New trains for East Midlands Franchise

[hwl]

Exactly, and the chance of an emergency is very slim, so not worth the hassle of changing couplers.

I believe the 180s have Schaffenburg couplers

Until 2023 when all the existing stock has gone and the new stock will be the same.

SWT changed their 458s to Dellner for emergency coupling.

 

[edwin_m]

I believe 168 (except /0), 170 and 171 are all basically "170s", and any with Dellner couplers rather than BSI have to be 171s, and any that go to Chiltern have to be 168s (some of the 171s are former 170s and other 171s were 171s from new, and some other former 170s went to Chiltern and became 168s) - I'm not sure using the "wrong" classification would be allowed, and would be confusing!

Just to clarify, 168 and 170 have the same mechanical coupler but different wiring of the electrical coupler so 168 can multiple with 165/166 and 170 can multiple with 150-159. The reason for the change in wiring on 165/166 is alleged to be that Network SoutEast didn't want Provincial nabbing their units!

 

[swt_passenger]

Exactly, and the chance of an emergency is very slim, so not worth the hassle of changing couplers.

I believe the 180s have Scharfenburg couplers

Scharfenberg and Dellner are basically the same thing, the naming comes down to historic licensing deals for the technology.

 

[squizzler]

- however, new bi-modes were mandated for St Pancras - Sheffield/Nottingham services; moreover, they had to be able to match the performance of the 222s, and this was described in such a way as to make it clear that this was when working in non-electric mode as well as when as straight electrics.

- DfT acknowledged that a bi-mode which met this requirement didn't exist at the time the ITT was issued, and laid down when a prototype had to be delivered to this country for testing.

In light of the experience of the Hitachi AT300 family I suspect that the bi-mode performance under diesel will be rolled back to something around that of the 802 as the realities of trying to match the Meridians strike home. The Hitachi was designed as a bi-mode and does not have that performance. What hope Bombardier has by nailing a few gennies to the underside of their current EMU, I don't know.

Mystic Squizzler predicts disappointment in the prototype bi-mode will coincide with a new enthusiasm to electrify off the back of public pressure and the research into cheaper wiring that will be coming to fruition at that time.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In light of the experience of the Hitachi AT300 family I suspect that the bi-mode performance under diesel will be rolled back to something around that of the 802 as the realities of trying to match the Meridians strike home. The Hitachi was designed as a bi-mode and does not have that performance. What hope Bombardier has by nailing a few gennies to the underside of their current EMU, I don't know.

Given that a Meridian is an EMU with diesel engines under it and the pantograph/transformer left off, I don't see why a bi-mode of suitable performance could not be built. Particularly as there are now options like batteries which could aid low-down acceleration.

 

[Dave1987]

Given that a Meridian is an EMU with diesel engines under it and the pantograph/transformer left off, I don't see why a bi-mode of suitable performance could not be built. Particularly as there are now options like batteries which could aid low-down acceleration.

Would you care to explain how you would defy the laws of physics? You statement sounds exactly like that of an Minister or SoS in the Government. Batteries are only able to provide so much output per kilogram in weight. By adding batteries to bi-modes you add yet more weight to an already heavy train. The class 80X already stands at 60 tonnes per coach. The more weight you add with batteries the more power you need to accelerate that weight. The whole bi-mode concept is a compromise because the Government cancelled the ultimate solution of putting up the wires.

 

[anamyd]

Just to clarify, 168 and 170 have the same mechanical coupler but different wiring of the electrical coupler so 168 can multiple with 165/166 and 170 can multiple with 150-159. The reason for the change in wiring on 165/166 is alleged to be that Network SoutEast didn't want Provincial nabbing their units!

Thanks for the explanation; I thought there must have been some reason why the 168s with 170-looking cab ends are classified as such!

 

[DanDaDriver]

Given that a Meridian is an EMU with diesel engines under it and the pantograph/transformer left off, I don't see why a bi-mode of suitable performance could not be built. Particularly as there are now options like batteries which could aid low-down acceleration.

Bombardier we’re developing a pantograph car for Meridians at one stage. I don’t know how far they got. I remember one Bombardier engineer saying they got quite far but encountered a “lack of interest,” from the DFT.

 

[anamyd]

Scharfenberg and Dellner are basically the same thing, the naming comes down to historic licensing deals for the technology.

I believe Dellner couplers are based on Scharfenberg couplers but are incompatible and have some added features...?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe Dellner couplers are based on Scharfenberg couplers but are incompatible and have some added features...?

Scharfenberg is the generic name based on who invented it. Dellner is a company that developed one version of it:

Dellner

Dellner coupler on a British Rail Class 221 Virgin Trains Voyager
The Swedish-made Dellner coupling,[28] is a proprietary version of the Scharfenberg coupler, connecting vehicle, pneumatics and electronics at the same time. The patented energy absorption D-BOX technology allows coupling at speeds of up to 15 kilometres per hour (9 mph) with no structural damage, and up to 36 kilometres per hour (22 mph) with deformation but with the vehicles remaining on track. The patented D-REX system provides Ethernet high speed data connection at speeds of 100 Mbit/s.

(from Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_coupling#Dellner)

 

[anamyd]

Scharfenberg is the generic name based on who invented it. Dellner is a company that developed one version of it:

(from Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_coupling#Dellner)

Thanks for linking me that article, I assume it hasn't changed since I Iast read it recently So can you couple a 175/180 to a Dellner fitted unit...? I'm guessing not, since the word "proprietary" is mentioned...?

 

[anamyd]

Re: TfW fleet going off-lease

I think that reason is ERTMS, as opposed to 175 reliability.

If the 158s were withdrawn first, you'd need to introduce the (more complex) ERTMS subfleet of the new CAF units first. Done the other way around, the conventional CAF units will already be in service when the ERTMS ones are introduced, and will be properly shaken down / fitters will be accustomed to them. So the usual snag list will be spread out over two periods, instead of front-loaded on the first subfleet.

Very good point!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Bombardier we’re developing a pantograph car for Meridians at one stage. I don’t know how far they got. I remember one Bombardier engineer saying they got quite far but encountered a “lack of interest,” from the DFT.

That's because the DfT were trying to find work to give to Derby after Siemens beat them to the 700 order.
Then they discovered the Voyager/Meridian family was essentially a Belgian design and an e-version wouldn't have generated much work for Derby.
But then they ordered several tranches of 377 and 387 for Derby to build, also TfL's Aventras for Crossrail, so the problem went away.
There were also other technical issues with the e-Voyager which would have added a lot of cost to reconfigure the fleet, so interest vanished.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's because the DfT were trying to find work to give to Derby after Siemens beat them to the 700 order.
Then they discovered the Voyager/Meridian family was essentially a Belgian design and an e-version wouldn't have generated much work for Derby.
But then they ordered several tranches of 377 and 387 for Derby to build, also TfL's Aventras for Crossrail, so the problem went away.
There were also other technical issues with the e-Voyager which would have added a lot of cost to reconfigure the fleet, so interest vanished.

Indeed. Though that isn't so important as that because a Meridian is a DEMU, there is no reason that same specification could not be applied to a new bi-mode and therefore create a bi-mode with the required performance. Or put differently, just because 800s are not very good doesn't mean another unit also isn't very good.

 

[Prestige15]

I've heard that the regional fleet will be made up of 171s and 170s. 360s on Corby is also another thing I heard rumoured. The fleet will definitely not include 153s, 158s or 156s.

I like to think it would be 170's from WMT when they go off lease. but some say chances of those sets ending up with Northern, XC or Chiltern are quite steep. Then theres the 175 whish is going off lease around the same time as the 170's, and im currently not seeing any other potential homes other than East Midlands.

Then theres the 350/2, 360 and 379 that needs a home, Myself and most people here believe the 379 is the more efficient option as its alread has 2+2/2+1 layout which can easily be refresh by adding EMR colors to it rather than doing more work to 360's, It is possible they can get upgraded to 110mph too.

It has mention ''modern, faster, aircon fleet for regional' so i can only speculate it would be 170/175 or possibly even the fat 185's if TPE fails to take over the Nottingham - Liverpool section.

 

[Qwerty133]

I like to think it would be 170's from WMT when they go off lease. but some say chances of those sets ending up with Northern, XC or Chiltern are quite steep. Then theres the 175 whish is going off lease around the same time as the 170's, and im currently not seeing any other potential homes other than East Midlands.

Then theres the 350/2, 360 and 379 that needs a home, Myself and most people here believe the 379 is the more efficient option as its alread has 2+2/2+1 layout which can easily be refresh by adding EMR colors to it rather than doing more work to 360's, It is possible they can get upgraded to 110mph too.

It has mention ''modern, faster, aircon fleet for regional' so i can only speculate it would be 170/175 or possibly even the fat 185's if TPE fails to take over the Nottingham - Liverpool section.

The 360s are approaching the point in their expected lifespan at which a major internal refurbishment is likely to be considered in any case, so with them going off lease I'd imagine that any future deal on them would include such a refurbishment and I see no reason why a 2+2 fitout with tables would be significantly more expensive than a more commuter-style layout.

 

[swt_passenger]

Thanks for linking me that article, I assume it hasn't changed since I Iast read it recently So can you couple a 175/180 to a Dellner fitted unit...? I'm guessing not, since the word "proprietary" is mentioned...?

As a generalisation, only the mechanical coupling is ever compatible. If it’s the right height it ought to be theoretically possible to rescue another unit. But then the electrical connector box positions, guide horns, gangway doors etc etc are the cause of restrictions.

Instead of going by Wikipedia, the RSSB historic guide (linked below) has all the various Dellner/Scharfenberg types grouped under one generic type M007...
https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/reldocs/sd001 iss 2.pdf

 

[The Ham]

it's a bit of a finger-pointing exercide I know!
no chance the 180's would be running at 125mph!

I'm just wondering how useful 90mph sets of 159's would be on SWT...you could gain a bit of time with a 100mph set of 180's.
not going to get their legs stretched on EMT lines,while 159's would get a bit of work.

the 180's might be a bit more reliable with a steady 100mph working.

Although others have pointed out that capacity is important on the SWR services a pair of 180's is just 14 seats short of 3*159's.

Now it could be possible to allocate them to the few diagrams which don't run into/out of Waterloo in peak times.

This could release 159's to either strengthen WofE line services or to release 158's to then strengthen WofE line services.

 

[anamyd]

As a generalisation, only the mechanical coupling is ever compatible. If it’s the right height it ought to be theoretically possible to rescue another unit. But then the electrical connector box positions, guide horns, gangway doors etc etc are the cause of restrictions.

Instead of going by Wikipedia, the RSSB historic guide (linked below) has all the various Dellner/Scharfenberg types grouped under one generic type M007...
https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/reldocs/sd001 iss 2.pdf

Thanks for the link

 

[43096]

That's because the DfT were trying to find work to give to Derby after Siemens beat them to the 700 order.
Then they discovered the Voyager/Meridian family was essentially a Belgian design and an e-version wouldn't have generated much work for Derby.
But then they ordered several tranches of 377 and 387 for Derby to build, also TfL's Aventras for Crossrail, so the problem went away.
There were also other technical issues with the e-Voyager which would have added a lot of cost to reconfigure the fleet, so interest vanished.

The Voyagers and Meridians have Alstom traction kit, too.

It was reported at the time that Bombardier were quoting silly prices for eVoyager which was another reason it got binned.

 

[edwin_m]

Indeed. Though that isn't so important as that because a Meridian is a DEMU, there is no reason that same specification could not be applied to a new bi-mode and therefore create a bi-mode with the required performance. Or put differently, just because 800s are not very good doesn't mean another unit also isn't very good.

The Hitachi solution is to fit transformers to the end cars and diesels to the intermediate ones, so it appears the transformer is about the same size and weight as a diesel engine but you only need one for about every five cars. A 9-car unit of the basic bi-mode design is about the same length as a 10-car Meridian, the maximum for St Pancras, but with the existing Hitachi design this would have only seven diesels compared with ten for the Meridian. Assuming both engines are the most powerful available to fit the space, it would also have 70% of the installed power. This is probably true of any bi-mode unless somebody can find a way of fitting a diesel and a transformer into the same coach.

However, according to Wikipedia a 9-car class 800 weighs 438 tonnes. There's no weight quoted for a 222 but if the 60 tonnes per car mentioned above is accurate then the 80x is 73% of its weight, so performance would probably be very similar. I think the 80x also has more than 50% axles motored, in which case it would have better accelleration at low speeds.

Comparison of half-length sets gives a fairly similar result, assuming Hitachi can engineer a diesel in one of the end cars as these sets would need only one transformer. However if a (say) 7-car needs two transformers then its performance on diesel would fall a bit short.

I don't think we know the power or the weight of the prospective Bombardier bi-mode. A similar length class 345 is only 264 tonnes but that could go up quite a bit with all those diesels and the extra structual requirements for 125mph.

 

[43096]

The Hitachi solution is to fit transformers to the end cars and diesels to the intermediate ones, so it appears the transformer is about the same size and weight as a diesel engine but you only need one for about every five cars. A 9-car unit of the basic bi-mode design is about the same length as a 10-car Meridian, the maximum for St Pancras, but with the existing Hitachi design this would have only seven diesels compared with ten for the Meridian. Assuming both engines are the most powerful available to fit the space, it would also have 70% of the installed power. This is probably true of any bi-mode unless somebody can find a way of fitting a diesel and a transformer into the same coach.

However, according to Wikipedia a 9-car class 800 weighs 438 tonnes. There's no weight quoted for a 222 but if the 60 tonnes per car mentioned above is accurate then the 80x is 73% of its weight, so performance would probably be very similar. I think the 80x also has more than 50% axles motored, in which case it would have better accelleration at low speeds.

Comparison of half-length sets gives a fairly similar result, assuming Hitachi can engineer a diesel in one of the end cars as these sets would need only one transformer. However if a (say) 7-car needs two transformers then its performance on diesel would fall a bit short.

I don't think we know the power or the weight of the prospective Bombardier bi-mode. A similar length class 345 is only 264 tonnes but that could go up quite a bit with all those diesels and the extra structual requirements for 125mph.

There comes a point where having many small(er) engines becomes grossly inefficient and costly. The tipping point is around five vehicles, after which you’re better off with a diesel power car. Stadler could offer such a thing, having the Class 68 (which could be modified for 125mph and one cab) and using FLIRT coaches (effectively a cab-less EMU).

 

[Bletchleyite]

There comes a point where having many small(er) engines becomes grossly inefficient and costly. The tipping point is around five vehicles, after which you’re better off with a diesel power car. Stadler could offer such a thing, having the Class 68 (which could be modified for 125mph and one cab) and using FLIRT coaches (effectively a cab-less EMU).

Stadler make conventional coaches as well - doesn't have to be a FLIRT, though the benefits from low-floor and level boarding are obvious and would be most welcome.

https://www.stadlerrail.com/de/produkte/detail-all/wagen/54/

(Amazed it hasn't got a silly name...)

 

[cactustwirly]

Stadler make conventional coaches as well - doesn't have to be a FLIRT, though the benefits from low-floor and level boarding are obvious and would be most welcome.

https://www.stadlerrail.com/de/produkte/detail-all/wagen/54/

(Amazed it hasn't got a silly name...)

So do Siemens, in their Viaggio product line, which is the best intercity train I've been on!
I don't think it's too the UK loading gauge unfortunately.

Well it is 'DARE'

 

[edwin_m]

There comes a point where having many small(er) engines becomes grossly inefficient and costly. The tipping point is around five vehicles, after which you’re better off with a diesel power car. Stadler could offer such a thing, having the Class 68 (which could be modified for 125mph and one cab) and using FLIRT coaches (effectively a cab-less EMU).

However another consideration is maximising passenger space within a limited platform length.

To achieve anything close to Meridian performance the "power cars" would have to feed power into the electric traction motors on the rest of the train, as was proposed for the original version of the IET. The Meridian is 750HP per coach so a 10-coach equivalent would need 3750HP each end, about the same as a class 68, but 125mph capability might limit the axle loading.

 

[Chester1]

In light of the experience of the Hitachi AT300 family I suspect that the bi-mode performance under diesel will be rolled back to something around that of the 802 as the realities of trying to match the Meridians strike home. The Hitachi was designed as a bi-mode and does not have that performance. What hope Bombardier has by nailing a few gennies to the underside of their current EMU, I don't know.

Mystic Squizzler predicts disappointment in the prototype bi-mode will coincide with a new enthusiasm to electrify off the back of public pressure and the research into cheaper wiring that will be coming to fruition at that time.

Its highly unlikely that the 800 and 802s are the most powerful bi modes that Hitachi can design. They were not meant to run at 125mph on diesel power and the design reflects that.

The Hitachi solution is to fit transformers to the end cars and diesels to the intermediate ones, so it appears the transformer is about the same size and weight as a diesel engine but you only need one for about every five cars. A 9-car unit of the basic bi-mode design is about the same length as a 10-car Meridian, the maximum for St Pancras, but with the existing Hitachi design this would have only seven diesels compared with ten for the Meridian. Assuming both engines are the most powerful available to fit the space, it would also have 70% of the installed power. This is probably true of any bi-mode unless somebody can find a way of fitting a diesel and a transformer into the same coach.

However, according to Wikipedia a 9-car class 800 weighs 438 tonnes. There's no weight quoted for a 222 but if the 60 tonnes per car mentioned above is accurate then the 80x is 73% of its weight, so performance would probably be very similar. I think the 80x also has more than 50% axles motored, in which case it would have better accelleration at low speeds.

Comparison of half-length sets gives a fairly similar result, assuming Hitachi can engineer a diesel in one of the end cars as these sets would need only one transformer. However if a (say) 7-car needs two transformers then its performance on diesel would fall a bit short.

I don't think we know the power or the weight of the prospective Bombardier bi-mode. A similar length class 345 is only 264 tonnes but that could go up quite a bit with all those diesels and the extra structual requirements for 125mph.

https://www.rrpowersystems.com/news...red_supplier_for_hitachi_super_express_train/

Tognum is preferred supplier for Hitachi Super Express Train
Sep 19, 2012

• 250 MTU Powerpacks for Intercity Express Programme (IEP)
• Delivery 2013 to 2018
• Additional maintenance contract covers service life of trains
• Dr Michael Haidinger, Tognum, and Alistair Dormer, Hitachi, agree cooperation on IEP project at Innotrans 2012 in Berlin

Friedrichshafen/Berlin, September 19, 2012. Tognum subsidiary MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH is to supply Hitachi Rail Europe Ltd. with 250 Powerpacks with Series 1600 rail engines. Hitachi and MTU have also agreed comprehensive maintenance contract for the drive plants to cover the service life of the trains. The total value of the contracts to be completed exceeds €200 million. The Powerpacks are set to drive Hitachi’s future high-speed Super Express Trains which are scheduled to go into service from 2017 on Great Western Main Line and East Coast Main Line routes as part of the British Intercity Express Programme. Delivery is scheduled between 2013 and 2018 and the maintenance contract is to run from 2017. “At Tognum, we are proud that the outstanding reliability of our Powerpacks and our extensive experience with comprehensive maintenance contracts will allow us to be part of the Intercity Express Programme and partners of Hitachi,” said Tognum Chief Sales Officer Dr Michael Haidinger at a joint press conference with Hitachi at the Innotrans 2012 rail exhibition in Berlin.

The MTU Powerpacks for the Hitachi railcars are diesel-electric underfloor drive units producing 700kW. At the heart of the package is the 12-cylinder MTU 12V 1600 R80L diesel engine. The unit meets EU Stage IIIB emissions regulations which came into force in 2012 and is fitted with an SCR exhaust gas aftertreatment system. Along with the engine and generator, the Powerpack contains all the subsidiary assemblies needed to drive the vehicle. As well as purely electric vehicles, the Super Express Train family includes bi-mode trains which operate solely on electricity where overhead lines are available but also run as diesel-electric units on non-electrified routes. The pure electric trains are also set to be fitted with one Powerpack each for auxiliary power. Depending on their length, bi-mode vehicles will each have three (five-unit trains), four (eight-unit trains) or five (nine-unit trains) Powerpacks. Prior to today’s announcement, Hitachi has already started intensive tests at their own facilities in Japan using a Powerpack prototype specially prepared by MTU for the joint project. The test program focused on fuel consumption, noise and vibration, power and exhaust emissions.

MTU warranties the availability of the drive plants over the service life of the trains. The comprehensive maintenance contract which accompanies the warranty covers preventive maintenance as well as repairs and major overhauls. In addition to its East Grinstead workshop which has been specially extended for the project, MTU is planning to station its own service personnel at rail depots in North Pole (London) and Doncaster (South Yorkshire). Engines for the current generation of British InterCity 125 high-speed trains were likewise supplied by MTU and the company also implemented a similar service concept covering preventive and corrective maintenance of the vehicles. Based at East Grinstead in West Sussex, MTU’s British subsidiary MTU UK Ltd. is responsible the service program.

That press release seems to confirm its 3 diesel engines for a 5 coach set and 5 for 9 coach. That would mean that no additional engines could be fitted to 5 coach sets without a major redesign. I don't see why the franchise needs any shorts sets. While the current mix has useful aspects its not the most efficient for capacity. A 9 coach set with 7 instead of 5 diesel engines of 940hp (a total of 6580hp) would nearly match a Meridan's hp (a 9 coach Meridan would be 750 x 9 = 6750hp). By comparison the original software restricted IET design had 3750hp, now uprated to 4750hp. Hitachi should be able to design a 9 coach, 7 engined variant of the 800/802 that can match a Meridian, the hp would nearly match, the bi modes will be heavier but the Meridians are over 15 years older and technology has moved on. A small battery for extra acceleration on diesel power might be an option?

 

[grumpyoldman01]

The Voyagers and Meridians have Alstom traction kit, too.

It was reported at the time that Bombardier were quoting silly prices for eVoyager which was another reason it got binned.

And it was Preston designed and built, too.

I was told by a person who held a senior position at Alstom at the time the bi-mode conversion was being considered that Bombardier tried to do the change using their own electrics, and that Alstom was not even invited to join the party.

 

[43096]

However another consideration is maximising passenger space within a limited platform length.

To achieve anything close to Meridian performance the "power cars" would have to feed power into the electric traction motors on the rest of the train, as was proposed for the original version of the IET. The Meridian is 750HP per coach so a 10-coach equivalent would need 3750HP each end, about the same as a class 68, but 125mph capability might limit the axle loading.

Hence my suggestion of a cab-less FLIRT for the stock: it would have pantograph, transformer etc (for use under 25kV) and traction motors, which would be fed from the power car under diesel. A single cab 68 would help reduce weight, as would distributing the motors through the rest of the train; you’d only need one or two traction motors on the power car, as much for moving them around in depots as anything else.

 

[edwin_m]

That press release seems to confirm its 3 diesel engines for a 5 coach set and 5 for 9 coach. That would mean that no additional engines could be fitted to 5 coach sets without a major redesign. I don't see why the franchise needs any shorts sets. While the current mix has useful aspects its not the most efficient for capacity. A 9 coach set with 7 instead of 5 diesel engines of 940hp (a total of 6580hp) would nearly match a Meridan's hp (a 9 coach Meridan would be 750 x 9 = 6750hp). By comparison the original software restricted IET design had 3750hp, now uprated to 4750hp. Hitachi should be able to design a 9 coach, 7 engined variant of the 800/802 that can match a Meridian, the hp would nearly match, the bi modes will be heavier but the Meridians are over 15 years older and technology has moved on. A small battery for extra acceleration on diesel power might be an option?

Interesting. Although a fair comparison with a 9-coach 80x would have to be a 10-coach Meridian, as this has similar length and passenger space (athough the 80x would probably have a lot more seats).

The Voyager/Meridian was a heavyweight even by the standards of its time, although the 185 was even worse.

 

[Mr Greedy]

Let's just hope someone, somewhere has got a plan that's going to surprise us all