Abellio Greater Anglia Class 755s (Regional Trains)

[Trainbike46]

Yes it has been but not taken any further so far.

Are you in a position to share why it hasn't been taken further so far (no worries if not!)

It seems like a very advantageous thing to add traction batteries to the 3-car 755s

 

[superkev]

If I understand correctly, the three car units have blocks of weight installed instead of the missing engines. If that's right, has consideration been given to putting in traction batteries instead (with the same weight)?

I would have thought the engine compartment was the last place to install batteries due to heat vibration etc.
K

 

[Trainbike46]

I would have thought the engine compartment was the last place to install batteries due to heat vibration etc.
K

On the 756, batteries are in the powerpack

 

[dk1]

Are you in a position to share why it hasn't been taken further so far (no worries if not!)

It seems like a very advantageous thing to add traction batteries to the 3-car 755s

Probably just cost mate. Who pays, GA, DfT, Stadler or leasing company? It's not something that was specified in the original order and as we know, this country seems to have lost some interest in greener transport options.

 

[Peter Sarf]

If I understand correctly, the three car units have blocks of weight installed instead of the missing engines. If that's right, has consideration been given to putting in traction batteries instead (with the same weight)?

I imagine the duties the 755s carry out are not ideal for batteries. Long stretches on diesel only mean that a battery would not be so useful. Granted not a step backwards if the batteries are replacing a dead weight except for the cost of the batteries and the ongoing maintenance.

To draw a parallel the 231s have no batteries as they will eventually spend considerable amounts of time away from electrified routes. The 756s will take over from the 231s on the valleys when these routes are largely electrified - the batteries will only need to provide power for smaller un-electrified sections.

 

[Trainbike46]

Probably just cost mate. Who pays, GA, DfT, Stadler or leasing company? It's not something that was specified in the original order and as we know, this country seems to have lost some interest in greener transport options.

Cheers mate. Unfortunately you are probably right. I guess GA, and therefore finally the government in the current contract set-up, would pay for it
Let's hope that the next government regains some interest in transport and the environment

 

[AdamWW]

If I understand correctly, the three car units have blocks of weight installed instead of the missing engines. If that's right, has consideration been given to putting in traction batteries instead (with the same weight)?

Why would they need weighting? I'd always assumed the two engines were on opposite sides (and that's why they only come with two or four engines).

Can't be for adhesion because the motor bogies are under the cabs not the power pack.

 

[Trainbike46]

I imagine the duties the 755s carry out are not ideal for batteries. Long stretches on diesel only mean that a battery would not be so useful. Granted not a step backwards if the batteries are replacing a dead weight except for the cost of the batteries and the ongoing maintenance.

To draw a parallel the 231s have no batteries as they will eventually spend considerable amounts of time away from electrified routes. The 756s will take over from the 231s on the valleys when these routes are largely electrified - the batteries will only need to provide power for smaller un-electrified sections.

The batteries would be useful for regenerative braking, as well as for faster accelleration, no need to have diesel engines on at the terminals (trains seem to stand for 10-20 minutes at Lowestoft), and less diesel use as less of the energy needs to be supplied by the diesel engine and less idling. Granted, it is unlikely to be a massive reduction in diesel use, but similarly cost is unlikely to be high too

What maintenance would batteries require?

The 231s don't have batteries because they, like the 4-car 755s, have diesel engines in all 4 bays of the powerpack, so there is no space for a battery. I do still think tfw should have got 755s rather than 231s though, a pantograph would have been useful

Why would they need weighting? I'd always assumed the two engines were on opposite sides (and that's why they only come with two or four engines).

Can't be for adhesion because the motor bogies are under the cabs not the power pack.

Maybe @dk1 knows? I just know that they're reported to have been weighted, no clue why it was done

 

[AlexNL]

I imagine the duties the 755s carry out are not ideal for batteries. Long stretches on diesel only mean that a battery would not be so useful.

Batteries could still play a minor role to reduce emissions, the trains could draw power from the batteries while starting from a stand and only later on have the diesel engines kick in. This reduces emissions, a desirable thing within an urban area.

 

[ac6000cw]

Why would they need weighting? I'd always assumed the two engines were on opposite sides (and that's why they only come with two or four engines).

The power car needs to have even weight distribution so it stays basically upright on its suspension and the wheel loads are even. (The old parcels vans used to say on their sides something like "Load x tons evenly distributed" for the same reason).

It's also why large heavy items on locos like diesel engines, fuel tanks, transformers etc. are usually placed near the centre of the loco.

 

[AdamWW]

The power car needs to have even weight distribution so it stays basically upright on its suspension. (The old parcels vans used to say on their sides something like "Load x tons evenly distributed" for the same reasons).

OK so it's not about balance on the two sides, but front-back?

 

[RailWonderer]

Batteries could still play a minor role to reduce emissions, the trains could draw power from the batteries while starting from a stand and only later on have the diesel engines kick in. This reduces emissions, a desirable thing within an urban area.

Back in 2016 when the order was placed battery technology was nowhere as advanced as it is now, there was far less net zero lip service anywhere really. A lot has changed in 7 years.

 

[Energy]

I imagine the duties the 755s carry out are not ideal for batteries. Long stretches on diesel only mean that a battery would not be so useful. Granted not a step backwards if the batteries are replacing a dead weight except for the cost of the batteries and the ongoing maintenance.

No, they'd be fine, the 755s spend a lot of time under wires (they pan up at Norwich) so plenty of time to recharge. The Wherry lines aren't particularly long, easily done on Stadler's claimed 150 mile range.

Back in 2016 when the order was placed battery technology was nowhere as advanced as it is now, there was far less net zero lip service anywhere really. A lot has changed in 7 years.

Indeed, back in 2016 battery range wasn't near what it is now.

 

[dk1]

Cheers mate. Unfortunately you are probably right. I guess GA, and therefore finally the government in the current contract set-up, would pay for it
Let's hope that the next government regains some interest in transport and the environment

Fingers crossed but experience tells us that they are often all as bad as each other once in power.

 

[ac6000cw]

No, they'd be fine, the 755s spend a lot of time under wires (they pan up at Norwich) so plenty of time to recharge. The Wherry lines aren't particularly long, easily done on Stadler's claimed 150 mile range.

I basically agree with you, but the current 755 routes also include trips like (Ipswich)-Stowmarket-Bury-Ely-March-Peterborough and return all on diesel - it's not just about the Wherry lines.

 

[dk1]

I basically agree with you, but the current 755 routes also include trips like (Ipswich)-Stowmarket-Bury-Ely-March-Peterborough and return all on diesel - it's not just about the Wherry lines.

Also Wherry line services inter-work with the East Suffolk line.

 

[Trainbike46]

Remember, the suggestion wasn't to remove any diesel engines, but only to add batteries, so they would be fine on any route - though the benefits of the battery would be more pronounced on some routes compared to others

 

[dk1]

Remember as well that there are only 14 x 755/3s that have the weighted battery space in the power-pack. This leaves the 24 x 755/4s unable to have similar treatment. All units work all routes except the Sudbury branch which is 755/3 only. Maybe this is another reason why the battery option has not been taken any further.

 

[ac6000cw]

OK so it's not about balance on the two sides, but front-back?

It's both really (if it's not reasonably balanced side-to-side it will lean over). Also I assume the power car structure will be designed to be evenly loaded (same weight in all four corners).

Also Wherry line services inter-work with the East Suffolk line.

Yes, I know - I sometimes do the Ipswich-Lowestoft-Norwich trip on the same 755 when I'm having a ride-around on an Anglia day ranger, after watching some freight action on the Felixstowe branch .

 

[dk1]

Yes, I know - I sometimes do the Ipswich-Lowestoft-Norwich trip on the same 755 when I'm having a ride-around on an Anglia day ranger, after watching some freight action on the Felixstowe branch .

And most of our fabulous conductors clearly announce this to passengers too

 

[ac6000cw]

Remember as well that there are only 14 x 755/3s that have the weighted battery space in the power-pack. This leaves the 24 x 755/4s unable to have similar treatment. All units work all routes except the Sudbury branch which is 755/3 only. Maybe this is another reason why the battery option has not been taken any further.

Personally I think eventually all of them (3 and 4 car) should go to 2 x diesel engines plus 2 x battery packs - even just on diesel that's still 1300hp for four (short) passenger cars, with decent batteries to provide good boosts for acceleration and hill climbing.

 

[dk1]

Personally I think eventually all of them (3 and 4 car) should go to 2 x diesel engines plus 2 x battery packs - even just on diesel that's still 1300hp for four (short) passenger cars, with decent batteries to provide good boosts for acceleration and hill climbing.

A 4-car will be taken out of traffic if it has less than 3 working engines.

 

[AdamWW]

It's both really (if it's not reasonably balanced side-to-side it will lean over). Also I assume the power car structure will be designed to be evenly loaded (same weight in all four corners).

Yes I'm sure it could do with being balanced side to side, but that shouldn't need extra weighting I'd have thought - just one engine on each side. I assume that's why they only come with 2 or 4 engines.

A 4-car will be taken out of traffic if it has less than 3 working engines.

But a train with 2 engines and batteries will perform better than one with just 2 engines.

 

[dk1]

But a train with 2 engines and batteries will perform better than one with just 2 engines.

I’m not sure it’s looked at like that but who knows?

 

[ac6000cw]

A 4-car will be taken out of traffic if it has less than 3 working engines.

The recent posts have been speculating about the future, not what happens at present (without any batteries!).

The TfW 756s have only one diesel engine and 3 battery packs, with each battery rated at around 560hp/430kW, and according to this web page - https://www.railvolution.net/news/innotrans-2022-28#:~:text=The traction batteries are of,2' Bo' axle arrangement. - the batteries can provide a range of 80km, as quoted below:

Each FLIRT tri-mode has traction batteries and one diesel genset housed in a 7.2 m long Power Module, which is incorporated on all FLIRT variants for Wales. The Deutz engine has a 480 kW power output and meets Stage V emission limits, however it is designed as an auxiliary engine to recharge/support the batteries rather than being used on a large scale to permanently power the train. The traction batteries are of the LTO type and provide a range of approximately 80 km depending on the type of service and track profile.

 

[dk1]

The recent posts have been speculating about the future, not what happens at present (without any batteries!).

The TfW 756s have only one diesel engine and 3 battery packs, with each battery rated at around 560hp/430kW, and according to this web page - https://www.railvolution.net/news/innotrans-2022-28#:~:text=The traction batteries are of,2' Bo' axle arrangement. - the batteries can provide a range of 80km, as quoted below:

Time will tell. Would be good but I can’t see anyone being interested enough to pay at the moment.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

This is classic British thinking though, look at making the modern 755s even more environmentally friendly rather than looking at the 150/156/158 and the 170s where the biggest gains could be made. Think about how replacing the emr 158s with modern bi/Tri modes would reduce emissions, more efficient engine plus using ohle where available.

 

[ac6000cw]

Would be good but I can’t see anyone being interested enough to pay at the moment.

Me neither - in the meantime just need to hope someone doesn't try and spirit away any 755s for use elsewhere...

 

[Trainbike46]

This is classic British thinking though, look at making the modern 755s even more environmentally friendly rather than looking at the 150/156/158 and the 170s where the biggest gains could be made. Think about how replacing the emr 158s with modern bi/Tri modes would reduce emissions, more efficient engine plus using ohle where available.

The sprinters are being looked at for replacement, both at northern and at GWR for example. Off-topic for this thread though!

 

[dk1]

Me neither - in the meantime just need to hope someone doesn't try and spirit away any 755s for use elsewhere...

No chance. The maintenance alone limits their use.