reasonable substitute.

 

[The_Engineer]

battery-electric train seems a reasonable substitute.

Not in most cases. Unless battery technology evolves again, at present 18km seems the maximum for a battery EMU away from the wires (charging).

 

[gingertom]

Not in most cases. Unless battery technology evolves again, at present 18km seems the maximum for a battery EMU away from the wires (charging).

which is agonisingly close to the length of the Windermere branch. In pure traction terms the range is probably sufficient. However a hot summer's day with aircon working or a cold winters' evening with heating and lights on and it may be too close. How do you rescue in the event of a flat battery?

 

[hexagon789]

Not in most cases. Unless battery technology evolves again, at present 18km seems the maximum for a battery EMU away from the wires (charging).

The Ballater Battery EMU managed the branch's full 43.25 miles on a single charge.

 

[hexagon789]

which is agonisingly close to the length of the Windermere branch. In pure traction terms the range is probably sufficient. However a hot summer's day with aircon working or a cold winters' evening with heating and lights on and it may be too close. How do you rescue in the event of a flat battery?

Get out and push?

 

[edwin_m]

Unlike Ballater, Windermere is downhill most of the way from the junction to the terminus. So if it starts out with a full battery it won't be able to regenerate much power and at Windermere the battery will have to have enough charge to get all the way back to Oxenholme. The turnaround at Windermere is also quite short, and the local supply may or may not be adequate for the load of charging a train. Also the train makes several journeys on the branch where the only charging opportunity is during the short turnaround at Oxenholme, before it has the opportunity to get a full charge on the way back to Manchester. Having a second train on charge, and a siding for it to sit in while charging, would ruin the economics.

So actually the duty cycle for a battery unit on this branch is quite demanding. The intention may be to put out a challenge to the industry, or perhaps as a figleaf to cover for an inconvenient admission that the government doesn't want to spend the money on electrification.

 

[43096]

Well, you can't win 'em all. Full electrification is the ideal but that's just not happening now and a battery-electric train seems a reasonable substitute.

No it isn't. Battery is an alleged solution looking for a problem.

Really, Windermere (and Blackpool) should have been wired when the rest of the Weaver Jct-Glasgow electrification was done in 1974. That's the problem with this country - too short-termist and muddled thinking.

 

[D365]

Heavy battery pack? By my estimates, 8 tons per 4 car EMU isn’t a significant increase, certainly less than compared to bi-mode.

I do agree though that Windermere should have been done long ago.

Though no particularly relevant to the 332s unfortunately.

 

[hexagon789]

No it isn't. Battery is an alleged solution looking for a problem.

Really, Windermere (and Blackpool) should have been wired when the rest of the Weaver Jct-Glasgow electrification was done in 1974. That's the problem with this country - too short-termist and muddled thinking.

I was more meaning that it's a substitute made necessary by circumstances avd which is preferable to running on diesel for miles under the wires.

 

[gingertom]

Heavy battery pack? By my estimates, 8 tons per 4 car EMU isn’t a significant increase, certainly less than compared to bi-mode.

I do agree though that Windermere should have been done long ago.

Though no particularly relevant to the 332s unfortunately.

i suppose what we are leading up to is, how best can the small fleet of 332s be recycled, is it feasible to fit them with batteries, along with the other things needed (AWS/TPWS etc)?

 

[hexagon789]

i suppose what we are leading up to is, how best can the small fleet of 332s be recycled, is it feasible to fit them with batteries, along with the other things needed (AWS/TPWS etc)?

It's doubtful, arguably a new battery-electric would be a sounder investment. I think the only hope for the 332s is TPWS fitment and use on a local commuter electric route.

 

[gingertom]

It's doubtful, arguably a new battery-electric would be a sounder investment. I think the only hope for the 332s is TPWS fitment and use on a local commuter electric route.

Trouble is development costs. For a small dedicated fleet these could not be recouped, the economies of scale in the sale of a large fleet won't apply so the unit cost of a micro fleet might be so high to prevent it being viable. So the thought of upcycling a small fleet of units like the 332 may come into play. Sounds like the 230 D-train sales pitch!

 

[TheWalrus]

There must be somewhere where some infill electrification could take place electrifying a smaller section which therefore costs less and would then make use of surplus EMUs.

I always thought the Snow Hill lines would have been a good candidate although not really an infill scheme.

 

[The Ham]

Trouble is development costs. For a small dedicated fleet these could not be recouped, the economies of scale in the sale of a large fleet won't apply so the unit cost of a micro fleet might be so high to prevent it being viable. So the thought of upcycling a small fleet of units like the 332 may come into play. Sounds like the 230 D-train sales pitch!

Quite, if there's a line that's likely to be wired up within 10 years then a recycled EMU with batteries could be better than it worth be to buy a new fleet of EMU's with some fitted with batteries especially if the rest of the EMU fleet for that TOC still has a good lot of life left.