• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Rail-ferry connections - present and future

Status
Not open for further replies.

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,424
None in UK yet AFAIK. I think the first may be Denmark or Finland. But they are in service. Where are the electric passenger planes that have had so much development funding?

here’s a little one
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50738983

An all-electric powered seaplane has taken flight in Vancouver, Canada, in what the operators describe as a "world first" for the aviation industry.

The short test flight by Harbour Air and magniX involved a six-passenger aircraft fitted with an electric motor.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
The Connex coach service between Ashford and Calais, which used the tunnel was useful. Although you would still have the problem of poor links between Calais and De Panne. Dunquerque to De Panne is a free, regular bus, but the train service between Calais and Dunkerque is surprisingly infrequent. If there was a regular walk on coach service, say every 2 hours, between Ashford, Calais, Dunquerque and De Panne, that would be make it easy to get to both northern France and the Flemish coast and there would be no need for ferries for foot passengers.
 

Flying Snail

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Messages
1,625

The weight of current Li-Ion battery technology makes it non viable for commercial air or shipping. Hydrogen fuel cell powered electric would be technically possible but the inefficiencies of hydrogen production and fuel cell generation is not commercially viable especially against zero-tax jet fuel and bunker fuel used in shipping.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
The weight of current Li-Ion battery technology makes it non viable for commercial air or shipping. Hydrogen fuel cell powered electric would be technically possible but the inefficiencies of hydrogen production and fuel cell generation is not commercially viable especially against zero-tax jet fuel and bunker fuel used in shipping.
You had better share your superior knowledge with these people: https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/20/world-s-largest-all-electric-ferry-sets-sail-in-denmark

but maybe you don't think these ferries count as "commercial shipping!"
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,190
Location
Wittersham Kent
You had better share your superior knowledge with these people: https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/20/world-s-largest-all-electric-ferry-sets-sail-in-denmark
but maybe you don't think these ferries count as "commercial shipping!"
The Ellen as mentioned in the article has an absolute range of 14 nm it currently operates on a route of just over 10 nm 7 times a day. It has no onboard ramps or charging facilities to save weight. The Danish islands between which it operates have a surplus of electricity generated by wind power which it can't export to the mainland because of lack of capacity in their interconnector (the same as the Orkneys).
Yes it is Commercial Shipping but it represents the very limit of technology and is only really suitable for use in relatively sheltered waters and a relatively low frequency.
The technology is way, way off being viable for something like the Belfast to Cairnryan or even the majority of Cal Mac services.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
The Ellen as mentioned in the article has an absolute range of 14 nm it currently operates on a route of just over 10 nm 7 times a day. It has no onboard ramps or charging facilities to save weight. The Danish islands between which it operates have a surplus of electricity generated by wind power which it can't export to the mainland because of lack of capacity in their interconnector (the same as the Orkneys).
Yes it is Commercial Shipping but it represents the very limit of technology and is only really suitable for use in relatively sheltered waters and a relatively low frequency.
The technology is way, way off being viable for something like the Belfast to Cairnryan or even the majority of Cal Mac services.
do these count then? https://new.abb.com/marine/marine-references/forsea They may not be deep-sea, but
Tycho Brahe and Aurora annually transfer more than to 7.4 million passengers and 1.9 million vehicles between Helsingør, Denmark, and Helsingborg, Sweden.
 

Flying Snail

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Messages
1,625
You had better share your superior knowledge with these people: https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/20/world-s-largest-all-electric-ferry-sets-sail-in-denmark
but maybe you don't think these ferries count as "commercial shipping!"

First of all; dial back the attitude there pal, you wouldn't talk to someone in person like that.

Sorry but as nice as that vessel is, it is a funded project with a number of compromises to make it work on a relativly short, slow, sheltered route and at under 1000 tonnes is a world away from 40-50,000 tonne ferries that carry the majority of ro-ro traffic around Europe. There will be short routes viable for battery operation but until the technology advances significantly they will be exceptional outliers with the vast majority of shipping not an option.

Having just enough reserves to make a return trip is so far away from the real-world requirements of open sea shipping. To sail in a vessel with such limited reserves on most routes would simply not be allowed, any captain caught running a vessel without days of reserve fuel would expect to lose their job or worse. The only thing keeping a ship afloat in bad weather conditions is the ability to steer a course and no port is 100% available in all weather conditions. Even relatively short sea crossings can be subject to long periods of riding out storms at sea due to docking being too dangerous, any vessel with such limited power reserves would have to be restricted in length and very conservative weather restrictions.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
First of all; dial back the attitude there pal, you wouldn't talk to someone in person like that.

Sorry but as nice as that vessel is, it is a funded project with a number of compromises to make it work on a relativly short, slow, sheltered route and at under 1000 tonnes is a world away from 40-50,000 tonne ferries that carry the majority of ro-ro traffic around Europe. There will be short routes viable for battery operation but until the technology advances significantly they will be exceptional outliers with the vast majority of shipping not an option.

Having just enough reserves to make a return trip is so far away from the real-world requirements of open sea shipping. To sail in a vessel with such limited reserves on most routes would simply not be allowed, any captain caught running a vessel without days of reserve fuel would expect to lose their job or worse. The only thing keeping a ship afloat in bad weather conditions is the ability to steer a course and no port is 100% available in all weather conditions. Even relatively short sea crossings can be subject to long periods of riding out storms at sea due to docking being too dangerous, any vessel with such limited power reserves would have to be restricted in length and very conservative weather restrictions.
It must have escaped your notice that the diesel engines and fuel tanks are still in place down below.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
If you are going to continue with the sarcasm it would be advisable to at least be correct.
I can't find a web page to support it now, but I was surprised that their batteries were on top of the vessels! Someone pointed out to me that a) Li batteries aren't actually very heavy and b) there is still all the original kit down below for stand-by (but maybe only 1/2 a tank of fuel.)
Do you have any evidence that the old kit isn't still on board?
edit: why didn't I (or you) just look in Wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Tycho_Brahe says
Two of the four diesel engines have been removed from each ship, with the other two as a backup system
Is that enough evidence of "correct?" The original reference is here if you want it: https://www.tu.no/artikler/89-tonn-batterier-i-verdens-storste-el-ferge/348995
 
Last edited:

Struner

Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
767
Location
Ommelanden, EU
Whatever.
If it’s a matter of capacity, that will have to be improved then.
& not to worry, it will be. It’s the way forward.
 

Flying Snail

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Messages
1,625
I can't find a web page to support it now, but I was surprised that their batteries were on top of the vessels! Someone pointed out to me that a) Li batteries aren't actually very heavy and b) there is still all the original kit down below for stand-by (but maybe only 1/2 a tank of fuel.)
Do you have any evidence that the old kit isn't still on board?
edit: why didn't I (or you) just look in Wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Tycho_Brahe says
Is that enough evidence of "correct?" The original reference is here if you want it: https://www.tu.no/artikler/89-tonn-batterier-i-verdens-storste-el-ferge/348995

...Except we were talking about an entirely different ship than this one.

90 tonnes to power a 11000t vessel 5km at 14kts max. Scale that up to an 80km trip on a 50,000t ship at 21-22kts

To compare, that ferry has 4MWh battery and 2 backup diesels that have 3600hp. The ferries that operate Belfast-Cairnryan have 4 propulsion diesels that generate 61,700 hp and 3 generators giving 7,400 hp.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
OK, but the principle is established and working.
They may only be for niche applications at the moment, but will undoubtedly get more capable and spread a bit, and I can think of similar runs, like Malta to Gozo, maybe even the Italian train ferries to Sicily.
If cutting fossil fuel consumption is the principal objective then maybe designing a ship that is 15% slower but used 30%less fuel might be the way to go. Life has to change, and some of the things that dominate at the moment will have to be relegated to secondary objectives.
 

jamesontheroad

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2009
Messages
2,032

Robert Llewelyn drove a Tesla from Copenhagen to Oslo last year for the Nordic EV Forum, and en route made this video about the electric ferries operating in Denmark.

As with all technologies, the first applications are always almost comic in their scale. However if this proves reliable there is no reason it couldn’t scale up as battery packs and propulsion systems develop.
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,190
Location
Wittersham Kent
do these count then? https://new.abb.com/marine/marine-references/forsea They may not be deep-sea, but
I'm not really sure what your trying to prove. I'm a Chartered Marine Engineer with 30+ years experience in the Royal Navy.
I'm aware of these niche projects which is all they are. This post was originally about rail and ferry links that would become popular again as a result of a move to a zero carbon society. Particularly mentioned was Belfast to Cairnryan and various English Channel Routes. There remains no commercial electric ferry that is suitable for those because the size of batteries required would be huge.
 

BigCj34

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2016
Messages
761
OK, but the principle is established and working.
They may only be for niche applications at the moment, but will undoubtedly get more capable and spread a bit, and I can think of similar runs, like Malta to Gozo, maybe even the Italian train ferries to Sicily.
If cutting fossil fuel consumption is the principal objective then maybe designing a ship that is 15% slower but used 30%less fuel might be the way to go. Life has to change, and some of the things that dominate at the moment will have to be relegated to secondary objectives.

I was quite curious about catamaran services from GB that have been cut since the turn of the century, but considering they are gas guzzlers it's not too surprising. I would have though high speed ferries could become popular if people are choosing not to fly, but while still cleaner than flying it could be using twice as much fuel (total guess, correct me on this) as a classic ferry service.
 

Elwyn

Member
Joined
5 May 2014
Messages
437
Location
Co. Antrim, Ireland
I was quite curious about catamaran services from GB that have been cut since the turn of the century, but considering they are gas guzzlers it's not too surprising. I would have though high speed ferries could become popular if people are choosing not to fly, but while still cleaner than flying it could be using twice as much fuel (total guess, correct me on this) as a classic ferry service.

I used to be friendly with the Stena Manager at Belfast port some years ago and he told me that the HSS High Speed Ships they had, used about 4 times the fuel that a conventional ferry used. There was also a significant problem with their wash which meant they had to slow down all the way along Belfast Lough and in Loch Ryan, especially when they still used Stranraer (as opposed to the current pier at Cairnryan). They were also difficult to manoevre and dock in a swell or high winds. The conventional ferries were cheaper and more reliable so Stena got rid of their HSS vessels. I should think the same arguments would still apply now.
 

BigCj34

Member
Joined
5 Apr 2016
Messages
761
I used to be friendly with the Stena Manager at Belfast port some years ago and he told me that the HSS High Speed Ships they had, used about 4 times the fuel that a conventional ferry used. There was also a significant problem with their wash which meant they had to slow down all the way along Belfast Lough and in Loch Ryan, especially when they still used Stranraer (as opposed to the current pier at Cairnryan). They were also difficult to manoevre and dock in a swell or high winds. The conventional ferries were cheaper and more reliable so Stena got rid of their HSS vessels. I should think the same arguments would still apply now.

Cairnryan to Larne would be less of an issue, but doesn't really help its case regarding fuel consumption. If I'm not mistaken, a classic service from Cairnryan doesn't take that much longer than a fast did to Stanraer anyway?

I saw there used to be a fast ferry from Harwich to Hook of Holland, taking under 4 hours. As far as surface transport goes a fast ferry would have stiff competition with the direct Netherlands service the Eurostar has now. It was cancelled as it couldn't compete with low-cost airlines anyway; the extra speed didn't justify it's fuel consumption.
 

Elwyn

Member
Joined
5 May 2014
Messages
437
Location
Co. Antrim, Ireland
Yes I agree that Larne to Cairnryan would avoid most of the issues to do with the huge wash. So they’d be able to travel faster, but it doesn’t overcome the huge fuel consumption disparity or the weather related reliability issues. (And climate change is increasing the number of stormy days at sea).

The Stena manager said that the money is in the freight and what freight customers are looking for is reliability. Most modern freight works on a just in time basis. So the food you see in a Belfast supermarket today came over from GB on last nights ferry. No ferry = no fresh food. Likewise the car parts you ordered on the internet. Nobody cares much whether the ferry takes 2 hours or 3 hours. What they are concerned about is that it can be relied on to arrive. The conventional ferries can bash on in heavy weather, albeit at reduced speed, when the HSS had to be taken off. So using conventional ferries increases reliability, as well as saving money.
 

Struner

Member
Joined
13 Dec 2018
Messages
767
Location
Ommelanden, EU
Stena introduced an HSS cat on the Hoek-Harwich crossing as well. Also withdrawn (2006/8 ?) & for the same reasons.
But cats can do a proper job, just compare the performance of Serco’s Hamnavoe to Pentland Ferries’ Pentalina (now succeeded by the bigger Alfred). & the Pentland Firth isn’t the most friendliest of waters of course.
 

duesselmartin

Established Member
Joined
18 Jan 2014
Messages
1,902
Location
Duisburg, Germany
In the Holyhead route I always took Irish Ferries in the 1990s. The Stena Cat had too many cancelations in winter while the Isle of Inishmore went almost at all weather.
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
Some of us less sea friendly travellers actually like the fact that cats won't run in steep seas!
 

37201xoIM

Member
Joined
29 Apr 2016
Messages
334
Anyone remember the Boeing Jetfoil in the 1980s/'90s between Dover and Ostend? Guessing that must have drunk fuel!

As has been said above, while there are interesting and encouraging signs of progress for e-ferries, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that even diesel (or, if you really must, bunker-fuel: yuk!) vessels are massively more energy-efficient than aircraft per passenger or tonne of freight: as with rail vs. road it's down to basic physics combined with a healthy dose of economies of scale.

Worth also flagging that the majority of carbon emissions unit comparisons (including DfT's unless it's changed lately) don't apply any multiplier to aviation emissions to reflect the increased radiative forcing effect of emissions at high altitude. While the correct value for such is not agreed amongst the scientific authorities, values between 2 and 4 (as multipliers to aviation) seem to cover the consensus - and there seems little sound argument for ignoring it entirely!

PS My compliments on the wonderfully condescending and self-important post suggesting that those of us who don't as a rule fly are trainspotters without full-time jobs. Let's just let that gem stand on its own merits, I suggest!
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
As has been said above, while there are interesting and encouraging signs of progress for e-ferries, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that even diesel (or, if you really must, bunker-fuel: yuk!) vessels are massively more energy-efficient than aircraft per passenger or tonne of freight: as with rail vs. road it's down to basic physics combined with a healthy dose of economies of scale.

Worth also flagging that the majority of carbon emissions unit comparisons (including DfT's unless it's changed lately) don't apply any multiplier to aviation emissions to reflect the increased radiative forcing effect of emissions at high altitude. While the correct value for such is not agreed amongst the scientific authorities, values between 2 and 4 (as multipliers to aviation) seem to cover the consensus - and there seems little sound argument for ignoring it entirely!
This hasn't had much publicity, but it was mentioned in a Beeb article recently (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51007504,
How to travel by train - and ditch the plane)
I didn't realise that was where your text came from, but the graphic is worth showing too:
In August, Swedish climate change campaigner Greta Thunberg set an example by crossing the Atlantic in a zero-emissions yacht.

If she had made the return journey from the UK to New York by air, she would have emitted 11% of the average annual emissions for someone in the UK, or the total caused by someone living in Ghana for a year.

The aviation industry contributes about 2% of the world's carbon emissions, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), and this is predicted to rise, with air passenger numbers expected to double by 2037.
_110412910_51e93821-2fbf-4b6c-be31-21b1970bfd74.jpg
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
From https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ng-stock-updates.143516/page-119#post-4382474 about the ferry service being canned so often:
I agree the current service is unacceptable but for those on the ground, between a rock and a hard place, it is the least disruptive option.

Foot passengers heading north off the ferry are usually in single figures in my occasional observations. If a train has to be cancelled it is better that one than one full of Ipswich commuters and students coming off one of the branches at that time of day.

By definition, the option that gives the least delay repay liability is the one that inconveniences the fewest passengers.
Are the ferry train passengers in single figures in part because the train services are so unreliable, though?

And as I was trying to hint at, the current thing of delay repay as almost the only metric effectively discriminates against ferry passengers by ignoring that boat train cancellations leaves them unexpectedly dragging luggage across mutiple stations. It may inconvience fewer passengers but massively.
 

chiltern trev

Member
Joined
28 Mar 2011
Messages
385
Location
near Carlisle
Helsingor.

We had a one week holiday to Denmark in August/September this year and stayed in Helsingor and used the trains a lot and one round trip on the ferry to Helsingborg www.forsea.com.

The ferry service runs 24 hours. The base service Mon-Sat from around 06.00-22.00 is a ferry every 20 minutes - at busy times (certain peak times or summer months) the service is every 15 minutes. The travel time is 20 minutes with 10 minute turnround so each ferry does one round trip every 60 minutes and it runs to time.

The service is normally run by 3 ferries (M/F Tycho Brahe (1991), M/F Aurora (1991) and M/F Hamlet (1997) all of the same design (but not identical) with a 4th older ferry (Mercandia IV) (to provide the 15minute frequency) and a 5h older ferry (Mercandia V) as a backup.

M/F Tycho Brahe and M/F Aurora were built to take cars, lorries, coaches and trains - so they are double ended (and can go either way) roll on roll off ferries with rails built into the car deck - 3 lines for 9 carriages.

But The Bridge put an end to the train ferry. On our visit there was no sign of rails on the vehicle deck (plated over or deck plating replaced), or in the quayside ramp or the approach from the station to the quayside ramp. The relevant ferry docks and ramps have not moved and remain in use.

You can see the stub remains of the line/siding that went from the side of the station to the ferries, on the right of this picture - https://www.flickr.com/photos/peter.../www.flickr.com/photos/peter2222/34738053855/

The above picture is taken from a passenger footbridge linking all the platforms at the platform mid-point. The ferry terminal building is the yellow building right of centre and there is a covered high level fully glazed walkway all undercover direct to the 2 ferry berths hiding at the right of the picture. The ferry berths are about 100m beyond the front of the station so the raised walkway is 200m-400m.

As has already been said earlier, there are now electric ferries on this route. M/F Tycho Brahe and M/F Aurora were built with 4 diesel engines. About 2-3 years ago, 2 diesel engines were removed and 4mw of batteries installed. So the ferries cross quietly and at each port an arm clamps onto the ferries side to provide the fast charge/recharge - 10 minutes charge for a 20 minutes crossing. M/F Hamlet has not been converted. There is a low point around 3am when the frequency drops to one an hour - perhaps an electric recharge catch-up opportunity?

To the left of the picture is the bus station and then the shops so the station is in a good central location between the shops and The Sound.

The train service from Helsingor -> Copenhagen -> Copenhagen Airport is 24 hour and operated by the Oresundstag units (over 100 of them). The Monday to Saturday base service from about 06.00 to 21.00 is every 20 minutes so thus both the trains and ferries can be classed as a turn up and go service. Trains continue to and from various Swedish locations with up to a 3 hour journey time in Sweden plus 1 hour from Helsingor to The Bridge - except late evening to early morning and no through service on Sundays (connections at Copenhagen/Airport)
 
Last edited:

jamesontheroad

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2009
Messages
2,032
From https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ng-stock-updates.143516/page-119#post-4382474 about the ferry service being canned so often:

Are the ferry train passengers in single figures in part because the train services are so unreliable, though?

And as I was trying to hint at, the current thing of delay repay as almost the only metric effectively discriminates against ferry passengers by ignoring that boat train cancellations leaves them unexpectedly dragging luggage across mutiple stations. It may inconvience fewer passengers but massively.

Call me a cynic, but in addition to this the delay repay liability to Greater Anglia for cancelling a train from Harwich International is much less than a “normal” train. Stena Line Rail & Sail passengers aren’t issued with normal train tickets with a face value, just a print-at-home PDF.
 

306024

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
3,942
Location
East Anglia
You’re a cynic ;)

The cancellation of the Parkeston to Ipswich leg of the morning Parkeston - Cambridge train is the first option when GA is short of one diesel unit. This allows other units to step up at Ipswich and is the least damaging of options, both in terms of cancellations and the number of passengers affected. Nothing more than that.​
 

ashkeba

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2019
Messages
2,171
You’re a cynic ;)

The cancellation of the Parkeston to Ipswich leg of the morning Parkeston - Cambridge train is the first option when GA is short of one diesel unit. This allows other units to step up at Ipswich and is the least damaging of options, both in terms of cancellations and the number of passengers affected. Nothing more than that.​
Most damaging in terms of inconvenicing fewer passengers more and of reputation: welcome home / welcome to British railways: eff you if you're not a commuter. Hopefully once all 755s are in service, this will both have decent trains and stop getting canned at the drop of a feather.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top