Siemens bidding to build new trains: who might buy them?

[Donny Dave]

Just spotted this on the BBC website.

A train maker is promoting the idea of battery-powered trains that could be built at its East Yorkshire factory.

Siemens Mobility said the new models would replace diesel locomotives and run on tracks with no overhead electrification.

The firm said if train operators placed orders it would build them at its base in Goole.

The plant is part of a £200m rail village which is building trains for London Underground.

Goole: Siemens' bid for battery-powered trains

Siemens is pitching the idea of battery powered trains to be built at its East Yorkshire factory.

www.bbc.co.uk

Question is, whose business are they trying to get?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A big order for Northern is in the offing, so probably that.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Question is, whose business are they trying to get?

I would say either Northern or SE. Northern are looking for 450 units with battery available as a Sprinter replacement and SE is looking for a 465 replacement on SE Metro with battery available for depot usage.

 

[Energy]

Siemens are promoting their battery trains and saying they are more efficient than tri mode (ohle + battery + diesel).

It's worth remembering that manufacturers of only rolling stock are likely to promote more expensive multi-mode units over normal EMUs + OHLE as they give them more income. Meanwhile Siemens offer both rolling stock and ohle.

The full press release also promotes using Siemens' RCC rapid chargers, which can be fed from 11kv supplies.

 

[Farigiraf]

A big order for Northern is in the offing, so probably that.

Northern have quite a large order however, so they could presumably only buy a few within the 'budget'. These would be great especially on the Manchester-Barrow/Windermere services.

 

[fgwrich]

A big order for Northern is in the offing, so probably that.

Along with Great Western too. Battery units from a reliable proven manufacturer would tick nicely in that box.

 

[Sorcerer]

I've no doubt that Siemens could deliver a battery unit that can also run on overhead lines, and indeed I would find that preferable than having bi-mode and tri-mode units since we want to decarbonise the railway as much as we can, but realistically speaking would that be possible on a network such as Northern which has quite a significant number of unelectrified routes without some form of diesel generators on board?

 

[Snow1964]

The infographic in the press release mentions £3.5bn savings over 35 years if UK switches from diesel to battery

Also refers to only needing 20-30% of the network electrified.

And because of lower power, can be connected to existing town power networks in 18 months, instead of typical 7 years for large scale connection.

 

[Ridgeblog]

I like the part where they say electric chargers will be used at every station. Cars have already started doing this, so it will be quite feasible to do it here, assuming similar technology is used. I guess these new stock being built will be BEMUs.

 

[skyhigh]

I like the part where they say electric chargers will be used at every station

I don't think it says that anywhere?

 

[MarkyT]

I've no doubt that Siemens could deliver a battery unit that can also run on overhead lines, and indeed I would find that preferable than having bi-mode and tri-mode units since we want to decarbonise the railway as much as we can, but realistically speaking would that be possible on a network such as Northern which has quite a significant number of unelectrified routes without some form of diesel generators on board?

On local service patterns with many closely spaced stops, saving the weight of diesel generator module and fuel tank is more important than for express service with long stop spacing.. Diesels are also far more maintenance intensive than any battery technology. Batteries can capture braking energy using regen, again particularly important for local stopping service with frequent acceleration and braking. The onboard storage can also help under the wires when the line isn't receptive to regen, when there are no other moving train loads locally to take the power and the substation isn't equipped to return power to the broader grid. It's sensible to use regen wherever possible to save friction brake wear, though trains also usually have high power resistor banks to burn off any surplus that can't be accepted by the line where applicable or the onboard battery.

 

[Trainbike46]

I like the part where they say electric chargers will be used at every station. Cars have already started doing this, so it will be quite feasible to do it here, assuming similar technology is used. I guess these new stock being built will be BEMUs.

I don't think it says that anywhere?

Based on the below quote from the press release, it rather says the exact opposite:

That means only small sections of the routes and/or particular stations have to be electrified with overhead line equipment (OLE), making it much quicker and less disruptive to replace diesel trains compared to full electrification.

i.e. only specific sections and stations will have to be electrified, so not all of them

Just spotted this on the BBC website.

Goole: Siemens' bid for battery-powered trains

Siemens is pitching the idea of battery powered trains to be built at its East Yorkshire factory.

www.bbc.co.uk

Question is, whose business are they trying to get?

I'm delighted to see more manufacturers explicitly pitching BEMUs for upcoming orders in any case!

hopefully the design is level-boarding as standard (or at least compatible with level-boarding)

I've no doubt that Siemens could deliver a battery unit that can also run on overhead lines, and indeed I would find that preferable than having bi-mode and tri-mode units since we want to decarbonise the railway as much as we can, but realistically speaking would that be possible on a network such as Northern which has quite a significant number of unelectrified routes without some form of diesel generators on board?

absolutely; many routes already share some of the track with already electrified sections or have electrification in progress. Add some key electrification sections for recharging, and you can cover the vast majority of Northern's routes with BEMUs, and the routes that require more work can use the 195s - which will be around for quite a while yet

The infographic in the press release mentions £3.5bn savings over 35 years if UK switches from diesel to battery

Also refers to only needing 20-30% of the network electrified.

Technically, it states that you need 20-30% of the train-km served by BEMUs electrified, which doesn't necessarily mean 20-30% of the whole network. You could probably achieve that with electrifying a much smaller fraction of the remaining diesel network.

 

[Failed Unit]

Be interesting when you look longer term if EMR / Scotrail would be interested. The 170s are approaching thier 30th birthday, with the planning cycles of trains manufacturing it is better to have a plan in place to following on the 15x retirement, keep the factory going etc. However reality is they will wait until the 170s are 30 years old and start thinking about it.

It is so difficult to plan rolling stock at the moment anyway as some diesel trains will become surplus following committed electrifcation (Leeds - Huddersfield - Manchester local) - But also some infill that take up many speculation threads could mean that once stock is ordered to replace the 15x and 16x the 17x could be replaced with cascades following electrication.

 

[Trainbike46]

Be interesting when you look longer term if EMR / Scotrail would be interested.

Scotrail has a procurement that may or may not be happening for EMUs and BEMUs, so this is clearly of interest.

 

[Meerkat]

”ONLY 20-30% needs to be electrified”
Thats still a lot. I’m assuming it needs to be patchy - ie having 20% already electrified but only at one end won’t be enough.
Could they chuck all this up in the timescale desired for the current train replacement tenders?
“which makes it possible to plug directly into the domestic grid” sounds like a 3 pin into a socket
I'm assuming this means battery cabins and the wires will only be energised when a train needs them? If so won’t that attract the metal fairies?
What’s the efficiency level of charging a battery to charge a battery?

 

[Trainbike46]

”ONLY 20-30% needs to be electrified”
Thats still a lot. I’m assuming it needs to be patchy - ie having 20% already electrified but only at one end won’t be enough.

20-30% of the route the BEMUs will travel - so you can cover a lot of that with the electrification already installed and in progress, but for longer routes you may have to add a few extra islands of electrification, but that's not going to be near 20% of the remaining unelectrified network, and for certain routes everything may well be in place already.

Could they chuck all this up in the timescale desired for the current train replacement tenders?
“which makes it possible to plug directly into the domestic grid” sounds like a 3 pin into a socket
I'm assuming this means battery cabins and the wires will only be energised when a train needs them? If so won’t that attract the metal fairies?
What’s the efficiency level of charging a battery to charge a battery?

Batteries have high efficiencies at charging and discharging in general, so likely quite high. Without detailed specifications for the system we can't really go more specific.

Being able to use a wider range of grid connection types is a major advantage - so having this 11kV option, in addition to the existing high-voltage options is great as it will allow designers more options to pick the best for the specific situation.

 

[anthony263]

This proposal would be good on the Cardiff to Portsmouth Harbour service with GWR especially if you wire Filton -Bristol TM-Chippenham.

Another example would be Reading to Gatwick Airport etc

 

[Snow1964]

”ONLY 20-30% needs to be electrified”
Thats still a lot. I’m assuming it needs to be patchy - ie having 20% already electrified but only at one end won’t be enough.
Could they chuck all this up in the timescale desired for the current train replacement tenders?
“which makes it possible to plug directly into the domestic grid” sounds like a 3 pin into a socket
I'm assuming this means battery cabins and the wires will only be energised when a train needs them? If so won’t that attract the metal fairies?
What’s the efficiency level of charging a battery to charge a battery?

I think term ability to plug into domestic grid, is more akin to getting new housing estate or small factory connected, (can use local supply for the town).

This is different from connecting to high power, and high voltage connection which requires completely new switching and substation.

 

[Farigiraf]

This proposal would be good on the Cardiff to Portsmouth Harbour service with GWR especially if you wire Filton -Bristol TM-Chippenham.

Another example would be Reading to Gatwick Airport etc

And if they acquire shorter (2/3 car) units, then Turbos can be displaced on branch lines such as the Thames branches (Henley, Marlow, Windsor (Greenford already has 230 trials)) in favour of battery units which can 'refill' at the GWML endpoint. Also possible on the Devon/Cornwall branches if the CML electrification ever happens.

 

[Meerkat]

20-30% of the route the BEMUs will travel - so you can cover a lot of that with the electrification already installed and in progress

But I assume that the battery capacity will be limited - so that intermittent charging is needed, not just one end. And even if capacity was high enough you would need more than 20% of the distance to the terminal as the train has to get back again.

so having this 11kV option

Is the ability to plug into the 11kV network a given - ie could there still be a grid capacity issue stopping you connecting a significant load without strengthening.

 

[MarkyT]

”ONLY 20-30% needs to be electrified”
Thats still a lot. I’m assuming it needs to be patchy - ie having 20% already electrified but only at one end won’t be enough.

Depends on the distance, the size of the battery, and layover times where wiring or stationary charging is available. Slow charge en route at one end (mainline hub already electrified) plus a fast top up at the other terminus (branch stub) might work. If there's more wiring, the fast charge might be avoided. The fast charge might also be seen as an insurance measure if a train made it to the terminus without the expected level of charge.

“which makes it possible to plug directly into the domestic grid” sounds like a 3 pin into a socket

I think that instead of a major National Grid connection, an ordinary moderately rated industrial three-phase supply from a DNO could feed one of these substations on fairly lightly used lines, which could be equipped with its own local storage to offset high intermittent loads of acceleration and charging. This is more akin to light rail design than typical heavy rail electrification, but could still use 25kVAC line voltage for efficient transmission. South Wales Metro is pioneering this technique using battery electric tram-trains. Most of the plain line will be electrified but the complicated bits around major stations and junctions can be avoided, as can difficult tunnels and bridges. Some short gaps use earthed conductor through low bridges and tunnels while other longer ones omit the wires completely. They've developed an automated system to raise and lower the pantograph using digital transponders.

I'm assuming this means battery cabins and the wires will only be energised when a train needs them? If so won’t that attract the metal fairies?

Mainly an issue with ground level conductors on DC. Overhead wires can remain energised all the time as they're far less likely to be touched accidentally.

What’s the efficiency level of charging a battery to charge a battery?

Li-ion batteries are claimed to have a round trip efficiency of 96 percent or even higher. This is much better than delivering the same power through a low voltage conductor system like the third rail which has high transmission losses mainly due to resistive voltage drop along the conductor and return path, and also a leakage component. 25kV is far better in this respect due to the much smaller current.

 

[RailWonderer]

GA and TfW purchased from different manufacturers so don't be surprised if Northern do the same as one size probably won't fit all for a network as large as theirs.

 

[Trainbike46]

But I assume that the battery capacity will be limited - so that intermittent charging is needed, not just one end. And even if capacity was high enough you would need more than 20% of the distance to the terminal as the train has to get back again.

Is the ability to plug into the 11kV network a given - ie could there still be a grid capacity issue stopping you connecting a significant load without strengthening.

All these things are location specific. In some places you could do it without extra work, in some places extra work would be needed. Similarly in some places the 11kV network will have capacity, in others it won't.

Siemens doesn't specifically state the capacity they're proposing here as far as I'm aware, but 60 miles on battery is entirely doable, with a buffer for delays etc. still remaining - and it can absolutely be (much) more than that if needed. So yes, in some places the electrified network as is will be enough, in others extra sections will be needed. And obviously getting grid connections will be easier in some places than others. Having more options will make it easier overall though.

An example:
The thames Vally branches off the GWR, and the 769 routes (both ones that actually have them and ones where they were planned to go, e.g. on GWR), will almost certainly be fine as-is, no infrastructure works needed. While say the branches in Cornwall clearly will need some electrification somewhere to charge the batteries, though they're generally short enough that one end would be enough

GA and TfW purchased from different manufacturers so don't be surprised if Northern do the same as one size probably won't fit all for a network as large as theirs.

What do you mean? Both GA and TfW got their trains from Stadler?

 

[RailWonderer]

What do you mean? Both GA and TfW got their trains from Stadler?

TfW ordered far more CAF Civities and GA the same with a much larger Aventra order.

 

[Trainbike46]

TfW ordered far more CAF Civities and GA the same with a much larger Aventra order.

I thought you were just talking about the bimode and battery fleets, which is almost all Stadler (+vivarail for TfW 230s)

How are the 720s and 19x relevant though?

 

[RailWonderer]

I thought you were just talking about the bimode and battery fleets, which is almost all Stadler (+vivarail for TfW 230s)

How are the 720s and 19x relevant though?

Stadler weren't competitive enough on price and unable to build to the high density GA needed for a commuter fleet and TfW opted for a Civity for regional services, preferring Stadler only for Cardiff metro services and a couple of regional routes so I'm saying Northern might opt for two different types, a local and a regional, from different manufacturers based on unit price, spec and seat density.

One size doesn't fit all - will Northern be able to use battery units on the CC line and Middlesboro' - Whitby as they would on Manchester - Windermere? It wouldn't be surprising to see Northern go for two different train types to see off all its Sprinters.

 

[Energy]

I think term ability to plug into domestic grid, is more akin to getting new housing estate or small factory connected, (can use local supply for the town).

This is different from connecting to high power, and high voltage connection which requires completely new switching and substation.

Not domestic grid but DNO level. It's goes off an 11kv feed which would normally go to a transformer.

Is the ability to plug into the 11kV network a given - ie could there still be a grid capacity issue stopping you connecting a significant load without strengthening.

Depends on location. In rural areas transformer location is more about distance than capacity, its why you also see 6.6kv (and very occasionally 3.3kv) sometimes in rural areas.

GA and TfW purchased from different manufacturers so don't be surprised if Northern do the same as one size probably won't fit all for a network as large as theirs.

Northern is split up into lots and phases.

Lot 1 - EMU
Phase 1
11 x 3 car
Phase 2
34 x 3 car
16 x 4 car

Lot 2 - Multimode Multiple Unit (any combination of electric, diesel, battery - may be ordered as just electric or just electric + battery)
Phase 1
33 x 3 car
66 x 4 car
Phase 2
30 x 3 car
20 x 4 car

Lot 3 - Battery EMU
Phase 1
6 x 4 car
Phase 2
26 x 4 car

However, for phase 2: lot 1 may be ordered under lot 1 or lot 2, and lot 3 may be ordered under lot 2 or lot 3. This is because lot 2 can also be ordered as EMU or Battery EMU.

As such this does allow for multiple manufacturers to be used.

One size doesn't fit all - will Northern be able to use battery units on the CC line and Middlesboro' - Whitby as they would on Manchester - Windermere? It wouldn't be surprising to see Northern go for two different train types to see off all its Sprinters.

While I understand where you are coming from, I suggest you read through the lot information as the Northern procurement team have thought about this.

 

[MarkyT]

All these things are location specific. In some places you could do it without extra work, in some places extra work would be needed. Similarly in some places the 11kV network will have capacity, in others it won't.

The railway feeder can incorporate its own storage to charge up slowly between trains which can moderate the load on the DNO supply. GWRs Greenford project does that. The measure can compensate for the high intermittent loads of acceleration and fast charging.

Siemens doesn't specifically state the capacity they're proposing here as far as I'm aware, but 60 miles on battery is entirely doable, with a buffer for delays etc. still remaining - and it can absolutely be (much) more than that if needed. So yes, in some places the electrified network as is will be enough, in others extra sections will be needed. And obviously getting grid connections will be easier in some places than others. Having more options will make it easier overall though.

I guess for a particular application, batteries can be sized according to requirements.

An example:
The thames Vally branches off the GWR, and the 769 routes (both ones that actually have them and ones where they were planned to go, e.g. on GWR), will almost certainly be fine as-is, no infrastructure works needed. While say the branches in Cornwall clearly will need some electrification somewhere to charge the batteries, though they're generally short enough that one end would be enough

With GWR owing a large number of the trains as well as the particular fast charging IP, battery D-trains are most likely in the medium term for the short largely self-contained branches in the Thames Valley and Cornwall, where lower top speed isn't a major problem interworking with other traffic on the main line. Those could work happily alongside a new fleet of more general purpose regional units.

What do you mean? Both GA and TfW got their trains from Stadler?

I think they're saying GA & TfW complete new fleet orders were both split, so neither were ALL Stadler, though they both bought SOME FLIRTs.

 

[Ridgeblog]

OK, I don't know where I got that from then, thanks for the correction. I see now, the point of this all basically is to electrify as little as needed to improve efficiency.

Based on the below quote from the press release, it rather says the exact opposite:

That means only small sections of the routes and/or particular stations have to be electrified with overhead line equipment (OLE), making it much quicker and less disruptive to replace diesel trains compared to full electrification.

i.e. only specific sections and stations will have to be electrified, so not all of them

 

[Meerkat]

The railway feeder can incorporate its own storage to charge up slowly between trains which can moderate the load on the DNO supply. GWRs Greenford project does that. The measure can compensate for the high intermittent loads of acceleration and fast charging.

Still need an available feeder - is that around on all northern routes

I guess for a particular application, batteries can be sized according to requirements.

Not really if you are buying a big fleet - don’t really want subfleets with different ranges, nor for most trains to be lugging a battery load way bigger than they need.