Rail Engineer - Issue 157 - November 2017 by Rail Media

Engineer

by rail engineers for rail engineers

NOVEMBER 2017 - ISSUE 157

Bi-Mode Trains:

UNLOCKING OPPORTUNITY? UNL

KEEPING WHEEL AND RAIL TOGETHER The second in a three-part series of articles on how to keep trains on the track, and what can be learned when it all goes wrong.

ROLLING STOCK/ DEPOTS

BUILDING SCOTRAIL'S 385s

BIODIVERSITY AT BERMONDSEY

The first Class 385 train to be built at Hitachi's Newton Aycliffe factory has been completed, with more well underway.

The latest major piece of infrastructure work for Thameslink has led to a 113% increase in biodiversity.

www.railengineer.uk

SUSTAINABILITY/ ENVIRONMENT

RAIL ENGINEER MAGAZINE

CONTENTS

06 72 74 76

Rolling Stock/Depots

10 18 20 22 28 34 38 42 50

Feature News Infrarail, Midland Metro, Levenmouth, Train orders.

Panasonic’s proactive CCTV Pattern-recognition algorithms process images from thermal and day/night cameras.

On the right track PcP developed new cable trough solutions for Danish and Norwegian railways.

Under the wires to Swindon Graham Coombs boards inspection coach Caroline to view Great Western progress.

Bi-mode trains – unlocking opportunity? Malcolm Dobell considers the pros and cons of the new breed of bi-mode trains.

Electrification benefits David Shirres sets out the benefits of electrification.

Electrification cutbacks – the unanswered questions Just when and where will more electrification take place?

Building ScotRail’s 385s The first Hitachi Class 385 to be built at Newton Aycliffe has been completed.

A little sand in the right place works wonders Sanding has been around for years, so why is RSSB conducting new trials?

Crucial completion Stuart Marsh visits the new Blackburn depot, built by Buckingham Group.

Enhancing UK traincare depots VolkerFitzpatrick has delivered 20 depot projects over the last 20 years.

From the past to the future at Scherbinka The biennial EXPO1520 for Russian gauge railways had some interesting technology.

The cost of a workplace fatality Zonegreen’s interlocking for train depots safeguards both personnel and equipment.

Sustainability/ Environment

22 52 57 58 62

Keeping wheel and rail together Grahame Taylor explains why wheels and rails sometimes part company.

GRP structures for new sidings at Maidenhead Dura Composites supplied GRP platforms and walkways under electrified lines.

80 82 86

Biodiversity at Bermondsey Thameslink’s latest civil engineering project leaves an environmental legacy.

From newts to knotweed Ground Control tackles invasive species while protecting wildlife.

Sustainability Summit Stewart Thorpe reports on issues discussed at the 2017 Rail Sustainability Summit.

Training for the Azumas Clive Kessell tries out Virgin Trains’ new driver simulators.

RVE 2017 – new venue, more exhibitors The Rail Vehicle Enhancements show keeps getting bigger and better.

Rail Engineer | Issue 156 | October 2017

RAIL ENGINEER MAGAZINE

EDITORIAL

Good news and bad news The good news is that almost 7,000 new rail passenger vehicles are being delivered or on order. These will displace many of the vehicles in the current fleet, which consists of over 13,000 coaches. Some, like the Pacers, are at the end of their serviceable life and will be scrapped. Others will be cascaded to provide longer and more frequent trains. However, a few thousand serviceable vehicles will be surplus to requirement. Many of these will be EMUs that can only be used if there is further electrification of the network. There are various reasons for this extraordinary number of orders. One is that the capital cost of new trains is about a third of their whole life cost. As modern trains become more energy efficient, cheaper to maintain and more reliable, there is a stronger case for the disposal of not-quite-so-new trains even if the result is miles of sidings full of unwanted yet serviceable trains. Other factors are cheap finance, increased focus on quality in train franchises and the reduced cost of modern trains. In the 1990s, an EMU vehicle cost typically £2.2 million at 2017 prices. Now, the price is around £1.5 million and this includes modern passenger facilities and, usually, a maintenance contract. In an industry often criticised for its increased costs, train manufacturers have shown how competition and innovation can keep costs down. So, where’s the bad news? The answer is the cut back of electrification, with the consequent uncertainty over future schemes, and how this is based on the flawed claim that the new type of bi-mode trains is the “best available technology” to improve passenger journeys. Yet the traction power of a Great Western IEP in diesel mode is only about seventy per cent of that in electric mode. Malcolm Dobell explains this, and much more, in his comprehensive article about bi-mode trains. Bi-modes are also much more expensive to run and maintain. Diesel fuel is significantly more costly than electric traction. The higher maintenance costs are reflected in the IEP’s procurement contract, which includes 27 years maintenance. This shows the contract cost of a GW IEP is 56 per cent more than an East Coast IEP, due to the higher proportion of diesel-powered miles done by bi-mode trains in the GW fleet. Over the IEP train’s lifetime, these extra costs add up to billions of pounds. When these, and other factors such as unused surplus EMUs, are considered, the question that needs to be asked is - where is the business case for not electrifying core routes? To be fair, Hitachi’s bi-mode IEP is an impressive piece of kit and, as Malcolm explains, is a good way of getting beyond the electrified network to, say Penzance and Inverness. Moreover, packaging diesel power packs underneath the train eliminates the need for power cars and so provides extra seats. In Scotland, the Class 385 will also provide much needed extra seats. We report on these trains and how they are being built alongside IEPs in Hitachi’s Newton Aycliffe plant. Much must be done to ensure successful service entry of these trains. Clive Kessell explains why a simulator is essential if Virgin East Coast’s 400 drivers are to be trained on the complexities of their new IEP trains before their introduction in December 2018. We also cover the construction of the new IEP depots, whilst Stuart Marsh also reports on a particularly challenging depot build for Northern’s new Class 195 DMUs in Blackburn. Stewart Thorpe reports from our summit on sustainability, a topic that requires the right balance between the needs of the environment, the economy and society. A hot topic at the summit was the Government’s

announcement that it is to cut back electrification and instead rely on diesel trains. In contrast, this was followed by a further statement a week later, that sales of diesel cars would be banned from 2040 on environmental grounds. With the eastern end of the GW main line to be fully electrified to Didcot by December, Graham Coombs describes his trip in Caroline’s front end to for see for himself how electrification and other enhancements have transformed the line. The wheel/rail interface is a complex topic. In our second feature in a three-part series on railway accidents, Grahame Taylor explains what can cause the wheel to leave the rail. Another aspect of this interface is wheel-slide in low adhesion conditions, which can be prevented by sanding. We describe how this is being investigated at the Old Dalby test track. The world’s first test track at Scherbinka is the setting for Russia’s biennial rail trade fair, EXPO1520 which, as we describe, offered glimpses into the past and future. It also showed how the European rail industry is taking advantage of Russian export opportunities. Just up the road from Old Dalby is Derby, which hosts the annual Rail Vehicle Enhancements show. Such is the success of this exhibition that this year it had to move to larger premises. We report on the new products on display as well as presentations on the implications of the large numbers of new vehicles and train refurbishment. The show’s meet the buyer event put 76 companies in touch with train builders throughout Europe and was considered to be very worthwhile. The business generated as a result is certainly good news.

RAIL ENGINEER EDITOR

DAVID SHIRRES

Rail Engineer | Issue 156 | October 2017

THE TEAM

NEWS

Editor David Shirres david.shirres@railengineer.uk

Production Editor Nigel Wordsworth nigel.wordsworth@railengineer.uk

Production and design Adam O’Connor adam@rail-media.com Matthew Stokes matt@rail-media.com

Engineering writers bob.wright@railengineer.uk chris.parker@railengineer.uk clive.kessell@railengineer.uk collin.carr@railengineer.uk david.bickell@railengineer.uk graeme.bickerdike@railengineer.uk grahame.taylor@railengineer.uk lesley.brown@railengineer.uk malcolm.dobell@railengineer.uk mark.phillips@railengineer.uk paul.darlington@railengineer.uk peter.stanton@railengineer.uk stuart.marsh@railengineer.uk

Advertising Asif Ahmed

asif@rail-media.com

Chris Davies

chris@rail-media.com

Jolene Price jolene@rail-media.com

Rail Engineer Rail Media House, Samson Road, Coalville Leicestershire, LE67 3FP, UK. Switchboard:

01530 816 444

Website: www.railengineer.uk

Rail Engineer Videos http://rail.media/REYouTube

Editorial copy to Email:

news@rail-media.com

Free controlled circulation Email:

subscribe@rail-media.com

The small print Rail Engineer is published by

Infrarail 2018 - the perfect platform Following recent announcements on building plans and contract awards for HS2, and the latest news outlining the Government's extensive investment aspirations for CP6, there is a real sense of optimism amongst the developers, operators and users of Britain's railways. As this new dawn in railway investment approaches, the country’s leading event for rail systems, equipment and services prepares for its return in 2018. Infrarail gives organisations a unique chance to showcase their work and put themselves in the driving seat for future opportunities from a profiling perspective. Infrarail, the UK’s leading exhibition of railway infrastructure equipment products and services, returns to the ExCeL London, in May next year. The event, which is always a hugely popular activity in the rail industry calendar, provides the perfect platform for companies to network, understand new demands, present their latest innovations, make connections and do real business. Kirsten Whitehouse, exhibition manager for Infrarail, said: “We are approaching what could be a landmark period for the UK rail industry, as investment soars and opportunities grow, so what better time for rail companies to showcase their products and services?

“Infrarail has been a highlight in the industry calendar for many years, and the twelfth edition promises to be our biggest and best yet. Exhibiting companies will cover the entire industry supply chain, and the venue will bring together some of the leading thinkers, legislators, organisations and engineers from across the UK rail industry.” Infrarail 2018 will feature keynote speeches by leading figures, industry seminars, project briefings and discussion groups all free to attend and aimed at providing valuable insights into trends in technology and policy. Kirsten added: “Next year’s event will be 2018’s definitive networking opportunity for visitors and exhibitors to meet, connect and inspire; sharing knowledge and making contacts. It is an event that is not to be missed and I urge businesses interested in exhibiting to make a reservation as soon as possible, as spaces are rapidly selling out.” Infrarail 2018 will take place between 1-3 May at the ExCeL London. For more information visit www.infrarail.com.

RailStaff Publications Limited and printed by Pensord.

Rail Engineer | Issue 156 | October 2017

»» 1, It may sometimes seem as though our writers are quite prolific. However, in the October issue, Clive Kessell was inadvertently credited with the article “Innovation and light bulbs” which he didn’t actually write. »» 2, Also, in the September article “Elegance with practicality”, it was claimed that Lundy Projects was employed “to design … bespoke OLE structures”. This was incorrect as the structures were designed by the AECOM Mott MacDonald JV which was also responsible for all the signal gantry structural designs - Lundy prepared elements of the design detailing, which AMM JV signed off as lead designer. BDP was responsible for the architectural design.

NEWS

'New' track for tramway museum The Midland Metro Alliance has donated around 100 metres of the tram track that was removed from the Bilston Road maintenance project in Wolverhampton to the Black Country Living Museum. The donation was made after discovering the rail in Wolverhampton was compatible with the track of the vintage tramway at the tourist attraction in Dudley. The Black Country Living Museum announced its expansion plans earlier in the summer upon gaining significant financial support from the National Lottery. The major development project, BCLM: Forging Ahead, will see the Museum create a historic town focused on the1940s to 1960s.The donated track will be cleaned-up by the team at the museum before being used in maintenance and expansion projects. Tim Shields, curator for industry and transport at BCLM, said: “We’re really grateful to the Midland Metro Alliance for this very generous donation of track. An important part of our new development is the extension

of our visitor tramway and we hope to use this particular track to create a turning radii to take historic trams along our 1930s street. We are especially pleased that it has been saved from its previous location in Bilston and will be put to good use at the Museum for years to come.” The Museum in Dudley, which attracted over 300,000 visitors last year, will ultimately be accessible by tram, too, when the proposed Wednesbury to Brierley Hill tram extension opens in 2023. This tram route, which is one of the seven projects that the Midland Metro Alliance is developing on behalf of the West Midlands Combined Authority, will enhance public transport accessibility across the Black Country and reduce journey times to key attractions in the region, including the Museum, which has to date only been easily accessible by car.

coming soon... NEXT MONTH... ELECTRIFICATION / POWER Transformers, Generators, OLE, Distribution Networks, Monitoring, Earthing, Lightning Protection, Control Equipment and Systems.

LIGHT RAIL / METRO Vehicles, Rail, Electrification, Signalling, Tram, TramTrain, Underground, Operating Systems, Platform Screen Doors, Automation.

JANUARY 2018 STATIONS Rail Engineer reports on Stations, the passenger experience through a station, and key developments below: Accessibility, Architecture, BIM, Barriers, Buildings, CCTV, Car Parks, Catering, Cleaning, Escalators, Landlord Permissions, Lifts, Lighting, Maintenance, Passenger Information Systems, Planning Issues, Platform Screen Doors, Platforms, Records, Refurbishment, Reporting, Retail, Security, Software, Smart Ticketing, Wheel / Rail Interface.

February 2018 RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE Rail Engineer looks at what’s involved in maintaining and renewing the UK Rail Infrastructure and the latest technology and innovations making it faster, easier and more cost effective, especially in these areas: Asset Management, Cable Hangers, Construction, Drainage, Examinations, Lifting, Modular Systems, Painting, Plant & Equipment, Precast Sections, Refurbishment, Replacement, Rope Access, Scaffolding, Spray Concrete, Surveying Equipment, Surveying Techniques, Tunnel Boring, Ventilation, Waterproofing.

Rail Engineer | Issue 156 | October 2017

NEWS

Levenmouth rail link a step closer Following a Scottish Parliament debate on 27 September, it is now likely that the mothballed Levenmouth branch in Fife will be Scotland's next new railway. There has been a long running campaign to re-open the line which has been the subject of two STAG (Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance) reports. The most recent report concluded that re-opening the line would cost £91 million and have a benefit cost ratio (BCR) of 1.3. However, the Levenmouth Rail Campaign (LMRC) produced a booklet arguing that the STAG report significantly under-estimated the line’s BCR as it did not quantify wider economic benefits and incorrectly concluded that Levenmouth would cost 23 per cent more per mile than the Borders Railway, even though this included major items of work not applicable to Levenmouth. In contrast, LMRC estimates that the per mile cost of re-opening this out-of-use line would be between 50 and 75 per cent of the Borders Railway, which is a total cost of between £37 and £56 million. Opening the debate, Jenny Gilruth noted that the Levenmouth conurbation was both the largest in Scotland without a railway and

Rail Engineer | Issue 156 | October 2017

an area of significant deprivation, isolated from transport links. She stressed that re-opening the railway wasn’t just a transport project, it was about regeneration and investment. In response Scottish transport minister Humza Yousaf accepted that Levenmouth’s cost benefit ratio should consider the regeneration impact as well as direct benefits and accepted that the LMRC had raised cost issues that

needed to be addressed. For these reasons he announced that he would instruct Transport Scotland to consider these issues in a further study to develop the case for re-opening. In a recent briefing, Mark Carne noted that third party investment could provide funding to re-open branch lines in accordance with the Hansford review proposals. Perhaps Levenmouth could be a test case.

NEWS

More new train orders Hardly a week seems to go by at the moment without a new train order being announced. This time it was Abellio, JR East and Mitsui, joint holders of the new West Midlands Franchise, who confirmed an order for a total of 107 new trains. Bombardier Derby will build 36 three-car and 45 five-car electric trains while Spainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s CAF will supply 12 two-car and 14 four-car diesel trains. Financing is being led by Infracapital and Deutsche Asset Management and the trains will be leased to the new West Midlands trains franchise. The Bombardier deal brings total orders for the companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new Aventra trains to 2513 cars, more than double the number in

the Thameslink order that the company lost to Siemens a few years ago, just showing how the East Midlands manufacturer has bounced back. In total, 6,833 carriages are now on order (or being delivered) for the UK railway. While

some of these will replace older trains, Pacers and the like, others will take the place of trains that are still serviceable, leading to a glut, certainly of electric trains. It will be interesting to see how the market shakes out.

Rail Engineer | Issue 156 | October 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

MALCOLM DOBELL

Bi-Mode Trains:

UNLOCKING UNL OPPORTUNITY?

“T

he future is bright, the future is bi-mode!” or so one might imagine with the level of focus on this type of train. There are a number of bi-mode trains being developed or manufactured and the Government sees them as a way of bringing forward the passenger benefits planned to be delivered through the authorised electrification programmes, several of which are now running significantly both late and over budget.

Class 802/3 in Hull Trains livery.

More recently, the planned electrification from Kettering to Nottingham and Sheffield has been cancelled in favour of modern bi-mode trains that are supposed to deliver, for example, a 20-minute reduction in journey time between Sheffield and London. Expecting the train in diesel mode to deliver this time saving will be a serious technical challenge and, in fact, it is rumoured that the saving is to be achieved solely by infrastructure changes and by omitting stops south of Leicester. This article will show that bi-mode trains in selfpowered mode will struggle to deliver anything like the performance possible in electric mode

Background It was around 2005 that the Department for Transport (DfT) was considering the specification of a train to replace the diesel High Speed Train (HST). Some of the routes where the new train was planned to operate were electrified, at least on the trunk sections, and it was desirable to make use of this infrastructure. However, the DfT also recognised that passengers valued the through journeys they enjoyed to destinations beyond the electrified network using HSTs, for example London to Aberdeen, and thus a number of options to maintain such services were considered: 1. New diesel trains equivalent to the HST; 2. Electric trains taken beyond the electrified network by diesel locomotives (as per the original Bournemouth electrification, and early days of Pendolinos from Crewe to Chester/Holyhead);

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Provide electric trains that have a selfpropulsion capability - which came to be known as bi-mode trains; 4. Making passengers change trains. As is well known, DfT selected option 3 and, despite many commentators’ contrary views, this was probably the only sensible option for passenger services that run on both electrified and non-electrified routes. Whether bi-mode technology justifies the cancellation schemes is another matter. However, bi-modes do bring additional benefits other than just using nonelectrified routes, such as accessing secondary platform faces, depots, stabling sidings and diversionary routes. Since then, Abellio Greater Anglia has ordered bi-mode trains and there are prototypes under development for more. This article describes the benefits and challenges of bi-modes and provides a roundup of current bi-mode trains under construction and in development. It assumes the following: »» Bi-mode trains are electric trains with the means to move independently of the electrification infrastructure; »» Even if it is carried out at a reasonable cost, there will never be a business case to electrify the whole railway; »» Rolling stock programmes and infrastructure programmes can never be fully aligned; »» Bi-mode trains in self-powered mode incur performance and/or range penalties compared with operation from the electricity supply.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS TransPennine Express has ordered 19 Class 802/2 trains.

Technology There are two key technologies that, currently, are reasonably proven to enable electric trains to move beyond the electrified network. The first is a battery, such as that used on the Class 379 IPEMU (Independently Powered Electric Multiple-Unit) trial carried out in 2015/16. These trains have a range, typically, of less than 80km. Battery vehicles can be connected to fast chargers (which, of course, need a power supply) at, say, terminal stations, and can be charged during regenerative braking, which might extend the range a little. Traction performance on batteries can be similar to that achieved when powered by the catenary but, overall, a bi-mode battery/electric train will have slightly reduced performance than its straight-electric equivalent, for a given size of traction motors, due to the mass of batteries. If the electrical supply comes from a carbon-free source, then this technology is carbonfree throughout the operating cycle. Batteries also add no noise or vibration. The Achilles’ heel of batteries is usually the recharging time; as a rule of thumb, batteries take at least as long to recharge as they

take to discharge. However, both range and recharging time are likely to improve over time, given the intense research and development into battery technology around the world. Diesel power provides a much greater range than battery as diesel fuel has some 50 times the energy density of a typical battery and can be “recharged” comparatively quickly. Effectively, the range is limited only by the amount of fuel that the vehicle can accommodate. However, diesel performance is often reduced compared with electric operation. Based on sparse published information, diesel-electric bi-mode trains generally have diesel engines producing less peak power than the vehicles deliver at the rail when operating from the catenary; a significant deficit.

Comparing power ratings Rolling stock engineers get excited by a train’s power rating, tractive effort and power-to-weight ratio. The latter is generally taken to allow comparison between different trains’ intrinsic performance capability. But does it? Here is a simplistic comparison between how diesel and electric power ratings are usually described and why there might be differences between diesel and electric trains. Effectively, the range is limited only by the amount of fuel that the vehicle can accommodate. Diesel engines are not, of course, free from harmful emissions, but the levels are low for engines that comply with current EU regulations. Take two trains, to the same general design from the same

Virgin Class 800 crossing the Royal Border Bridge, Berwick-upon-Tweed.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

An MTU power pack being installed under a Class 800 at Hitachi’s Newton Aycliffe factory.

manufacturer. One is a diesel and has a diesel engine or engines capable of delivering 3MW. The other is an electric train with four 750kW electric motors. They both obviously have the same power-to-weight ratio, right? Well, probably not the electric train will quite likely have the better performance as it will be lighter. Diesel engine power output is usually quoted as the output at the flywheel, although it might be the output of the alternator for diesel alternator sets. Some power is used to feed all the auxiliaries such as compressors and the train heating, lighting and air conditioning. In addition, the main output has to pass through a three-phase drive before the energy is fed into the traction motors. Both the auxiliaries and inefficiencies in the drive system reduce the power available to the traction motors. This might amount to 10 per cent, reducing the 3MW diesel train’s output from the traction motors to as little as 2.7MW. This is the maximum power that the diesel train can produce for traction purposes. In contrast, an electric train’s power output is usually specified as the continuous rating of the traction motors. What this means is that if 3MW is stated, then 3MW is what is delivered. However, traction

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

motors usually have a peak rating known as the “one-hour” rating. This can be up to 25 per cent higher than the continuous rating so, for example, the onehour rating could be 3.7MW. What this means is that, for two trains with nominally the same power output, the diesel delivers a maximum of 2.7MW from the motors whereas the electric train can, in short bursts (such as when accelerating), deliver 3.7MW. It is also lighter, increasing the power-to-weight ratio still further. What does this mean for bi-mode trains? If there is a requirement for the bi-mode train to have the same performance in either electric or diesel mode, then the headline output of the diesel engine(s) needs to be higher than the nominal electric rating - for this example, the diesel rating would need to be in the order of 4MW. So far, all bi-mode trains have been specified with diesel engines with a lower rating. This is not surprising, as the basic assumption was that the best performance was required on the busiest parts of the railway which would be electrified. The diesel performance was only required to be broadly comparable with or better than the diesel trains being replaced on the diesel sections of line. With the ambition to deliver the performance of an

electrified railway with bi-mode trains over large sections of railway where electrification has been cancelled, diesel and electric power ratings for bimode trains to be used on these routes will inevitably need to be revisited.

Bi-mode or tri-mode? In addition to the engineering question of power ratings, many people intensely dislike the noise and vibration of underfloor diesel engines. Moreover, even the latest diesel engines are not free of CO2 and other emissions, and the equipment required to make them acceptably clean adds to the maintenance cost. Both technologies require space on the vehicles and add mass, which is ‘dead weight’ when operating on electricity. Although there is currently no UK application, engine supplier MTU provided a paper at Railtex 2017 on diesel/battery/ pantograph electric hybrid trains - which they called tri-mode. This offers several possibilities including regeneration into batteries when operating in selfpowered mode, and then using the batteries to assist the diesel engine in acceleration, and operating on battery only in, for example, station areas. This can deliver significant savings. As David Shirres said in his review of Railtex: “Another

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS energy-saving arrangement was on display at the MTU stand. Their hybrid power pack has a 390kW diesel engine and 400kW electric motor connected to a separate Li-ion cell battery module. Three years of trials on a DMU in Germany demonstrated that this unit gave fuel savings of 18 per cent on a 23km route with nine stops. In addition, noise and pollution at stations were significantly reduced.” Even better might be diesel/pantographbattery-electric train - the ideal go-anywhere train with the means to use the battery to supplement the diesel engines during acceleration.

Inter-city routes The roll out of bi-mode trains in the UK has inevitably been linked to the electrification programme for the Great Western (GW) line from London Paddington to Oxford, Newbury, Swansea and Bristol. Indeed, the original specification provided for electric, self-powered and bi-mode versions. The Government started work on the specification for the HST replacement around 2005 and announced that Agility Trains had been selected as the preferred bidder in early 2009, but it was not until 2011 that electrification of the GW line was confirmed. It was after the electrification programme was announced that the contract was placed for what became known as the Intercity Express Programme (IEP). With the advent of GW electrification, no one ordered any self-powered versions. The notion was that electric trains would operate trunk routes and that routes which extended beyond the electrified lines would be operated by bi-mode trains. Details about who has ordered what comes later in the article.

On the East Coast main line, trains to/from London and Leeds, York, Newcastle and Edinburgh will be operated by electric trains while other services, such as the London to Inverness and Aberdeen through-trains, will use bi-modes. There was debate at the time about whether it was appropriate to run trains fitted with a number of idle, and heavy, diesel generators ‘under the wires’, but it has to be said that the bi-modes represent an improvement over operating the pure-diesel trains in these circumstances. On the GW lines, there were significant time and cost overruns for Network Rail’s electrification of the originally proposed routes. Similar to the East Coast, the original plan involved obtaining a number of electric trains for the trunk London to Cardiff, Swansea and Bristol routes and bi-modes trains for the routes going

GWR Class 800.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

beyond the wires, such as to Gloucester. Separately, First GWR had ordered a number of bi-mode trains with higherpowered diesel engines and larger fuel tanks to help them tackle the hillier South West route to Exeter, Plymouth and Penzance. Once the scale of electrification delays became clear (electrification to Cardiff prioritised but delayed, wires to Bristol, Swansea and Oxford delayed beyond CP5 or cancelled), the orders were changed. At an unspecified cost, all of the DfT-ordered electric trains were re-specified as bimodes and GWR added a small number of additional trains to their order to cover routes such as London to Oxford. In July the Government announced that “new (bi-mode) technologies mean that we can improve journeys for passengers on the Great Western Main Line in South Wales” and that, as a result, there is no need for

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

electrification between Cardiff and Swansea. At the same time a decision was taken to uprate engines on the route’s bi-mode trains from 560kW to 700kW. The engines were originally rated at 560kW to minimise fuel and maintenance costs as well as to improve reliability. At the time, their initially low output was not a problem for a train that would not be diesel-powered very often. Their upgrade is a variation to the contract for the supply and maintenance of these trains and so comes at further unknown cost. As will be seen, even when uprated, the power output from these engines is still only 80 per cent of the train’s electric mode. The Government’s claim that bi-mode operation improves passenger journeys thus ignores the facts. Hull trains and TransPennine Express have also ordered trains based on the five-car version of the Hitachi train being supplied to GWR for the South West route services.

Regional services When the Government announced that Abellio had won the Greater Anglia franchise competition, there was much surprise - both that they were replacing their entire fleet and that 138 of these new vehicles would be bi-mode trains. Little has so far been released on the benefits of these on the Greater Anglia routes, but it is to be expected that the trains will provide much-improved performance compared with current diesel trains when operating ‘under the wires’. This will help to maximise the capacity of the congested electrified main line. In late 2016, Northern stated it was seeking to extend the reach of the class 319 trains that have been leased for the North West Electrification programme and is co-operating with Porterbrook in converting eight of them into bi-mode trains described as class 319 Flex (to be designated Class 769).

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Abellio Wales and the Welsh Assembly Government announced in July 2017 that they would take five Class 769 trains, operated in diesel mode, to cover for Sprinter DMUs that need to have modifications carried out to conform to the Technical Specification for Interoperability - Requirements for People of Reduced Mobility.

Inter-City Express Train/Programme (IEP) Looking in detail at which trains are on order, some 182 Hitachi Class 80X trains, in a mixture of five-car and nine-car formations and totalling 1,223 cars, have been ordered for four operators using three leasing companies as outlined in Table 1. The only operator that will receive pure-electric trains is Virgin Trains East Coast, although even these will be fitted with one diesel generator to provide auxiliary supplies and limited movement capability in the event of the loss of the catenary supply, overcoming an issue that had caused much trouble on the Class 91/Mk4 sets currently in use. In the event of catenary damage, ECML trains will be able to power through failed OLE, albeit slowly, after the wreckage has been cleared away, reducing the impact of such a failure which today would stop all but diesel services. There has been criticism of carrying diesel plant on trains running on electricity, but the mass of the auxiliary generator is estimated at about one per cent of the mass of a nine-car train. In fact, the mass of the diesel plant of the bi-mode trains is not huge; it is estimated that the weight increase between a nine-car class 801 electric train and a similar class 800 bi-mode is about 20 tonnes, which represents less than five per cent

of the total. Class 80X trains are being supplied in five-car and nine-car formations using 26 metre long cars. Five-car trains have three motor cars (12 traction motors), plus three MTU 12V 1600 R80L (12-cylinder, 21 litre) diesel alternators on the bi-mode sets, while nine-car trains have five motor cars (20 traction motors) and five diesel alternators on the bi-modes. With the recent uprating of Class 800/0 engines, the only difference between the DfT-ordered Class 800 and GWR-ordered class 802 is the size of the fuel tanks. Class 800 trains have 1,300 litre fuel tanks whereas those in the Class 802 have a capacity of 1,550 litres. As to performance, there has been a great deal of speculation about how well the Class 800 and Class 802 will perform, both compared with the HST they will replace and comparing their diesel and electric modes. The power-to-weight ratios in Table 1 are based on the published electric motor and diesel engine ratings. Train masses have been estimated by the writer from the mass of the class 802 nine-car train.

MTU power pack being fitted to Class 802 at Pistoia.

An MTU power pack awaiting installation into a Class 802 bi-mode train.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Stadler Flirt UK. The short third car houses the diesel engines.

Compared with the HST, which has a power to weight ratio of approximately 8.2kW/tonne, class 80X has an improved power to weight in electric mode. In diesel mode, Great Western 80X units are comparable with HSTs. However, East Coast class 800s have a noticeable performance deficit compared with HST, and so are unlikely to be capable of achieving HST timings in diesel mode unless their engines are also uprated to 700kW.

Abellio Greater Anglia - Stadler

Class 769.

The central car of this Stadler Flirt UK is the diesel power car.

As part of its commitment to replacing its entire fleet, Abellio Greater Anglia has ordered 38 bi-mode FLIRT UK articulated trains (14 three-car and 24 four-car units plus, in each case, a sevenmetre-long engine pod) from Stadler for its crosscountry services, the aim being to take advantage of 25kV supply where it is available. The electric power rating for both length trains is some 2.5MW. There is a diesel performance deficit which will be more severe on the three car sets. Four-car sets will be fitted with four 480kW diesel generators whereas the three-car sets will only have two. The Stadler trains are fully articulated and the diesel generator sets are fitted above the train floor in short engine cars, effectively separating the “noisy, smelly, vibrating parts” from the passenger space. Moreover, if the lines are eventually electrified, or some other fuel source becomes the norm, the engine cars could be removed quite easily. From the published figures, the bi-mode FLIRT trains will have significantly improved performance compared with Abellio’s existing diesel trains when running over the 25kV routes with an average acceleration rate from 0-40km/h of 1.1m/s2 and 1.3m/s2 for the four-car and three-car sets respectively. In diesel mode, compared with existing diesel trains, the four-car set’s performance will be improved and the three-car sets will be at least comparable. This is based on acceleration values from the Stadler leaflet available at Railtex 2017 and estimated power-weight ratios shown with other vital statistics in Table 2.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Porterbrook/Northern Class 319 Flex In December 2016, Porterbrook Leasing announced that it was developing a bi-mode version of the Class 319 EMU. These Class 769 units, which are both 750V DC and 25kV AC capable, have recently been replaced on Thameslink by new Class 700 trains and many of them are being transferred to Northern. It was realised that these trains would be able to provide more through journeys if the trains could operate independently of the 25kV supply. The trains will use two diesel generator sets, one under each driving trailer car. Each generator set will comprise a MAN D2876 horizontally mounted six-cylinder, 12.8-litre diesel engine driving an ABB alternator.

The specification sheet for the engine suggests output settings in the range 310kW to 390kW. Taking a nominal 350kW per engine gives approximately 700kW on diesel power, which is lower than the reported rating on electricity of approximately 1,000kW. Reports suggest that the diesel performance will be comparable with Pacers and class 150 DMUs.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Vivarail Class 230 Vivarail has been developing a train for use on the main line based on former London Underground D Stock. The first prototype employed automotive diesel engines, generators, and a DC chopper control system driving the existing traction motors. More recently the company has been developing a batteryelectric version with a view to offering a hybrid diesel/battery train which would operate through a three-phase drive and new AC traction motors.

Bombardier Aventra Although nothing has been announced, Bombardier is rumoured to be working on a bi-mode version of its Aventra platform.

Pros and cons As this article has shown, there are disadvantages of dieselelectric bi-mode trains - they are heavier and, in self-powered mode, noisier than electric trains. Battery power has yet to be deployed on UK main line railways, although trials have been promising. In all the applications described, the train’s selfpowered performance is inferior to electric performance, in terms of range and/or acceleration. In the worst case, it is also inferior to the diesel trains they replace.

Whilst this might not be all that important away from the trunk routes, it will matter on the busiest lines. Bi-mode trains, as currently specified and configured, will not deliver the run-time benefits planned from electrification when running on diesel. All this implies that main trunk routes should be electrified. But wasn’t that the original plan? That said, bi-mode trains offer considerable customer benefits in enabling through journeys beyond the electrified network that would have otherwise required a change of trains, time wasted attaching or removing locomotives or running diesel trains ‘under the wires’. They also allow trains to continue to run if the electrification system fails or on diversionary routes. The initiative also allowed the electrification programme to be de-linked from train purchases, so they could be deployed whilst electrification is still in progress. It does seem strange, though, that some new trains have been specified with an inferior performance on diesel power compared with the trains they will replace. Great credit goes to Abellio Greater Anglia and Stadler for providing new bi-mode trains with significant installed power that can more than keep up with electric

trains and, on diesel, generally improve on the performance of the existing trains.

Vivarail Class 230.

And finally… Whilst researching this article, a colleague who works in France wondered what all the fuss is about. In France, they have to cope with both 25kV AC and 1.5V DC and lots of areas with no electrification, and they are used to lowering the pantograph to avoid obstructions. One of the reasons for the high cost of UK electrification is the need to raise bridges - why can’t the UK use neutral sections, for example? For some years French railways have also used bi-mode trains. These are dual-voltage and fitted with diesel generators (sometimes on the roof) so that trains go where customers want to go. Perhaps we need to learn some lessons from our neighbours?

Values stated as estimates have been developed by the author. It should be noted that the power ratings and power-to-weight figures in Tables 1 and 2 are not strictly comparable between electric and diesel modes, see the explanation in the section ‘Comparing power ratings’.

(Footnotes) 1. Plus diesel engine module 2. Continuous rating. Maximum output at wheel is 2600kW 3. Engine output – from which power to auxiliaries (air conditioning etc) has to be deducted 4. Estimated by the author Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

DAVID SHIRRES

Electrification Power station steam turbines are thermally more efficient than diesel engines.

he electrification infrastructure that enables electric trains to draw their power from the national grid offers many advantages, most of which are due to trains not requiring diesel engines. For the foreseeable future, diesel remains the only credible alternative traction power to electrification. For the same weight, diesel fuel stores fifty times the energy of a modern battery. Hence battery-powered vehicles can only be suitable for short distance services.

Diesel engines have obvious problems. They are expensive to buy and maintain, as well as being heavy, and so require additional track maintenance, especially at high speeds. The power output of a diesel engine is limited by its rating. Traction power is further reduced as a diesel engine also has to supply the trainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s hotel load. Electric traction power is limited by its thermal loading and so can operate for short periods at peak power. Partly for this reason, an electric multiple unit has typically twice the acceleration of a diesel multiple unit. A diesel train operating at variable power settings is less efficient than a train that has its power generated by highly efficient powerstation steam turbines at almost constant load. An RSSB report on the efficiency of traction energy use (T618) considers that power stations operate at 40 per cent efficiency compared with 32 per cent for diesel traction, but showed that transmission losses account for 1.4 per cent of the power supplied to electric trains.

Fuel and wastage Diesel fuel is also significantly more expensive than electric traction. A recent ORR report revealed that diesel fuel accounts for 40 per cent of Virgin West Coastâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s traction cost, yet only 15 per cent of its fleet is diesel powered. As electric trains can be powered by any source of power, they are not susceptible to oil price rises and shortages. With electricity being increasingly generated by renewables, the carbon footprint of electric trains is being reduced accordingly. Indeed, all Dutch electric trains are now powered by wind energy. When braking, the enormous kinetic energy of a train, which is proportional to the square of its speed, cannot be stored on-board, so on a diesel train it is dissipated in heat from its brake discs or

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

from roof-mounted rheostats, if it is a diesel-electric train using the traction motors as generators for braking. However, on electric trains, this braking energy can be regenerated and fed back into the grid, offering energy savings of up to 20 per cent and reduced brake wear. Of course, electric traction also eliminates harmful diesel engine emissions and particulates which are a particular issue at stations. The one major disadvantage of electrification is its high initial capital cost. For this reason, it is not appropriate to electrify lightly trafficked lines. Many countries understand these benefits and have a large percentage of their rail network electrified. These include Netherlands (76 per cent), Italy (71 per cent), Austria (70 per cent), Spain (61 per cent), Germany (52 per cent) and France (51 per cent). In the UK, 42 per cent of the network is electrified. PHOTO: HUGH LLEWELLYN

This view of a Class 220 passing Charfield clearly shows the black rheostats on the roof for dissipating heat generated by braking.

FEATURE

Electrification cutbacks the unanswered questions MALCOLM DOBELL

n 19 July, the Secretary of State for Transport announced that the planned electrification schemes from Kettering to Nottingham and Sheffield, from Cardiff to Swansea and from Oxenholme to Windermere had been cancelled.

Making the announcement, he said: “Technology is advancing quickly, and this government is committed to using the best available technologies to improve each part of the network. New bi-mode train technology offers seamless transfer from diesel power to electric that is undetectable to passengers. “The industry is also developing alternative fuel trains, using battery and hydrogen power. This means that we no longer need to electrify every line to achieve the same significant improvements to journeys, and we will only electrify lines where it delivers a genuine benefit to passengers.” This statement begs a number of questions in that it combines statements of fact “bi-mode trains” with speculation that new technology will come on stream in time to satisfy the demand. In practice, the self-powered energy source will be diesel, at least in the medium term. For the Cardiff to Swansea route, their trains are already being delivered and the issues affecting the Great Western electrification are not repeated.

Protecting the environment? The announcement about Oxenholme to Windermere included this statement: “We have listened to concerns about electrification gantries spoiling protected landscapes. Northern, the train operator, will therefore begin work to explore the possibility of deploying alternative-fuel trains on the route by 2021, improving comfort and on-board facilities for passengers whilst protecting the sensitive environment of this World Heritage Site.” The expression “…begin work to explore the possibility of…” suggests something truly innovative, but vague in terms of timescale. There is a strong suspicion that this route’s bi-mode services will be electro-diesels. There are through services between Manchester Airport and Windermere, which provides enough operation under the wires to recharge batteries. However, the service is currently mainly a shuttle service with very short turn round times at both ends of the branch which is incompatible with maintaining batteries in a good state.

The Bombardier/Greater Anglia IPEMU on test in January 2015. Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

The bi-mode trains for the Midland main line are intended to deliver improved journey times - for example, a 20-minute reduction in journey time between Sheffield and London. It has become apparent, since the announcement, that this improvement will be delivered through infrastructure improvements and omitting station stops. As has been shown, bi-mode trains do not deliver the performance of an electric train. Moreover, there are still many unanswered questions about the remaining electrification on this route from Bedford to Kettering and Corby. For example, will it (and the existing London St Pancras to Bedford section) be installed (upgraded) to allow 125mph operation with multiple pantographs? If not, the bi-mode trains might be slower on the southern half of the line than the current diesel Meridian and High Speed Trains.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

DAVID SHIRRES

Building ScotRail’s 385s The factory

Hitachi’s rail vehicle manufacturing facility under construction in April 2014.

The first Class 385 bodyshell is completed in December 2015 at Hitachi’s Kasado plant in Japan.

reparing a train operating franchise bid is a complex and expensive business. For the current ScotRail franchise, this included the requirement for electric multiple unit (EMU) procurement for the soon-to-be electrified Edinburgh to Glasgow service and for there to be sufficient electric trains to operate a four-trains per hour service by December 2017, 32 months after the start of the franchise. To meet this requirement, Abellio ScotRail was in discussion with Hitachi Rail during the preparation of its franchise bid and, as a result, could sign a £400 million contract for 70 new EMUs (46 three-car and 24 four-car) in March 2015, just before taking over the franchise a month later. These trains were to be built in Britain, except for the first seven, which were manufactured at Hitachi’s Kasado plant in Japan.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Meanwhile, the factory that was to build these trains was taking shape at Newton Aycliffe, near Darlington. The construction contract for the new plant was let to Shepherd Construction, which started work on a 127,500 square-metre green field site in December 2013. The new plant has a footprint of 44,000 square metres and its construction required the excavation of 370,000 cubic metres of sub-soil and rock, 16,000 cubic metres of concrete and 2,000 tonnes of structural steel. On its roof are 6,500 square metres of solar panels, which can generate up to 1.7 megawatts. The plant has extensive sidings and is connected to the Darlington to Bishop Auckland line, alongside which a 1.1-kilometre test track, electrified at 25kV, has been built. The main line connection is near Heighington station 1,

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

which, although then named Aycliffe Lane, was an original station on the Stockton and Darlington Railway which opened on 27 September 1825. Almost exactly 180 years later, on 3 September 2015, the new £82 million Hitachi plant was officially opened by Prime Minister David Cameron. It comprises three main areas - a warehouse, a production area and a test house. The production area has 16 lines that can be set out according to production requirements. In October, five storage lines each had space for six vehicles, with the remaining 11 lines set up for five production bays on each. These lines are separated from 17 static cells at the eastern end of the production area by a low-profile traverser, provided by Mechan. Outside the western end of the plant is an external traverser that can move individual vehicles into the four-road test house. On the other side of this traverser, work is underway to expand the plant with excavations preparing the ground for an additional onebay-wide holding building.

Hitachi Rail’s rise in the UK Hitachi entered the European rail market in 2007 as the first of 28 Class 395 ‘Javelin’ units were delivered for use on domestic high-speed services on HS1 between London St Pancras and Kent. These trains were introduced into service in 2009 and are based on the 400-series

Shinkansen, adapted to meet European standards. With a maximum speed of 140 mph, the Javelin trains are the UK’s fastest domestic train and have dual voltage operation (25kV AC and 750V DC third rail). Also in 2009, it was announced that a consortium of Agility Trains and Hitachi Rail was the preferred bidder for the £5.7 billion contract for the delivery and maintenance of 122 InterCity Express (IEP) trains (866 vehicles) for the Great Western and East Coast main lines. Hitachi Rail Europe, as part of its growth strategy, decided to build these trains in Britain and, in 2011, chose Newton Aycliffe in County Durham as the site for its new rail vehicle manufacturing facility. Work started on the new plant after the IEP deal had been finalised in 2012. The order for ScotRail EMUs, placed in March 2015, was followed by orders from Great Western Railway (GWR), First Trans Pennine Express and Hull Trains for class 802 bi-mode trains totalling 419 vehicles. With such a full order book, the Great Western class 802s are being built at Hitachi’s plant in Pistoia, Italy (issue 153, July 2017).

The AT family IEP is an example of the AT (aluminium train) series that Hitachi Rail has developed for the European market. These trains use technologies that Hitachi has developed for Shinkansen trains over many

years and come in four types. The AT100 is for metro services and each car is 20 metres long. For suburban use, there is the 23-metre long AT200, whilst IEP is a version of the inter-city AT300, which have a 26-metre body shell. In addition, and in the future, the AT400 is for highspeed operations. As far as possible, the different AT trains have interchangeable components, so the modular traction packages of the AT200 and AT300 are very similar. This allows for various train configurations to meet differing performance requirements. For example, AT300 trains can be fitted with diesel traction modules as required. The AT family has a doubleskinned body shell produced using friction stir welding (FSW), in which a rotating tool heats two facing surfaces to create a region of very soft metal at each face, which the tool mixes together. As this does not melt the mating surfaces, there is no requirement for filler materials and minimal heat distortion, as is evident from the smooth bodyshells that require no filler before painting.

Inside Class 385 aluminium bodyshell showing double skinned construction at window frames.

To meet crash worthiness requirements, the body shell has corner posts, collision posts and anti-climbing devices, designed to prevent overriding and penetration into the cab and passenger compartment in the event of an end-on collision. The auto-coupler can absorb impact energy at low speeds,

Class 385 vehicle on production line at Newton Aycliffe showing its smooth sided bodyshell.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Class 385 Driver’s cab.

above which it is designed to break away from its mountings and be retained within its coupler pocket.

ScotRail’s new EMU

Class 385 roll out on 12 October.

The AT200 trains that ScotRail have procured are the Class 385 EMUs and have a feature unique to the Hitachi’s AT series trains. This is due to the requirement for the Class 385s to have the “ability to support at-seat catering which is available to all passengers”. This innocuous sounding phrase

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

in Transport Scotland’s franchise specification requires a frontend corridor connection. This unique aspect of the Class 385 required a modified design that had to consider crash worthiness, driver ergonomics and possible driver sighting issues. To optimise the cab and interior design, Hitachi engaged the services of the University of Liverpool’s Virtual Engineering Centre (VEC). VEC was also used to get feedback from drivers and train crews as part of the design process to ensure their buy-in.

The Class 385 trains will have a maximum speed of 100 mph. Four-car trains have two motor bogies fitted to each end car while, on the three-car train, one end car has an unpowered bogie under the cab giving a total of three powered bogies. The traction system includes a transformer manufactured by ABB and a water-cooled inverter from the Czech Republic. Traction control is by an insulated-gate bipolar transistor system developed by Hitachi. The Class 385/0 three-car units have 206 seats, whereas the Class 385/1 four car units have 273 seats, of which 20 are first class. Production of these units is now well advanced. On 12 October, Rail Engineer was invited to a ceremony to mark the completion of the first Newton Aycliffe-built Class 385 and saw, not one, but four units rolled out of the test house: the completed three-car unit 385004, plus units 385015, 385103 and 385104 which were part-built in Japan and completed in Newton Aycliffe. During the tour of the plant, 32 Class 385 and 39 IEP vehicles were seen in the production area at various stages of the build process.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Building the 385 Whilst building Hitachi’s large new train manufacturing plant in less than two years is an impressive achievement, perhaps the real challenge is to get its brand-new workforce of over a thousand to produce the trains to the required quality and timescale. Hitachi Rail’s head of production at the plant, Mark Chilvers, told Rail Engineer what was involved. He explained that, as quality is an absolute requirement, production cannot be ramped up until the production processes are proven and the workforce has shown the required competence. For example, it took nine months to produce the first vehicles for which the target is 29 days. Train production at Newton Aycliffe requires a different philosophy to that of Hitachi in Japan. Mark advised that this is because skilled craftsmen at the Kasado plant have been working there for many years and can interpret drawings to make complex adjustments to pipework and wiring as required. For trains built in Newton Aycliffe, Hitachi has developed a set of standard operating procedures (SOPs) that minimise the need for such work. Currently, Hitachi has about 1,200 employees at Newton Aycliffe (approximately production - 700, test - 100 and support - 400). Whilst they are well qualified, train manufacture is new to them so a welldefined production process is required. To illustrate this point, he explained that Class 385 production requires over 1400 SOPs.

Mark is pleased with Hitachi’s approach which gives Hitachi Rail Europe significant business autonomy to “let us do our own thing” to take account of UK conditions. He also advised that, before the production lines were set up for the Class 385s, much was learnt from Hitachi’s Pistoia plant in Italy, for example the need for a flexible production line approach to allow for the extra work on traction vehicles.

The production process Work to fit out the Kasadosupplied bodyshells starts in the static cells where vehicles typically spend seven days. The vehicles, mounted on accommodation bogies, are then moved to the production lines where different operations are undertaken at each station. Shunting operations, using the internal traverser, move vehicles around the production area and along the production lines. When a vehicle is complete, it is moved to the bogie-fitting bay to be mounted on its bogies, which are supplied from Hitachi’s plant in Naples. From there, it is moved to the handover line for various checks, including an air pressure test, before the external traverser

moves the vehicle into the test house. It takes around 2,100 man-hours to build one vehicle. Hitachi stated that 71 percent of all parts used to build the Class 385 are from the UK. However, what is not known is the percentage value of the British components. These include pipework, windows and most items required for internal fit-out. Japan supplies the bodyshells, traction equipment and air conditioning units. Hitachi has a specialist plant in China which supplies wiring looms, whilst its Naples plant supplies the bogies.

IEP and Class 385 vehicles on Newton Aycliffe’s static cells.

Starting something big Four years ago, Hitachi’s Newton Aycliffe factory was a field and Hitachi had an order for 866 IEP vehicles. Today

it is a fully operational train manufacturing plant and Hitachi has orders for 1,519 vehicles including bi-mode Class 802s and ScotRail’s Class 385s.

Class 385 production lines at Newton Aycliffe.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Much has indeed happened since 2013. However, from ScotRail’s perspective, not enough has happened, as its franchise agreement requires seven-car Class 385 trains to operate a four-trains per hour service between Glasgow and Edinburgh by December 2017, for which 21 units are required. Delays to the Edinburgh to Glasgow electrification programme, now almost a year behind schedule, have limited access for testing in Scotland where there are currently two Class 385 units under test, with the first powered tests under the new wires imminent. A further two units are undergoing unpowered dynamic testing on the German rail network due to insufficient track access in Britain to complete these tests within the programmed date. Finally, a Class 385 completed its first successful powered test run under Edinburgh to Glasgow wires early in the morning of 18 October.

Notwithstanding the infrastructure delays, it has taken Hitachi longer to ramp up Class 385 production than originally planned. As their manufacture required the building of both the factory and the trains, this is perhaps understandable, especially given Mark Chilvers' comments about quality. When Class 385s are introduced, ScotRail’s passengers should find these modern trains worth the wait as, amongst other benefits, they will provide a significant increase in capacity. When the Glasgow Queen Street station works are completed to allow eight-car Class 385 service to

operate, this will provide 45 per cent more seats than the current six-car Class 170 trains. As for the Hitachi plant, its expansion, two years after its opening, shows the company has confidence in its future, whatever Brexit might bring. Train manufacture there is very different from the first locomotive assembly at Newton Aycliffe in 1825, when three horse-drawn wagons arrived from Robert Stephenson’s Newcastle workshop with six tons of the various bits that made up Locomotion No 1, which was then assembled on the track bed of the Stockton and Darlington Railway. This was also the start of something big.

CMS Rail advert.qxp_Layout 1 23/09/2016 12:07 Page 1

LOCOMOTIVE SERVICES

CMS Cepcor is a high quality machining company based in Coalville Leicester. We specialise in supplying both standard and narrow gauge heritage railway organisations with quality products. Recent examples: • Tyseley Locomotive Works - Valve and cylinder liners • LMS Patriot project- expansion links, bushes, eccentric rods and sheaves, big end strap, reversing gear components and brake gear parts • Class 5 4-6-0, No 44767 “George Stephenson” - new cylinders We also have the capability of machining all motion parts (inc. full length connecting and coupling rods) plus pressing wheels/axle assemblies. CMS Cepcor Precision Services Technical Centre, Samson Road, Hermitage Ind. Est., Coalville, Leicestershire, LE67 3FP Tel: 01530 510247 E: precisionservices@cmscepcor.com

www.precisionservices.co.uk Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

INNOVATION in Rail

BYBANEN BERGEN TRAM DEPOT, NORWAY

Phoenix range Swift automatic bi-folding doors – only solution for rail depots. Safe, energy efficient, fast, reliable and industry proven throughout the world. jewersdoors.co.uk

OXLEY TRSMD, WOLVERHAMPTON

01767 317090

@Jewers_Doors

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

A little sand

in the right place MALCOLM DOBELL

works wonders

perators of locomotives (and trams) have used sand to enhance traction adhesion for as long as anyone can remember; the first recorded use was in 1886. Over the last 20 years or so, as the combination of autumn leaf fall and modern short trains initially led to an increase in station over-runs and signals passed at danger because of lack of adhesion, the rail industry started experimenting with using sand in braking. The first modern UK standard for sanders on multiple units was issued in 2001 by Railway Safety, the RSSBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s predecessor, and it set the requirements for sanding equipment. This early standard, based on the available equipment at the time, required mandatory fitment for new vehicle designs and was non-mandatory for retrofit. It encouraged sanders to be controlled by the wheel slide protection (WSP) equipment, but originally only allowed sand to be applied in maximum service and emergency braking positions. Manual operation of sanders in traction was also allowed. So-called â&#x20AC;&#x153;single shotâ&#x20AC;? sanders, which applied all their sand in one application, were also allowed.

As sanding developed Sanding is not universally welcome. Infrastructure managers would be happier if sand was not dumped onto their ballast and signalling engineers have always worried that sand might interfere with the operation of track circuits and delicate points mechanisms. There were also a number of practical issues. These included the arrangements for detecting low sand levels in sand hoppers and the organisation of sand hopper replenishment. That said, as the benefits of sanding became apparent, more and more sanders were retrofitted so now there is a reducing minority of passenger trains that do not have them.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Sanding in brake step 2 (or 50 per cent brake for trains with step-less brake control) is now allowed, following the realisation that, with very low adhesion, wheels could also lock at low brake rates, and that it is counter intuitive to manually release the brakes, so as to get the wheels turning and then re-apply maximum service or emergency brake to get the benefit of sanding. It is now universally accepted that sanders are an important part of ensuring that trains stop in the correct distance, although adhesion-related incidents still happen and there is still room for improvement.

The original standard mandated a maximum discharge rate of 2kg/ minute, which was fixed irrespective of train length or speed. This was partly a limitation of the equipment then available and partly due to nervousness about the risk of sand debris between the wheels and rails causing wrong-side track circuit failures. Gradually, experience supported by risk assessments has shown that using sand to achieve the best possible stopping distance delivers both the least risk and enables high throughput and closer headway operation. More than ever, the railway requires confidence that trains will stop in the required distance, especially where increased capacity is sought.

Testing alternatives It has been suggested that variable discharge rates (more sand at higher speeds) and/or distributed sanders (more sanders spread along the train) might further reduce the risk of adhesion-related incidents. This begs

This static demonstration, to show how the sand was 'fired', is never permitted in operation.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Sander test programme

Both plain water and a detergent mix can be sprayed onto the rail head. many questions. How much sand? How many more sanders? And on which axles should they be mounted? This is a complex, multi-dimensional issue. Whilst some evaluation can be done with simulations, testing is still required to optimise the solution. The testing would be complex with so many variables. A test train would require a number of sanders spread down the train and each sander needs to be capable of having its sanding rate varied and having each sander isolated. Moreover, poor adhesion has to be simulated predictably. A tall order? Possibly, yet it is exactly what RSSB is doing in research project T1107. Rail Engineer was invited to Old Dalby to see the testing. The invitation read: “RSSB’s objective is to determine the optimum distribution of sand from trains to improve performance of the railway in low adhesion conditions. “RSSB has collaborated with a cross-industry team using Class 387 rolling stock at the Rail Innovation and Development Centre Melton to test the performance of various sander configurations in simulated leaf fall/ low adhesion conditions to determine the optimum arrangements for future fitments. “The project is carrying out an intensive programme of test runs with multiple sanders in different locations on the train using both fixed rate and variable rate equipment, building on previously completed research work. “This complex project includes using vehicle-mounted instrumentation and monitoring equipment, temporary fitment of additional sanders, and vehicle on-site logistical and planning activities.”

The project On a mild, dry, slightly windy day in early October, Rail Engineer arrived at the Old Dalby Goods Yard to meet Paul Gray, professional engineering lead, and Justin Willett, professional operations and performance lead, from RSSB’s R&D team. They outlined the scale of the cross-industry team cooperation on this significant project. RSSB is providing project management, technical direction and communications. GWR has loaned two new Class 387 EMUs to the project, with manufacturer Bombardier and owner Porterbrook supplying technical, logistical and commercial support. For the Old Dalby test track, now RIDC Melton, operator Serco and owner Network Rail are supplying the test track, depot services and operations staff. The train drivers come from Freightliner, which is also maintaining the trains and hauling the transit moves. Ricardo Rail is leading a multidisciplinary team, which includes DB ESG Rail, Serco, Knorr-Bremse and Bridgeway. Together, they are contributing the design, approvals and installation of temporary modifications to the test train (including sander hardware and control systems, train instrumentation, low adhesion equipment), creation of the low adhesion railhead conditions (by application of paper tape throughout a 1km test zone), provision of test strategy and engineering documentation, test management and safety staff for track access. The work is sponsored by industry’s Adhesion Research Group (ARG), with a project steering group drawn from industry representatives and experts.

Following a recently completed research project (T1046), the standard was revised to allow for trains formed of two or more units coupled together to use the existing sanders on the non-leading units, where previously the practice has been to use only the leading sander on axle 3. For example, an eightcar train formed of two four-car units can now use two sanders compared to one. This practice has now been adopted by a number of TOCs. Paul Gray told Rail Engineer that, to support further implementation across other fleets of multiple units, this project was carrying a number of test runs using two four-car Class 387 units coupled together, applying sand on axles 3 and 19 (the third axle on the second unit) which is a typical formation, especially in the South East. Twenty days of testing have been organised, which allows for approximately 150 tests. Most of the tests are being carried out on a four-car Class 387 unit which, in standard trim is fitted with sanders in front of axle 3 on each cab car. However, for this work, the Ricardo /Knorr-Bremse/ESG consortium had modified these to deliver fixed and variable rate sanding. Additional sanders had also been fitted in front of axles 7 and 11, as well as control equipment to allow the testers to select which sanders to use and whether fixed or variable rate. These additional sanders only allow for testing in one direction. The sanders were demonstrated to Rail Engineer to illustrate how sand is fired into the “nip” between the wheel and the rail, but it was stressed that operation when the train is stationary is not allowed in service.

Justin Willet and Paul Gray of the RSSB. Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Applying the paper tape. To avoid the project having to interfere with the train’s braking system, the sander configuration and operation is controlled manually. The only interface with the braking system was to obtain a brake initiated signal. Brake cylinder pressures and axle speed probe signals are recorded. The train has also been equipped, at the leading end, with water spray equipment able to spray at two rates with plain water and with detergent solution, as required, depending on test conditions. The test objective is to show whether, and in what combinations, stopping distance can be further reduced by the application of sand to more wheelsets and, if so, to which axles. It is also intended to investigate how the application of sand at a variable rate with speed can deliver more sand at higher speeds without exceeding the 7.5g/m of sand per rail currently allowed. (Using a variable rate sander with a discharge rate of up to 4kg/minute can provide 7.5g/m at 20mph reducing to 2.5g/m at 60mph.) However, these were not the only variables. Compressed and moistened paper tape has been shown to provide comparable adhesion properties to crushed leaves, and this was used for the testing. The simulated adhesion conditions depend on whether paper tape is applied and its condition (roughly five sanding test runs wears off the tape). The volume of water applied by sprays at both ends of the train to moisten the tape, and the concentration of detergent (zero, one or five per cent), also has a bearing. Interestingly, small quantities of detergent can help maintain low adhesion when the weather and rail temperatures are warmer.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

The final variable is the weather; hot, cold, wet, dry. If it is too cold/damp, the paper tape will not stick properly to the rail. If the weather is hot/dry, it can be difficult to keep the paper tape surface wet enough to give low adhesion. If there is a cross wind, it can affect the sand jets. However, on the day that Rail Engineer visited, the weather was almost ideal. With all these variables, it’s important to make best use of the available testing time. Stuart Brown of ESG demonstrated two flow charts that help him and other test engineers set up and maintain low adhesion conditions.

Method Before each set of tests, the team from Ricardo Rail, supported by Bridgeway Consulting, apply the paper tape to the rails over a distance of one kilometre using a bespoke trolley.

Video capture of sand being applied.

Once the tape is in place, the train will undertake a number of runs over the tape to condition it ready for testing. Then, when the tape is ready, the train will run northbound at 20mph for a final conditioning run and also applying water to wet the tape. The train travels beyond the tape to allow enough space to accelerate up to speed. The first test run is without any sand, to demonstrate that the tape is providing a low adhesion condition. For each subsequent run, the test configuration is chosen - which axles for sanding, fixed or variable rate, detergent concentration (or none), water spray volume. As an example - sanding on axles 3 and 7, fixed 2kg/min flow rate, one per cent detergent concentration, spray nozzle. Finally, on the word from Steve Mills, RSSB’s project manager, driver Tony Orr from Freightliner sets off and accelerates to 55mph. Dan Hamm, RSSB’s project engineer, starts the water spray, and at the agreed point, Tony applies step 3 full service brake (9%g), and at the same time Dan starts sanding, whilst Serco’s Dan Ling controls and monitors all the instrumentation including video images of the sand applications. There is a continuous video feed of two sand nozzles, illustrating how the sand jet scatters and how it varies with train speed and wind; a screen shot of the video shows this clearly. The sand is cut off just before the train stops and, on one or two of the runs, the wheel stopped rotating just before the train stopped.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Current standards and recommendations for sanding:

Dan Ling, Serco. The instrumentation records all brake cylinder pressures, all axles’ speed, from which WSP activity is inferred, as well as location, distance travelled and the video camera feeds. This instrumentation allows the engineers to see very quickly how each of the 16 axles performed during the test. The test equipment is fed with electricity from the train’s auxiliary supply supported by an uninterruptable power supply, which prompted Steve Mills to observe that the test team are fed with sandwiches and doughnuts! After each test there is a brief review of the data and then Stuart Brown observes the condition of the paper tape to determine, from the flow chart, the flow rate and concentration of water/ detergent for the return trip before the next run. Typically, after 5 or so tests (one move in each direction), the paper tape is worn out. During the afternoon’s tests, braking performance differed markedly. For a 9%g brake demand, achieved performance varied between 3.5%g (no sand) and 7.5%g. As an observation, whilst one could hear the WSP working hard, most of the stops were very smooth with little longitudinal snatching. It is also a testament to the quality of the braking system/WSP that, after more than 100 full service brake applications, all under challenging adhesion conditions, there were no flats to see or hear.

Results Rail Engineer was shown some of the results to date. As the tests are not complete, this article cannot yet report on the detailed findings, but there is

some emerging data that quantifies the benefits, in terms of reduced stopping distance in challenging adhesion conditions, of providing sanders on an additional axle and using variable rate discharge. The validated results, due in early 2018, will be very interesting. Paul Gray said that the draft report would be reviewed by industry experts (including ARG) before being presented to the wider industry in a series of workshops. Look out for the results of project T1107.

Testing at RIDC Melton Finally, a word about the test site at Old Dalby. At the time of writing, there were at least three customers using RIDC Melton site, London Underground/Thales for signalling integration work on S Stock, Bombardier for mileage accumulation on Crossrail Class 345 Aventra trains and this project. LU and RSSB share the shorter track, with each working on different days of the week, whilst everyone uses the stabling/maintenance facility at Asfordby. Steve Mills said that all parties are working very well together, especially for sharing access to the single pit road at Asfordby depot. Thanks to RSSB’s Claire Grewer and Paul Gray for organising the visit. A special thanks to the test team: Steve Mills and Dan Hamm (RSSB), Dan Ling and Paul Whitworth (Serco), Stuart Brown (DB ESG Rail), Tony Orr (Freightliner) and, on paper tape laying duty, Paul Richards and Matthew Marinaccio (Ricardo Rail) for making Rail Engineer so welcome.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

The current UK standard for sanders is GMRT 2461 issue 2 “Sanding Equipment”, which deals with open points in the sander requirements in the Locomotive and Passenger Rolling Stock and Command and Control Technical Specifications for Interoperability. It also contains a great deal of guidance which has been developed from the results of three RSSB research projects - T796, T797 and T1046. The latest, T1046: “Optimising the ability of industry to deal with low wheel-rail adhesion and the use of sanders on train” has produced guidance for best practice on the deployment and use of sanders: »» Sanding at multiple locations, rather than just axle number 3, is permitted so long as there are sufficient axles after the last sanding location to clear any residual sand from the rail head - this applies to both single, fixed formation units and units in multiple formation; »» Fixed rate sanders should be designed to deliver as near as possible to the maximum deposition rate permitted by the RGS (2kg/min), but not exceed it. Finally, all the guidance available reminds specifiers and designers that sand shall not adversely affect operation of track circuits.

Part way through testing, the paper tape has turned into a deposit similar to leaf mould.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Crucial completion

STUART MARSH

here’s always time pressure, isn’t there? It seems to go without saying these days - just a part of modern life and all that. Rail infrastructure projects, complex as they might be, are invariably time constrained and, when those crucial deadlines become threatened by external factors, things can get interesting. Such was the case during the construction of Blackburn’s new train depot, but it’s said that problems can boost creativity and Network Rail’s main contractor, Buckingham Group Contracting, proved the point. Under plans to improve the railway across the North West, Network Rail is electrifying a number of key routes, including Preston to Blackpool, Manchester to Preston via Bolton and Manchester to Stalybridge. The introduction of electric trains to these routes will require the adaption and enhancement of existing depots. This in turn means the displacement of the existing diesel trains.

Concurrent with this plan, Northern is procuring new Class 195 DMUs, which will allow the withdrawal of its Class 142 and Class 144 Pacer units. Key to the fulfilment of the entire improvement process is the new diesel train depot at Blackburn, which will accommodate the displaced trains and service the new Class 195s.

Tight schedule To ensure the success of the wider North West Electrification Programme (NWEP), it was crucial that the Blackburn depot scheme met a construction completion date of August 2017 and an entry into service date of November 2017. The

Blackpool blockade, forming part of NWEP Phase 3 (Preston to Blackpool electrification), will effectively place the Blackpool diesel train depot off limits. Servicing those trains at Blackburn is, therefore, vital to the successful delivery of NWEP Phase 3. In addition to this requirement, the rolling stock cascade needs to coincide with a December 2017 timetable change. No pressure then! Constructed on the site of the disused King Street coal sidings, the six-road depot has been designed for the light maintenance, servicing and stabling of up to thirty diesel train sets. It can also offer additional stabling and servicing facilities in support of the North West Electrification Programme. A thorough selection process was undertaken prior to choosing the Blackburn site. Already in Network Rail ownership, the adopted location was suitably close to the start/end journey points of the trains that will be stabled there. It also provided sufficient space and an opportunity to develop a neglected urban area.

Experienced The Blackburn depot project has been delivered by Buckingham Group Contracting (Civils, Rail M&E), acting as the principal contractor, in collaboration with Babcock Rail (signalling) and their respective design consultants Atkins and Arup. The Buckingham Group’s project team has delivered multiple depots, so lessons learned during these previous projects

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS were embedded into the outline design stage and realised during the detail design and build. Depot flow modelling was used during the design phase, to generate an efficient scheme of operations within the depot whilst at the same time reducing capital expenditure. It was also used to challenge the application of main line standards to the 5mph running operated within the depot.

Enforced delays The construction programme was planned to commence in July 2016, but prior approval wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t granted by Blackburn with Darwen Council until September 2016. Fortunately, the project team was able to identify opportunities that allowed the works programme to be pulled back in line with the target commissioning date and EIS (entry into service) date. With the construction phase fully underway, Northern announced in January 2017 that it would be acquiring new Class 195 diesel trains. Being built by CAF in Spain from July 2017, these new trains will run as a mixture of two-car and threecar sets. The new depot at Blackburn would therefore need to accept five-car formations.

Because the arrival siding length and the servicing facilities had been designed for four-car units, this necessitated an extensive series of revisions (from four 23-metre cars to five 24-metre cars). The Class 195 also requires the use of Ad-Blue fuel additive. With construction progressing well on the servicing sidings, the project team had to work collaboratively and quickly to install the necessary storage tank and ducting, at the same time maintaining the existing schedules and budget.

Of course, collaboration between stakeholders is an important feature of all large rail infrastructure schemes these days. For the Blackburn depot project, meeting that vital completion date was always paramount. It was therefore necessary for everyone on site, from the sponsor through to the subcontractors, to be involved in reaching the optimum solutions that would ensure a successful delivery. With design changes and construction activities running in parallel, the challenges of late changes could only be managed through a culture of mutual support and positive attitude.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Efficiency

Tested

Slab

Blackburn depot is served by a short twotrack spur that merges with the existing Down Through siding at Blackburn Bolton Junction. The connecting line swings northwards through almost ninety degrees, passing over the highway at Galligreaves Street on a new precast concrete bridge. Due to restrictions on road closures, the project required a solution that was quick to install and which offered minimal disruption to the public. The bridge design therefore made use of pre-cast, pre-stressed deck beams with integral parapets on pre-cast cills. Within the depot itself, the six dead-end sidings accommodate a 150-metre long covered fuelling facility, oil and watering systems, carriage cleaning and effluent treatment. Two 40,000 litre aboveground tanks are installed for diesel fuel and there

Earthworks to create new site levels required the removal of 32,000 tonnes of spoil. Previous use of the area as coal sidings had resulted in ground contamination, which required an extensive programme of testing and validation to ensure correct disposal and that on-site construction activities were safe. The Buckingham Group team also used innovative ground investigation techniques, such as continuous surface wave testing, to determine site-wide ground stiffness profiles. Value engineered solutions were then derived for the track bed and structural foundations. Two complex drainage systems were installed for the new depot. The surface water drainage system discharges water into a nearby river whilst the foul

Through the fuelling areas and carriage wash facility, use has been made of the Low Vibration Track (LVT) system developed by Sonneville AG. Integrated aprons ensure that all fluids are collected by the special drainage systems. The LVT system consists of reinforced concrete blocks. These are separated from the concrete slab by a specially developed rubber boot that contains a resilient block pad below the concrete block. The elastic support of the blocks by the pads, which are designed especially for each application, gives improved load distribution. The geographical constrains of the site demanded a complex permanent way design, involving an intricate arrangement of switches and crossings across the site, together with a complete renewal of the tie-in to the existing mainline network. Precast retaining walls were developed to allow ease of construction whilst also safeguarding the neighbouring land and buildings. These extend to a height of five metres at some parts of the perimeter. Security and safety is provided by three-rail palisade fencing, which also incorporates an anti-burrow strip.

Quiet

are four 5,000 litre tanks for oils, lubricants and Ad-Blue. The depot also has brick built stores and plant rooms for fuelling and the carriage washer. Accommodation, offices and shunters cabin are of modular construction.

water system, carrying carriage effluent, discharges to the sewerage system. Both have attenuation tanks, petrol interceptors and hydro-breakers to ensure safe and environmentally friendly discharges.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Because of its urban location, the project faced challenges to ensure that noise is mitigated during depot operations. Specialised acoustic consultants were used to model future noise levels from trains operating within the depot during the night and to develop measures for reducing the noise levels at various receptors within the vicinity of the site. One practical solution combines the use of innovative noise absorption material with the security fencing. This reduces noise levels whilst at the same time ensuring minimal visual impact. The project team also negotiated special operating procedures with the train operators to reduce horn noise within

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

the depot. A trial of this system indicated a reduction in horn soundings from the predicted 200 per week to just two.

Job done This £28 million multidisciplinary design and build project was delivered on time and under budget and was handed over to Northern in August 2017. Following Northern’s operational learning period, entry into service will take place in November 2017 as planned. The project staff has totalled more than 120, with over 58,000 hours worked and zero accidents.

Buckingham Group attributes its excellent safety record to a number of initiatives, including Network Rail’s Close Call System. In addition, a subcontractor safety forum was set up to share lessons learned and allow issues to be raised. Bi-weekly engagement sessions were held for site staff, during which ‘hot topics’ and safety issues could be discussed. Buckingham Group has also led three Network Rail ‘Step to Safety’ events, during which all staff were stood down to discuss specific safety topics. It is estimated that the project delivered a £4.5 million efficiency improvement when compared to the outline design

estimate, including delivering the increased scope within that value. This saving was returned to the funder for use on other enhancement schemes by Network Rail. A first class depot and stabling facility has been built which provides a safe working environment for the staff, an efficient train operation for the Northern franchise and a first-class legacy for future train stabling in the North.

Thanks to Will Metcalfe of Buckingham Group for his help with this article.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

ENHANCING

UK traincare DEPOTS K

eeping passengers and freight on the move, on a punctual and reliable railway, can only be achieved if the UK’s traincare depots are developed strategically and well maintained, right across the network. These important facilities will continue to play an essential role in a highperforming railway and it is for this reason that many purpose-built maintenance facilities have been created during the last decade. Today’s clean, spacious and airy train depots, able to take complete trains under cover, are a far cry from those of yesteryear, so it’s perhaps not surprising that so many new ones have been built recently. One of the businesses involved is VolkerFitzpatrick, which has played a pivotal role in the design, construction, modification, upgrade and renewal of a wide range of depots during the last 20 years.

100 years of success VolkerFitzpatrick is a civil engineering and building contractor with a reputation for innovative engineering and design. With a history dating back to the 1880s,

it has evolved into a multidisciplinary construction business, providing civil engineering, building and rail infrastructure services to public and private sector organisations throughout the UK. As part of VolkerWessels UK, VolkerFitzpatrick has the backing of a multi-disciplinary construction and civil engineering group with a turnover of around £877 million and over 2,500 employees. All VolkerWessels UK businesses work very closely together and draw upon individual and collective expertise and resources to deliver quality projects across a wide range of disciplines.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

VolkerFitzpatrick’s strength comes from the high-quality performance of its people. Their mission is to work together to ‘Experience Excellence’ for their clients and teams and the whole business is focused on meeting customer expectations whilst operating accountably and striving for excellence in all that they do. Over the years, VolkerFitzpatrick has built up a successful track record of delivering multi-disciplinary works at traincare depots, renewing or upgrading facilities to meet the changing needs of train operating companies. One crucial factor in all projects has been undertaking the works without impacting on operational safety or the running of services which rely on these facilities every day. The business is also recognised for the added value it delivers on its many and varied projects, from stakeholder interfaces, vast operational experience in live rail environments, understanding design and providing great temporary works solutions, to overall programme management and integration. A total of 20 depot projects have been delivered across the UK in the last 20 years, ranging from £2 million to £100 million in value. These include Heathrow Express, Temple Mills EWS, Northam, Bedford Thameslink, Temple Mills RLE, IKF Ashford, IKF Ramsgate, Etches Park, Bedford Cauldwell, Liverpool Edge Hill, Blackpool Tram Maintenance Depot, Reading Traincare Depot and two Thameslink Depots.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

VolkerFitzpatrick worked with sister businesses VolkerRail, which supplied and installed all the overhead line equipment (OLE) for the project, and VolkerGround Engineering, which worked on the piling for the OLE, as well as the sheet piling for two retaining walls. John Cox continued: “Our team is extremely proud to have been a part of this project. The new Doncaster depot combines modern design with exceptional engineering and is a credit to everyone involved.”

Stoke Gifford Building for the future

Doncaster

The team is also currently undertaking infrastructure and depot works at a number of sites, including Ilford, Temple Mills Remodelling B and Craigentinny in Edinburgh. John Cox, managing director of VolkerFitzpatrick’s Rail division said: “There is nothing that we can’t turn our hand to in traincare depots, as we support our clients in delivering centres of excellence at all of the facilities we are involved with. We have a solid track record of delivering well and working safely. “Close collaboration between our team and clients means we continually improve our systems and service, in pursuit of ever better reliability and maintainability at the facilities we build and enhance. We will continue to innovate and add value as we support our clients to achieve their longterm visions. It is my pleasure to introduce some of the more recent projects we have worked on.”

The new state-of-the-art Doncaster depot, delivered as part of the Department for Transport’s Intercity Express Programme (IEP), breaks all stereotypes, offering a clean, light and modern working environment, using industry-leading technology. Designed and constructed by VolkerFitzpatrick, the depot will house fleets for Virgin Trains East Coast and Transpeninne Express. Hitachi Rail Europe, the company building and maintaining the new intercity trains, is on schedule to employ 250 people at the depot. Over 2,000 people worked on the project, which began in July 2014 and ran for two years and eight months. The works began with ground preparation, including the removal of contaminated soil. The team then constructed train-wash and wheel-lathe buildings and a 11,000 square metres maintenance depot, as well as an under-frame cleaning facility.

VolkerFitzpatrick also designed and constructed the new Stoke Gifford depot for the IEP programme, at a site just outside Bristol. The depot is required for the maintenance of the GWR’s fleet of IEP Class 800 trains. This includes planned services, train washing facilities, heavy maintenance, office accommodation and connections to the Bristol to South Wales Line. A ten-car storage maintenance shed and carriage wash building was constructed on the northern corner of the site with a floor area of 9,040 square metres. To the west of the shed, a two-storey office and welfare facility was constructed. The scope of work included two raised maintenance roads with roof and platform level access and 2.5 tonne monorail hoists. A 740 square metre wheel-lathe building was constructed for the maintenance, along with external sidings for train storage. Other buildings include a train wash, project offices and an amenity building.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

A service spine was built to facilitate inspecting, repairing, cleaning, maintaining, refuelling, rewatering and replenishing consumables, as well as storing the rolling stock.

North Pole To maintain IEP trains just outside London Paddington, VolkerFitzpatrick designed and delivered a complete remodelling of the former-Eurostar North Pole depot, a facility that is key to the success of train operations on the Great Western main line. The site, which is approximately 3km long, contains the main servicing shed (a 400-metre-long six-track shed for light maintenance and cleaning) and a repair shed approximately 200 metres long with four tracks, all of which are designed to carry out major repairs including multiple bogie exchange and other major component replacements. In addition, the site also includes a dedicated wheel lathe building to re-profile wheels as part of the trains maintenance programme, and a dedicated bogie shed, used primarily for single bogie changes.

Three Bridges The Thameslink Rolling Stock Project (TRSP) is part of the larger Thameslink Project to upgrade the rail link between Brighton and Bedford across London. TRSP comprises the supply of new rolling stock (1,200 carriages and trains) and the maintenance of these over 25 years.

Siemens engaged VolkerFitzpatrick to act as their construction partner to design, build and commission two depots in parallel at Hornsey and Three Bridges. The Three Bridges depot is split into east and west side facilities, either side of the London to Brighton main line. The works consisted of delivering a five-road, 12-car maintenance building with associated stores, welfare facilities and offices, train stabling and servicing roads. Two carriage washing machines, one on each side of the site, two CET systems, a wheel lathe and all associated depot infrastructure were also installed. Two under bridges were widened as part of the work and three storage sidings added on each side of the main line.

Hornsey The depot at Hornsey in north London, the 25kV AC depot (Three Bridges is in DC territory), was constructed within a live operational rail environment next to the East Coast main line. On this occasion, the project called for the coordinated redevelopment of two separate areas of existing infrastructure, including the existing operational depot and derelict sidings. The work included building a new three-road, 12-car maintenance shed, two carriage washing machines, offices, CET and all associated depot infrastructure.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Two bridges over the New River and Turnpike Lane were also widened.

Looking ahead VolkerWessels UK and its business units are built on controlled and sustainable growth, with careful risk management of opportunities, targeted investments and careful management of overheads and cost base. Throughout the remainder of 2017 and beyond, VolkerFitzpatrick looks forward to playing an ongoing role in helping to deliver a better railway for Britain. The business is exploring potential opportunities to deliver a full turnkey solution, providing funding for projects, collaborating on feasibility and development studies, design, construction, testing, commissioning, handing over and maintaining facilities. Following recent announcements regarding plans and contract awards for HS2, the latest news outlining the Governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s extensive investment aspirations for CP6 and upcoming franchise renewals, there is a real sense of optimism amongst the developers, operators and users of Britainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s railways. Within VolkerFitzpatrick, this optimism is underscored by a determined and motivated team, whose ambitions stretch as far forward as its excellent track record and experience go back.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

From the past to the future at

DAVID SHIRRES

Scherbinka

Scherbinka celebrates its 85 years.

ussia’s biennial rail trade fair, EXPO1520, is a four-day event held at the end of August offering extensive exhibition halls, static exhibits, a thought-provoking conference and a dynamic exposition. It was first held in 2007, making this year’s show the sixth EXPO1520.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Testing times The event is hosted by the Scherbinka research institute, 33km south of Moscow. This is one of six facilities run by the Russian rail research institute (VNIIZhT) which employs 1,700 people throughout Russia. It is six times the size of Derby’s Railway Technical Centre and has a circular test track of sixkilometre circumference, fitted with overhead catenary that can be energised at either 3kV DC or 25kV AC. Its test track was the world’s first and opened in 1932. It was electrified in 1935 and two further tracks were added in 1960. It has played a key role in the development of Russian rolling stock. In 1934, it was used to finalise the SA-3 automatic coupler design. Early diesel and electric locomotives were tested here, including a 20kV AC locomotive in 1940. Recently, the longitudinal forces in freight trains of up to 15,000 tonnes have been analysed and the test track has been used to test and certify modern traction. Russia’s infrastructure has also benefited from the testing of numerous sleepers, rails and fasteners as well as all aspects of traction supply, current collection and overhead line equipment. Currently, four different types of slab track have carried 600 million tonnes over a 22-month period as part of their testing at Scherbinka.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS 1

3 4

Dynamic exposition

Modern traction

If pushed, most railway engineers would admit that they have a little of the train spotter in them. Your writer is no exception. Hence, the highlight of the show is the twice-daily “dynamic exposition” in which two dozen Russian locomotives, old and new, are paraded before the crowds on the test track. Many of the exposition’s steam locomotives owe their survival to being part of the Soviet Union’s strategic reserves during the cold war, when they were kept in a ready to steam condition. If this sounds odd, note that in World War 2, Soviet railways moved 2,500 factories to Siberia ahead of the German advance. Some locomotives were restored after being displayed on plinths, as was the 1897-built class b-2012 0-6-0 tank locomotive which was on show for the first time at EXPO1520. In total, there were twelve preserved steam locomotives in the exposition. These included an E series 0-10-0 locomotive, introduced in the thirties, of which 10,670 were built, the world’s largest number of any type. Perhaps the most impressive machine was the 4-8-4 Class P36 steam locomotive, introduced in the 1950s for prestige passenger expresses. This weighed 133 tonnes, excluding its twelve-wheeled tender, and has a power output of 2,265kW. Next were six historic electric locomotives, of which the oldest was a class VL22 (VL for Vladimir Lenin and 22 denoting the axle weight). This 3kV DC locomotive was introduced in 1938 and has a power output of 2,400 kW. Others included the 4,650-kW Class VL60. Introduced in 1962, this was the first Soviet 25kV AC locomotive in large-scale production. The last historic locomotive was the 1974 Czech-built 200 km/hr two-unit class ChS200 that had a power output of 8,400 kW and was used on Moscow to St Petersburg services prior to the introduction of high-speed Sapsan trains.

Russian Railways has a locomotive fleet of almost 13,000, of which around 7,900 are mainline locomotives (1,400 passenger, 6,500 freight). In recent times, about a billion pounds a year is spent procuring 500 locomotives to replace those from the Soviet era which are less efficient and less powerful. Siemens and Alstom have played a crucial role in the production of these modern locomotives. In 2010, Siemens entered a joint venture with the Sinara Group to create the Ural Locomotive Company (ULC). At the same time, Alstom entered into various collaboration agreements with Transmasholding (TMH) and now owns 33 per cent of the company. The products of these joint agreements also formed part of the dynamic exposition. ULC’s 3ES10 “Granit” locomotive is a three-unit 3kV DC freight locomotive with a total power output of 12,600 kW. The introduction of this three-unit version enabled freight trains to be increased to 9,000 tonnes weight. The company’s 1,500 kW 180 tonne TEM7A diesel shunter has unusual eight-wheeled bogies, of which more later.

(1) 1897-built class b-2012 0-6-0 tank locomotive. (2) E series 0-10-0 locomotive, the world’s most numerous type. (3) Class VL22 3kV DC electric locomotive introduced in 1938. (4) 133 tonne 4-8-4 Class P36 steam locomotive. (5) Dual voltage passenger locomotive Class EP20.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS 6

Cooking with gas

(6) The four-unit Class 4ES5K “Ermak”, the world’s most powerful locomotive at 13,120kW. (7) Class TEM19, LNGpowered diesel shunter. (8) LND powered gas turbine locomotive class GTh1 with its eightwheeled bogies. (9) GTh1’s gas turbine.

TMH had its EP20, 4ES5K, TEM19 and 2TE25A locomotives on display. The EP20 is a 7,200kW dual-voltage passenger locomotive with a maximum speed of 200km/h and a Bo-Bo-Bo wheel arrangement. The 25kV AC four-unit 4ES5K “Ermak” locomotive has a total power output of 13,120kW, making it the world’s most powerful locomotive. Far less powerful is the 880kW TEM19 shunting locomotive, which has a piston engine and is powered by liquefied natural gas (LNG) stored in a cryogenic tank. The use of LNG instead of diesel is expected to reduce energy costs by 20 per cent. The 5,000kW two-unit Class 2TE25A was the only diesel locomotive in the exposition. Its introduction on the Baikal-Amur main line has enabled freight train weight to be increased from 4,900 tonnes to 5,600 tonnes. The static display included a 7,500 kW three-unit version (3TE25A). Bombardier’s entry into the Russia locomotive market was marked by the static display of the 2EV120 Knyaz (Prince) Vladimir locomotive, a joint venture with the First Locomotive Company (FLC). This dual-voltage, two-unit locomotive has a power output of 8,800kW and an option for a 500kW last-mile diesel engine. Its design is based on Bombardier’s Traxx and IORE locomotives, the latter hauling heavy iron ore trains in Sweden. The company has an order for an unspecified number of these locomotives, subject to their certification.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

As part of its energy policy, Russian Railways requires some locomotives to be powered by LNG. Russia has an abundance of natural gas, which is both cheaper than diesel and has significantly less harmful emissions. Thus, in 2008, its VNIIZhT research arm produced a prototype 8,300kW LNG-powered gas turbine locomotive. After much trial use, a production version, the Class GTh1, was developed that could haul a 9,000-tonne train for 700km without refuelling. This was certified for use earlier this year. It is a two-unit locomotive with one unit housing the 20-tonne LNG tank and an 8,500kW gas turbine in the other. It weighs a hefty 368 tonnes and so requires 16 axles to give an acceptable 23-tonne axleweight. This is achieved by using eight-wheeled bogies like those on the TEM7A shunter - two double-axle bogies connected to the vehicle body by a spreader frame. Introduction of the TEM19 and GTh1 locomotives is in accordance with a 2016 agreement between Gazprom, Russian Railways, THM and Sinara Group. This requires Gazprom to both supply the gas and provide the locomotive fuelling infrastructure, Russian Railways to manage the introduction of these locomotives and their production by TMH (TEM19) and the Sinara Group (GTh1).

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS (10) Eight-wheeled bogies on the LND powered gas turbine locomotive class GTh1. (11) Various exhibits could be seen in the static displays.

Sinara is reported to be building up to forty GTh1 mainline locomotives for use on Sverdlovsk railway, on which there is an LNG complex near Yekaterinburg.

Carriages and wagons Other rolling stock featured in the static display included innovative passenger coaches and wagons. TMH developed its 3kV DC class EP2D EMU for use on lightly-used lines and offers a 20 per cent reduction in energy consumption compared to previous EMU designs. Originally produced by Siemens in Germany, the Lastochka (Swallow) is now manufactured in Russia with 90 per cent locally produced content. With 128 units now in service, Ural locomotives presented its premium version of this EMU, intended for intercity journeys of up to 500km. For urban rail, TMH displayed its new-generation eight-car Moscow subway trains with walkthrough gangways, for which it has an order for 912 vehicles (114 trains). At peak load, capacity is 2,604 passengers, of whom 338 are seated. Stadler exhibited its three-car, low-floor Metelitsa tram. Its factory in Minsk, Belarus, is to build 23 of these trams for St Petersburg. Other coaches on display included a 66-tonne, 160km/h double-decker coach seating 104 passengers and a 48-tonne purpose-built postal wagon, both built by TMH. Over a million wagons operate on Russian Railways, many of outdated designs. With the drive for greater capacity and increased reliability, around 300,000 of these have been written off since 2012 to be

replaced by a similar number of modern wagons. It is expected that Russian wagon production in 2017 will be about 40,000, a market worth £1.3 billion. EXPO1520 featured various innovative freight vehicles. The United Wagon Company showed an articulated container wagon that could carry up to 116 tonnes on six axles. RM Rail, meanwhile, demonstrated a hopper wagon which was the first in Russia to have an aluminium car body, reducing car body weight by 45 per cent and so increasing load capacity by 13 per cent to 79 tonnes. PTK Group presented its BCM 2000 ballast-cleaning machine that has two cutters and can operate at 750 metres per hour, which is claimed to be twice the normal speed. The machine could also be split into sections for local repairs. Two of Sinara’s track machines featured in the dynamic exposition. With side ploughs, its RP B-01 distributor planer has a grasp width of 6.7 metres and can operate at 6km/h. The PUMA multifunctional track machine incorporates a planer, tamper, working platform and Hiab crane.

High-speed ultrasonic testing Moscow Metro’s diagnostic train is supplied by Infotrans, whose equipment is also used on Swiss and German railways. This coach monitors tunnel environmental conditions, communication systems including Wi-Fi, track circuit signal frequency and output, insulated joint condition, tunnel and platform gauge, rail and conductor rail geometry and cross-section, high-speed video monitoring of track components. Infotrans has also converted a 1970s’ ChS200 locomotive (a class shown in the dynamic exposition) into a comprehensive mainline infrastructure monitoring unit. This has all the Metro diagnostic train’s features plus catenary monitoring and ground radar to detect ballast problems such as wetbeds. In addition, the same company has also fitted an infrastructure-monitoring frame to a bogie on a high-speed Sapsan train. TVEMA also supplies infrastructure-monitoring coaches. Its offering includes high-speed ultrasonic rail testing at speeds up to

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS 12

(12) Bogie on TVEMA’s infrastructure-monitoring coaches showing the 160 km/h ultrasonic rail testing sled.

140km/h, which has now been successfully used on 10,000 miles of track. The system consists of two sleds, each with up to three probes, offering up to 18 ultrasonic channels per rail. The sleds have a contactless magnetic guidance system and use water as contact liquid.

China and Europe The EXPO1520 conference also provided some interesting insights. Russia’s approach to the digital railway was as we reported from the recent 1520 forum (issue 155, September 2017). This included Siemens showcasing Thameslink as a good example. Guo Yang, head of CRRC’s high speed train project, described the development of high-speed rail in China where its 22,000-kilometre network has high-speed trains running at a maximum 350km/h in temperatures that range from minus to plus 40°C. By 2020,

(13) Russian Railway’s senior vice-president, Valentin Gapanovich introduces the EXPO1520 conference.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

China plans to increase this network by a further 8,000km and have 45,000km of highspeed lines by 2030. She described how CRRC is developing sleeper, double decked and palletised cargo high-speed trains. For the proposed high-speed line between Moscow and Beijing, the company has designed gauge-changing trains for the transition between the Chinese standard gauge and Russian 1520mm gauge. With a co-operation agreement between China and Russia for the proposed Moscow to Kazan high-speed line in place, CRRC clearly sees itself as a likely supplier of trains for this line. Philippe Citroen is director general of UNIFE, which represents the European rail supply industry. He made it clear that Europe wants its share of Russia’s 12-billion-euro rail market, which is forecast to grow at 0.8 per cent per annum.

To this end, he explained how UNIFE is pursuing discussions on regulations, standard and authorisation issues. For this British observer, it was ironic to hear him describe both the €1 billion Shift2Rail programme and the Trans-European transport network policy, which aim to reduce bottlenecks at borders. Dr Libor Lochman, executive director of the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER), echoed this view and described how the fourth European railway package will remove technical, administrative and legal obstacles impeding entry to railway markets. Edgar Keller, chief executive of ABB traction, gave an example of a European company responding to a market need. He explained the benefits of refitting mechanically strong locomotives with modern electrical equipment to reduce energy consumption and maintenance costs as well as increasing their reliability. As examples, he mentioned how replacing old thyristor converters with insulatedgate bipolar transistors (IGBT) had reduced the power consumption of German ICE1 trains by 15 per cent. ABB had undertaken similar electrical refits on 60 Indian locomotives and were currently refitting 101 Swiss class Re460 locomotives.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Looking to the future One of the most interesting presentations was by Rudy De Waele of the Futures Agency on the future for transport engineering. This mirrored some of the issues raised at events such as the RIA innovation conference (issue 151, May 2017). Russian Railways clearly thinks that this is an important subject, as his presentation lasted for 45 minutes compared with the normal ten minutes or so. His presentation started with a quote from Bill Gates that “we always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten” or, to put it another way, most change happens gradually then suddenly. Computing is one such example. The first computers were stand-alone, then they were networked and now they are part of the cloud which links billions of users. The next stage is ambient computing - billions of users, apps and sensors linked with effectively infinite network connections. Inevitably, this will result in a level of interconnectedness and interdependence that will lead to hyper-collaboration, rather than hyper-competition. It will also provide fully digitised business models and artificial intelligence that Rudy considers will become the “single most important thing in business”. With the rise in connected computing, data has become the new oil. Currently, the world’s three most valuable public companies are Apple, Alphabet (Google) and Microsoft, whereas ten years ago they were ExxonMobil, General Electric and Microsoft. Today, North America has data platform companies valued at over a billion dollars, Europe less than a quarter of this value whilst China is in between and catching up fast. After mechanisation, mass production and automation, the fourth cyber-physical industrial revolution has started. As a result, anything that can be digitised and automated will be and there will be “swarms of robots to build on each other’s learning experiences at lightning speed”.

No longer science fiction If this sounds like science fiction, think how, in the 1979 film Alien, Sigourney Weaver defeated the creature with her manually operated robot. Such machines are now available in the form of robotic exoskeletons. Another technology that was in the realms of sci-fi is augmented reality, of which the Microsoft Hololens is an example. Rudy considers these technologies will fundamentally change the way companies operate. As an example, he cited 3D printing hubs, a global network of thousands of 3D printing companies that can produce parts within two days, that will transform manufacturing and inventory control. Railways have a promising future in the new technological revolution. One reason for this is increasing urbanisation that, by 2050, will have 75 per cent of the world’s population living in cities. However, to remain competitive, the industry needs to embrace new technologies. Rudy demonstrated this point by showing the video produced to illustrate the UK Rail Technical Strategy. He also stressed that travellers had to be provided with a seamless door-to-door experience and mentioned the concept of stations as destinations, giving St Pancras as an example.

(14) Premium interregional version of Lastochka EMU.

(15) The static displays were popular.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS 16

(16) 2-10-2 FD Class steam locomotive at the dynamic exposition. (17/18) Steam locomotives whistle to mark the start of the dynamic exposition.

He ended his presentation with another quote, this time from Albert Einstein: “Computers are incredibly fast, accurate and stupid, whilst human beings are incredibly slow, inaccurate and brilliant. Together they are powerful beyond the imagination.”

Lessons from Russia Everything in Russia is on a big scale. With 25,000 visitors and 8,000 square metres of exhibition space, EXPO1520 is no exception. Although Russian Railway’s operations are quite different to those in the UK, the show had much of interest for the UK rail industry. Whilst much of Russia’s railway modernisation is the result of technology transfer from Europe, the country has developed its own impressive railway technologies. As an example, Russia leads the world in the development of LNG-powered trains. This may not seem applicable to the UK, which will never see 9,000 tonne freight trains. Yet the TEM19 shunter shows how piston-engined rail vehicles can be powered by LNG, a more environmentally friendly fuel than diesel. Of more immediate interest are Russia’s rail infrastructure monitoring techniques, particularly high-speed ultrasonic testing. 17

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Both Russia and Britain face the same challenges of embracing future technologies. Whilst it was good to hear examples of UK practice quoted at EXPO1520, Russian Railways and its VNIIZhT research institute might also provide examples of best practice. Russia also offers a large rail export market. European rail companies have exported much to Russia and don’t seem to be constrained by sanctions. As indicated by the size and number of their stands in the exhibition halls, they wish to continue to do business with Russia. The Russian rail market is a difficult one to break into but, for a company with particularly innovative products, the 2019 EXPO1520 could be a good place to start. 18

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Interlocking for safety of personnel and equipment

The cost of a workplace fatality

ealth and Safety Executive (HSE) statistics for 2016 reveal that 137 people were killed in UK workplaces that year. As well as the immense grief and distress to all concerned, there is a significant cost to the businesses involved. When considering the cost of legal proceedings, medical and emergency services charges, damage to equipment, loss of production and insurance costs, a figure between £2 and £7 million is not unreasonable.

of an undesirable event by another positive mechanical or electrical action. A simple example is traction interlocking, whereby a driver cannot move his train until all doors are closed and locked.

Interlocking in train depots High-voltage equipment, heavy machinery and moving vehicles make it undeniable that rail yards and depots are high-risk environments to work in. Whilst the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) Annual Health and Safety Report 2016 states that overall harm at yards, depots and sidings was at its lowest level since consistent recording began in 2007-08, there is still more to be done. The report goes on to detail how its investigation found depots to have an inconsistent approach to managing risk to the workforce and, while some had a strong approach to staff safety, other depots were found to have developed their own

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

individual safety culture, which was described as poor with only ad hoc risk control arrangements. Many injuries and fatalities can be avoided if prescribed safety procedures are followed. Unfortunately, human error is inevitable and most procedural systems fail to recognise the human element. However, an engineered solution to protect rail depot staff from exposure to high voltages is at hand in the form of system interlocking. Most engineers will know what the word ‘interlocking’ means. However, for anyone who is under the impression that it means the way the pieces of a jigsaw fit together, please note that, in this context, it means the prevention

Zonegreen has developed highly sophisticated interlocking systems in train depots that prevent unauthorised movements of trains, thus protecting injury or death to personnel and damage to other trains and equipment in the depot. Generally acknowledged as market leader, Zonegreen has installed its Depot Personnel Protection System (DPPSTM) in numerous depots throughout the UK, Ireland, Australasia and the Middle East. Additionally, the company manufactures interlocking systems that prevent personnel and depot equipment from coming into contact with overhead line equipment (OLE).

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Zonegreen has developed a safe system of work that absolutely prevents access to high-level access platforms by means of a fully guarded stairway and interlocked gate that can only be opened with a key that is released from a control panel when the OLE is isolated and earthed. The sequence of unlocking and removing keys that in turn allow other keys to be released ensures prohibition of access to areas unless they are safely isolated and earthed. It is also possible to monitor the position of the gate locks to ensure that they are all closed and locked prior to enabling the reenergisation of the OLE. In addition, a series of green lights can be provided that illuminate above the roads that are isolated, earthed and interlocked, providing visual indication when it is safe to work. This form of interlocking is vastly superior to a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;permit to workâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; system that is only reliable provided that everyone concerned strictly obeys the rules.

Further refinements to the basic interlocking system can be made to ensure the safe placing and removal of earth loops on overhead wires. Another hazard that can be eliminated is the risk of inadvertent conductor rail energisation due to 750V DC suburban rolling stock having multiple pick up shoes along the length of the train. In addition, depot equipment, such as cranes, that have the potential to come into contact with the OLE, can be interlocked to inhibit their operation whilst the OLE is live.

The future Many new depots, including the Thameslink, IEP and Crossrail maintenance facilities, benefit from the technology described above, which reduces the risk of injuries and fatalities. However, there are still a number of maintenance depots that have room for improvement, as identified by the ORR report.

In order to achieve the Network Rail vision of everyone home safe every day, it is essential that a consistent approach to protecting the workforce from human error and failings of manual permit-towork systems is adopted across all rail depots. The engineers at Zonegreen are practical professionals who understand the fact that humans will, especially if under pressure to get the job done, cut corners and try to fit square pegs into round holes. Zonegreenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s DPPS can be developed to encompass both electronic and mechanical interlockings which are intuitive, user friendly and provide proven protection against accident or fatality.

(Top) Crane interlock panel (Middle) OLE interlock panel. (Bottom) UFC interlock panel.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Derailments can be very destructive. This one at Lewisham in January 2017 closed the railway for a week.

arlier this year, Paul Darlington put together an article that dealt with some of the major accidents that have happened in recent history and how these have had a major impact on infrastructure and operating procedures. Around the time that the article was published, the industry had a ‘bad week’. It involved a passenger train that was routed into the side of a work train at Waterloo, a freight train destroying the track near Ely, and a train hitting the buffers at King’s Cross. Although all these specific incidents will be examined in detail and formal reports published elsewhere, here at the Rail Engineer we thought it might be useful if some of the general failure mechanisms of the rail/wheel interface were explained to the non-track or rolling stock fraternity.

Fantasy vs reality There is a scene in the vintage 1953 film ‘The Titfield Thunderbolt’ where a tank engine is derailed and then proceeds to run down a road, through an advertising hoarding, then on through a wood before colliding with a tree. Some may believe that this could be possible - the film-makers obviously thought so. For those involved in any aspects of practical railway engineering, this is understood to be complete fantasy - great fun, but utter nonsense. Sorry, but it really isn’t what happens when a train leaves the track. The reality can be shocking. Even a low speed derailment will cause a disproportionate amount of destruction. Anything involving an element of speed will leave a lasting impression on the observer. Great fun it is not. Derailments are to be avoided.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

GRAHAME TAYLOR

Victorian legacy It probably doesn’t give much cause for comfort, but the mechanism of a train travelling - and staying - on the track is largely still a gloriously crude Victorian (even pre-Victorian) mechanism. Essentially we have two strips of steel laid at a fixed distance from each other. The strips of steel are supported on a medium - timber/ concrete (even plastic now) - which sits on terra firma. The wheels are made of steel, have running surfaces that are also a fixed distance from each other, courtesy of a rigid axle making up a wheelset. Helpfully, each of the running surfaces of this wheelset has a flange. That’s it. Despite nearly 200 years, there is nothing else to augment this rail/wheel arrangement - nothing to stop the wheels bouncing up and over the strips of steel (which we will now call rails). The whole arrangement relies on gravity. It’s gloriously primitive and, despite the current preoccupation with additional safeguards and precautions, is still very simple and largely unaltered. If the railways hadn’t been invented when they were and if they hadn’t proved their effectiveness and their safety over generations, it would be inconceivable that they could be invented today. Who would believe they would work? But, without any additional comfort mechanisms, it is important that the basic rail/wheel interface is managed rigorously as there is little scope for mistakes.

PHOTO: NETWORK RAIL

KEEPING WHEEL AND RAIL TOGETHER

Of course it didn’t always work, which is why in those intervening 200 years we have invented some very clever rail steel and equally clever steels for the wheels and axle along with cunning rail and wheel profiles. These are so cunning that the flanges almost never touch the rail inside edges. But they are not so cunning that the flanges can be left off. That’s just a stage too far.

Defining a derailment A simple search of the internet will come up with a definition of a derailment, and most definitions talk about a train accidentally leaving the track. Railway engineers have a gallows sense of humour, which they have had to adopt to deal with the enormity of these events. ‘Leaving the track’ is often referred to as ‘on the floor’, ‘on the dirt’, ‘on the deck’ or simply ‘one off’. In almost all cases, a derailment does indeed involve a train on the floor, but strictly a derailment happens before the train hits the deck. Once a wheel has left the comfort of its rail surface it has derailed. So, what will cause a wheel to leave a rail? Of course, there are a variety of reasons, broadly categorised as track defects, vehicle defects and outside forces.

Track defects These include a failure of the track itself or rail geometry that is outside of safe limits. Sleepers, baseplates/chairs and fastenings all form part of the track structure. Any single failure of one of these components is generally unlikely to cause the track to collapse. There is enough redundancy in the system to cope with a couple of adjacent baseplates failing, for example, or for a few missing fastenings. If track is not inspected/ maintained, then there is a real chance of collapse leading, usually, to track spread - an inability of the track to keep the rails to the correct gauge. This leads to one - or both wheels - forcing the rails apart with a consequential rapid descent to the ballast. The instant that the wheel running surface drops below the rail head is the point of derailment. The normal sequence of events thereafter is for the wheelset to then unzip the rest of the track allowing the rest of the train to drop into the hole. This is often because the rest of the track generally is in an equally ropey condition and thus cannot withstand the forces involved. There can be rare cases where the track ahead of the derailment is not in poor condition and

PHOTO: ATSB

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

is robust enough to resist the unzipping process. The wheel set may be persuaded to climb back onto the good track and for the train to continue its journey as if nothing has happened. Nevertheless there has been a derailment despite the track healing behind itself and there being little or no damage. So, how can such an extraordinary event be detected? It comes down to wheel edge marks. As the wheel drops down the running edge, it cuts into the edge making a very distinct gouge - it’s the point of derailment. Similarly, if the wheel is able to climb back onto the running surface there will be a gouge at this point also.

Evidence of a wheel dropping off the rail due to gauge widening – Melbourne, Australia, October 2013.

Derailment at Prague, February 2007. PHOTO: LUDEK

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

PHOTO: RAIB

This broken rail, and the subsequent dislodgement of a triangular section at Hambleton in February 2013 could have caused a major accident. Fortunately it was caught in time. Fatigue failure by inadequate support of sleepers passing a bending moment through the bolts of the fishplate.

If a rail fails, then there may or may not be a derailment. A simple rail break initially is an open joint. If a large section of rail is dislodged, then that’s when a number of forces take over. The pounding of wheels over the gap will cause a major geometry track defect which we’ll cover in a minute. Initially, wheels may ‘jump’ the gap, but this may not last for long before sequential rail/component failure occurs. A rail failure that prompted the industry to take a long and hard look at the whole issue of incipient rail defects was the Hither Green disaster in 1967. Here, a bolt-hole crack caused a triangular portion of rail end to become dislodged. Instead of being kicked out of the way by passing trains, the fragment rotated and formed a ramp that propelled the following wheels off the track.

Flange climbing

Evidence of flange climb at the site of a derailment at Calgary, Alberta, Canada on 18 February 2016.

Track is rarely consistently billiard-table flat. In fact, on the transition from straight to canted track, or from one portion of canted track to another, there is a deliberate - a designed - change of crosslevel over distance. There are, of course, safe limits for this change in crosslevel. Vehicles will tolerate such variations. But there are limits! If the change is too rapid, then it is possible for the wheel encountering the lower rail to be momentarily less loaded. In an extreme case, it can be seen that

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

the wheel tread might leave the rail surface. Problems really arise if, at the same time as the wheel is unloaded, the whole vehicle yaws slightly from side to side. This can lead to the flange of the unloaded wheel being at an angle to the running edge such that it can start to climb up the running edge. (This is termed, unsurprisingly, flange climb.) Once flange climbing starts then it takes very little imagination to understand that it will soon reach the running surface of the rail. From thence it can run on and indeed over the running surface and drop off the wrong side. At the same time, the wheel at the other end of the axle has fallen off its rail surface and the derailment is complete. Only in extraordinarily rare cases is there any hope of recovery. The derailed wheelset - even if it’s the only set to come off - is busy destroying fastenings and sleepers. The rest of the train may not derail and it is possible for several miles of track to be severely damaged by just one wheelset. If the wheelset encounters a crossover or a set of points then destruction and further derailment is very likely.

The point of derailment is again shown by a mark where the flange rides up the running edge. There’s usually a scar on the running surface caused by the relatively sharp edge of the flange running on the top and then there’s a scar on the opposite rail where the sharp edge of the other wheel drops down.

Cyclic top Flange climbing isn’t only confined to track twist faults. Two particular problems emerged 20-30 years ago. One involved an issue with freight trains travelling over track that, in most respects, did not have twist faults that were out of tolerance. The track could not be described as ‘good’ but individual faults appeared to be relatively minor. The problem lay in the frequency of the faults and their spacing. This was a classic interaction between vehicle type, speed and track fault frequency. What happens is that a resonance is set up in the vehicles, which come off after lurching from side to side and bouncing up and down. At a particular point in the agitated vehicle movements, a flange is

PHOTO: TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD OF CANADA

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS able to climb up the running edge and the train is then off the road. The cyclic top issue had been discovered and it continues to bring trains off to this day.

Switch blades The other issue concerned flange climb over switch blades. Often, this involved suburban electrical multiple units and caused significant disruption to services even though the derailments were generally low speed. A new regime of testing switch blades was initiated using special handheld gauges so that wear rates could be detected and remedial works undertaken in time. Switch blades themselves can cause problems if they fit up incorrectly and allow a flange to run between the closed switch rail and the stock rail. This is known as splitting the points (again unsurprisingly) and is not always caused through badly adjusted points. An undetected run-through in the trailing direction can leave a gap wide enough for the next train in the facing direction to split the points.

Mention it not And then there’s the cause that has no name - at least not a name that permanent way engineers wish to utter. Muttered under the breath it is sometimes referred to as a… misalignment or a… heat issue. Just cut the crap, we’re talking about a track buckle, plain and simple. Depending on the severity of a buckle, the results can range from a very rough ride to a rapid flange climb and derailment. A buckle is caused by a build-up of compressive forces within the rail/s. Normally, the forces are managed by ensuring that continuously welded rail is fooled into thinking it was laid on a hot day, by

having a surround of sufficient ballast and/or, in the case of jointed track, by having properly regulated rail joints. Buckles are not confined to hot weather and there can be rare cases of vertical buckles where rail joints ‘stand up to attention’. Vertical buckles rapidly convert to horizontal buckles as the raised portions of track fall over.

Clues In almost all cases of derailment caused by track defects, it is possible to pinpoint the exact point of derailment and this gives a clue as to the cause. It is possible to take detailed track geometry readings upstream of the derailment as the track is undisturbed. Anything that is downstream is usually destroyed and in any case has little relevance to an investigation on cause. There are naturally exceptions to the rule. If, after derailing, the vehicles come to a very abrupt halt, then a shock wave can travel back along the train - even back beyond the point of derailment. The shock can be sufficient to derail or cause track damage upstream of the actual point of derailment. For many vehicle defects the upstream evidence can be vital. Marks on rails or through level crossings from errant components can be seen many miles ahead of the actual point of derailment, so giving a clue as to when the original failure occurred.

Vehicle defects When looking at vehicle defects it’s useful to keep in mind the mechanisms involved with track defects. For example, flange climb - the very same mechanism - is involved if a vehicle has a stiff bogie. The bogie assembly is unable to follow the track geometry and so sets up an unnecessary angle of attack for the flange on PHOTO: RAIB

This track buckle derailed a train at Cummersdale on the Cumbrian Coast line on 1 June 2009.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

A broken axle on a Class 222 at East Langton, Leicestershire on 20 February 2010.

the running edge. If the vehicle has unevenly set up suspension, then it will be overly sensitive to cyclic top type of defects, as it will if it is unevenly loaded. Unevenly loaded freight vehicles, in combination with track geometry faults, can also result in flange climb. Containers can be problematic in this respect as any uneven loading is not visually obvious. Buffer locking can happen as a result of a violent shunt or if a vehicle is somehow wrongly routed. It involves buffer assemblies at the ends of a pair of vehicles riding behind or on top of each other. The vehicles may be able to tolerate this whilst going round a curve but, when the track straightens out, the vehicles are then locked together and will not follow the track alignment. The result will be that one pair of wheels - at least - will be forced over the rail head and onto the floor. Pretty obviously, if a component breaks on a vehicle, falls off and jams underneath then the result can be terminal.

Infrastructure failures

Derailment due to an ‘outside force’ – Coswarth, Cornwall, 31 August 2004.

Even with vehicles and track under control, it is still possible for the infrastructure to cause problems. Track geometry can be disturbed by failures of the supporting structures. Although very rare, it is possible for structural elements of bridges to fail. An example was the bridge near Stewarton in Scotland in 2009. Perhaps less rare are failures of embankments, the causes of which can range from clay shrinkage, overloading and even instability due to rabbits. Rabbits can cause derailments - or at least the activities of many over the years. Warrens can riddle an embankment which, after a sustained period of rain, can collapse, causing just enough subsidence to affect the track with cyclic top.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Earlier, we summarised the various causes of derailments, the last category being ‘outside forces’ This is a catch-all term to include collisions with vehicles, overspeeding around curves, livestock, landslips and even ice in flangeways. All these effectively destroy the integrity of the track as a vehicle support system, lifting flanges over the running rail. The list of derailment causes is long and, to the non-railway engineer - daunting. But it has to be kept in mind that, over the 200 years of railway evolution, all the causes have been recognised. There is very little left that will catch out the competent track or rolling stock engineer. It has all been seen before and strategies are in place to manage the risks. As Paul Darlington stated, the main reason for dissecting railway accidents in great detail is to ensure that lessons are not forgotten. Hither Green, for example, was 50 years ago, but its legacy is still with us today. This is the second of a three-part series of articles on railway accidents, their causes and what lessons have been, or should be, learned. The first, From Blame to Better Understanding by Paul Darlington, appeared in issue 155 (September 2017). The third and last article, looking at wheel and rail profiles and their interdependence, will be published next year.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

GRP structures for new sidings at Maidenhead

he Great Western main line between London Paddington and Cardiff is going through a major modernisation process. The much-discussed electrification scheme forms part of it, but there are several other major enhancements

that are being carried out at the same time.

One of these is a series of new sidings at Maidenhead. This £4.5 million project will enable Great Western Railway (GWR) to increase its capacity at peak times by introducing a further three new eightcarriage Electrostar trains. Principal contractor is Balfour Beatty, and the design called for a number of Dura Composites glass reinforced plastic (GRP) modular access platforms and walkways. These precision-engineered GRP solutions were installed by Balfour Beatty Rail, and are the perfect fit for the OLE (Overhead Line Equipment) environment thanks to their non-conductive properties. Dura Composites GRP profiles can be designed to comply with bespoke site specifications and offer significant improvements over traditional alternatives, including increased buildability and a dramatic reduction in possession times.

Through good cooperation, the project was completed 18 months early. Rafal Konstanty, contractors responsible engineer at Balfour Beatty, commented on the installation of the Dura Slab walkways and modular access platforms: “Dura’s GRP solutions were ideal for this project as the driver walkway access platforms are situated under 25kV OLE wires. The resulting installations are non-conductive, lightweight and require virtually no maintenance, which means that they offer excellent lifecycle benefits for our end client, Network Rail. “The team at Dura Composites were great to work with, both in terms of their ideas and the technical support they were able to offer during the design stage, and I would happily recommend them to other colleagues in the Rail industry.”

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

CLIVE KESSELL

Training for the

Azumas V

irgin East Coast will, in just over a yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s time, begin operating its new fleet of high-speed Azuma trains, currently being built by Hitachi and assembled at the recently constructed Newton Aycliffe factory in County Durham.

These trains embody all the latest technology, most of it being controlled by software-dominated electronic systems, for which driver and maintainer understanding will be a challenge in itself. They will be delivered with all the necessary control systems already fitted, even if some of these will not be needed until the infrastructure elements are also provided. ERTMS (or more pertently, the ETCS - European Train Control System - signalling system element) is to be the future method of controlling the East Coast main line (ECML), but the contract for the control system and trackside equipment has still to be let. Thus, initial operation of the trains will be dependent on the existing lineside signalling including AWS and TPWS. The initial phase of ERTMS will be from Kings Cross to Stoke Tunnel (just short of Grantham) and will be linked to the first stages of York ROC (Rail Operating Centre), which will replace the ageing Kings Cross and Peterborough power boxes. All this should start to happen in 2021/22, and thereafter ERTMS will be extended northwards as the existing power boxes at York, Newcastle and Edinburgh fall due for replacement.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

The ETCS equipment on the train will be isolated until ERTMS becomes operational. The trains will also be fitted with C-DAS (Connected Driver Advisory System) supplied by TTG Transportation Technology, for both Great Western and East Coast IEP fleets. This system is already proven on Great Western and numerous other train operating companies in the UK and internationally. Initially, this will be used as a networkedDAS which can give near real-time information to the driver on optimum speeds to reach stations or junctions at the correct time, thus avoiding excessive high speed running or harsh braking

to achieve the best fuel economy while maintaining precise timetable compliance. Later, the system will be used in C-DAS mode, which will take account of real-time train movements so as to get the optimum flow through junctions and pinch points. Providing TMS (Traffic Management System) at York ROC will be an integral part of this. The trains will have automatic and manual SDO (Selective Door Operation) for any stations that have short platforms, this being triggered by GPS location and eurobalises coded with Packet 44 as part of eventual ETCS operation.

Bi-mode operation The new trains will also be bi-mode, meaning that, as well as being powered from the overhead 25kV electrification system, they will incorporate MTU diesel

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS All this takes place by GPS positioning information and eurobalise, which is then fed into the train management system. A typical example would be a through train from Kings Cross to Aberdeen, requiring diesel power after Edinburgh. The diesel engine preparation will thus need to happen before the train arrives in Scotland’s capital. Should diesel power be required in an emergency or unforeseen circumstances, then the startup process may have to be shortened. engines for operating over routes not equipped with the overhead line and for when engineering work or disruption renders the electric traction supply unavailable. These Azumas (along with similar trains being supplied for the Great Western route) are the first bi-mode trains that Hitachi have designed and built, so there is an element of a learning curve for both supplier and operator. The trains will come as either a nine-car or five-car formation. In the nine-car version, there will be five under-floor diesel engines and the five-car unit will have three diesel engines. The fivecar trains can be coupled together to

make a 10-car unit. A ‘hotel services’ supplementary diesel engine will also be provided on each electric train to maintain air conditioning, information systems, door operation and provide limited traction power to clear the line if the main power supplies have failed. Changing from electric to diesel operation and vice versa can be automatic (APCO) or manual for the timetabled changeover points. For fuel efficiency and maintenance considerations, start-up of the diesel engines will take place before they are actually needed for traction power. This is to ensure the engine coolant is pre heated to 45ºC.

Simulating the Azuma With all this new technology, training the drivers will be a lengthy and complex business. To achieve this on real trains on the actual ECML is not a practical proposition, as not only would it need additional train paths, but many of the conditions to be encountered would not be able to be experienced on a live railway or test track, such as major fault alarms, emergency situations or emergency GSM-R calls. Virgin Trains East Coast (VTEC) has had simulators for the Class 91 and HST cabs for some time (issue 146, November 2016). Supplied by Corys, a French company well-versed in rail and power

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS industry simulation, these simulators were purchased primarily for training and assessing drivers on train operation and signalling systems. It was a logical step for Virgin to extend the contract for provision of an Azuma simulator, the first one of which arrived at Kings Cross in September, with later ones earmarked for Leeds, Newcastle and Edinburgh. Whilst there are a few similarities between the Azuma and the earlier Javelin Hitachi trains in use on Southeastern, the trains are much more complex with bi-mode operation and there will be many new types of control and alarm conditions that have to be understood. The exact simulation scenarios that will be needed to train and assess drivers are still being worked out as training modules are developed, but sufficient progress had already been made for Virgin to invite Rail Engineer to view the system. The HST simulators at VTEC have been retired, all locations will all have Azuma and Class 91 ones going forward. One HST simulator has been transferred to East Midlands Trains, which envisages continued HST operation for some time, one is being retained at Edinburgh and two are in storage. The Azuma cab is impressive, with many screens for the various functions. The single power and brake controller is conventional, as is the GSM-R radio, but most set up, condition selection and alarm monitoring activities are by touch screen operation. Personal identity, train description, train formation, start signal number, operation mode (ETCS or AWS/ TPWS) information has to be entered correctly before any traction power can be applied. A modelled representation of the ECML from Stevenage to Peterborough, with the existing signalling system

superimposed, is shown on a large screen commensurate with the driver’s forward view. As is normal on simulators, weather conditions can be changed and include thick fog and falling snow. However, new on this version is a cracking thunderstorm!! All of this can be controlled at the fingertips of the instructor using Tactis, Corys’ innovative new tablet-based control application. The picture is not quite as good as real film but the images add immense realism to all the essential elements of the railway. Should any aspects of the track layout, countryside or buildings change over time, it is easy to amend the associated graphics using the Corys track builder tool. Having the four simulator locations gives a good geographic spread for VTEC and makes it easy for drivers to access the sites, as they are based at their driver depots. However, the amount of training required cannot be encompassed within just the simulator suites’ driving desks. The Corys system allows the basic elements of the Azuma controls to be put onto a “Laptop Sim”, such that training can then take place at any convenient location using any screen in a classroom, or even the boardroom. The laptop screen shows the same portrayal of the Azuma cab, all of the screen-based controls being identical, but with controls such as the power controller adjusted by a touch screen movement. The laptop alternative is not the end of the story, as a further development SODA (Simulation on Demand) allows the same training to be achieved on a tablet device using cloud-based technology. VTEC is the first deployment by Corys of this innovative tablet-based training technology.

The training process Around 400 drivers, supervisors and managers will need to be taught the many aspects of driving Azuma trains. The training sessions will focus on individual elements of the controls, which will include: »» Train operation; »» Data input and login;

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

»» ETCS and AWS/TPWS operation; »» Alarms, fault finding and circuit breaker control; »» Electric and diesel operation and changeover; »» Emergency procedures; »» Fire suppression; »» Wheel slip/slide and sanding operation; »» GSM-R radio and DAS observance. Groups of drivers will attend each session for group and individual learning. The design of the simulation technology allows excellent observation by all of the action, thus students can mutually experience the actions and mistakes that others make. An enthusiastic consensus amongst the driving community has emerged with the earlier Class 91 and HST simulators, and this is expected to continue. Thereafter, regular re-training and re-certification of competence will take place at the prescribed intervals that Virgin Trains East Coast determines. It is also likely that new requirements from lessons learnt in operation and operational methodology will occur from time to time, such as the introduction of ERTMS and 140mph running, whence the simulators will be invaluable to facilitate such new skills.

Into operation Whilst an Azuma train has already traversed the ECML as part of the manufacturer’s proving process, the first VTEC train proper will not be introduced until summer 2018. This, and subsequent deliveries, will undergo a period of faultfree running during the autumn of 2018, with the first ones entering passenger service in December 2018. This gives time enough to train sufficient drivers for the new service. It’s going to be fascinating to watch the next 16 months of East Coast operation and witness the transition from the present 30-year-old trains to the new Azumas. Thanks to Paul Boyle and Paul Lartey from the Virgin Trains East Coast team and to Richard Stanton and Neal Smith for facilitating the visit.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

MALCOLM DOBELL

RVE 2017

New Venue, More Exhibitors

ail Vehicle Enhancements (RVE), the rolling stock industry’s annual

components and systems show, moved to a new venue for 2017 and attracted more exhibitors and visitors in the process.

Rail Engineer reports on this exhibition each year. It had previously been held at Derby’s Riverside Centre, but it was obvious to regular visitors that it was getting a little cramped. For 2017, show organiser Onyxrail decided to move to larger premises and, on 5 October, a large number of people visited Derby Arena, the city’s new velodrome, adjacent to Derby County’s football ground in Pride Park. Derby Arena is much bigger than the former venue, with space for the exhibition in the cycle track’s infield, a raked seating area for the conference, and a mezzanine space used by the Department for International Trade East Midlands (DIT) for a Meet the Buyer event, funded by the Midlands Engine. By, the way, if you’ve never been to a velodrome, but have seen the banked track on TV, I can assure you that it looks much steeper in real life!

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

The exhibition was opened by the Mayor of Derby. There were 80 exhibitors, and nine conference speakers. It was impossible to get around them all and visit the conference, so this is a highly selective report about the stands and the presentations that struck a chord with me.

Sell them off abroad It has become traditional that Ian Walmsley, formerly of Porterbrook Leasing and now a regular contributor to another railway magazine, opens the conference with his usual round up of the market for enhancing vehicles. This year was no exception, although his usual wicked sense of humour was a little muted because this market “lives in interesting times” as the apocryphal Chinese curse would have it. He summed it up in five words “Enhancement or the Scrap Line”.

Despite a number of reports from organisations that should be well informed, it has become increasingly difficult/impossible to forecast the demand for used or refurbished rolling stock - “all those reports, always wrong”, he said. It seems that the quality score in the franchise process arising from new rolling stock trumps premium payments. Moreover, new rolling stock and its financing has never been cheaper, encouraging franchise bidders to offer new trains. Thus, thousands of electric vehicles from the 1980s could be destined for the scrap heap. Ian suggested a solution, based on the time when the UK exported redundant locomotives and coaches (for example EM2 1500V locos to the Netherlands, MkII coaches to New Zealand and Pacers to Iran) called Project Electra. He suggested that the rail vehicle enhancement industry might

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS buy some of these redundant vehicles, refurbish them and sell them abroad. Was he being serious? I don’t know, but I saw members of the audience nodding wisely as if a sea change was happening in owners’ willingness to invest so that existing fleets might compete more readily.

Innovation is key

On show

Simon Evans, from Wabtec Faiveley, talked about the need for his company to innovate in the vehicle support area. In the UK, it faces a “cliff edge” in passenger rolling stock work as it ruses to complete modifications by the 2020 deadline which has been set by the DfT for compliance with the Technical Specification for Interoperability - People of Reduced Mobility. He also talked about some innovations, including fitting powered sliding bodyside doors to MkIII carriages and the work to fit diesel engines to Class 319 electric sets, giving them bimode capability. Simon foresaw that UK rail will never be fully electrified and there will always be a demand for bi-mode trains, and the self-powered capability might not always be diesel. He also reminded the audience that new trains become old trains in time and will always need support.

Back to the exhibition, and I think it is no exaggeration to say that there was a representative company of any activity that might be undertaken to enhance a train ranging from the highly technical (such as networks) to non-technical (insurance broker Jobson James Rail). A selection follows. Connected trains: This is probably the fastest moving area of train technology. It doesn’t matter how old the train is, customers expect Wi-Fi and operators want data from the train’s data recorders. Several companies offered equipment for installing or upgrading Ethernet backbones to trains and the various devices that connect to it - switches, antennae, servers. At my first RVE, suppliers suggested that Gigabit (1 gigabit/sec) capable Ethernet was the coming thing. Now it’s all about future proofing at least the cabling by providing

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

10 Gigabit, generally in copper. Onyxrail, Westermo, Lütze, Harting, UR Group, Time 24 and LPA were amongst the companies offering Ethernet components, connectors or solutions. On train systems: Hasler Rail, Televic Rail, KeTech, Knorr Bremse, Sella Controls, EKE Electronics make a whole smörgåsbord of sub-systems that use or rely on Ethernet and Wi-Fi, including passenger information systems, data recorders, and, increasingly, sensors and applications that aggregate data from these sensors and other systems. As Jan Richard of Hasler Rail put it, “we are in the age of the Internet of Things Trains”. It’s also important not to forget the lineside systems that support communication to and from the train, which is ADComms’ specialism. I noticed particularly that full colour LCD displays have largely replaced LED displays for

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Staytite had a test rig on its stand to show how fasteners loosen under vibration (or, in the case of Staytite nuts, how they don’t!).

A nut being tightened to 500Nm with a hand-held power wrench whilst the assistant just held the mating shaft with one hand.

internal applications and there is now a reasonable range of long, narrow LCD displays that generally suit train interiors. Arrowvale, famous for its On-Train Data Recorders (other names and acronyms available), was demonstrating a small, prototype box designed to monitor passenger comfort. Just 140mm x 70mm x 50mm, it is intended to monitor temperature, humidity, light level, CO2 and vibration. The device can be powered by the train or have its own internal battery. As ever, once installed, the challenge is to turn the data it supplies into useful information - for example comparing vibration data between all cars on a train or over a whole fleet to identify rough riding trains, or indeed, gross track defects. Decoration: Long gone are the days when trains were painted by coach painters with decoration by expert sign writers. Today, companies such as Ast Transport Branding say effectively: “If you can draw it, we can make it into printed film for a livery.” Moreover, they can apply it more quickly than it would take to paint the train. Aura Graphics offers a complete refurbishment process whether paint or film. Forbo Flooring offered a range of materials ranging from classic lino (linoleum) though to quality carpets. I was particularly impressed with the specialist materials for entrance

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

materials and by the Flotex Vision FR material, which looks like lino from a distance but has an upright pile and can be “printed” to almost any design. Nuts and bolts: There have been a number of major incidents where at least one of the causal factors was nuts or bolts that were not properly tight. Staytite was showing its Hardlock two-part lock nut solution. The main nut is fitted with a short cone. The locking nut has a cup that fits the cone, but is off-centre to the threaded hole. When the lock nut is tightened to the right torque it binds on the main nut and will stay put, as a demonstration on the stand clearly showed. Meanwhile, on the Hytorc stand, there was a demonstration of how to tighten a large nut to 500NM torque using comparatively compact power tools whilst an assistant holds a very short torque reaction lever. This involves a two-part concentric socket on the tool, the outer part of which interlocks with a washer between the nut and the part being secured. This washer is serrated on the face that mates with the part. The

outside of the socket is held stationary whilst the inside part mates with the nut and builds up the torque. This process avoids the use of reaction fixtures that can damage the bolts and prevent the bolted joint seating properly. Windscreen wipers: One of my very earliest jobs was to convert a really bad windscreen wiper system to use a sprung arm and a flexible blade. Hepworth Group and PSV Wipers were displaying their products, which have to cope with much bigger windscreens and higher speeds, have to have wash wipe systems and might even respond automatically to moisture on the screen. PSV made the point that wiper systems are getting bigger by displaying a two metre long blade on its stand, although they admitted that there is no current application for something this big. Today, even windscreen wipers are required to integrate to train Ethernet system to monitor, for example washer fluid levels, further increasing the complexity of what was once a very simple system.

Quality precast concrete manufacturers... for a great range and even greater value Elite Precast Concrete are one of the UKâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s leading precast concrete manufacturers combining the highest levels of customer service with always being the best value option. Our focus is on driving down the cost base and then passing these savings onto our customers. This enables us to provide constant and predictable price structures which in turn underpin our ethos of developing customer relationships over the long term. Every product we make is cast from the same premium quality, high strength (50N/mm2) concrete. We were also the first and by far the largest manufacturer of interlocking blocks for various temporary works; fire breaks; retaining, blast and push walls and also, by offering three block types, you can be certain that we have the solution you are looking for.

For more information on Elite quality concrete products phone 01952 588 885 or browse www.eliteprecast.co.uk

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Electronics faults and obsolescence: Referring again to “new trains will become old trains”, electronic trains will increasingly have faults and obsolescence issues that will need specialist electronics engineers. Amongst the exhibitors, Wabtec and SET both offer these services, the latter illustrating its capability with a number of case studies including work on frequency division multiplexing racks, IGBT (Insulated-Gate Bipolar Transistor) obsolescence and failure and automatic voltage regulators. Lubrication: At the Certas Energy stand, I picked up a leaflet describing the benefits of reviewing the lubricants that are used in diesel engines with a case study illustrating how the use of Valvoline Premium Blue engine oil allowed Bombardier to change the frequency of oil changes from 36 days to 48 days. It also improved the engine wear properties on the Cummins QSK19R engines fitted to the Voyager DEMUs.

Meeting the buyers Meanwhile, the Meet the Buyer event was doing great business. It was open to any to any UK registered company, and 114 companies registered; a great improvement on 2016. The DIT had secured buyers from Alstom, CAF, Eurostar, Hitachi, MTR Tech Sweden, ÖBB Austria, SBB Switzerland and Siemens, providing a cross section of opportunities from federal operators to OEMs. Some 76 companies were selected for appointments, of which there were nearly 200 scheduled for the day.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

The 14 booths for these short, 20-minute appointments provided valuable opportunities for face-to-face conversations and aimed to develop export opportunities for the UK’s rolling stock supply chain. In addition, DIT commercial officers leading on rail from South Africa, Nigeria and Austria conducted meeting programmes supporting companies interested in developing activity in these markets. At the end of a busy day, Antxon de la Fuente from CAF said: “This was a perfectly organized meet the buyer event in Derby. It helps developing our supply chain in the UK, and is a starting point to work with new suppliers.” Gustav Sjöberg from MTR Tech Sweden added: “The event was a good way to establish a contact and understanding of new potential suppliers that I could choose based on current interests.”

Alstom’s Tim Ward said they had met 28 suppliers in one day with well-planned and managed meetings “reinforcing existing relationships and making new connections. This was a very effective way of doing business”.

Parts list Back to the conference, and Lee Barron from Siemens talked about the refurbishment of the 51 Class 185 diesel multiple units, currently all used by First Trans Pennine Express. The following list of changes neatly illustrates how expectations have changed in just 10 years: »» Auto passenger counting (Infodev); »» Power sockets - one per pair of seats; »» LED lighting; »» Automatic selective door opening; »» Additional passenger information screens; »» Wi-Fi including Ethernet

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

backbone and media servers; »» External film livery plus roof repaint; »» Interior refresh including new seat cushions and upholstery (flat cloth in standard and e-leather in first class); »» LED headlights; »» Driver advisory system; »» Forward and rear facing CCTV. Lee was especially pleased that they have reduced the production time to nine days.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

For the fleet, some large quantities of materials have been required: »» Enough external livery film to fill two football pitches; »» Over 6,500m2 internal film and nearly 25,000 labels from Aura; »» 7,400m2 of Axminster carpet; »» Nearly 6,400 power sockets from TBM; »» Over 12,000m of electrical cable for Wi-Fi and power sockets; »» 1,275 tables from Baker

Bellfield; »» Over 1,300m2 of curtains from Richmond Interior Supplies. In addition, Lee highlighted the success of the seats, which were refurbished by Diamond Seating of Sheffield. They used the existing frames but fitted new cushions and upholstery. It took 50 tests and over a year to demonstrate compliance with the fire requirements and the refurbishment used more than 6,700m2 of flat cloth from

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Camira of Huddersfield and nearly 1,500m2 of E-leather, notsurprisingly from E-Leather of Peterborough.

Refurbishment challenges Tim Burleigh from Eversholt Rail gave a presentation about the current landscape from a ROSCO point of view. Tim echoed some of Ian Walmsley’s thoughts, saying that, in his 14 years in the industry, he had not known of such a period of change on so many fronts - volatility of passenger numbers and uncertainty over infrastructure enhancements which has led to “significantly reduced EMU cascade opportunities”. He thought that a refurbished train can still be sold, provided it is not specified (and priced) too close to that of new trains. He added, though, that there are few, if any, places outside London that can absorb a “London-sized” fleet. He illustrated the work on the Class 321 Renatus project, where Eversholt has split the interior work, which is being

carried out by Wabtec, from the work to replace the traction package and motors being carried out by Kiepe Electric. Tim concluded that large new fleet builds and Network Rail enhancement delays have had a far-reaching impact. However, he ended on a positive note that enhancement programmes are delivering tangible benefits and new opportunities continue to emerge, but these will only succeed if focussed on efficient delivery of capacity.

Looking forward In conclusion, whilst this is a challenging time for the rail vehicle enhancement sector, the general mood of the event was optimistic. Kevin Lane and his team at Onyxrail are to be congratulated on taking on the much greater risk with the larger venue. I thought that the event was a great success and there is still room to grow. Here’s to next year; put the date in your diary - 4 October 2018.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

FEATURE

Panasonic’s

proactive CCTV I DAVID SHIRRES

t is difficult to find anywhere in Britain’s town and city centres without CCTV. There are few shops, banks and railway stations without them. Yet, whilst it might seem that big brother is watching you, this is unlikely to be the case. With a typical control room having a small number of operators monitoring the output from a hundred or so cameras, the chances of anything untoward being detected in real-time are slim. In practice, CCTV is used to find out what happened after an incident. Keith Gillespie of Panasonic System Solutions Europe (PSSEU) considers that, with 99 per cent of current use of CCTV being reactive, there is a need for more proactivity. He also points out that CCTV is not just about surveillance as there are many other possible applications, for example people counting.

Technology solutions Keith explains that PSSEU has been formed to enable companies to make the best use of the types of hardware that Panasonic provides. Its approach is to identify problems that can be solved and then find matching solutions. However, he emphasises that there is no absolute requirement to use Panasonic products. In this respect, PSSEU has an approach which is technology agnostic. The solutions offered by Panasonic are quite common in other sectors such as retail, banking, museums and events. However, the rail industry has only just started to use these techniques. As an example, Keith describes an advanced security system at a manufacturing facility. This has one hundred cameras, which are selectively displayed on eighteen screens monitored by two operators. The output from these cameras is analysed by patternrecognition algorithms to identify any abnormal activity. In this way, operators are alerted of all potential risks, which would not be possible by two individuals constantly monitoring the output from a hundred cameras. To explore potential use in the rail industry, Panasonic Solutions arranged a forum last November with attendees that included nine train operators, Network Rail and the Department for Transport. The forum’s aim was to identify the priority issues that Panasonic could address. The three most important issues were: keeping the railways safe for people, making better customer decisions in real time and dynamically changing capacity.

Suicide, trespass and security Suicides are both a tragic loss of life and a cause of great distress to all involved. Sadly, there are around three hundred each year on the main line and underground networks. In addition, a further 1,200 or so individuals each year are restrained by either front line

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

staff or members of the public from taking their life on the railway. British Transport Police and the Samaritans are involved in several worthwhile initiatives to reduce this number. These include staff training and press guidelines to avoid copycat suicides. There were also 8,265 railway trespass incidents last year. This is 24 per cent more than five years ago. Each year around twenty trespassers are killed. Together trespass, vandalism and suicides account for a third of all train delays. The safety and security of passengers and staff at overcrowded stations is a challenging issue. Behaviour that leads to security incidents needs to be detected whilst avoiding disruption from lost and abandoned luggage. Potential issues from those under the influence of alcohol also need to be detected. Sixty percent of staff assaults are by those under the influence and, in the past decade, sixty percent of fatalities on the railway were alcohol related. In addition, there is the requirement to ensure the safety of vulnerable or at-risk individuals such as young children, those with disabilities and those who are elderly or pregnant.

Trespass warning system in use Panasonic’s trespass warning system has now been in use at a station in North East England for a year. Another is operational at a busy commuter station in the South East. These use a combination of day/night cameras, which operate in the infra-red spectrum at night, together with thermal cameras which are needed to confirm the number of individuals in an image pattern and so avoid false alarms. Smart security algorithms take account of both behaviour and location (such as at a platform edge) to recognise likely trespass and suicidal activity, security incidents, drunken passengers, abandoned luggage and other potential problems including crowd control. When such incidents have been identified, a pan, tilt and zoom camera will capture the activity at a high-resolution and generate an alert so that appropriate action can be taken by staff who have been given intervention training. For potential trespass incidents, the individual concerned is advised not to go on the railway by an automatic audible warning.

FEATURE Facial recognition technology is also used to identify repeat visitors who linger at a station, which is an indication of a potential suicide or other incident. The system includes face-masking technology to protect the identity of railway staff and passengers. This can be de-activated if authorised individuals need to review footage following an incident, thereby addressing one of the new requirements of the forthcoming General Data Protection Regulation.

Other applications Panasonic’s smart CCTV technology has also been used at level crossings for people counting, trespass alerts and gathering of intelligence on behaviour at crossings. This does not suffer from the problems of conventional analysis cameras, which can generate false alerts caused by other moving objects. In remote areas, the CCTV equipment is powered by a Panasonic hybrid off-grid solution which uses solar panels and batteries, such as that provided for GSM-R repeater at Worlaby (issue 149, March 2017). Passenger wayfinding by interactive displays is a further use of Panasonic technology. In the medium to long term, the use of drones to patrol lines automatically is being considered. As with on train surveillance, this application would require a reliable wireless video technology such as that provided by Vislink (issue 155, September 2017). Another potential application is monitoring train doors during station departure. Currently, whoever checks that the train doors are clear does so thousands of times a year, almost always without incident. In such situations, human beings, be they a guard or driver, are prone to “look but don’t see” errors, and so may not notice the rare occasion when someone is caught in a door. Pattern recognition analysis of the output from on-train video door cameras could reliably detect passengers trapped in doors and potentially eliminate trap and drag incidents as trains depart.

Looking for more solutions Introducing proven new technologies from other industries is a way to accelerate rail innovation, especially when, as in this case, the system just observes the surrounding environment and so has no interface with railway hardware that may present operational, safety or reliability issues. It is, however, a technology that needs to be properly integrated into operational procedures, backed up with the required training. With passenger numbers on an already overcrowded railway predicted to increase, the need to manage behaviour, unpredictable events and capacity becomes increasingly important and technological innovation has to be harnessed to manage such issues across the industry. Keith Gillespie is looking for more solutions. He considers that this technology offers huge potential and is keen for the Panasonic team to engage with companies throughout the rail industry to help develop solutions to their needs and provide support, from definition right through to installation and integration. He feels this is best done by a collaborative approach where information is shared, rather than working in silos. Does this all mean that big brother will be watching you? For most people, who will benefit for improved safety and security and reduced disruption, the answer is no. The answer is only yes if you are acting suspiciously!

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

FEATURE

PHOTO: BI BASMO

ON THE RIGHT TRACK

ook at any railway, and the most obvious thing to see is the track. One or two sets of steel rails, supported on concrete, wooden or metal sleepers that are partly buried in ballast.

Just occasionally, the whole track bed is concrete - ‘slab track’ - but outside the world of very-high-speed railways that’s comparatively rare, most often used in busy stations and problematic tunnels. What is less obvious is the fact that, alongside the railway lines, there is another network - an electrical one. Cables for signalling, power, telecommunications, computer networks and CCTV camera feeds all have to run alongside the railway, going on to the next station or back to the control centre. These cables are often hidden in ducts, which keep them safe, dry and out of sight. These ducts, which can be concrete or plastic, are usually roughly square in section, and can be partially buried or supported on small columns.

manufacturer of simple gratings and stair treads as well as highly specialised heat shield decks on oil rigs. The remit was for PcP to come up with a design of cable ducting that would be maintenance-free, durable, vandal resistant, easy to install, fire proof and would enable water to drain away freely. After two years of design and testing, the new system was accepted by Banedanmark for use on the Danish network having met all of the design criteria, and even surpassed them in some areas.

Danish desire The railways in Denmark are no different. In fact, the first-ever national rollout of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) will entail even more wires and cables being needed. They need to be kept safe yet quickly maintained, with the possibility of whole new cable runs being easily installed. So, in 2013, infrastructure owner Banedanmark felt that a new design was called for to run alongside its high-speed railways. It contacted PcP A/S in Vildbjerg, Central Jutland, which was known as a

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Design concept The basis of the design is a three-metrelong 100mm-deep aluminium tray, with holes for drainage, which sits on dedicated supports that are driven into the ground. Available in two widths, 320mm and 420mm, the trays are closed using galvanised steel lids, which can then be secured using special tamper-resistant screws. Using two different materials, aluminium for the trough and HSS420 high-strength steel for the lid, ensures that no magnetic field is set up. Where necessary, a 2.5-metre-long glass-reinforced polymer neutral section is inserted every 300 metres or so along the trough. The height of the lid above the ground - usually around 200mm - makes it easy for passengers to step over them if they

have to be evacuated from a stranded train. Indeed, the lid has a non-slip surface so it can even be used as an emergency walkway. The 100mm gap between the bottom of the trough and the ballast prevents the build-up of water and blown debris such as leaves, reducing the need for routine maintenance.

PHOTO: BI BASMO

FEATURE

Speedy installation After trial installations of five, 10 and 12 kilometres, the new system was specified for the main rail link from Copenhagen and Ringsted, a distance of 50km. This is when its installation speed was revealed for the first time. The 70mm-diameter tube, up to four metres long, which will support the carrier (saddle), is driven into the ballast/ground, with care being taken that it is upright. A template is used to identify the location of the next tube three metres away, so setting the correct separations is easy. Next, the saddles are fixed to the top of the tubes and adjusted for height. The trough is fastened in place between two adjacent saddles and the lid affixed. Using two teams, one setting tubes and one fastening the troughs to them, two kilometres of ducting was installed in a single, one-shift day. With the largest

aluminium trough weighing 14.4kg, and its corresponding steel lid 25.5kg, just two people can install and fix all of the components.

Now for Norway Recently, a six-kilometre installation has been supplied for the Nordlandsbanen railway line between Trondheim and Bodø in Norway. This line is noted for including Hell station, in the village of the same name, which has understandably become

a tourist attraction. Perhaps to combat the underworldly tone of the station name, one of the buildings is labelled ‘Godsexpedition’, although that is actually old Norwegian for Goods Handling. The PcP cable ducting system is now coming to the UK. Its patented design and elevated installation, which ensures good drainage, is complemented by its light weight and ease of installation. And no, it’s not the cable ducting from Hell, it’s from Vildbjerg!

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

FEATURE

Under the wires GRAHAM COOMBS

to Swindon

ome opportunities are simply too good to miss. One of these came about on 10 October when Rail Engineer was among a select group invited to join Network Rail chief executive Mark Carne on a tour to inspect the progress of electrification works on the Great Western route.

Arriving at London Paddington Platform 11, our ride for the day proved to be Network Rail’s inspection saloon 975025 ‘Caroline’, propelled by 37425 ‘Sir Robert McAlpine’. Caroline offers a unique opportunity for a group of people to share the driver’s view - on this trip he was Tim Howlett of DRS, somewhat surprisingly based in Stowmarket but one of a small group passed to drive from Caroline. As well as Mark Carne himself, our guides were Mike Gallop, director of route asset management, Graeme Tandy, the electrification delivery director, and route delivery director Paul Stanford.

overhead lines are a familiar sight here, but they have noticeably spread to cover more tracks and sidings, including a new depot at Old Oak Common. The old depot looks rather forlorn and it will not be long before demolition contractors move in to clear the site in readiness for an HS2 access shaft. The next major piece of civil engineering shows up at Acton Yard, where a diveunder removes the conflict between London-bound local services and the heavy freight trains at this key hub for aggregates.

Not just electrification As we prepared to get underway, the first thing that Mike Gallop stressed was that the massive project we were going to see is not just about electrification, that is just one part of the whole Great Western Route Modernisation. This became very apparent during the course of the journey, most obviously the massive fly-overs and diveunders. Less obvious, but equally tangible, are the track renewals and resignalling, while the considerable works for the future Elizabeth line services through Crossrail include platform lengthenings and new depots. Much of this can obviously be seen from any passing train, but the forward view from the inspection saloon really brought it into perspective. Leaving Paddington we passed the Crossrail portal to the right. With 20 years of Heathrow Express electrification, the

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

By Ealing, we had caught up with a Heathrow Connect stopping service and had a good view of the platform lengthening under way at most stations, a vital step as services increase from six to eight cars with electrification, and then to ten when Elizabeth line services start. At West Ealing, a fleet of Bombardier Electrostars stood in the new sidings in front of the Plasser UK on-track-machine works. We lost the Heathrow Connect service as it heads off at Stockley Junction, where another massive flyover has been constructed to give unconflicted access to the Heathrow Airport lines in both directions. The scale of this structure and the engineering involved is really only apparent from the front of the train.

FEATURE Series One to Reading On to new electrification now, with the ‘Series One’ overhead line equipment (OLE) structures standing prominently along the line with lots of steelwork. Graham politely described them as “chunky” and explained that this is quite deliberate in view of the reduced reliability of the East Coast electrification equipment which he considers was done at minimum construction levels to reduce costs and so makes it prone to extremes of weather. The new system developed for the Great Western is much more robust, with heavyweight structures and greater tension in the wires. It is also designed to be of modular construction, with common components, to ease maintenance. Some masts are noticeably higher than normal, to allow the Auto Transformer Feeder power cable to be carried up above the OLE itself. The electrification itself is all complete here, although each station we sped through showed signs of platform lengthening and other rebuilding and we passed occasional gangs out renewing fencing and finishing off other works. As we passed mile after mile of new structures, the scale of the whole project started to sink in. Someone asked what

the total tonnage of steelwork is, which was not immediately known, but Graham commented that delivering electrification is above all an exercise in logistics. After a fast dash down the main line, we slowed as the lines fanned out on the approaches to Reading, surrounded by a vast amount of buddleia. Reading is undoubtedly the most impressive part of the route modernisation, with the new station buildings looming above. Several rail enthusiasts recorded our passage for posterity as we powered onto the new flyover, the two clear tracks being a great change from the previous complicated pointwork and a major improvement to this busy junction. We passed over a container train heading for Southampton Docks through the newly-completed dive-under below - before this was built, one or other train would have needed to wait. Conflicting

moves between the various East-West and North-South flows have been virtually eliminated and an additional 50 trains each day now operate through Reading. Paul told us that there was an immediate and noticeable improvement in timekeeping when the dive-under opened earlier this year. Approaching Didcot, we crossed back to the Relief lines and, as we trundled through Didcot Parkway station, one of the new Hitachi IEPs under testing passed in the other direction, followed by another a few minutes later and a third shortly after that. This activity was not surprising, as the new trains were due to commence passenger services the following Monday. We paused at Foxhall Junction to allow an HST to pass, stopping alongside the main electrical feeder station for the central section of the route, ironically close to where Didcot Power Station once stood.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

FEATURE Steventon and beyond As we reached the end of the four-track section West of Didcot, the first gap in the wiring appeared. The overbridge at Steventon (pictured right) has proved to be particularly problematic. Not only is it a grade II listed structure, but the need for maximum wire height at adjacent level crossings prevents the specification of minimum contact wire height under the bridge. After evaluating all possible options, it was concluded that a replacement bridge was the only feasible solution. Although Network Rail has been in discussion with all relevant stakeholders since 2013, Listed Building Consent (LBC) has yet to be obtained. Because of this, it is now not possible to reconstruct the bridge before 2018, when electric train services are due to start. As a temporary solution, trains will have to lower their pantographs under the bridge and be subject to a speed restriction, perhaps as low as 60mph. It is anticipated that, subject to LBC approval, the bridge will be reconstructed in 2019 or soon afterwards. Beyond Steventon, the electrification is again complete. We were routed into the freight loop at Wantage Road, a four-track section restored for the now-disappeared Didcot coal traffic but still proving very useful. We were running nine or ten minutes ahead of time, and the signalman apparently had second thoughts and gave us a green signal back out on to the main line. The OLE soon started to become less complete, with some gaps in the wiring, then a long section with the fittings hanging ready for the wires and finally lengths where only the masts were present. The last part of our journey into Swindon showed no signs at all of electrification, until the huge main depot appeared on the left, with a wide range of

modular construction train units, covering the different activities such as piling, mast erection and wiring. As we crossed over to the loop platform, the Electrification Training Centre on the right was pointed out, a £10 million facility opened in 2016 where apprentices are trained in the skills necessary to install and maintain electrification equipment. So how is the electrification progressing? Since June 2017, electric services have run as far as Maidenhead, with the section between Reading and Didcot also commissioned and being used for testing. The section between Maidenhead and Reading will be energised during October but is not yet commissioned; extensive testing is now under way. The plan is for electrification to be fully commissioned through to Didcot ready for services to commence in January 2018. The problems encountered in the early stages of the Great Western Electrification programme have been well documented, so is the programme now back on track? Mark Carne said yes: “It is a case of once you know what you are doing… In the last two years we have done everything we said we were going to do.” Graeme Tandy explained that many lessons have been learnt, not least the importance of getting the design stage right. “We ended up developing the new OLE system at the same time as trying to deliver it, which was clearly not good,” he commented. “And the piling stage was much more complicated than expected

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

- we now know working in the ground is not predictable. But we are now two-thirds complete to Cardiff, meeting all delivery dates and working the most efficiently ever.” There is no doubt that the Great Western Route Modernisation is well on the way to providing a much-improved railway for both passengers and freight, and the electrification is a key part of that. If the final stages of the programme are delivered as effectively as is expected, this could go a long way towards restoring confidence in main line electrification and getting some of the deferred projects back on the agenda. Editor’s note: On 7 October, passengers were advised that there would be no trains between Maidenhead, Reading and Didcot over the weekend of 14/15 October. Network Rail explained that this was because more testing of overhead line equipment was needed before the Maidenhead to Reading section could be energised.

Focus on Caroline Built at Eastleigh in 1958 as a Hastings line DEMU restaurant car, 975025 Caroline only spent six years in passenger traffic before being stored as surplus to requirements. In 1969, she was converted into the Southern Region general manager’s saloon, and fitted with SR multiple-unit driving controls, often working with a Class 33. As well as inspections, the saloon car has had an interesting history. She was occasionally also used for VIP traffic, notably for the Prince Charles and Diana wedding train and for the visit of Pope John Paul II in 1982. She was also the first standard gauge train to enter the Channel Tunnel, carrying members of the Parliamentary All-Party Channel Tunnel Group on 2 October 1992. In 1999, she was transferred to Network Rail and received her name, undergoing a thorough overhaul at Fragonset Railways including conversion to conventional loco controls.

www.datum-group.com

Critical Rail Temperature Monitoring & Dynamic Track Void Monitoring Monitor track voiding and critical rail temperature remotely. Our Network Rail approved RailtempMate and VoidMate systems provide Permanent Way managers with continuous access to live data via smartphone, tablet or computer. Installed in seconds, compact, portable and robust, the monitoring equipment is designed for the rail environment and solar powered for long-term deployment. RailtempMate and VoidMate provide crucial information about the presence of track voiding and rail track temperature including alerts when limits are reached.

Network Rail Approved PA05 / 05507 - RailtempMate PA05 / 06798 - VoidMate

Cable free Remote controlled Simple to install Compact and portable Configurable alarm settings Removes requirements for track access

RailtempMate CRT MONITOR

VoidMate

T R AC K VO I D M O N I TO R

Any questions? Please call us +44 (0)161 797 5511

MADE IN THE UK

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT

ou can always tell a major construction site. There are acres of bare earth, often rutted and with stones sticking out of it, dirt tracks carved into the landscape by the passage of countless heavy machines, and weeds starting to appear in the more neglected corners. Finally, after construction is finished, the whole lot gets smoothed off and grass is planted, along with a few trees with those plastic tubes round them for protection, returning the site “back to nature”. However, it isn’t always like that. One of the major railway construction sites in recent years has been the Bermondsey dive-under, a joint project by Network Rail and partners Skanska and Ramboll to untangle the tracks approaching London Bridge station as part of the Thameslink programme. This £50 million project began construction in 2012 and was completed for hand over to maintenance in April 2017. At the height of construction, the project employed 45 office staff and 200 site personnel including graduates and operatives from the local area. Rail Engineer covered its construction on several occasions. Before it was built, train lines to Sussex and Kent criss-crossed over each other at a series of flat junctions, causing delays and limiting the number of trains that could travel per hour. Demolition and reconstruction of the 180-year-old brick arch

viaduct created new infrastructure that will allow designated lines for Southeastern trains to Kent and Southern trains to Sussex to ‘dive under’ new Thameslink lines from January 2018, reducing delays and increasing reliability for passengers.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

at Bermondsey

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT Sustainable project

Green walls replace Japanese Knotweed What may surprise readers is that the construction of the Bermondsey dive-under has increased biodiversity in the urban area of Bermondsey by 113 per cent and has won the team a coveted CEEQUAL ‘Excellent’ award. Prior to the beginning of construction in 2012, the Bermondsey site had limited botanical diversity and low conservation value. It was scattered with the previous tenant’s debris and the soil was heavily contaminated with asbestos, Japanese Knotweed and hydrocarbons. The extent of this contamination meant only 0.1 hectares of the original 1.5 hectares of vegetation could be retained. The project removed over 21,900 tonnes of contaminated material and eradicated the Japanese Knotweed. To increase biodiversity, wildflower planting and green walls were installed to offset vegetation lost in the process of removing the contaminated soils. In total, the project installed 765 square metres of green walls under arches and access ramps, areas that would otherwise be void space, and planted wildflowers on the railway embankments. This created green corridors and stepping-stones to the wider area, leaving a fantastic legacy both environmentally and aesthetically for the local community.

However, this improvement in biodiversity is only the most visible part of various activities to produce a sustainable design that significantly reduced carbon, materials, waste and cost. For example, the number of piles was reduced from 1,600 to 1,000 decreasing the total by over 175 tonnes and the overall length by 10,000 metres. Changing the specification for a structural steel bridge from painted steel to weathered steel led to almost halving the total costs over the bridge’s lifetime, through lower initial costs and elimination of maintenance materials. The Bermondsey dive-under also produced a materials management plan that allowed material from the demolition of the viaduct arches to be reused onsite. This resulted in a total of 31,500m3 of material being reused on site, reducing the costs of fill material and waste removal while also minimising lorry movements through the local community. Creating wildlife diversity and new green spaces wasn’t the only way in which the project team engaged with the local community. The team also upgraded the garden in the Lewisham Community Centre, refurbished a youth club in a local church and volunteered on the XLP youth charity bus. All of this work resulted in excellent community relations, fewer complaints, positive media coverage on TV and newspapers, and left a positive legacy within the community. The success of these initiatives resulted in CEEQUAL, the international evidence-based sustainability assessment, rating and awards scheme for civil engineering, awarding the project a Whole Team Award with an ‘Excellent’ rating of 96.6 per cent. The assessors commented that “the project leaves a fantastic legacy both environmentally and aesthetically for the local community”. It had been a whole-team effort. Skanska project manager Charl de Kock said: “We were able to achieve this excellent CEEQUAL score due to us embedding a sustainable approach from the design stage through to the delivery of the project. This success is testament to the commitment to sustainability from our client, Network Rail, our design partner, Ramboll, and all our other contracting partners and supply chain.” So next time you see a row of saplings protected by plastic tubes on a recently completed site, remember what can be achieved with a little thought and effort. This article ‘stolen with pride’ from Network Rail and CEEQUAL.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT

From newts to knotweed Managing the ecology of the railway

ird nesting season is over, leaf fall is already in full swing and nature’s life cycles are slowing down in preparation for winter. Network Rail and the train operating companies work extremely hard throughout the year to reduce the effect of delays on services and mitigate autumn and winter delays, including the ongoing management of trees and vegetation growing alongside the railway. When broad leaf trees lose their leaves, complications arise with slippery platforms and Teflon-like coatings are deposited on the rail tracks, causing railway delays. The railway environment is constantly changing as trees and vegetation grow relentlessly, both alongside the railway and in close proximity to overhead cables. Add to this the tens of thousands of trees growing along thousands of hectares of the national network, tonnes of leaves falling onto the railway annually and storms upsetting roots resulting in trees and branches falling onto the lines, and it’s easy to see how damage and delays occur.

Common Pipistrelle bat.

Bats and badgers

Many protected species, including birds, badgers, hazel dormice, great crested newts and lots of other animals, call these environments home. Within any site, large or small, it is essential to identify the presence of protected species. For this, a specialist is usually called in, one with the expertise and manpower to conduct the survey and report on its findings. One such is Ground Control, an Essexbased company that operates nationally, Great Crested newt. having acquired the UPM Tilhill rail business in 2012. RISQS approved for vegetation management, fencing, weed control and ecology, the company offers advice to customers based on best practice, and once an invasive species is identified, has the resources to undertake further investigative works.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

As Ground Control has its own in-house design department, which includes many highly skilled ecologists, it is able to work alongside clients to provide: »» Environmental impact assessments; »» Extended phase 1 habitat surveys; »» Protected species surveys; »» Species mitigation and translocation; »» BREEAM assessments; »» Ecological clerk of works. Working within the National Planning Policy Framework, the company delivers across all stages of the planning approval and development process, providing accurate GIS, CAD and GPS spatiallyreferenced data and drawings.

Invasive species While the threat to wildlife is being managed, over the last 40 years or so, a significant group of invasive nonnative species has become established throughout the network. Invasive species continue to pose a significant threat to the environment. In fact, invasive non-native species are now recognised as the second biggest threat to biodiversity worldwide, which is why it is all the more important to be able to distinguish the threats. Japanese Knotweed, an extremely aggressive, alienating species listed by the World Conservative Union as one of the most invasive species due to its rapid growth (up to 20 centimetres a day), is extremely difficult to remove. From an ecological point of view, it destroys the

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT Japanese Knotweed.

habitats of native species, putting bio-regions at notable risk, which is subsequently a threat to the environment. Overall, it is detrimental to buildings and land, blocking footpaths, damaging concrete, tarmac and the stability of riverbanks. Japanese Knotweed is a huge threat, not only to the landscaping industry, but to many other vertical sectors, ranging from railway networks to highways, water networks and the property industry. Today, invasive species are causing structural damage to the tune of £2.1 billion per year, according to figures from the Environment Agency and the Department of the Regions. The problem is so severe that the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors now surveys for Japanese Knotweed in or near the property as part of its mortgage survey. If it is found to be present, not only will the property be devalued by around 40 per cent, neighbouring properties’ values will be affected, often resulting in litigation.

Although Japanese Knotweed is the most pernicious to control, it is not alone. Another invasive species known to cause detrimental damage is Himalayan Balsam, which spreads its seed through biological ‘explosions’. These seeds can remain viable for five years, meaning a long-term treatment regime is crucial. Giant Hogweed contains sap that can cause horrific blisters when in contact with skin. However, it is susceptible to herbicide if treated correctly.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT

(Above) Giant Hogweed. (Inset) Himalayan Balsam.

To combat this threat, Ground Control’s services include: »» Pre-development site surveys; »» Biosecurity; »» The legislative landscape and organisations’ legal obligations; »» Full technical support and advice; »» Long-term treatment guarantees; »» Internal staff training for customers; »» Lantra-registered training. Timing of treatment, whether for Knotweed or other invasive species, is critical for achieving acceptable levels of controland early engagement is recommended. Japanese Knotweed is an herbaceous species, which lies dormant throughout the winter, making it incredibly difficult to pick up during these months. But that’s not all, the species will start to appear in mid-to-late March and is most active throughout the summer growing season. To be able to spot any invasive species on and around rail networks, knowing what they look like is crucial. Ground Control is currently supporting Network Rail staff to ensure they possess the knowledge of what to look for when identifying

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

invasive species. This includes their natural habitats, what environmental factors increase their growth and most importantly, the warning signs. This way, rail engineers and other staff will know what they are looking for during their everyday activities, speeding up the process of treating it before it impacts on such areas as neighbouring cities and towns. Following identification, the next step is to call in the experts. Ground Control can assist rail networks in creating a long-term strategy that includes a sustained annual tri-treatment chemical control regime. With this comes the saving of muchneeded money in comparison with the likely significant cost of having to dig up and remove the invasive species from around and sometimes even underneath the rail tracks.

Vegetation management Ground Control has worked for many years in the field of arboriculture; surveying and assessing the conditions of trees to establish whether they are dead, dying or diseased, and where necessary, managing them in accordance with BS3998:2010 (Tree Work,

Recommendations). The rail network requires the same management activities to avoid disruption, so clearing vegetation and trees lineside is critical. The cost of disruption is not easily calculated to the economy, but is likely to be significant. Industry-standard chainsaw and chipping techniques are applied to clearance work but, after some recent investments, the process is now being mechanised. With the right conditions on track and around access to sites, this can greatly speed up the rate of clearance, reducing the number of workers in or around the railway environment. Ground Control is both an innovator and pioneer of technology, delivering a range of services including grounds maintenance, winter maintenance, tree works and vegetation management, soft and hard landscaping, ecology, design and build, pest control, fencing and roofing services. Ecology and environment concerns remain at the forefront of all that the company does and, as environmental awareness remains topical in today’s society, it is keen to be sustainable when it comes to wildlife and our surroundings. Ground Control’s managers are expertly trained to work across the range of possible systems and site types to ensure that customers continue to enjoy their services efficiently throughout the year.

Trojan Services Ltd formed an alliance with Trackwork Ltd. in June 2017 - TroTrack Composites. TroTrack will combine the innovation of the Trojan team with the established rail industry experience of Trackwork to deliver existing and new recycled polymer products in the U.K. ■ British designed and British manufactured ■ Over 1 million units supplied and installed in the UK infrastructure ■ Manufactured using 100% recycled polymer from end of life vehicles

■ Significantly lighter than the equivalent Concrete Troughing, to comply with HSE manual handling regulations ■ In Network Rail Ergonomics study, TroTrof C1/9 was installed over 4 times quicker than concrete equivalent ■ Units are designed to interface with concrete equivalent troughing ■ Products offer excellent impact resistance, quality and durability ■ Products are driven by innovation, environment and sustainability TM

Sales/General: +44 845 074 0407 Email: info@trojan-services.com www.trojan-services.com

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT

Sustainability and the fallout from scrapped electrification plans

Anthony Perret (RSSB) addresses the Rail Sustainability Summit.

he fallout from the Government’s decision to scrap three major electrification projects, in Wales, the Midlands and the North, is inevitably a hot topic on the subject of sustainability. Mary Creagh MP, chair of the environmental audit committee, voiced her frustrations as keynote speaker at the Rail Sustainability Summit in September, commenting: “We could have HS3, HS4 and HS5 by the time they electrify the Great Western main line.”

STEWART THORPE

Electrification A vocal opponent of transport secretary Chris Grayling’s summer announcements, Mary used the example of the electrification programme to raise her concerns that sustainability is falling down the Government’s agenda. Brexit, she added, is the biggest threat to environmental rights in 40 years, and the industry must remain vigilant and focused, as the public did not vote to see the environment degraded. As chair of Parliament’s environmental audit committee, Mary assesses if governmental bodies are adequately contributing to environmental protection and sustainable development. A report labelled ‘Meeting Carbon Budgets: Closing the policy gap’, which her committee helped to produce in June, noted that the Government isn’t on track to meet its own emission targets. Overall, UK greenhouse gas emissions are 42 per cent lower than in 1990, around halfway to its 2050 commitments, but progress is stalling and new policies are urgently needed. The report also found that transport emissions are a particular issue, as these figures are rising.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Not only does the railway contribute to climate change, it can be critically disabled by products of climate change too, demonstrated by such events as flooding, erosion, landslips, overheated tracks and overheated power lines. The network’s vulnerability was emphasised by Storm Angus last winter, with ballast wash-aways in Exeter, and by storms in 2014, which battered the Devon coast and caused Dawlish sea wall to collapse under the railway line, cutting Cornwall and much of Devon off from the rest of the UK.

Network Rail describes electrification as essential for introducing faster, greener and more reliable train journeys. The numerous delays and failures have destroyed trust, added Mary, but there is much more to be lost from the schemes. James Howles is the rail director of BakerHicks, the design subsidiary of Morgan Sindall Group and a key supporter of the summit. He has 15 years’ experience in the rail sector and examined the negative impact that the cancelled electrification programme will have on rolling stock, people and the environment in the North.

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT Safety’s poor sister

Mary Creagh MP. Run by Arriva UK Trains, the Northern franchise is to order 281 new vehicles by 2020, half of which will be electrically powered and half diesel. Meanwhile, First Group’s TransPennine Express franchise is to order 220 vehicles, a mixture of electric and bi-mode trains. James commented that the impact of this new rolling stock on sustainability will be “significantly compromised” without the equivalent infrastructure development. It may mark the end of the Pacers on those franchises but it also means that, while diesel cars are on a finite programme of retirement, railways are left with the prospect of diesel-powered trains running on the network indefinitely. James stressed that cancelling electrification is a backwards step for the North and urged the soon-to-be launched devolved authority Transport for the North to prepare for, and fight, the case for a more sustainable way forward. Bombardier’s head of engineering for Crossrail, Mark Ellis, added that electrification would have killed bi-mode trains, but that they are now a necessity. Working from the rolling stock manufacturer’s Litchurch Lane facility, Mark has worked on the development of the Aventra programme and revealed it was intended to be an electrical multiple unit only, but that the team had to return to the drawing board. Nevertheless, Bombardier will be looking at exporting the resulting bi-modes. Visiting Bombardier’s Derby neighbour Rolls Royce to look at alternative technologies, Mark said that fuel cells would probably not be ready for another ten years. Therefore, a diesel engine in a bi-mode with an electrical system is currently the best solution.

Since the last Rail Sustainability Summit on 8 November 2016 the day of the United States’ presidential election - there has been a lot of political change, but the need for sustainable economies and a sustainable rail sector has not changed. So noted returning host Adam Crossley, who works as environment director for one of the summit’s key supporters, Skanksa. The conversation around sustainability has only gained prominence in recent years. This is emphasised by the fact it was only the third Rail Sustainability Summit and that Network Rail this year held its first sustainable leaders conference, revealed by its environmental systems manager Rebecca Harris. As a result, sustainability has been viewed as the poor sister to safety. There is, of course, more to sustainability than just environmental considerations. Two other key areas are economy, such as value for money and economic growth, and society, including wellbeing and communities. Thus, sustainability is about getting the right balance between the needs of the environment, the economy and society. According to the United Nations, any development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs is classed as sustainable development. In the rail-franchising programme, sustainability is promoted through such tools as the mandatory sustainable development strategy for franchise bidders, who must also set baseline environmental targets. Using the example of the recently awarded South Western franchise, Department for Transport’s head of stations policy Peter Batten said the department rewards bidders who set out innovative proposals to exceed these targets. In First MTR’s case, innovation rather than finances was the deciding factor.

Laura Russell (HS2).

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT Adam Crossley (Skanska) chaired the sessions.

Ultimately, the length of franchises are barriers to innovation, Peter said, because they do not incentivise train operating companies (TOCs) to introduce new ideas or methods as they are given a clear mandate. But GTR Thameslink’s head of environment Jason Brooker disagreed. He argued that TOCs need lengthier franchise agreements, because that is in the very essence of sustainability. The idea of potentially conflicting or contrasting sustainability strategies every seven years - the length of the Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise - isn’t sustainable in nature, especially considering the tight - or in his case nonexistent - budget they have to work with. Another factor that holds sustainability back, as raised by RSSB’s head of sustainable development Anthony Perret, is that sustainability lacks the same “burning platform” that safety did in the post-privatisation landscape.

Aventra Returning to Bombardier’s Aventra platform, Mark Ellis explained the sustainable elements that have shaped its new family of trains. Starting in the design phase, Bombardier took an active decision to concentrate on lifecycle rather than initial cost. The design uses FLEXX eco bogies, reducing the mass of the train and, resultantly, its energy usage and noise. The train’s paint is water-based, stringent requirements have been issued to suppliers on re-usable packaging equipment and the trains can feature driver advisory systems (DAS) and intelligent stabling functions as well. DAS

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

enables drivers to monitor the timetabled path of a train to ascertain whether the train will reach its next timing point on schedule, and to give an advisory speed for this to be achieved, while the intelligent stabling functions can automatically shut a train down, including lowering pantographs, when it is not in service. Once the Aventras reach their end of life, Bombardier is targeting a recoverability of at least 95 per cent. This is based on data from its predecessor, the Electrostars, which had a recyclability rate of 90.2 per cent and recoverability of 95.2 per cent. Recoverability is defined by Bombardier as the percentage of materials that can be diverted from the end-of-life stream to be material recycled or energy recovered. In summary, Bombardier put sustainability at the heart of the Aventra’s lifecycle.

Stealing with pride Other speakers shared their experiences on various approaches to sustainability. Rail Delivery Group’s head of railway planning Mary Gaynor said that it can be difficult to try radical technologies on railways, because of the magnitude and severity of problems that could occur. The industry should therefore “steal with pride” from other sectors, to look at best practices and learn from them. Drawing from his work on projects with the National Grid and Yorkshire Water, AECOM’s Robert Spencer touched on developing an understanding of natural capital for the benefit of the environment and finances. By measuring the strengths of natural capital - woodlands, for example, which absorb rain water and potentially prevent houses from

James Howles (BakerHicks).

SUSTAINABILITY/ENVIRONMENT

being flooded - landowners can have a proactive approach to managing environmental impact and see them as assets rather than liabilities. Network Rail’s Sarah Borien explored one of the three areas of sustainability that many didn’t touch on - society, and social performance - looking at health and wellbeing, volunteering and local labour and procurement. The final speaker on this topic was Willy Bontinck, who travelled from Belgium on Eurostar for the conference. Representing the International Union of Railways (UIC), he spoke about sustainability more broadly and looked at the positives of rail sustainability. For example, he revealed that railways consume only 1.3 per cent of all energy used in the transport sector, but they deliver 9.1 per cent of all journeys, emphasising how energy efficient rail is compared to other modes of transport.

Crossrail 2’s consents and environment manager Nick Giesler said that they hope to kick off the environmental impact assessment soon with an attitude of “what they can fix” in mind, designingin sustainability from scratch, as well as synergising stations into communities and green spaces. Bringing together the end-to-end supply chain, the Rail Sustainability Summit provided the perfect opportunity to share best practice and give sustainability the important platform it needs. Thanks to the summit’s hosts, Addleshaw Goddard, and to Craig Hales, rail sustainability manager at Skanksa, and Nick Craven, sustainable development manager at UIC, for helping to put the programme together.

Future Transport for London’s sustainability coordinator Helen Woolston disclosed that it does not have a single strategy on the subject, but rather it is a key part of the mainstream strategy. Representatives from HS2 and Crossrail 2 also spoke about how sustainability is being embedded into these huge infrastructure projects from day one. HS2’s sustainability manager Laura Russell has been making sure that - as well as other forms of public transport - the high-speed line will link into existing walking and cycling networks, especially at Euston station. A Lincolnshire nursery has also procured seven billion trees and shrubs as part of planting on Phase One to ensure the impact it has is reduced. Laura added that HS2 will be re-using 86 per cent of the 130 million tonnes of excavated material Crossrail generated ‘only’ eight million - to build the line, but it is also working with the Environment Agency to use it for flood defence schemes.

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

CAREERS

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

CAREERS

Rail Engineer | Issue 157 | November 2017

Unlocking capacity and improving reliability Helping your passengers travel when they choose â&#x20AC;&#x201C; safely and reliably.

As the need for capacity increases, Siemensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; digital solutions allow optimal use of infrastructure. Trains can run more frequently, data can be used to predict and prevent failure and disruption, and control centres can make decisions that improve service across the network. Passengers are given the latest information to streamline their journeys.

siemens.co.uk/digitalrailway