Tag: Railways

• The New East Midlands Franchise & Associated Fallout

  Dear reader, as you may be aware, I frequent the East Midlands railway network. This activity brings a variety of experiences, some good, some bad, and some ugly. For example, while I have had some excellent journeys on the Midland Mainline on various fast trains, I have also witnessed the rather tragic state of affairs that is the regular single-coach train between Derby and Crewe. I was also aware that with changes to disabled access regulations, and increasing passenger numbers, the Inter-City rolling stock could not stay as it is.

  Against this backdrop I looked forward to a new franchise being awarded. We now know who the winner of that competition is, but there has been considerable fallout from decisions taken surrounding it, and so this article will come in two parts:

  Part 1: The New Franchise

  After much pushing back of the date it was to begin, the winner of the competition, to take over in August, was announced as Abellio. Now, Abellio are not complete newcomers to running trains in this country – they already run the Greater Anglia and ScotRail franchises – and indeed they are the commercial arm of the Netherlands’ state railway operator, so we naturally expect great things.

  That’s all very well and good, but what are they promising? For the purposes of this article, I shall split the proposals up into 2 broad categories:

  Inter-City

  These are the trains serving London, Leicester, Nottingham, Derby, Sheffield and so on. At up to 125 mph these are considerably faster than all the others run by the franchise, and they serve a slightly different market.

  Apart from a smattering of timetable changes and tweaks (for example more trains calling at Luton) Abellio propose to replace the existing fleet (a mixture of decades-old High Speed Trains and more recent “Meridian” trains) with a completely new fleet of bi-mode trains. “bi-mode” means that these trains will run on electricity where there are overhead wires and diesel engines the rest of the time.

  This wasn’t their idea, as the Department for Transport has been pushing for these on the Midland Mainline for quite some while now. I personally think this is somewhat unwise – the bi-mode train must lug about a diesel engine and fuel when running on electricity, both of which are useless to it when running in this mode. Equally, it must lug about a whole host of useless electrical equipment when it is running on diesel. This naturally has an impact on the train’s performance, particularly on diesel.

  Such problems are further compounded by the fact that as it stands the route is only being electrified as far as Market Harborough, meaning that about half the route will have to be done on diesel power, with potentially worse performance than the existing “Meridian” trains. Giving the trains better performance on diesel only is likely to be expensive and make them heavier, passing the cost either onto the train leasing company or Network Rail who maintain the infrastructure.

  Ideally, the entire route would be electrified, and pure electric trains (which are lighter and cheaper) would have been ordered. Alas, we may only hope that whoever gets the contract to build these trains has been very clever in their design.

  Regional

  These trains go all over the East Midlands, stopping at all kinds of smaller stations. This is a very different market, in fact, most of these trains were once upon a time operated by a completely different franchise called Central Trains, but I digress.

  The proposals here are somewhat less ambitious. Apart from the usual timetable changes and other service tweaks (notably more Sunday services), Abellio propose to introduce “refurbished modern trains”, a phrase which gives little away as to what they might turn out to be. We do get some clues in the list of features these trains are supposed to have, as alongside WiFi and all the other mod cons is air conditioning.

  Air conditioning is significant because currently a good chunk of the East Midlands Trains fleet does not have it, relying instead on opening windows for ventilation. Thus, without heavy modification, we are going to see many of these trains go.

  What will replace them? My money would be on trains drafted in from elsewhere, which is not necessarily a bad thing – far better to give perfectly good trains a stout refurbishment and put them to work where they are needed than to scrap them.

  The wildcard of all the proposals is the trialling of hydrogen fuel cell trains. I am of course very pleased about this development, but I really have talked about Hydrogen quite enough on this website.

  ---

  Part 2: Fallout

  The big news did not end with the ascension of Abellio. The incumbent, Stagecoach, were banned from bidding – not just for this but also for the Southeastern and West Coast Partnership franchises. This was because the Department for Transport was not happy with the pensions arrangements in their bids.

  Railway pensions are a looming issue that has thus far gone largely unnoticed. Some sources claim that the pensions deficit for the rail industry could be as large as £5-6 billion, a not-insignificant cost I am sure you will agree. Even if it is not quite that large, there is a bill that will need paying, and an argument over who should settle it.

  Who is responsible will depend on your reading of the situation, but I do think it was unfair to simply ban Stagecoach from bidding for 3 franchises. For a start, on the West Coast Partnership franchise (that will include HS2, by the way) Stagecoach were bidding with Virgin – banning their bid could see the end of Virgin Trains, an operator that has done an enormous amount to raise standards on the Great British railway.

  This also further discourages British companies from taking part in the rail market in their own country. Already, due to increasing premium payments and increasingly rigid franchise contracts, National Express has rid itself of all involvement, despite once being among the largest owning groups. With Stagecoach (and possibly Virgin) now potentially also soon to leave, and more contracts going to foreign state-backed enterprises, the picture looks even more bleak.

  These foreign state-backed concerns (including Abellio and Arriva, who are backed by German State rail operator DB) can afford to take on more risk because they have the backing of governments. This might be convenient for a Department wanting to move risk away from itself, but it isn’t fair on foreign taxpayers and leaves British companies (in fact, private companies of any kind) struggling to compete.

  We can at least take heart from the fact that Stagecoach are not taking this lying down. They are challenging the decision, as are Virgin, and I do hope they succeed in getting the decision reversed. I believe they have a strong case – after all, the Department for Transport has had all these bids for months, and nothing was said at the time of submission. It does seem rather strange to take months to notice something apparently so glaring.

  Even if they lose in a legal challenge, Virgin have a trump card – among a consortium of companies, they recently acquired domestic airline Flybe. The airline is to be rebranded as part of Virgin Atlantic and promises “improved connectivity at Manchester and London Heathrow”. Manchester and London, oddly enough, are prominent on the existing Virgin Trains route map, and will also be under the West Coast Partnership franchise. Coincidence? I think not.

  Alas, the time has now come for me to end my incoherent rambling and thank you for reading. Please do leave a comment if you feel inclined, and have a sublime morning/afternoon/evening/night (delete as appropriate).

  April 17, 2019

  2019, East Midlands, East Midlands Railway, East Midlands Trains, HST, Hydrogen, Meridian, Midlands, National Express, Rail, Railway, Railways, Stagecoach, Train, Trains, Virgin, Virgin Trains

  ---

• Leaves on the Line is Actually Not a Terrible Excuse

  Dear reader, I am sure that, if you live in the UK, “leaves on the line” is an excuse you have heard for the late running of a train. I am also sure that, if you have any sensory capabilities at all, you will have noticed that it is autumn, and, therefore, there are leaves falling from the trees.

  I will admit, it is not immediately obvious that these would cause a problem for trains. After all, trains tend to be large and quite heavy, whereas leaves are neither of those things. It is also true that a railway (at least in this country) tends to be a substantial construction, so much so that the track is often referred to as the “permanent way”. The question then arises as to why, if this is all true, leaves on the line should be a problem.

  To answer this question, we must first look at what makes trains so efficient, and to do that, we need to look at cars. You see, a car has rubber tyres, which run on a tarmac road. Both of these surfaces are rough, and as a result, the friction between them is high. Even when it is wet, the contact between tyre and road is not lubricated since the tyre is designed to channel water away from the contact (in all but the most extreme cases), and your car still grips the road. The other thing about car tyres is that they are quire wide and, therefore, the contact area is large, so even if some of it is slippery, chances are a good tyre will find grip somewhere.

  Trains are very different. Wheels on trains have steel tyres, which are very smooth, running on a steel rail which is also very smooth, leading to very low resistance. This is great in normal conditions, since the rolling resistance is very low and you can transport large loads with relatively little effort. However, as the wheels are quite thin, and there is not much “spring” in them, the contact area for each wheel is about the size of a pound coin. Suffice to say, it is very easy to get a train wheel to slip, with very little of the rail needing to be slippery.

  Now, it might surprise you to learn that the problem is not leaves per se. Dry leaves are, in themselves, not that slippery. Unfortunately, as leaves get crushed between the wheel and the rail, a leaf mulch is created. Add in a little water from rain, and perhaps some grease and other contaminants,  and you now have something akin to washing-up liquid on the rails, which the train will find it near-impossible to grip. Given that a mature tree might have some tens of thousands of leaves, and that there are 20,000 miles of track in the country, this is no rare problem.

  If the train cannot grip the rail properly, it cannot accelerate nearly as fast, and, equally, cannot brake properly either, without the wheels locking. This is potentially very dangerous, and so trains tend to travel at lower speeds, further increasing journey times and delays. Of course, when the poor passengers are told, there is not time to explain the problem properly, hence the “leaves on the line” excuse.

  Of course, railway engineers have not been sitting idle while the problem persists. Most passenger trains in the UK are now equipped with a system called WSP, or Wheel Slide Protection, which is a bit like your car’s anti-lock brakes and traction control rolled into one. However, while this does mitigate some of the problem, the train will still be slower if WSP is constantly cutting power to avoid slipping, or varying the brake to find grip. It does at least reduce the damage done to the wheel (and the rail) by slipping – which can be very expensive indeed.

  Another solution is the use of (and I apologise for the all the acronyms) RHTTs, or Rail Head Treatment Trains. These (very noisy) trains go around the network every autumn, spraying a substance called “sandite” onto the rails, which is a sort of gritty paste-like substance, improving grip dramatically. This is only a partial solution though, and the rails must be treated regularly if it is to be effective.

  The obvious solution is to just get rid of the trees next to the railway. This, like so many things in life, is much more complicated and expensive than it may seem. The decision to fell trees cannot be taken lightly, as the roots of trees may be helping to stabilise earthworks the railway depends on. Furthermore, tree felling near railways has come under fire from environmental groups such as the Woodland Trust and Greenpeace (not helped by some very dubious reporting in the Guardian newspaper). For tress not technically on railway land, landowners must be consulted, which can lead to its own problems, and, apart from anything else, felling a tree next to a railway line must be done with great care to avoid it falling onto the railway itself.

  One charge that could be levelled against the railway is that “this never used to happen”. And for once, the people saying this are, by and large, correct. In the days of steam, there were few trees next to railway lines, and consequently, there were few incidents of leaf mulch on the line. Why was this?

  Well, steam engines tend to produce sparks (after all, they rely on a large fire to work), and these sparks, when hitting dry vegetation, can lead to fire. Lineside fires were something that the old railways were understandably very keen to avoid, and so they made sure that linesides were kept perfectly manicured. Any tree that sprouted in this environment would have to come to terms with being on fire before or being chopped down long before leaves on the line became a problem.

  However, with steam trains being phased out in the 50s and 60s, lineside fires became less of a problem. The new diesel and electric trains did not produce sparks, and so the linesides could be left alone (which was quite convenient because it saved British Rail a lot of money). In fact, for a while, British Rail banned steam engines (even those run privately) from its lines entirely, partly to prevent lineside fires. Vegetation growing on the now-not-well-looked-after linesides has unfortunately resulted in the current situation.

  The supreme irony at the end of all this is that this article was itself delayed, though not through leaves. I have been rather busy, as mentioned in the public service announcement, but I have also begun writing for other places, which has rather taken up my time. Do not fear though – I will still be writing on here, just not with the frequency to which you may previously have become accustomed.

  It only remains for me to wish you an excellent day, and ask politely for you to pass this on to whomever might find it useful and/or interesting.

   

   

   

   

   

   

  November 13, 2018

  Autumn, British Rail, Excuses, Leaves, Rail, Railways, Trains

  ---

• Why I Think HS2 Is A Good Thing

  HS2 is perhaps the most controversial railway in the UK, despite it not yet existing. While there are some legitimate arguments against the project, overall I think that Europe’s newest high speed line will be a good thing, and I hope you, dear reader, will be satisfied with my explanation of this stance, following a run through of arguments against, starting with…

  WE DON’T NEED IT

  Yes, we do. Since 1997, passenger numbers have more than doubled on the National Rail network. The West Coast Main Line, between Rugby and London Euston, is the busiest mixed-use railway in Europe, and, without separating the faster trains from the mix, overcrowded misery for those using it will ensue. That is without considering the congestion and environmental problems of people switching to road transport.

  You could perhaps argue that with the rise of video conferencing and other tools allowing for people to work from home, there is no need to expand transport capacity any further. I would counter that by pointing out that demand for rail travel continues to increase in the North, and that the poor rail service in the South is leading to people losing faith in the railways. We must improve things on the railways, or people will go elsewhere.

  If we (and by we I mean the British) fail to invest in our railway, then not only is inconvenience caused but safety is reduced by people travelling on the roads. In the past 11 years, no-one has died as a result of a train accident on the railways of Great Britain. In that time, many more will have died on the roads, though I do not have the exact figures.

  LET’S UPGRADE THE REST OF THE NETWORK

  It may surprise some readers to learn that this is already happening. Readers from Derby will not be surprised in the slightest, but right across the country, capacity and speed upgrades are being undertaken, and unfortunately are failing to keep pace with demand. Electrification work has also taken place both on the Great Western Main Line and on the Midland Main Line, with varying degrees of success, but with a great deal of cost. Another innovation of recent times is digital signalling technology, that reduces the personnel required to signal trains and (at least in theory) increases the reliability of the network.

  All this upgrading is entirely welcomed by me, but as I understand it, it does cause a number of problems. Overrunning engineering works have caused delays in the past, particularly a few Christmases ago, and look likely to continue to do so. One of the major causes of the present Northern timetable chaos is the late running of the Bolton line electrification, so many of the electric trains Northern have cannot be used, and the diesel trains used instead cannot be used where they are supposed to.

  The point is that although spending money on the conventional network has its merits, it causes disruption to passengers, which never goes down well, and costs a great deal for what are often marginal gains.

  IT WILL RUIN THE COUNTRYSIDE

  This argument has rather more merit to it, considering that the new line will cut through the green and pleasant land which is England, of which I am a fan. One must, however, note the recent announcement by HS2 of a “green corridor” along Phase One of the route, with, among other things, 7 million new trees and shrubs. For particulars, I would use the link here. I would also point to the only High-Speed line currently in the UK, HS1, in Kent, which has managed to minimise its environmental impact through, among other things, moving the soil of ancient forests, to transplant new trees into.

  One must also remember that motorways, road’s equivalent to a high-speed railway, are far wider and the emissions are also far more of an air quality problem than the railway would be.

  PEOPLE WILL BE DISPLACED

  This is true. Those that live on the actual route have been offered compensation, but those that live near it will have to endure the construction traffic for up to a decade. The construction work at Euston will be particularly disruptive, and go on for much longer than work on each phase of the route. I admit that this will not be a great thing for those affected, and that the railway will do little to help local communities, except perhaps providing work for local contractors.

  However, this argument somewhat misses the point. During the construction of the major railways into London, whole streets were destroyed, whole suburbs displaced, and the character of the villages surrounding London completely changed. However, I suspect that no-one in our modern times would argue that connecting the country was therefore a bad idea and should never have happened.

  IT WILL COST TOO MUCH

  Yes, the cost of several tens of billions is very large, especially in an era when the emergency services are under pressure, as are schools, libraries and other public services are under threat.

  However, building this high-speed railway will provide thousands of jobs for the next few decades, as well as the economic benefit of rapid travel between many of the UK’s major conurbations. Some may argue that business travellers won’t use a faster service, and will opt for the cheap-but-cheerful option of the conventional train. I urge these people to look at Birmingham New Street, and compare the passengers of the slow London North Western Railway service to those on Virgin’s Pendolinos – the suits opt for the quicker train.

  IT WILL ONLY SERVE LONDON AND BIRMINGHAM

  On the first count this is patently not true – Phase 2 of the line will serve Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Crewe, and a whole host of other places in the North. Furthermore, with connections to the conventional railway at Sheffield and Crewe, trains from HS2 will also serve destinations further North still, including those in Scotland, making the whole journey faster.

  On the second count, even if it was just a line between London and Birmingham, this would still help people in the North. How, you ask? Well, with the fast trains from Birmingham removed from the busy section of line south of Rugby, there is now more room for trains from the North, which means more services for Manchester, Liverpool, and many other places on the West Coast Main Line.

  In Conclusion

  Dear reader, I believe it is in the national interest to build this railway line. Even if you do not accept my rebuttal of the various points listed above, one must admit that this is a chance to show the world the very best of British engineering. For too long, we have been seen as the sick man of Europe, with no major high-speed railway of our own. Here, an opportunity presents itself, not just to rectify this shortcoming, but also to build the best railway in the world.

  Many of the problems of conventional railways will be eliminated. Modern in-cab signalling will mean far more regular trains, and the new trains will be at least 200 m long, so plenty of room for everyone. Many will also be doubled to 400 m long, by coupling the trains together. Each station is being designed with care and attention, to make them pleasant places to be, not just a place to get on a train.

  Alas, this is probably getting a little long at this point, so with that I shall wish you an excellent day, and ask you to pass this on if you know anyone who might be interested.

  August 15, 2018

  Birmingham, Britain, British, Controversy, Engineering, Future, Green, High Speed, HS1, HS2, Leeds, London, Manchester, Rail, Railways, Transport, Upgrade

  ---

• The Coming Rail Revolution

  Diesel trains are wonderful. No really, truly wonderful things. You can get enough power out of a diesel engine for most applications, the fuel is readily available and quite cheap, and, while they don’t quite have the captivating power of a steam engine, old diesel locomotives do still command attention among enthusiasts.

  That is not to say, outside of the spheres of operational convenience and trainspotting, they don’t have their problems. No doubt you, dear reader, will have heard of the dieselgate scandal at Volkswagen, and you were probably also unsurprised to learn of the various Sulfur and Nitrogen based pollutants that stem from diesel engines. Perhaps, with some astonishment, or a sense of unsurprised resignation, you may have learned of the quality, or lack thereof, of the air in the cities of the UK. Yes, we learn that the air quality in the great cities of this nation is far worse than the limits set by both the UK and many other organisations, including the EU.

  Of course, this is a difficult issue of modern times, and if we are being honest, the main culprit is most likely the proliferation of motor vehicles powered by fossil fuels. I confess that this is not my area of expertise, but for some more detailed commentary on the issue, I refer you to my article on cars, which can be found helpfully here.

  But, my dear reader, we should not be complacent about the railways, and our aforementioned diesel trains. Though, due to the low-friction nature of the steel wheel on steel rail system on which railways work, the energy consumption of a train per passenger is lower than a car, we should perhaps give trains a lower priority, this is no excuse, as I shall now explain.

  You may have noticed shiny new Tesla cars appearing on the roads, or perhaps on television. If you haven’t seen one of these fine new American machines, you may well have seen a different kind of electric automobile, a Nissan Leaf maybe, or a (fairly odd-looking, if I may say so) BMW i3, or some kind of Toyota hybrid car. What they show is that the electrification of the roads is coming, or rather, it is already happening, and it even extends to motorsport, with Formula E. This could, with time, reduce the harmful emissions, of the automobiles themselves that is, to nothing.

  Not content with the electrification of private transport, the inventive Mr Musk has decided to extend this potentially life-saving innovation to the complex world of road freight. He has devised this electric truck, that he claims at least will do 300 miles on a single charge, and 500 for the top model. Now I am not going to try and argue that this is a bad thing, as in itself this is rather good news, particularly for those living near main roads, but I am slightly worried about this development. I am not concerned, dear reader, about the issues of building such large batteries, and the environmental problems thereof, though that is a valid concern.

  No, I am concerned because this makes us in the rail camp, frankly, look bad. At the moment, rail freight is much more environmentally friendly than the equivalent road freight. After all, one lorry can take only one shipping container, whereas one train can carry over 30. The low steel wheel on steel rail friction also reduces the energy consumption per container, so on the assumption that both modes (road and rail) are using diesel engines, rail is going to result in lower overall emissions. However, with the road freight electric, this is turned on its head, as the rail option is still producing emissions.

  Now I shall grant myself, and the others in the rail camp, the small comfort that some of the main lines in the UK are electrified, generally using overhead live wires from which the trains can draw power. The unfortunate fact is that most of the ports and freight terminals are not electrified, leaving the freight operator with two options:

  i) Change the locomotive from diesel to electric when the train reaches the main line

  This is possible, and used to be reasonably routine. It is a solution, dear friends, not without its problems. On the contrary, you have complications with where to change locomotives, and store them when not in use. You also have the obstacle of how to fit in all the associated train movements on an increasingly crowded network. As such, that leaves us with…

  ii) Run the train with a diesel locomotive all the way

  Far too often, this is what actually happens, even when the distances “under the wires” are hundreds of miles. All the same, as I am sure you are aware, this does bring the problem of emissions.

  So a solution that reduces, or preferably eliminates, the emissions of freight locomotives, is needed.

  Earlier I mentioned the various electric automobiles that are beginning to furnish the driveways of fine, upstanding UK citizens. This brings me onto the subject of passenger transport, and here again, railways are in a spot of bother. You see, there are many routes on which there is no electrification, particularly in the North and in the Midlands, mainly due to economic reasons. Much of the reason is economic – one cannot make a good business case for electrifying a railway, with the associated cost of overhead wires and their structures, which only has perhaps 4 trains an hour. Regrettably, the automobile manufacturers can justify the expense for a car for about 4 people.

  You also have similar problems with non-electrified lines joining electrified ones, but the problem is even worse with passenger trains. The majority of passenger trains are formed of multiple units – that is, trains with engines and traction equipment under the floor, and in fixed formations with a fixed number of carriages. This confers a number of advantages on the train operator, who does not have to spend the time and money of marshalling trains together, or allocate a locomotive of the correct power rating for the train. It makes it almost impossible to make diesel trains run on electricity from overhead wires, however, and bi-modes (trains with diesel engines and electrical equipment) are heavy and expensive.

  So again, a solution is demanded to reduce, or preferably eliminate, the emissions of passenger trains, at least the lightly used ones. I am of course not talking of the excellent electric trains, of which you are no doubt aware, that operate in numerous parts of the country. These are already zero emission, at least at the point of use.

  At this point, you have either decided that I am waffling far too much, or are curious to know how the railway industry gets itself out of this newly developing pickle. Well, if you are in the first camp, I’m afraid I can’t help you, but enjoy the rest of the internet. If, on the other hand, you find yourself in the second camp, allow me to enlighten you.

  One potential solution is to use an alternative fuel – hydrogen. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, a fact which I’m sure you covered at school, and is also the simplest element, consisting merely of a single proton and an electron. This is all tremendously interesting, but what we are really interested in is that hydrogen can be combined with oxygen in a fuel cell to produce electricity. Electricity which, in sufficient quantities, can be used to power traction motors, and hence a train. Electricity produced with the only waste product being water. Ah, you might say, fascinating, but this all sounds rather sci-fi. The truth is that hydrogen fuel cells are nothing new, and have been used in the space industry for decades, most notably on the Apollo moon missions.

  I must admit, readers, before I get carried away, that although hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, it can be hard to come by here on Earth. It tends to be combined with other things such as natural gas or water, and the extraction process can be energy intense. The good news is that extracting hydrogen from water (a process called electrolysis) only requires electricity, which can come from renewable sources, or during the night when it is not currently being used.

  Hydrogen is not terrifically energy dense, at least in terms of volume, presenting something of a problem to the potential train designer. To get around it, hydrogen is stored in pressurised tanks, fitting much more hydrogen in a smaller space, but even this doesn’t give the energy density of diesel. For a small regional train, this isn’t necessarily a problem. For a freight locomotive… well, we’ll come back to that.

  In Germany, a hydrogen fuel cell powered regional train, one of Alstom’s Coradia range, the iLint, is already under test. It will do 140 km/h, which, in British, is 87 mph, plenty on most smaller regional railways around the country, especially considering the increased acceleration that electric motors provide over the conventional hydraulic transmission of a diesel train. Alstom already have their sights set on bringing a version of this train to the UK.

  That said, it won’t be as simple as just shipping it over on the next appropriately sized ship. The loading gauge, that is, the width and height trains are allowed to be, is narrower in the UK than on the continent. As such, the train will have to be reworked (a result of the lack of energy density) before it will physically fit on the UK network, which will take time.

  Anyhow, support for the idea of hydrogen trains in the UK continues, partly drummed up by a little project from the University of Birmingham. This actually came out of an Institute of Mechanical Engineers challenge, to build a 10 1/4 inch gauge locomotive that can, among other things, recover energy from braking. It was decided to build a locomotive that used a hydrogen fuel cell, mainly, I am told, as batteries would be a rather boring and predictable power source. This locomotive has undergone numerous iterations over the years, but until now was really rather obscure.

  Over the past year or so, the locomotive has been worked on, and she has acquired a new set of clothes, a much more pleasing result than in previous years. Officially, she is the University of Birmingham’s IMechE Railway Challenge entry, but she is now better known as Hydrogen Hero. She has already appeared on the local BBC television news, with yours truly at the controls, at Rail Live 2018, even attracting the Secretary of State for Transport, Chris Grayling. On the 30th July this year, she was again demonstrated by yours truly (on the left, in the orange) to Grayling’s opposite number, Shadow Secretary of State for Transport, Andy McDonald:

  

  In doing demonstration runs, our relatively small team has been raising money for Help for Heroes, by taking donations from passengers. I am sure you’ll agree this is a worthy cause, and somewhat justifies the name, but, importantly, this makes our little locomotive the first revenue-earning hydrogen train in the UK.

  Now, I may have mentioned earlier the freight side of things, and the trouble with energy density. This is not the only problem. Hydrogen fuel cells produce a fairly constant amount of power, which is fine usually, but during high-power moves, such as starting a heavy train or accelerating up a hill, this is not quite enough. A solution is to charge batteries using the fuel cell’s power when the train is stationary, or cruising using little power, and to use the power stored for the high-power situations. One can also use the motors as generators to charge the batteries when the train brakes, increasing energy efficiency. Needless to say, these batteries also take up space.

  A solution to this is to have 2 vehicles, instead of one. In one of these vehicles, you could incorporate hydrogen tanks and batteries, and in the other the power electronics necessary. All the axles of the train could be powered with traction motors, which would also increase the tractive effort of such a locomotive over a conventional one, given that you now have twice . This is the eventual plan with Hydrogen Hero. 

  My point, if I may conclude, is that the technology to do this exists today, and that there is no shortage of ideas, particularly in Europe. I firmly believe that hydrogen is the way forward, and I would urge the policy-makers and railway companies to seriously consider making use of the technology.

  With that, as usual, I shall wish you an excellent day.

   

   

   

   

   

   

  August 4, 2018

  Conservative, DfT, Electric, Future, Hero, Hydrogen, IMechE, Labour, Rail, Railways, Revolution, Trains, Transport, UK, University of Birmingham, Zero-emission

  ---