Hitachi and Hyperdrive sign agreement on traction battery packs for Battery EMUs

[Greybeard33]

Hitachi Rail and Turntide agreement opens way for battery trains across Britain

Hitachi Rail and Hyperdrive Innovation have signed an exclusive agreement to develop battery packs to power zero-emission trains and create a battery hub in...

www.mynewsdesk.com

Hitachi Rail and Hyperdrive Innovation have signed an exclusive agreement to develop battery packs to power zero-emission trains and create a battery hub in the North East.

The two North East manufacturers will now accelerate the creation of batteries that can be mass-produced to provide emission-free power for hundreds of battery trains across the UK.

With almost two-thirds (58%) of the UK’s 20,000 mile rail network not electrified and with the Government setting ambitious decarbonisation targets, Hitachi Rail analysis estimates the potential market for Hyperdrive and Hitachi’s battery technology is over 400 trains.

This agreement is an important step towards manufacturing batteries at Hyperdrive’s HYVE facility in Sunderland, and then installing them just 20 miles away at Hitachi Rail’s train-building factory in Newton Aycliffe, County Durham.

Hitachi has identified its fleets of 275 trains as potential early recipients of the batteries for use in the UK, as well as installing them on new metro and intercity trains that will be needed in the coming years to replace ageing diesel fleets.

Battery trains produce no greenhouse gases, air pollution and are a far quieter, offering passengers cleaner air in stations, less noise disruption and a carbon-free way to travel. Installing batteries on to existing fleets can also extend their range and allow passengers to reach stations on non-electrified branch lines without having to change train.

Presumably this means that Hitachi envisages retrofitting battery packs to existing Class 80x units, in place of the underfloor diesel generator units, as well as future 25kV/battery bi-mode EMUs.

Andrew Barr, Group CEO, Hitachi Rail said:

"The partnership with Hyperdrive creates shovel-ready opportunity for new battery trains to be ordered now. As well as new trains, this is also a window of opportunity to cut carbon and supercharge a green recovery in the North East and across the UK."

No mention of range on battery though!

 

[mullac30]

It's interesting to see what a Class 385/AT200 looks like without gangway ends in those renders.

 

[Stathern Jc]

Obviously a case of first things first. It does sound interesting as a means of adding contingency into EMUs to enable them to pass / make diversions around interrupted overhead supplies, and then for relatively short ends to journeys such as to Lincoln or Hull.
I haven't heard anything about the likely performance that could be anticipated on battery power, or the range as Greybeard referred to. Hopefully there will be some informative contributions later, and I look forward to reading more.
Presumably units fitted with replacement battery packs working more than a short distance away from the wires will be reliant on shore supplies being significantly upgraded from current arrangements (no pun intended) for carriage heating etc.
Mustn't sound as if we're expecting everything to happen immediately, but several of us will wonder how batteries will be a practical option for services to more "isolated" destinations such as Aberdeen and Inverness, and those beyond Exeter.

 

[haggishunter]

The linked video says 90km+ range and better acceleration where diesel engines are replaced with batteries (but I'd imagine that would come at hit on range).

 

[gsnedders]

It's interesting to see what a Class 385/AT200 looks like without gangway ends in those renders.

http://www.hitachirail-eu.com/products/our-trains/at200-commuter has had the non-gangway version for as long as the AT200 has been offered (at Glasgow Queen Street!); the gangway was as far as we know a late addition to meet Transport Scotland requirements.

 

[swt_passenger]

The linked video says 90km+ range and better acceleration where diesel engines are replaced with batteries (but I'd imagine that would come at hit on range).

So the likelihood of most GW 800s and 802s having diesels replaced by batteries is still about zero.

 

[InOban]

The 5-car bimodes for Lincoln and Harrogate, surely?

 

[Greybeard33]

Presumably units fitted with replacement battery packs working more than a short distance away from the wires will be reliant on shore supplies being significantly upgraded from current arrangements (no pun intended) for carriage heating etc.

An alternative to plug-in shore supplies might be isolated "islands" of 25kV electrification at terminal stations and depots, to enable battery recharging during turnarounds and layovers. This would extend the length of a branch that could be served with 90km range.

Such small electrified "islands" could be supplied from the local Distribution Network Operator (DNO) 33kV network via Static Frequency Converter substations, rather than needing a (very costly) supply point from the 400kV Supergrid. This technology could be a gamechanger - see the Rail Engineer article linked in:

ECML Power Supply Upgrade

As I've started a Tracking/Queries thread for the WCML PSU, I thought I'd start one for the ECML too. Phase 1: Wood Green (London) - Bawtry (Doncaster) Cabled ATF (in troughs, rather than suspended from structures) in operation between Welwyn SATS & Hitchin SATS. New Substations: Potters Bar...

www.railforums.co.uk

and the discussion in subsequent posts of that thread.

 

[broadgage]

So the likelihood of most GW 800s and 802s having diesels replaced by batteries is still about zero.

The economics of removing serviceable diesel engines from existing units sounds very doubtful. I expect batteries to be more applicable to new trains that are not yet constructed.

 

[Energy]

So the likelihood of most GW 800s and 802s having diesels replaced by batteries is still about zero.

No but some LNER Azumas may have them removed, especially the 801s which take around a diesel engine everywhere in case there is an issue with the overhead wires.

 

[hwl]

The economics of removing serviceable diesel engines from existing units sounds very doubtful. I expect batteries to be more applicable to new trains that are not yet constructed.

Reduces maintenance requirement and costs especially on the seldom used engines on LNER's 801s.
Electricity is also cheaper than diesel!

 

[hwl]

No but some LNER Azumas may have them removed, especially the 801s which take around a diesel engine everywhere in case there is an issue with the overhead wires.

The Lincoln and Harrogate type services could be battery operated but is it easy enough for LNER to retain a small diesel fleet to be able to operate Inverness/Aberdeen e.g. retain 9 cars.

In GWR terms Swansea - Cardiff return as well as 2 legs from Bristol TM to Chippenham, Parkway or Stoke Gifford are all doable with that range hence given the maintenance contract structure and higher level of maintenance than anticipated on the 800s (especially given the uprating) then potentially some long term cost savings for Hitachi if units equivalent in number to the planned GWR 801s (21x 9car) could be converted to battery...

 

[Domh245]

Reduces maintenance requirement and costs especially on the seldom used engines on LNER's 801s.

Being 'seldom used', the maintenance requirements can't be too onerous, surely? I am also not so sure that such a move would actually reduce costs, given that Hitachi would still have another 167 Gensets to maintain across the ECML based fleets (TPE, HT and remainder of LNER) - they obviously still need all the spares and equipment to service those. The 'variable' cost for the 42 gensets you'd remove from the 801s would be matched by the costs to setup maintenance for the battery packs I would have thought

 

[hwl]

Being 'seldom used', the maintenance requirements can't be too onerous, surely? I am also not so sure that such a move would actually reduce costs, given that Hitachi would still have another 167 Gensets to maintain across the ECML based fleets (TPE, HT and remainder of LNER) - they obviously still need all the spares and equipment to service those. The 'variable' cost for the 42 gensets you'd remove from the 801s would be matched by the costs to setup maintenance for the battery packs I would have thought

Still plenty of inspection still required for standby engine use.
It also provides an extra float of Euro IIIB spec engine rafts.

Battery maintenance and monitoring requirements will be much lower.

The staffing requirements for ECML maintenance could be quite complex, especially as the TPE units are doing more diesel mileage than anticipated currently hence it might be a case of not having to add extra facilities/ equipment.

 

[43096]

Being 'seldom used', the maintenance requirements can't be too onerous, surely? I am also not so sure that such a move would actually reduce costs, given that Hitachi would still have another 167 Gensets to maintain across the ECML based fleets (TPE, HT and remainder of LNER) - they obviously still need all the spares and equipment to service those. The 'variable' cost for the 42 gensets you'd remove from the 801s would be matched by the costs to setup maintenance for the battery packs I would have thought

Changing them out for batteries now is a variation to the IEP contract, which will not be cheap in terms of negotiations nor in terms of long term costs. I’d bet that Agility would get an increase in contract value out of it rather than a decrease (capital cost of engines to be written off, cost of batteries, software/integration costs etc etc).

 

[Domh245]

Changing them out for batteries now is a variation to the IEP contract, which will not be cheap in terms of negotiations nor in terms of long term costs. I’d bet that Agility would get an increase in contract value out of it rather than a decrease (capital cost of engines to be written off, cost of batteries, software/integration costs etc etc).

Whilst it would be a variation, as Hitachi are pushing it themselves (and are the major party in Agility East) the DfT would really have to screw things up to end up with an increased cost coming back to them/LNER! If indeed batteries do work out cheaper, are capable of replacing the emergency gensets on the 801s, and the various contracts are worded loosely enough*, then by all means Hitachi should get on with installing them and start enjoying the additional profit!

*unlikely to be the case however - the TTS specifically refers to a self power source as "relying on the conversion of a fuel carried on board the train into power in a useful form and making no use of any sources of power external to the train." - batteries would not really fit that description!