Are there any such trains in the pipeline for that TOC?
Not as far as I know, but it's the ideal opportunity. XC could replace its entire fleet of 170s with 100-mile-range BEMUs, recharging them at Newport/Cardiff, Derby/Nottingham and Ely/Stansted.
Thankfully, RS3 can of course be split with 2 out of 4 lines being shut. I suspect, as well, that Bardon Hill and the quarries on the Ivanhoe Line might do more of a roaring trade during the RS3 works...
I would have expected that would be enough. The specifications for the Stadler Flirt AKKU give "Charging time under catenary: 15 minutes" according to https://www.stadlerrail.com/en/flirt-akku/details/ Are those details misleading, then?
I was forgetting that Platforms 6 and 7 at Peterborough are not wired. So specify 110 mile range off the wires, if necessary, that being the distance from Birmingham New St to Ely North junction. The combination of BHM-Proof House Junction; Wigston North-Syston South; Ely North-Stansted is at least a third of the total distance from Birmingham to Stansted. With turnaround times at each terminus, that should give plenty of time to recharge.
Indeed. Anywhere with crossovers, as well as 4-track overlap/MPA portals, as per the Bedford - Kettering section of route, would require complete line blocks.
I imagine those modelling parameters are being set so as not to exceed the charging capacity of the OHLE. Which is why it is so important to ensure that any new OHLE is specified properly to allow for faster charging rates. Modern transport batteries can accept charge in much less time than they typically spend in driving mode.
It would be much cheaper to build 10 miles of high-current OHLE than 100 miles of standard kit. But nobody in Network Rail seems to be quantifying those trade-offs.
I'm afraid I would disagree with you there. Matlock has only one train per hour, which would never justify electrification by itself. And Matlock-Newark Castle is a perfect candidate for BEMUs, charging between Derby and Nottingham twice per cycle.
This is an ideal battery candidate surely.
I agree as I expect electrifying it would be disproportionately expensive as there are a lot of pretty and so I expect listed low metal footbridges and it travels through scenic areas where there would probably be a lot of legal challenges as well.
How much reconstruction would be required for OLE? Batteries are a solution to a problem that is unavoidable on the GB rail network. The Matlock line is never going to need W10/12 clearance for freight, so if a battery extension avoids the need to rebuild every bridge and tunnel surely it's a good compromise? If the Matlock line only has half a dozen footbridges, then yes put up OLE, but if there's a tunnel or something save the money.
No current EMT regional service could go over to pure EMU operation after completion of MML electrification to Nottingham and Sheffield. That's probably one reason why GWML and lines around Manchester were prioritised over MML in the 2010s, when it was planned to cascade surplus EMUs to reduce the amount of new DMUs needed. Battery EMUs would only really be viable for off-wires running to Matlock, Newark and maybe Lincoln, with several other routes that would touch the wires hardly or not at all. So any single fleet replacement for this service group would have to be a bi-mode, possibly with batteries too.
It's a significantly smaller problem than it used to be, but in essence it is built into the calculations. People buy the trains with a understating of the mileage they will need to achieve, the expected performance of the battery, and where necessary the cost of battery replacement during the lifetime of the stock.
To avoid going too far off topic on this thread, can I suggest we transfer this discussion to another thread? e.g. here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ery-emu-for-the-gb-rail-network.238086/page-3
I think you will see them in the next ten years. As I understand it, the economics of electrification are compelling at intensively used sections of railway like Sheffield.
And all the politics behind the Northern Powerhouse, the Red Wall seats held by the Tories etc
Dont forget a Grid connection at Kegworth has been applied for. Wires are slowly going up.
Yes they did, and they published the spreadsheet which made those calculations. But that's because they compared full electrification against retaining the diesels for 60 years. And half of the route, to Bedford, had already been wired.
Well if the MML wasn't wired from Kegworth north there would surely be no HS2 trains over the river Trent ?
I'm intrigued by the case for Dore to Sheffield, but apparently not Meadowhall to Doncaster - or infill to Leeds. I'd love to get a through electric train from Dore to Meadowhall taking 12 minutes.