Island Line Railway - current state and the future

[DelW]

I agree these aren't suitable replacement ideas. If you did close the line which I'm against surely done sort of tram the same size as the train running on the train tracks would make more sense

The steam railway are (re?)building a pier tram, perhaps a series production run could be arranged?
http://www.iwsteamrailway.co.uk/ryde-pier-tram-restoration-project.aspx

HOW WILL THE TRAM BE USED?
No final decisions will be taken until the Railway has had an opportunity to test it on its return but several suggestions have been made. These include demonstration runs on the longest siding at Havenstreet, using it for early or late services on the full line or using it as a second service when there aren’t enough passengers to justify two steam trains, much as other Heritage Railways use DMU’s. In any event, after all the delays, it won’t be long before our visitors will be able to sample this unique mode of transport as, so far as we are aware, the Ryde Pier Tram is the only surviving self-propelled light railcar of the inter-war years.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Could they have had a single unit running a shuttle service between the Pier Head and Esplanade stations only, being operated by a driver and a manager as a guard?

 

[Rick1984]

From Island Echo
http://www.islandecho.co.uk/diesel-battery-trains-solution-island-line/

DIESEL AND BATTERY TRAINS COULD BE THE SOLUTION FOR ISLAND LINE
By Island Echo
Published on 13th November 2017 at 17:32

South Western Railway have revealed that the Island’s 80-year-old trains could be replaced with a diesel, battery or flywheel powered locomotive, a tram or even a guided bus lane.

The train operator, which took over the running of Island Line earlier this year, has stated in a consultation document published this week that the Class 483 former London Underground trains are no longer viable, with parts availability becoming an issue and limited capability of electricity supply.

A number of alternative options are being considered by SWR including introducing self-propelled flywheel trains (as seen on the Stourbridge Line in the West Midlands); self-propelled diesel trains or self-propelled battery trains. A tram/train hybrid is also on the cards, as is developing a brand new type of train specifically for Island Line.

As well as exploring options for new trains, SWR say there is a possibility of the Ryde to Shanklin line being converted into a dedicated guided bus way.

South Western Railway say that a self-powered train which can be accommodated on the existing infrastructure is the best way forward for Island Line. The company has indicated that a battery or flywheel powered system would be preferred to save on the cost of replacing the third rail system and avoiding the storage and air pollution concerns associated with a diesel powered train.

The final proposal won’t be revealed until May 2018 a costed option is submitted to the Department for Transport.

 

[yorksrob]

From Island Echo
http://www.islandecho.co.uk/diesel-battery-trains-solution-island-line/

Well, a self-powered train within the existing infrastructure would be better than no train at all. De-electrifying seems like step backwards, but there are worse options.

 

[Chris125]

What a joke, seems they've spent about 5 minutes on this 'consultation' - without any idea of the cost or practicality of the different options its meaningless.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looks to me like Vivarail might be getting one more small order.

 

[davidgiles]

Sounds more like Parry People Mover being preferred. Consultation document in full... https://www.documentcloud.org/docum...ultation-Document-November-2017.html#document

 

[yorksrob]

Wouldn't a PPM be a bit on the small side ?

 

[DT611]

Wouldn't a PPM be a bit on the small side ?

I'd imagine very much so. Unless maybe they could order the bigger varient that is supposed to be availible?
All though, even that would be quite small, so maybe the island line could be a test bed for a multiple unit varient?

 

[Monty]

It's would need to hold as least as many people as the current trains and be just as fast, anything else is a retrograde step.

 

[yorksrob]

I'd imagine very much so. Unless maybe they could order the bigger varient that is supposed to be availible?
All though, even that would be quite small, so maybe the island line could be a test bed for a multiple unit varient?

I suppose it works for the Stourbridge branch because its so short. It can just shuttle up and down. You'd need a lot of them running up and down the IoW.

 

[Chris125]

It's would need to hold as least as many people as the current trains and be just as fast, anything else is a retrograde step.

It's not just a retrograde step, any significant reduction in performance could make a half hourly service unreliable if not impossible.

I still think they'll end up keeping the 3rd rail - a flywheel can make sense for a short line where energy can be recovered in one direction and used in the other, but how does how that translate to an 8 mile line like Island Line with it's varying gradients? I doubt there'd be any real advantage over a conventional DMU yet would incur all the shortcomings.

 

[Dougal2345]

Odd that the lavishly-illustrated consultation document contains not one picture of the railway - are they worried they'll remind people of what they might lose?

From the choice of pictures, it seems though that bicycling is the best way of getting round the Island.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Looks to me like Vivarail might be getting one more small order.

Let us see when they finally receive all the required approvals first.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is Parry Associates still building PPMs? I thought they had had financial issues.

I guess the third rail equipment must be life expired, then?

I suppose the advantage of PPMs (or similar) is that because they are custom builds by definition they'll be able to make something perfectly fitting the loading gauge and platform heights. Level boarding a possible benefit. I guess it'd look a bit like an updated Pacer - a rail chassis with bus body panels and seating, which is basically what the existing ones are. And to be fair, there isn't a lot that a Pacer would ride better than, but the 1930s Tube stock is probably it!

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not just a retrograde step, any significant reduction in performance could make a half hourly service unreliable if not impossible.

Might a third unit on the go be affordable if the staff were cheaper (pretty sure the Stourbridge staff don't get full train driver money, and they are also "multifunction" drivers and guards)?

 

[jon0844]

Battery powered trains don't sound like a bad idea. It would be a good PR move, could possibly get some subsidy from the Government perhaps, and even continue the testing carried out with 379s not so long ago.

A diesel generator as a backup might also be worthwhile, to help the train limp if necessary.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Battery powered trains don't sound like a bad idea. It would be a good PR move, could possibly get some subsidy from the Government perhaps, and even continue the testing carried out with 379s not so long ago.

I wonder..... there are tube sized battery locomotives used for the Underground's engineering trains...

*runs for cover*

 

[JohnRegular]

The Island line would be an ideal testing ground for battery trains, which could go on to be used on branch lines all over the UK where electrification isn't viable.

Battery locomotives?! Yes please!

 

[ainsworth74]

Is Parry Associates still building PPMs? I thought they had had financial issues.

I must admit I had been under the impression that they had gone bust!

 

[Dougal2345]

It is a curious document. There seems to be a lot about "sustainability" in it. But what does that actually mean?

It seems that SWR don't know, given question 4 in their survey, "What is your definition of the term “more sustainable”?".

But it's still used 22 times, as here:

"In the franchise specification, the Department for Transport (DfT) echoed this, stating it wanted the
next franchisee to “work with the Isle of Wight Council to secure a long-term sustainable solution to
the future of the Island Line during the course of the next franchise that will enable it to become a
more sustainable business”."

A quick Google brings up this:
(i) able to continue over a period of time
(ii) causing little or no damage to the environment and therefore able to continue for a long time.

The current railway certainly fulfils (i) - it's as able to continue over a period of time as any other railway in the UK. It just needs subsidy, as most railways do, and as all the other options on the table would.

On (ii) it's pretty good at the moment too. If we are rating the various options on environmental grounds, fairly obviously the electric options come out in front of the diesel ones.

So I think when they say "sustainable", what they actually mean is "economical" - or "cheap". It's rather a shame they're not more open about that.

 

[67018]

The current railway certainly fulfils (i) - it's as able to continue over a period of time as any other railway in the UK. It just needs subsidy, as most railways do, and as all the other options on the table would.

I think this bit is the flaw in your logic. The stock is obsolete, knackered and expected to need replacement; no easy solutions for replacement are readily available; various options to improve things involve sizeable investment; and the whole operation costs five times as much to run as it makes in revenue. That, to me, is a pretty good example of ‘unsustainable’.

Not that I think it should close, but some serious thinking needs to be done, as evidenced by the length of this thread!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I am hearing that one of the 483s went on fire at Ryde Pier Head a couple of hours ago.

 

[GW43125]

I am hearing that one of the 483s went on fire at Ryde Pier Head a couple of hours ago.

Correct. Only a minor fire confined to the shoegear, service resumption imminent.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I wonder..... there are tube sized battery locomotives used for the Underground's engineering trains...

*runs for cover*

Not a bad idea - well done for a bit of lateral thinking - or the loco;s used to haul 38 TS if and when the motors go on them . Like it .

 

[Chris125]

Battery powered trains don't sound like a bad idea. It would be a good PR move, could possibly get some subsidy from the Government perhaps, and even continue the testing carried out with 379s not so long ago.

Given the weight, cost and relatively short lifespan it's hard to see how batteries could be cheaper *long term* than renewing the existing electrification - there are plenty of unelectrified lines on the mainland where such trains can be trialled.

Ian Walmsley wrote about the dire economics of the 379 trial a few years ago in Modern Railways, summarised elsewhere on this forum by Philip Phlopp

"Ian Walmsley (who most of you will know was formerly Engineering Development Manager with Porterbrook Leasing) has done the economics on it, with no help from the actual Class 379 team, who are doing a great PR act and some lousy engineering.

Walmsley did the calculations based on serving Sudbury and the battery size calculations came to 660kWh, rather than the 452kWh on the trail unit, which gives a cost for a single battery pack somewhere around £570,000. The life expectancy of the battery is around 2,000 cycles which equates to 5 years. I'm sure those of you who know the details of the 27.5 year MTU contract for the Hitachi Super Express program are shaking your heads at this stage (1 x 12V1600R80L engine comes to €800,000 with 27.5 years of maintenance support from the manufacturer)

Walmsley correctly but perhaps, in my view, over optimistically discounts the cost of the battery for bulk order and continual manufacturing cost reductions, giving a total cost on average of £300,000 for each battery pack. He doesn't explicitly commit but I'd suggest he's also working on manufacturing cost reductions offsetting inflation on the price of the battery packs and they'll remain around the £300k mark for much of their life, which gives a total cost of £2m for batteries alone over the 35 year life expectancy of a new build EMU.

£2m is just slightly more than the total cost for 1 vehicle of an EMU, and it's not a cost that can be written off/depreciated against, the battery pack costs money, 5 years later the next battery pack costs money and so on, there's going to be no discernible decrease in the leasing costs, which work out at something in the region of £17,000 per battery pack per month, going on Ian's figures"
​

 

[takno]

Given the weight, cost and relatively short lifespan it's hard to see how batteries could be cheaper *long term* than renewing the existing electrification - there are plenty of unelectrified lines on the mainland where such trains can be trialled.

Ian Walmsley wrote about the dire economics of the 379 trial a few years ago in Modern Railways, summarised elsewhere on this forum by Philip Phlopp

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/battery-powered-train-trials.118370/#post-2247233
Hasn't Ian Walmsley revisited those numbers more recently? They still aren't great, but battery tech has moved on apace. If there's a need to look at innovative solutions a battery hybrid would be a more reasonable than the crazy whirly wheel idea. The other possibility of course would be discontinuous electrification - in particular a battery might remove the need for third rail through the tunnel, raising the possibility of re-lowering the track.

 

[Chris125]

Hasn't Ian Walmsley revisited those numbers more recently? They still aren't great, but battery tech has moved on apace. If there's a need to look at innovative solutions a battery hybrid would be a more reasonable than the crazy whirly wheel idea. The other possibility of course would be discontinuous electrification - in particular a battery might remove the need for third rail through the tunnel, raising the possibility of re-lowering the track.

They've improved but the fundamental issues of cost, weight and lifespan remain.

While battery power for traversing the tunnel is more realistic, regaining a few of the inches lost when they improved the drainage may make little difference given other gauging constraints and may just require more regular pumping - I don't think it's as big an issue as many assume, BR appeared unconcerned when proposing 503s in the 80s.

 

[jon0844]

Battery technology (including longevity, the chemical make up itself, and the charging tech) can only improve. If the development of solar charging improves immeasurably over time, you may also have other benefits there.

I can't say how long it will take, but it is definitely the future.

 

[Chester1]

Diesel and battery power the prefered options! Just waiting for a proposal to dismantle the rail pier and upgrade the road pier to support mini buses....