mushroomchow
Member
What a strange tangent this thread has gone off on already!
By coincidence, did you read the press release from NS. They have just achieved 100% wind power for the whole railway system in the Nederlands,
This was not achieved by self contained windmills on each train but by responsibly sourcing electricity from efficient North Sea wind farms delivered through the ole to the train. Perhaps the Minister should pay a visit.
Population of the Netherlands is 17m with a population density of 414.1/km2, we have a population of 63m with a population density of 270.7/km2 so what's achievable and viable in the Netherlands might not be here.
just because they find it more convenient.
Of course another way of eliminating diesel would be to close all non-electrified lines by 2040
I think you will find that the average windspeed over the British Isles are greater than in the (less exposed to Atlantic winds) Netherlands. And heavens knows it's hard enough to overcome local resident objections to developing wind power even with the lower population density in the UK.
The areas with the most wind (Cornwall, west of Scotland, Northern Ireland) don't coincide with the areas with the largest populations (Greater London, West Midlands, southern part of the North West and southern part of Yorkshire.) The water which comes out of my taps at home could have travelled 100 miles from a reservoir and I imagine it could be a similar situation for green energy to get to some places.
why dont they just concentrate on running a reliable, affordable, customer friendly railway as a priority.
I think a more sensible approach would be to set a date for when diesel trains can no longer be built or imported. Its plausible that by the time the sprinters need replacing battery storage will have increased enough to be viable. 195s will likely end up on long rural routes towards the end of their lives to serve lines that are off the wires too long for batteries to be viable. They are a very small proportion of new stock therefore production and import of diesel trains has almost ended.
Even if the 195 order does go ahead, I hope it is the very last. Every new train that isn't a pure EMU or LHCS should be bi-mode.
Even if the 195 order does go ahead, I hope it is the very last. Every new train that isn't a pure EMU or LHCS should be bi-mode.
What do you mean by "if", exactly? It's happening.Even if the 195 order does go ahead, I hope it is the very last. Every new train that isn't a pure EMU or LHCS should be bi-mode.
What do you mean by "if", exactly? It's happening.
Edit: forgot the WM order which indeed isn't confirmed. Apologies.
I was very peripherally involved in being shown a demonstration battery bus in Edinburgh, in what must have been 1972 (it was the old K suffix registration). We joked it was just a milk float with about 25 seats. The manufacturer (Chloride?) I recall at the time saying exactly the same thing, that battery technology was advancing so rapidly that in a "few years" they would be up to diesel performance.Its plausible that by the time the sprinters need replacing battery storage will have increased enough to be viable.
https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/p...ly-electric-bus-routes-to-cut-toxic-emissionsI was very peripherally involved in being shown a demonstration battery bus in Edinburgh, in what must have been 1972 (it was the old K suffix registration). We joked it was just a milk float with about 25 seats. The manufacturer (Chloride?) I recall at the time saying exactly the same thing, that battery technology was advancing so rapidly that in a "few years" they would be up to diesel performance.
46 years on they are still nowhere near.
Though Stadler may be able to do something based on the SMILE (a faster version of the FLIRT).
I am uncertain as to how transformer/control electronics can solve the basic problem of a diesel engine of less than 1000bhp being able to match the power output of, say, 4000bhp in pure electric mode.Locos designated for passenger train haulage can be bi-mode. I know that the class 88 has much lower performance on diesel, but future generations of transformer/control electronics can fix that.
I am uncertain as to how transformer/control electronics can solve the basic problem of a diesel engine of less than 1000bhp being able to match the power output of, say, 4000bhp in pure electric mode.
Is it not the case that the limitations of bi-modes have influenced where they're proposed, rather than the other way around?It may not need to; typically the diesel bit of a bi-mode route will be slower than the electric bit anyway.
I was very peripherally involved in being shown a demonstration battery bus in Edinburgh, in what must have been 1972 (it was the old K suffix registration). We joked it was just a milk float with about 25 seats. The manufacturer (Chloride?) I recall at the time saying exactly the same thing, that battery technology was advancing so rapidly that in a "few years" they would be up to diesel performance.
46 years on they are still nowhere near.
That doesn't mean that long-distance trains are about to be running around on battery power; it works for buses because they spend so much of their time at low speed or stopped!