Rail Engineer - Issue 179 - November 2019

by rail engineers for rail engineers

NOVEMBER 2019 – ISSUE 179

The quest

for a cleaner railway

SEVEN INTO FOUR DOES GO The rebuilding of Thickley Wood footbridge over the Stockton to Darlington railway turned three arches into an embankment.

BACK TO PORTALS

HS2 WAY OUT IN FRONT

Why headspans were necessary, how resilience has suffered, and the decision to go back to portals.

High-speed tunnels suffer from sonic boom, Japanese trains have long noses, the UK has a test rig in Derby.

www.railengineer.co.uk

ROLLING STOCK/ DEPOTS

EXPERIENCE WORKING FOR YOU

At Hitachi, high speed trains are in our DNA. From our extensive delivery record in Japan to our Class 395 Javelin™ fleet operating across HS1, we understand how important it is to connect cities and people using innovative solutions that work out‑of‑the‑box. hitachirail.com

HitachiRailEU

38 CONTENTS

52

06|

News

10|

The quest for a cleaner railway

16|

Locos go bi- and tri-mode

3

GTR trains, Birmingham trams, Port Talbot fatalities, Network Rail enhancement pipeline.

Alternative power sources such as batteries and hydrogen will make the railway greener than ever.

Keith Fender compares and contrasts the latest locomotives from Europe’s leading manufacturers.

16

24|

A little sand in the right place works wonders

In part 3 of this series, Malcolm Dobell reports on the latest trials on Birmingham's Cross-City line.

42 26|

If it’s Tuesday, it must be Olomouc

58|

Cornwall’s branch lines

34

On the up down under

60|

Enhanced intrusion management through innovation

38|

New Tyne & Wear depot at Howdon

62|

Ferriby to Gilberdyke resignalling

42|

Dawlish sea wall – the start of a 100-year plan

66|

ECML upgrade – progress and plans for the future

46|

Gateline throughput at stations

70|

Network Rail’s digital ETCS signalling long-term deployment plan

48|

Restoring the roof at Aberdeen station

74|

Brits at Trako

52|

Cornwall’s capacity triumph

78|

Where are we now?

David Shirres experienced the delights of the IMechE Annual Technical Tour.

Zonegreen’s depot protection system installed at Packenham East depot, Melbourne, Australia.

With the metro’s only depot due to be demolished and rebuilt, Buckingham is building a temporary one.

Now the tourist season is over, Collin Carr checks on the progress being made on Devon’s sea defences.

ByteToken has developed a ticket gate that ‘reads’ tickets while they are still in passengers’ pockets

Twinfix non-fragile panels are used to replace this busy station’s roof, which dates from 1913.

Clive Kessell finds out whether last year’s capacity improvements had the desired result.

While he was there, Clive also checked out Cornwall’s picturesque branches.

How Vortex IOT’s RODIO sensor system monitors and detects intrusions onto the railway.

Paul Darlington reports on the F2G, delivered by Hitachi Rail STS, Linbrooke Services and Arup.

Work to improve the resilience of the East Coast main line at King’s Cross and further north.

Looking forward to control periods 7 and 8 so as to determine the workload to come.

Europe’s largest rail industry show of the year boasted a strong British presence.

Twenty years on, Rod Muttram considers the lessons learned from the Ladbroke Grove accident.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

ELLIS IS PROUD TO PRESENT ITS RANGE OF STANDARD AND BESPOKE PRODUCTS, TAILORED TO THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS OF THE RAIL INDUSTRY.

Cable Cleats Steel Cable Hangers Plastic Cable Hangers Complete Cable Management Solutions Bespoke Solutions

Ellis Patents Ltd. High Street, Rillington, Malton North Yorkshire, YO17 8LA United Kingdom

T. +44 (0)1944 758395 F. +44 (0)1944 758808 sales@ellispatents.co.uk www.ellispatents.co.uk

@ELLISPATENTS #HOLDINGPOWER

RAIL ENGINEER MAGAZINE

EDITORIAL

An anniversary to remember October saw the twentieth anniversary of the tragic Ladbroke Grove train crash, in which 31 people died and 227 were hospitalised after signal SN109 was passed at danger resulting in a 130mph head-on collision. This accident was particularly awful as indications that there was a high likelihood of such a crash had been ignored. Following the Paddington resignalling in the early nineties, there had been an abnormally high 67 SPADs (signals passed at danger) in the area, of which eight were at SN109.

In one of these, a train overshot SN109 by over 400 yards before stopping clear of the fouling point and so narrowly avoided the potential head-on collision that occurred twenty months later. In his report, Lord Cullen considered that there was a “dangerously complacent attitude to SPADs as being simply a matter of driver error”.

The Cullen report was a watershed for the industry. As well as identifying the issues that led to the Ladbroke Grove accident, such as poor signal sighting and inadequate driver route knowledge training, its broader review of railway safety led to the creation of RSSB and RIAB. Moreover, the shock of the industry’s failings being exposed to harsh media scrutiny helped drive the necessary improvements in safety culture.

In the 20 years prior to Ladbroke Grove, SPADs had caused nine fatal train accidents. In the last 20 years there have been no such accidents. Much work has been done to improve UK railway safety over this period. With the last fatal train accident occurring 12 years ago at Grayrigg, Britain’s railways are now the safest in Europe.

Yet there is no room for complacency. If this record is to be maintained, the rail industry must not forget the lessons from Ladbroke Grove, Clapham Junction and other significant accidents.

Ensuring that trains can stop in poor adhesion conditions is an important aspect of SPAD prevention, one which Malcolm Dobell has been investigating. In the third of a series of articles on variable rate sanders, he reports on a trial on Birmingham’s Cross-City line which needed 1.5 kilometres of paper tape and a temporary additional compressed air tank. All concerned were suitably impressed.

The reduction in SPAD accidents is largely due to the fitment of Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS), throughout the network, within a few years of publication of a joint Cullen/Uff report into train protection systems published in 2001. In a feature first published in IRSE News, Rod Muttram explains that TPWS was recommended as the short-term system and why ETCS is now the only way forward. At the time, it was expected that ETCS would be implemented on East Coast, West Coast and Great Western main lines by 2008.

Paul Darlington also explains why ETCS is also the only way forward for the replacement of the 86 per cent of signalling assets that are expected to be life expired in the next 20 years. This is because ETCS, without signals, is estimated to be 75 per cent of the cost of conventional signalling. As it involves less work, this volume of renewals is within the annual deliverability ceiling. However, installing ETCS without lineside signals requires all trains that pass through ETCS-signalled areas to be ETCS fitted. Aligning ETCS rolling stock and resignalling programmes could be a challenge.

Future ETCS resignalling work will be much reduced if conventional resignalling schemes are ETCS ready. We report how this was done on the Ferriby to Gilberdyke resignalling scheme.

One of the next ETCS schemes will be the southern part of the East Coast main line, where signalling equipment is nearly life-expired and almost all its new trains are ETCS fitted. Although ETCS will provide some of the required increase in capacity benefit, this also requires infrastructure work at Kings Cross, Stevenage and Werrington Junction, as well as power supply enhancements, as explained in our East Coast upgrade feature.

Increased capacity in Cornwall is the subject of Clive Kessell’s article, which describes how the county will benefit from an improved timetable in December as a result of a project that made pragmatic use of existing signalboxes, shortened block sections and new telecoms links. The train service into Cornwall depends on the Dawlish sea wall, which is threatened by the sea and the unstable cliffs above. Collin Carr describes the work that is being done to ensure the resilience of the railway at Dawlish against increasingly extreme weather.

Nigel Wordsworth has been considering the developments in battery technology that enable passenger trains to travel for 50 kilometres beyond the wire. It remains to be seen whether batteries will ever power trains for longer distances, and it is doubtful whether they will ever power freight trains. Nevertheless, Keith Fender shows that there is a role for locomotive traction batteries in his comprehensive feature on European bi- and tri-mode locomotives.

Other reports from Europe are Nigel’s visit to Gdansk to experience Trako, apparently Europe’s second-biggest rail industry show, and my participation in the IMechE’s annual railway technical tour to the Czech Republic, Austria and Switzerland. There was much to learn DAVID from both events.

SHIRRES

RAIL ENGINEER EDITOR

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

5

6

THE TEAM

NEWS

Editor David Shirres david.shirres@railengineer.co.uk

Production Editor

GTR new train deliveries complete

Nigel Wordsworth nigel.wordsworth@railengineer.co.uk

Moorgate old and new - Class 313 (left) and its replacement, a Class 717.

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

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

Advertising Asif Ahmed

asif@rail-media.com

Chris Davies

chris@rail-media.com

Craig Smith craig@rail-media.com

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

01530 816 444

Website: www.railengineer.co.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 RailStaff Publications Limited and printed by PCP Ltd. © All rights reserved. No part of this magazine may be reproduced in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright owners.

Part of: ® www.rail-media.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

The five-year £2 billion programme to replace the aging Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) fleet with modern trains is finally complete.

With a total of 1,500 new carriages now delivered, the final moment came when Great Northern consigned to history the last of its 42-year-old Class 313 trains that operate on the Moorgate route. All are now modern Class 717s.

Since its launch in September 2014, GTR has overseen the introduction of four fleets of trains and expanded one other, transforming journeys for thousands of passengers: » 116 brand new Class 387/1 carriages (29 units) - initially used on the Thameslink network, now on Great Northern, operating as far as King’s Lynn; » 108 brand new Class 387/2 carriages (27 units) - serving Gatwick Express between Brighton, Gatwick and London Victoria; » 1,140 brand new Class 700 carriages (115 units) - serving the entire, expanded Thameslink network; » 150 brand new Class 717 carriages (25 units) - serving the Great Northern Moorgate route; » 12 Class 171 carriages (4 units) for Southern - adding to the existing fleet and facilitating the first longer 10-carriage services between Uckfield and London Bridge.

GTR has overseen what is thought to be the biggest cascade of rolling stock since privatisation - a total of more than 1,500 new carriages brought into the franchise, and almost 900 cascaded out. A further 880 were cascaded between routes within the network.

NEWS

Centenary celebrations Trams on the West Midlands Metro have reached Centenary Square, Birmingham, for the first time as testing begins on the Westside extension.

After announcing the milestone on 24 October, the Midland Metro Alliance - the organisation charged with delivering five tram extensions - said that trams will now run on the new track from Grand Central during overnight trials. Signalling, track and other infrastructure were to be tested during this period, which was expected to last for several weeks in preparation for the launch of passenger services in December. Daytime running, to allow the public to get used to trams travelling at low speeds through the city centre, was

also part of these plans.

Andy Street, mayor of the West Midlands and who travelled on one of those first test trains from Grand Central, said: “This project is on time and will, in December, be bringing passengers to the International Convention Centre, HSBC Bank and the Library of Birmingham.

“This latest addition to the line, which will soon be heading out along Broad Street towards Edgbaston, offers residents a genuinely viable alternative to the car in Birmingham city centre.

“With further extensions planned towards Birmingham Airport and a new Wednesbury to Brierley Hill line, our Metro network is expanding rapidly and helping to revolutionise transport across the West Midlands.”

When it launches later this year, the Westside extension will operate catenaryfree trams - a first for the UK in the modern era. The challenge of extending the tramway through the historic city centre led developers to pioneer the use of new battery technology.

www.jobson-james.co.uk/rail

We Are A Rail Specialist Insurance Broker (RISQS Link up approved)

SPECIALIST RAIL DEVEGETATION CONTRACTOR - £2M TURNOVER

WE INSURE • RRV and Plant Companies • S&T, S&C, SMTH, OLE and Civils contractors • Rolling Sock Turnkey Modifications companies • Manufacturers, Wholesalers and Installers of rail products • ROSCOs and TOCs supply chain • Rail Consultants, Surveyors and Engineering Companies WHY US? • Specialist Rail Knowledge • NEBOSH/Safety approach producing lower premiums • Contractual Liability checking • Better Technical advice • Specialist rail safety consultancy site audits funded by insurers

• The company had an excellent health and safety record however we felt this was not recognised by the current insurers.

• A 15 page detailed report was compiled explaining the companies safety investment and accreditations achieved.

• The result was improved cover with 32% premium saving.

£12,351 SAVING

ON INSURANCE PREMIUM

15-PAGE Contact Keven Parker on 07816 283949 / 0121 4528717 / 0207 9839039 Email: Keven.parker@jobson-james.co.uk

RISK REPORT TO

INSURERS

£2M

TURNOVER

32%

SAVING

HAPPY TO RECOMMEND

Offices in London and Birmingham. Nationwide coverage.

Jobson James Insurance Brokers Limited are authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

7

8

NEWS

Interim report on Port Talbot track worker fatalities Network Rail has released an interim report into the fatalities that occurred at Margam, near Port Talbot in South Wales, on 3 July 2019.

It looks into what happened on the day and why and how the accident occurred. The full report, which will be released in a couple of months, will explore the underlying causes and will make relevant recommendations.

On the day in question, thirteen permanent way staff left Port Talbot depot to work at Margam (20 mins away). They arrived just after 08:00, whereupon the team split into two, with one team of seven working in a planned line blockage at Margam Moor while the other group of six deployed to Margam East Junction.

Some time later, three of the six were using a petrol-engine impact driver to tighten bolts in a crossing. They were all wearing ear defenders due to the high noise levels. When a bolt seized, they all became focussed on the task with no-one looking out.

Unnoticed, a GWR train approached the site at approximately 70mph. Two men, Gareth Delbridge, 64, and Michael (Spike) Lewis, 58, were struck and fatally injured while the third escaped impact with just inches to spare.

It is uncertain whether a series of short high tone warnings, rather than continuous sounding of the low tone, could have resulted in the track workers becoming aware of the train earlier.

Various other anomalies are included in the report. These include: » The Safe Work Pack did not specify all of the work and how it was to be safely undertaken; » The COSS was only appointed that morning; » The COSS had his authority undermined - the PIC didn’t believe a distant lookout was needed; » The work was started in the morning, not the afternoon as planned;

How did it happen?

Work had been planned to take place at the Margam East Junction site during the afternoon in a line blockage. But the safe work pack contained a second option, to work with unassisted lookouts that afternoon.

One of the six team members was asked to be the Person in Charge (PIC).

He appointed another team member as the COSS (Controller of Site Safety).

» There was no safe system of work in place; » The COSS was not with the group involved when the accident occurred; » The group all became focussed on the task and were unaware of an approaching train; » The wide experience of the closely-knit group and familiarity with each other potentially affected their perception of risk.

The COSS was told to use the second system in the safe work pack and

There are still facts to be determined, and questions to be answered,

appointed distant and site lookouts. The team of six on site at Margam East

which will hopefully be included in the full report when it is published. In

Junction decided to do extra work that wasn’t in the plan, some of which

addition, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) is conducting its own

involved noisy plant to maintain bolts in a crossing.

report into the accident, though these typically take around 10 months to be

A group of three, including the COSS, site lookout and another, moved about 150 yards away, leaving their colleagues to wait for their return.

However, the three left at the points started to work on the crossing bolts.

issued.

The Office of Rail and Road (ORR) has also stated that it is undertaking an investigation.

There was no appointed COSS with them, no safe system of work and no distant lookout in place.

The Person in Charge said he would look out then became involved in the work, focussing on the bolts. None of them saw the train coming.

The train driver initially gave warning to the track workers using the high

Reaction On the release of the interim report, Martin Frobisher, Network Rail’s safety director, said: “The whole railway family shares the loss of Gareth and Spike. Nothing will lessen the pain but understanding what went wrong and

and low tone of the train horn but thereafter used the low tone for two long,

learning from that will, I hope, go some way to reassure all those affected

continuous blasts as the train approached the work group. The investigation

that we will do all we can to stop it ever happening again.

team note the requirement in the Rule Book for the high tone to be used

“Today is the first step in that journey as we share an initial investigation

to give an urgent warning to anyone on or dangerously near to the line.

into what happened. We will continue for several months to look deeper into

The Rule Book specifies: “Give a series of short, urgent danger warnings to

the root causes before we make recommendations for our organisation and

anyone…who does not…appear to move clear out of the way of the train.”

all of our people for the future.”

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

NEWS

Rail Network Enhancement Pileline published The Department for Transport (DfT) has finally published a list of rail enhancement projects in its updated Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline (RNEP).

When it announced its funding

Network Rail, the DfT has, until now,

of Network Rail in Control Period

refused to confirm which projects

6 (CP6 - 1 April 2019 to 31 March

were in the pipeline. This caused

2024), enhancements, other than

some consternation amongst the

those already underway, were not

supply chain, which wanted to

included. In future, Network Rail

ensure that skills and resources

would have to ‘bid’ for those and

would be available when required.

the DfT and Treasury would decide which ones to fund.

Provision was made in the CP6

There is therefore some relief

performance on the Castlefield

upgrade projects.”

Schemes go through four decision gateways before the funding is

that the DfT has now published

approved for Network Rail to

its list of those favoured projects.

deliver them:

cross-Manchester Corridor are on this list.

Stage 2 - Develop

Decision to Initiate takes the

A further 22 projects are

settlement for funding to prepare

Darren Caplan, chief executive of

the business cases and bids for

the Railway Industry Association

scheme into the pipeline and

currently under development.

enhancements, but it would not

(RIA), said: “This is a really positive

unlocks funding for a Strategic

These include the Western Rail

be a forgone conclusion that

development announced today

Outline Business Case (SOBC).

Access to Heathrow, a new

any particular scheme would be

by Transport Secretary Grant

accepted and funded.

Shapps and we welcome this timely

on the SOBC and authorises

the redevelopment of Euston

intervention at the Transport Select

development work towards a single

Conventional Station.

Committee.

viable option and to put together

Pulling major projects out of the control period cycle would allow each one to be funded properly,

“The Railway Industry Association

Decision to Develop builds

the Outline Business Case.

station at Cambridge South and

Stage 3 - Design

with thorough planning, and

and its members have been calling

Decision to Design follows the

so avoid the mistakes made on

for a list of enhancements projects

Outline Business Case and permits

being designed with a view of

schemes such as Great Western

for well over a year, and that is why

technical development to ensure

taking them to the final DfT

Electrification when certain stages

we launched our ‘Show Us the Rail

that the desired outputs can be

gateway of the Decision to Deliver.

were rushed to hit CP deadlines,

Enhancements’ campaign in the

delivered through the option being

The Transpennine Route Upgrade

resulting in inadequate preparation

autumn. So, it’s great news that

progressed.

falls into this category, as does East

and the ensuing cost and time

the new Ministerial team has acted

overruns.

swiftly on taking office to deliver

project over to Network Rail for

on this.

implementation.

Rail Engineer looked at the new method of planning in March 2018

“This comprehensive list of

Decision to Deliver passes the

A total of 13 projects are currently

West Rail Phase 2.

Other schemes

The DfT’s latest RNEP report

If a scheme is entirely funded from

(issue 161), publishing a list of

enhancements will now give rail

includes the following projects

other sources, it does not need

some of the candidate schemes

businesses some more confidence

under development:

to go through the RNEP process.

for DfT funding for CP6. Some

to plan, hire and invest in

of these were carry-overs from

preparation for upcoming work.

CP5 that would continue, others

And it will help ensure we can

were developed during CP5 for

get to work to build an enhanced

Decision to Initiate and are under

passed the decision to Deliver,

implementation in CP6, while still

world-class railway in the coming

development. Plans to provide a

which includes all the part-finished

more were just plans that would

years. We and our members will

permanent solution to passenger

schemes from CP5, do not appear

be fully developed after the start

now examine the list further, and

congestion at Clapham Junction,

on the DfT’s list but are instead

of CP6.

work with the DfT and wider rail

for Wigan to Bolton Electrification

on Network Rail’s Enhancements

supply community to deliver these

and to improve capacity and

Delivery Plan.

Despite that list, which came from

However, even if it is only partStage 1 - Determine

funded by the DfT, it does.

23 projects have passed the

Any project that has already

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

9

10

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

The quest

for a cleaner railway

NIGEL WORDSWORTH

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

T

he UK’s railway is eliminating carbon. You must have noticed. The government has pledged to get all diesels off the railway by 2040 and have it “Zero Carbon” by 2050. Scotland, trying to get one over on England as usual, plans to decarbonise its railways by 2035.

But what does that mean? The obvious answer is electric traction, and that means electrifying the railways.

Scotland does indeed have a more developed programme of electrification than England and Wales. But with only 8.4 per cent of Great Britain’s population, and 17 per cent of the railway route miles, to electrify the whole network all will be both an expensive and time-consuming proposition.

Will anyone really electrify the Glasgow to Mallaig and Oban line - the West Highland line - voted the top rail journey in the world by readers of the Wanderlust travel magazine in 2009? How will that look with electrification poles every few hundred metres alongside it?

How clean is your electricity?

And then, of course, there is the question - what is zero carbon? It’s actually a myth, like perpetual motion and the Holy Grail. You can get close but, as they say, “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”. Everything costs something, and part of that cost is in carbon.

True, certain stages of the process don’t generate carbon emissions. Electric trains don’t put out CO2 from their traction motors, but the electricity they are using is likely to have produced carbon when it was generated.

Coal and other fossil fuels produce carbon when burned, that’s obvious.

Nuclear power is meant to be clean, but building new power stations uses a lot of resources, and a lot of concrete, and that generates carbon. It’s not much when amortised over the life of the power station, but it’s still not zero.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

11

12

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Wind is carbon free isn’t it? Well, yes, but manufacturing the turbine produced carbon, so that has an impact too. Same for hydro schemes, wave power, solar energy they all added to industry’s carbon dioxide output when they were made.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a United Nations body, publishes figures on the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from electricity generation on a whole life basis including the construction, running and final demolition of the plant. For coal-fired power stations that’s 820 grammes of CO2 per kilowatt-hour (kWh), although, with cleaner coal and more control, the UK government is trying to get that down to 450g/kWh. Gas-fired power stations do better, at around 250g/kWh. Then there are the ‘zero carbon’ forms of generation. Taking account of the capital investment and whole-life output, solar energy averages 48g/kWh with a minimum of 18, offshore wind averages 12g/kWh with a minimum of 8, and nuclear also averages 12g/kWh, although Hinkley Point C, which will generate seven per cent of the nation’s power for 60 years, will be around 4.7g/kWh as its start-up emissions are spread over a lot of power produced over its lifetime.

Hinkley Point C (below) will be a baseload station, running all the time. So, what happens when it’s the dead of night and no-one wants electricity? It isn’t wasted - it just recharges the batteries. Huge batteries. A car battery can be rated at about 100 amp-hours, or 1.2kWh. The battery (right) that EDF Renewables has been running at West Burton, near Gainsborough, Lincolnshire, since June 2018 is rated at 24.5MWh, that’s 20,000 times the size! It forms part of National Grid’s 100MWh reserve capacity that is used to correct fluctuations on the grid within less than a second.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Battery technology

Electric traction from batteries It would seem, then, that electric traction, powered by nuclear or renewable sources, is a close to zero-carbon as we’re going to get. But that doesn’t solve the problem of the cost of electrification.

However, there may be a way to keep that cost down, and a way that’s down to the design of the train, not the infrastructure.

Siemens Mobility makes electric passenger trains. One of its latest orders is for 189 three-Car Desiro ML Cityjet trains for Austrian State Railways (ÖBB).

These are electric multiple unit trains, designed to work from ÖBB’s 15kV 16 2/3Hz overhead AC supply.

It’s one of these units that’s particularly interesting. Taken straight off the production line, it has been constructed to incorporate Siemens Mobility’s ‘eco’ technology that will result in an EMU/ battery bi-mode. Siemens has fitted a modular LTO battery system to the roof of the train, providing the unit with a range of 50km on batteries alone, with similar ‘off the wires’ performance to it running on AC power. The batteries can be recharged off the AC supply when running on the electrified line, topped up from regenerative braking, and can be fully recharged in as little as 12 minutes.

Lithium-ion batteries were first developed in the 1980s and have been used for mobile devices since the 1990s. On discharge, lithium ions move from the negative electrode (cathode) to the positive electrode (anode) through an electrolyte the process is reversed on charging. They are quick to charge, have no memory effect (unlike nickel-cadmium batteries) and have a high energy density.

However, the electrolyte is flammable, and early fires caused problems for Samsung Galaxy Note 7 mobile phones and Boeing 787 airliners.

A development of the Li-ion battery, patented in 2001, is the NMC, which uses lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide for the positive electrode in place of the lithium cobalt/iron/manganese oxides of early examples, with the negative electrode being graphite or another carbon-based material. Electric vehicles such as the Nissan Leaf use this battery technology.

More recently, LTO or lithium-titanate batteries use that material on the surface of their anodes in place of carbon. This allows electrons to enter and leave the electrode more quickly, permitting quicker recharges and giving longer life.

The Siemens X-EMU train uses these LTO battery cells.

The battery packs are part of a fully managed integrated, temperaturecontrolled system and it is anticipated that they will have a service life of at least 15 years - half of the expected life of the train. They will therefore need only one battery change in their lifetime. A similar arrangement using NMC batteries would typically require three or four changes throughout a train’s life and, although each NMC pack would be cheaper to purchase initially, the LTO battery has a significant advantage in terms of whole-life cost.

Fitting batteries to an EMU like this gives two possibilities. An X-EMU can run off the main electrified routes down an unelectrified branch line on batteries alone.

For longer range ‘off-wire’ operation, a recharging station can be provided at the end-of-line terminus or even en-route.

In addition, the train can run through ‘extended neutral sections’ on a main line, electrified using a discontinuous electrification scheme without loss of performance. With this approach, railways could potentially be electrified at a significantly lower cost, resulting from the fact that difficult infrastructure (tunnels and bridges with inadequate clearance) would not be wired, instead relying on

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

13

14

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

the train’s batteries for that portion of the route, with the batteries being recharged when the train reconnects to the AC supply.

The ÖBB Cityjet train completed homologation in August and entered passenger service on 2 September 2019 in the Linz area of Austria. Passengers throughout Austria will have the chance to ride on this exciting train in the coming months.

Elsewhere Siemens Mobility’s ‘eco’ battery technology could also be fitted to a brand-new fleet of 20 Siemens Mireo trains (above) for Ortenau Network 8 in the German state of Baden-Württemberg, to operate both on and off electrified routes, giving the batteries ample time for recharging. The local government wanted an ‘emissions-free’ solution, so the electric/ battery units could work well, but the contract award is currently under appeal by another bidder, meaning the award may not be confirmed as planned.

In the United Kingdom, where the more restricted loading gauge probably precludes the batteries being mounted on the roof, existing four-car units could be upgraded to include underfloor mounted Siemens Mobility ‘eco’ battery technology, increasing the potential of existing EMUs by turning them into battery EMU bi-modes.

Graeme Clark, head of business development for Siemens Mobility Rolling Stock in the UK, is keen to point out that, even when running on batteries, these are still electric trains. “Off-wire, they still have EMU acceleration,” he emphasised, “so they will have faster journey times than the diesels they replace, as well as being lighter, far more efficient and significantly cheaper to maintain.”

Improvements in technology are helping all the time. Electric regenerative systems can brake an electric train significantly and efficiently, with energy being returned for re-use to the infrastructure or (to recharge train battery systems), but friction brakes are still needed to bring it to a complete stop.

As technology has advanced, the proportion of braking done electrically has increased, significantly reducing brake pad and disc wear and minimising maintenance cost.

The industry’s gradual move from asynchronous electric motors to permanent magnet motors will make a big difference in this area. They will be capable of braking the train to a complete stop, meaning that potentially, mechanical braking can be removed completely and replaced with a simple parking brake!

And there’s more The other ‘clean’ fuel that’s much touted these days is hydrogen. Like electricity, its cleanliness depends on how it was made.

If it’s made by the ‘steam reformation’ of fossil fuels, particularly natural gas and methane, then significant quantities of both carbon monoxide (CO) and dioxide (CO2) are produced, so it’s not a zero-carbon process.

Some industrial processes produce hydrogen as a waste product. It wasn’t produced by a zero-carbon process, but it would otherwise be burned off and wasted, so using it to power trains is, essentially, recycling.

Then hydrogen can be produced by simply passing an electric current between two electrodes submerged in water.

Oxygen comes off at one electrode, hydrogen at the other. There are no other waste products and no pollution.

Once again, the cleanliness of the electricity can be called into question, but if

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

it comes from a wind turbine at 3am when the world is asleep and using very little electricity, then the power is both clean and essentially free, meaning that the hydrogen is also clean and is produced for only the infrastructure cost of the plant.

It can also come from nuclear power. EDF Energy R&D, in partnership with Lancaster University, Atkins, European Institute for Energy Research (EIFER) and EDF Group’s Hydrogen subsidiary Hynamics, is looking to design a hydrogen gas generation plant at Heysham power stations. The project, which is funded as part of the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy’s £20 million Hydrogen Supply programme, runs in two phases - the first is a feasibility study, which will be completed

by September 2019, and the second (subject to selection by the UK government) will be the pilot demonstration, starting in 2020 and running for two years.

To use this ‘free’ hydrogen, Siemens, which makes both wind turbines and the electolysers that produce hydrogen, has designed the ‘eco’ concept to include an option for hydrogen fuel cells that will charge the batteries, giving extra range ‘off the wires’ or even allowing it to run on non-electrified long distance non-electrified routes.

Siemens is working with Canadian company Ballard, a market leader in fuel-cell production, to develop compact, lightweight high-power fuel cells that can be fitted easily onto trains. The fuel cells will recharge the batteries, which then power the train. This approach reduces noise, as the fuel cells are running under constant load, reduces hydrogen consumption and leads to longer fuel-cell life.

Will the future of passenger trains be overhead/battery/hydrogen hybrids?

Quite possibly. The first Siemens ‘eco’ train powered by a hydrogen fuel cell will be on test in the near future and offers an excellent solution to the replacement of diesel trains and an alternative environmentally friendly approach to lines which could never justify electrification.

But all of this development leaves one unanswered question - what to do about freight trains? Here in the UK, the freightonly lines are not electrified, the trains are heavy, and batteries, with no overhead wires to recharge them, would not last long.

Is electrifying the whole network the only solution? Time will tell...

Thanks to Graeme Clark of Siemens Mobility and to Martyn Butlin and Andrew Cockroft of EDF for their help in preparing this article.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

INNOVATION in Rail

BYBANEN BERGEN TRAM DEPOT, NORWAY

RAILWAY

Reliable Connectors for Harsh Environments

Phoenix range Swift automatic bi-folding doors – only solution for rail depots.

Safe, energy efficient, fast, reliable and industry proven throughout the world.

OXLEY TRSMD, WOLVERHAMPTON

Stäubli Electrical Connectors specialises in the supply of electrical connectors for harsh environments such as

jewersdoors.co.uk

01767 317090

@Jewers_Doors

railways, offering innovative solutions that will increase productivity.

A67468 Jewers Rail engineer Advert Innovation 90w x 130h.indd 1

21/04/2016 09:40

MPC – Modular Power Connector The compact and modular MPC system has been designed to connect many elements of a train’s electrical traction system, including the flexible

Transforming the Market

by Turning Our Customers’ Wishes Into Reality

Approved Replacements for Legacy Rectifiers & Transformers • Zero Inrush & Insulated to 3kV • Full Certification Class II • Hybrid Rectifiers & Transformers • Eco friendly and High Efficiency CLASS II HYBRID RATINGS

Economy Range

250va 1.4kva

500va 2kva

connections between carriages.

Modular CombiTac System CombiTac enables multiple configurations incorporating different contacts for countless applications. The new CT-HE rackable version is particularly suitable for use with slide-in systems, being compact yet meeting railway standards for operating temperature, shock, vibration and fire protection.

1kva 3kva

• Zero Inrush & Insulated to 20kV • Patented Insulated Coating (GB2496062) • Full Certification Class II • Hybrid Rectifiers & Transformers

www.staubli.com/electrical

CLASS II HYBRID RATINGS

Insulated Range

2 x 5ADC 1 x 10ADC

2 x 8ADC

FT TRANSFORMERS LTD

+44 (0) 121 451 3204

www.ft-transformers.co.uk

Staubli is a trademark of Stäubli International AG, registered in Switzerland and other countries. © Stäubli 2019 | Photocredits: Shutterstock, Stäubli

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

15

16

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

KEITH FENDER

LOCOS GO

bi- and tri-mode!

Siemens Vectron for Finland – 3302 seen at Jyväskylä operating as an electric on 25 April 2018.

R

ail Engineer has previously looked at several innovative forms of traction for new passenger trains; from the Hitachi built bi-mode (electric / diesel) trains now widely in use in the UK (with other bi-modes such as the Class 769 conversions coming into service soon) to the iLint hydrogen powered train in passenger service in Germany (with several hydrogen powered projects announced in the UK too now).

However, until now, we haven’t looked in detail at the developing range of bi or tri mode locos now being designed and built for use in the UK and Europe.

Not a new idea

WLC (Wiener Lokalbahnen Cargo) 187 324 diesel outside Bombardier’s Kassel factory, 4 April 2019.

Dual mode, bi-mode, or electro-diesel locos are not new in conceptual terms. Diesel locos equipped with third rail pickup were developed for use by the New Haven Railroad in the mid-1950s in New York City, where steam and diesel usage was prohibited from 1903, leading to early electrification and time-consuming traction changes from steam to electric outside the city limits.

Siemens supplied electric mining locos equipped with auxiliary petrol engines to a diamond mine in South Africa as long ago as 1925!

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

British Rail and English Electric built a fleet of 49 Class 73 thirdrail electric locos equipped with 600HP diesel engines from 1962 onwards and converted another ten older Class 71s to Class 74 (all since scrapped). 52 years later, some of the Class 73/1 versions are still in service, with the original engine, with freight company GB Railfreight, although others have been completely rebuilt as Class 73/9 with modern engines and traction equipment.

Last Mile vs. Main Line diesel All of the major European manufacturers have developed bi-mode or hybrid locos in the last decade, but they vary considerably in terms of power rating – and orders received.

The initial trend of all the manufacturers was rather like the old BR Class 73/74 - to provide ‘Last Mile’ diesel power, enabling an electric loco to access non-electrified branch lines and yards. The diesel power installed was usually a small engine (around 180kW or 240HP, so around the power of half the old BR Class 73) hidden in an equipment cupboard inside the loco.

Bombardier and Siemens between them have sold the most ‘Last Mile’ equipped locos with Siemens selling 112

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Vectrons fitted with 180kW diesel power modules and Bombardier 120 Traxx AC locos (90 of which were in use at mid-2019); the latest with 230kW diesel power modules and 40kW battery packs (used to provide a short term traction boost when the loco is operating in last mile mode).

Within these totals, Siemens is currently supplying 80 1,524mm gauge Vectrons, each with two 180kW last mile diesel power packs, to Finnish state railway operator VR to enable replacement of diesel trip/shunting locos on nonelectrified freight routes.

Bombardier has supplied ‘last mile’ diesel modules as an option since it launched the Traxx 3 variant of its long running Traxx design; the latest version, the Traxx 3 Multi System that is now undergoing final Europe-wide approval testing, can combine a quadri-voltage (1.5/3kV DC and 15/25kV AC) electric loco with a 230kW diesel power pack /40kW battery pack for last mile operation.

Austrian freight operator Wiener Lokal Bahn has six Class 187 ‘Last Mile’ equipped Traxx 3 locos on order. The locos are also equipped with remote control so can be driven

in yards etc by staff on the ground. In the picture taken at Bombardier’s Kassel factory on 4 April, the loco is running on diesel and the driver is on the ground next to the loco. Side lights beside the driver’s doors illuminate when the loco is being driven remotely (they are different colours for diesel and electric operation).

by Stadler after they took over the business. Ten ‘UK-Dual’ 4,000kW 25kV AC electric and 700kW diesel (using a Euro IIIB emissions compliant Caterpillar C27 diesel engine) - Class 88 locos were ordered by Beacon Rail in September 2013 for DRS using essentially the same body shell as the Class 68. Like the Class 68, the Class 88 used ABB traction equipment.

The Class 88 order was followed in October 2013 with an order for 50 similar but 1,067mm gauge locos for passenger services in South Africa, for delivery in 2015-16.

A modified version of the ‘UK Dual’ bodyshell was chosen to accommodate the South African loading gauge. Whilst some of these were built, in advance of the UK Class 88s, deliveries have been suspended due to ongoing contractual problems in South Africa.

Diesel powerpack inside new Bombardier TRAXX3 Class 188 multi-system electric and last mile loco.

Diesel engine inside Class 88.

New Trend – bi-mode main line locos Before it sold its transportation, business based near Valencia in Spain to Stadler in 2016, Vossloh had identified the market opportunity for ‘go anywhere’ locos that could operate under catenary but which also have enough diesel power to operate through passenger and freight trains away from the electrified network.

Instead of just including a ‘last mile’ diesel module within a modern electric loco, the EuroDual loco range, which Stadler is now offering, is a capable electric locomotive that also has a powerful 2,800kW diesel engine.

Vossloh also sold two versions of its initial UK-Dual design, based on the UK Class 68 (UK Light diesel loco) bodyshell, although deliveries were made

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

17

18

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Class 88 away from the wires – a guest appearance on the Severn Valley Railway in May 2018.

EuroDual for ELP under construction at Stadler’s Valencia factory in early 2019.

Late in 2018 came news of a planned new variant of the UK Dual Class 88 – but this time a tri-mode loco – with diesel, overhead electric and also battery power. Beacon was once again to be the buyer, but the end customer would be UK stock-movement specialist Rail Operations Group. So far, the locos have not actually been ordered, so technical details are limited, but lithium-titanate batteries would be fitted to store energy from regenerative braking plus the overhead supply.

The design concept assumes use of the batteries to increase starting power, enabling heavier trains to be moved and to supplement diesel power for short periods, for example when going up gradients. The Class 93 may feature a slightly more powerful diesel engine than that used in the Class 88.

Pan European bi-modes Some of the big European manufacturers are aiming to supply freight operators with locos that are powerful enough, as diesels, to handle freight on non-electrified secondary

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

routes but also are powerful electric locos for use on electrified trunk routes. This is especially true in countries such as Germany or Austria, where most diesel-hauled freight currently operates for hundreds of kilometres under electric catenary (as much as 80 per cent of the time in Germany).

Very few ‘pure’ main line diesel locos have been built for use in Europe in the last decade; Stadler’s Euro 4000 six-axle design has taken the majority of orders, with Siemens and Alstom selling very few. Bombardier has sold 51 of its Traxx Multi-Engine (Traxx ME) loco to operators in Germany – this design has four small diesel engines instead of one large one, offering cheaper maintenance, the ability to operate with one or two engines switched off when running light, and redundancy.

Spanish manufacturer CAF built the first big European bi-mode locos over a decade ago. Nine six-axle ‘Bitrac’ electro-diesels were built for use in Spain, but CAF sold no more. These 4,500kW electric / 3,600kW diesel locos (fitted with two MTU 12V R43L engines) are now owned by Beacon Rail and leased to French Railways’ international freight subsidiary Captrain.

The Stadler EuroDual design, as already mentioned, is a powerful six-axle electrodiesel which utilises the same 2,800kW Caterpillar C175-16 diesel engine (as used UK Class 68 but the EuroDual uses the more-modern Stage IIIB version) in addition to offering 6,150kW (power at wheel rim) as a 25kV AC electric.

Stadler has sold 30 EuroDual

locos, and agreed options for 70 more, to new Swiss-based leasing company European Loc Pool (ELP). Some are currently being tested whilst others are in production at Stadler’s Valencia factory. For the first batch of ten locos, ELP ordered two locos specifically for use in Scandinavia with winterisation (for temperatures as low as -40°C) and signalling systems for use in Norway and Sweden, plus eight locos for use in Germany. All ten locos are equipped for operation from 15kV/25kV AC catenary.

The 126 tonne locos have a starting tractive effort of 500kN (under both diesel and electric power) and a top speed of 120km/h (although they could be geared for 160km/h if required). The three-axle bogies are an improved form of those used under the Stadler Euro 4000 CoCo diesel design and each bogie has three asynchronous traction motors.

Initially, the ‘German’ locos are only designed for use in Germany, although Stadler intends to secure approval for operation in other countries in the future.

Further orders In addition to the ELP order, Stadler has orders for ten EuroDual (15kV/25kV AC bimode) locomotives for German operator HVLE. ITL (owned

by SNCF French Railways via Captrain) also ordered four locos in the same configuration for use in Germany in late 2018.

The prototype EuroDual, which is a 25kV AC/1.5kV DC bi-mode version, has been sold to VFLI in France - unlike the other locos this loco is equipped with French safety systems.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS During 2019, Stadler has announced an order for seven locos for Turkish open access operator Körfez Ulaştırma, due for delivery in 2021. Körfez Ulaştırma will use the locos to operate 2,000-tonne oil trains in Turkey. Stadler will also maintain the fleet.

Stadler says it has now sold 74 of its new EuroDual six axle locos. Stadler has also announced orders for 22 bi-mode locos for Spanish national rail infrastructure manager ADIF for delivery in 2021/22 - technical details for this order have not been announced.

Siemens presented the first of its new ‘Dual Mode’ (DM) version of the Vectron locomotive in March 2019.

Designed as a mid-power diesel loco (2,400kW) and mid-power AC electric loco (2,000kW) in one four-axle loco, the Vectron DM offers the maximum flexibility to freight operators for traffic that originates or is destined for places on nonelectrified lines but which

uses the electrified main line network for the trunk-haul part of their routes.

Siemens estimates that German freight operators, currently using over 700 older diesel locos, could save 53 per cent of their energy and maintenance costs, plus reduce CO2 emissions by 950 tonnes annually per locomotive, by using the new Vectron DM instead of an existing diesel loco.

Siemens developed and built the first German Class 248 Vectron Dual Mode loco from scratch in six months. This fast concept to prototype period was possible as the Vectron Dual Mode uses bogies and traction motors from the

existing diesel-only Vectron DE platform and these were already available as, so far, only nine Vectron DE Class 247 locos have been built since the model’s launch in 2010.

The Vectron Dual Mode will now probably replace the Vectron DE in Siemens’ range, although the company would potentially continue to offer it to customers outside Germany if the order quantity was economically attractive.

The 90-tonne loco is capable of 160kmh. It is equipped with a 2,500-litre diesel fuel tank and the German PZB signalling system (although it is preequipped for ETCS). Whilst not designed for passenger operation, Siemens says it could

EuroDual for ELP under construction at Stadler’s Valencia factory in early 2019.

RAIL DEPOT & WORKSHOP EQUIPMENT • • • • •

RAILCAR LIFTING JACKS BOGIE/EQUIPMENT DROPS TRAVERSERS TURNTABLES BOGIE WORKSHOP MACHINES • UNDER CAR EQUIPMENT HANDLING

• • • • •

LASER MEASURING SANDBOX FILLING SHUNTERS EXHAUST EXTRACTION UNDER FLOOR WHEEL LATHES

mechan.co.uk info@mechan.co.uk +44 (0)114 257 0563

Davy Industrial Park Prince of Wales Road Sheffield S9 4EX

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

19

20

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

operators in New Jersey (USA) and Montreal in Canada. New Jersey Transit (NJT) has a fleet of 35 and is currently adding a further 17.

The 4,000kW (electric), 2,700kW (diesel) ALP45DP has an axle loading of 34.1 tonnes (compared to 22.5 for the four axle European Siemens Dual Mode). The North American loco is fitted with two Caterpillar 3512C HD engines and, in the case of the NJT locos, works from two traction voltages too (12.5kV 25Hz AC and 25kV 60Hz AC) at up to 125mph (electric only).

Siemens has also built bimode locos for US commuter operator Long Island Railroad in the 1990s (23 DM30AC electrodiesels delivered from 1996).

Adding a third dimension battery power

Siemens Vectron Dual Mode locomotive, engine and air filters.

be equipped with electric train supply for air conditioning etc if that was requested. Siemens is currently testing the two prototypes and seeking orders for the new Vectron Dual Mode with delivery from Q4 2020 promised.

The MTU 4000 engine used in the Vectron Dual Mode, fitted with a set of large air filters, meets EU Stage V emissions standards (as does the four-engined, pure-diesel Bombardier Traxx ME).

Across the Atlantic

NJT ALP 45DP leaving Seacaucus Junction, New Jersey, June 2017.

Bombardier has also built bi-mode locomotives, but not for use in Europe. Its ALP 45DP BoBo electro-diesel has been supplied to commuter rail

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

While developments in battery technology are leading to all major manufacturers looking at battery power for passenger trains, it is increasingly being considered for locomotives too.

Battery powered locos are not new – the first named “Galvani” was demonstrated by its inventor Robert Davidson between Edinburgh and Glasgow in 1842!

During the 19th century, many manufacturers built small battery shunting locos but, using lead acid batteries, they were heavy, slow and had limited range.

The Hythe Pier railway in Hampshire uses two small Brush-built electric locos delivered as battery locos in 1917 to work in an armaments factory. They are still in use, although converted to third rail operation, as this August 2019 picture shows!

Battery technology has moved a long way in the last few years. Batteries are now being used daily for trams in many cities – although often only for short sections – and they are now seen by all the major manufacturers as a key traction option for the future. As mentioned earlier, the Beacon/ROG Class 93 design would use batteries,

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

primarily to enhance starting performance but also to store energy.

Combining modern battery technology with electric traction systems and, in some cases diesel engines, as well, could be the next trend in locomotive design. Some such locos already exist - Chinese rail engineering firm CRRC has delivered electric locos with battery packs, charged via regenerative braking or ground supply, for use operating engineering trains on metros in Sydney (Australia), Hong Kong and Guangzhou (China).

Maximum Speed using battery power is 40km/h.

CRRC has also supplied two diesel-battery hybrid shunting locos to German Rail operator DB for use operating maintenance trains on the Hamburg S-Bahn network (one was displayed at Innotrans in 2018). A total of four locomotives are on order, to be equipped with lithium-titanate batteries capable of generating 150kW of traction power (or, with the 250kW diesel engine, a combined 400kW).

In August, Welsh rackrailway operator the Snowdon Mountain Railway announced it has ordered two batterydiesel hybrid locomotives from British manufacturer Clayton Equipment. The new locos will

replace older diesels and will use regenerative braking on the descent to generate energy for use on the next ascent to the summit of Snowdon.

Several smaller European manufacturers, including Gmeinder, are now offering battery hybrid options for previously diesel-only designs; the Gmeinder DE75 BB fouraxle shunter has a 354kW Caterpillar engine and a lithium-ion traction battery pack producing 600kW of traction power between them.

Russian manufacturer Transhmash unveiled a diesel battery hybrid loco in 2019,

equipped with a 200kW diesel engine plus a 240kW lithium ion battery pack.

Vossloh Locomotives, which is being bought by Chinese firm CRRC, offers its DE18 four-axle diesel with 150kWh battery packs in addition to the standard ‘straight’ 1,800kW diesel version.

Turkish manufacturer Tülomsas has rebuilt mid-1980s vintage Turkish State Railways DE11000 diesel locos with smaller 300kW diesel engines plus 400kW of lithium-ion battery power. The resultant hybrids are able to run on either or both power sources as required.

Alstom has been building diesel-battery hybrid locos designed for trip freights, shunting industrial plants and empty stock moves in Germany for five years. The ‘H3’ three axle design equipped with Nickel-Cadmium batteries has sold fairly well and is in use in Germany and central Europe. A bigger four axle development of the technology – the ‘H4’ - has been developed, but the only order so far for Swiss Railways (SBB), who have ordered 47 Class Aem 940 locos for infrastructure trains. These are classic electro-diesels equipped with two Caterpillar C18 diesel engines.

A British battery loco that is 102 years young this year, and still in daily use, seen at Hythe in August 2019.

CRRC loco for DB at Innotrans 2018.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

21

22

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS America and China. However, it currently seems unlikely that hydrogen will have any major role in locomotive design.

Stadler has developed and sold battery-equipped versions of its Flirt EMU - 55 battery/15kV AC overhead power trains for use by NAH.SH (the public transport system in Schleswig-Holstein) in northern Germany and 24 tri-mode 25kV AC/ diesel and battery versions for use in the Welsh valleys by Transport for Wales.

Batteries with everything?

DB Regio H3 operating in battery mode at Nuremberg Hbf on 13 December 2016.

In 2017, CAF announced it had won a contract to supply twelve 1,000kW electric/battery hybrid locos to Paris metro and rail operator RATP to operate engineering trains on the RER network. The locos will be produced at CAF’s French plant and incorporate ten tonnes of nickel-cadmium batteries, as well as traditional pantographs for overhead power collection.

Battery power for passenger trains Hitachi has announced plans to develop battery-powered trains for the UK market and has already delivered them in Japan. The wider Hitachi group is already a major automotive battery supplier and Hitachi Rail Europe has previously said it expects the rail market to piggyback the developments in battery technology for road transport; the market for which, on a global scale, is many times bigger than the market for rail.

The company has been developing hybrid and battery technology since 2003, largely in Japan. In 2007, it fitted a Class 43 HST power car with battery technology and ran trials in the UK in partnership with Network Rail. The train, named Hayabusa, completed over 100,000 km. The result was a 15 per cent fuel saving and a silent and emission-free movement out of stations.

In 2017, Hitachi delivered the BEC819 series ‘DENCHA’ (Dual Energy Charge Train) BEMU to

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

Japanese operator JR Kyushu.

Now in passenger service, it is operating for 50km route on battery power, between recharges.

Hitachi is now planning to add batteries to its UK bi-mode trains, which will be used alongside diesel engines to form a tri-mode hybrid power system. Hitachi expects not only to boost acceleration rates, but to cut fuel consumption (and costs) by 10 per cent or more. Hitachi also point out that batteries can benefit station environments too. Using them for initial operation in and out of busy stations can cut noise and air pollution, which is highly significant as air quality at some UK stations breaches safe legal limits significantly due to diesel emissions.

Siemens, using lithium-titanate battery units, and Bombardier (lithium-ion batteries) are already testing battery equipped EMUs in Germany and Austria respectively.

Alstom’s new iLint hydrogenpowered train, which is now in service in Germany, is a hydrogen/battery hybrid with a sophisticated control system that uses batteries to store energy from regenerative braking and minimise fuel-cell load variations. As hydrogen fuel has a greater energy density than batteries, it clearly has some passenger multipleunit applications and has also been used for shunting locos in

The convergence of differing propulsion systems, with both electric traction equipment and even diesel engines becoming more compact and needing less space in a locomotive car body, plus the likely future development of battery technology, could lead to the disappearance of ‘simple’ diesel or electric locos. If batteries are cheap and powerful enough, they can power movements in depots or assist with self-rescue for failures and could become standard.

One major European freight operator calculated that simply restarting an older, 1960s vintage diesel loco and moving it from one end of a yard to the other costs around £50 a time! With batteries, such costs disappear.

Battery technology for transport use is developing rapidly, and billions are being spent by the automotive industry to enable this. The UK Automotive Council estimate that the energy density of batteries could quadruple by 2035, yet even this is only one tenth of the energy density of diesel.

Hence, for more demanding rail applications such as heavy freight, high speed trains or even high-frequency metrostyle services, it is unlikely that batteries will ever have a major role – although anyone re-reading this in 2050 might know better!

superior sanding . . . . . . OPTIMISING TRACTION, ACCELERATION AND BRAKING PERFORMANCE Knorr-Bremse offer innovative sanding solutions, including variable sanding technology, to deliver optimised traction, acceleration and braking performance for both passenger and freight trains. Knorr-Bremse sanding systems are available for new build, modernisation and retro-fit applications and are proven, in-service, in some of the world’s toughest operational conditions. | www.knorr-bremse.co.uk |

24

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

A little sand

in the right place MALCOLM DOBELL

I

works wonders Part 3, Operational Trials

n November 2017 (issue 157), Rail Engineer reported on trials undertaken at the Rail Innovation and Development Centre, Melton of multiple variable rate sanders fitted to a GWR class 387 EMU, with the expectation that service brake performance would be significantly improved in poor adhesion conditions.

Then, in May 2018 (issue 163), Rail Engineer reported on a seminar held by RSSB to present the results of those tests.

They reported that 6% G deceleration could be achieved, even in very poor adhesion conditions. At the end of that seminar, RSSB appealed to members to volunteer to help them take the project forward.

Rolling forward to October 2019, at the invitation of RSSB’s Aaron Barrett and Paul Gray, Rail Engineer arrived at Redditch station - one end of the Birmingham Cross-City line - to witness further tests that were carried out over several Sundays in October 2019 and to learn what had happened since 2017/8.

West Midlands Trains, the operator trading though the West Midlands Railway and London NorthWestern Railway brands, had volunteered to work with RSSB as they were particularly keen to improve the reliability of the Cross-City line, where, as operations director Mark Steward explained, there are significant leaf fall problems from trees on third-party property.

WMT routinely implements an autumn timetable, which slows the trains and harms punctuality.

Since Autumn 2018, enhanced adhesion performance data has been collated and analysed on the Cross-City Line, including additional train traction/ braking monitoring equipment on Class 323 units. Although this has provided

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

further insight into the effectiveness of the various low-adhesion treatments, only limited results were obtained as the drivers drove mostly in step 1, the lowest brake rate, and provoked little WSP (wheel-slide protection) activity.

Undaunted, two units have been equipped with variable rate sanders, a) to replace the fixed rate sanders dispensing on the third axle in the direction of travel and b) additionally to apply sand under the seventh axle of these three-car units.

A further change since the original tests is that sander operation is now automatic in response to the train WSP equipment.

Test set up The purpose of the test was two-fold.

Firstly, to ensure that the performance of the improved sanders on the Class 323 was at least as good as that on the previous trial, and secondly, but most importantly, to enable WMT drivers and health and safety representatives to experience how the system works and to be able to use higher brake rates, steps 2 and 3, with confidence.

Arrangements were quite similar to those for the 2017 tests, except for the site and the rolling stock. Despite a very strong desire not to disrupt passenger services, all concerned saw the benefit of demonstrating the system to drivers who would operate the trains on infrastructure that they drive every day hence the Redditch site.

The Class 323 train that was used for the trials.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Results

The paper tape that was laid on the track to replicate fallen leaves.

(Inset) An additional compressed air tank was carried to cover the period when the pantograph was lowered and the compressors were not functioning.

PHOTO: RSSB

In summary, paper tape was applied onto the running rails over a length of approximately 750 metres. The tape was wetted with train-mounted water sprays to provide the low adhesion conditions, and the train was then run over the tape for two out-and-back moves to bed the tape in.

Then several runs were carried out, braking from 55mph without sanding to condition the rails before a step 1 brake was used to demonstrate slide at a low brake rate and thus poor adhesion.

Finally braking runs with sand in steps 2 and 3 were demonstrated.

One of the safety control measures was to lower the pantograph before entering the paper tape zone and not raise it again until the train had coasted off the tape. This measure ensured that there were no adverse effects from possible poor traction return paths whilst on the paper tape; a lesson learned from the 2017 tests.

The sander in operation.

Another precaution was the provision of a temporary additional compressed air tank. This provided a reserve of compressed air whilst the pantograph was down and the compressor out of action.

To illustrate the effect of the enhanced sanding, a step 3 brake with no sand only managed to reduce speed from 55 miles/hour to 40 miles/hour by the end of the paper tape (a speed reduction of 15 miles/hour over the 750 metres travelled).

Once the enhanced sanders were activated for a repeat test, the brake application was so successful that the brakes had to be released early because there was barely enough momentum left to coast to the end of the paper tape so that the pantograph could be raised again. Your author was in conversation with Parvaiz Elahi, the ASLEF health and safety representative, during the step 3 test with sand and we were both suitably impressed.

A further innovation was the method of controlling the possession. Network Rail’s operational sponsor and organiser of the tests, Dominic Mottram, said this is a comparatively unusual Signal Protection Zone, where both incursion into and out of the possession is controlled solely by signals held at danger. Whilst SPZs are not a new concept to the railway, the success and positive reaction to their implementation for this project has already attracted attention from other parts of Network Rail.

Dominic added that this project was a team approach with Network Rail, RSSB, West Midlands Trains, DB ESG, Ricardo Rail playing leading roles and with a very important stakeholder in the form of the West Midlands Rail Executive.

What follows are the impressions from the day; RSSB will publish formal results in due course.

Mark Steward of West Midlands Trains told Rail Engineer that the test objective - building driver confidence when driving relatively normally on contaminated track - had been delivered. He said that the next step is to introduce the two units into passenger service. Mark was aiming to use experienced drivers on these modified units, and to compare their performance with the performance of the trains in front and behind using ‘big data’ analysis techniques to assess performance in service.

He added that, as this is an experiment, he recognises that there will be a risk of station over-runs when driving this way, and will manage that risk appropriately, both for safety of the railway and for driver competence management, such that drivers will not be penalised if they are driving modified units on contaminated track using the techniques tested.

He added that he had not been prepared to authorise the trial unless he was confident it was safe and his visit was partly to gain that confidence.

Drivers, their representatives, and their managers were most impressed with the system. If this autumn’s service trial is successful, it is to be hoped that the system will be fitted to many more trains over the next few years.

Thanks to Paul Gray (RSSB), Mark Steward (West Midlands Trains), Dominic Mottram (Network Rail), Andrew Lightoller (DB ESG) and Liam Purcell (Ricardo Rail) for their assistance with this article.

ASLEF representative Parvaiz Elahi (left) discusses the trials with DB ESG’s Andrew Lightoller.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

25

26

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

If it’s Tuesday it must be Olomouc I DAVID SHIRRES

t is easy to sympathise with teachers who take groups of schoolchildren on educational visits, as they work hard to keep their charges together. Consider, then, the task of Felix Schmid and Bridget Eickhoff as they led a group of 40 railway engineers (and their luggage) from the Czech Republic to Switzerland via Austria. This took a week and involved 14 technical visits, four hotels, a sleeper train, travel on 24 other trains and 12 trams. The average start time was 07:45.

This was the IMechE Railway Division’s Annual Technical Tour, one which Felix and Bridget had spent months organising. For everyone on the tour, it was huge learning experience to see the manufacture, maintenance and operation of trains and trams, as well as learning from each other. The opportunity to have informal chats with senior engineers was particularly useful for the young engineers, some of whom contributed to this article.

In addition to the engineering experience, the group had to hone its time management, organisational and packing skills to keep up with the demanding schedule. The tour also provided an opportunity to visit cities that many of the group had never heard of.

Participants had made their own way to Prague where the tour started at 13:00 on Saturday 5 October with a short tram ride to a train maintenance depot.

České dráhy

In the Czech Republic, infrastructure maintenance is undertaken by the state infrastructure manager, SZDC whilst České dráhy (CD) is the state railway operator, although there are also some private operators. The Czech rail network is about two thirds the size of the UK’s railway and 31 per cent of it is electrified. Overhead electrification is a mix of 3kV DC in the north and 25kV AC in the south. There is a 20-year plan to convert the 3kV DC lines to 25kV AC. The visit was CD’s Prague maintenance centre, which is responsible for 90 EMUs, 247 DMUs, 75 diesel locomotives, 113 electric locomotives and 1,082 coaches. The EMUs include

Examining Elefants.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

the Czech Pendolinos and the double decker “City Elefant” EMUs. CD has two other maintenance centres, at Pilsen in the west and Olomouc in the south.

At the Prague maintenance centre, which has 40 kilometres of track, the group visited its two maintenance sheds and saw loco-hauled coaches being maintained in one and Elefant EMUs in the other, where a wheel lathe had been installed a year ago. To make the best use of this lathe, CD is about to procure a wheelset preventative monitoring system.

Prague’s trams Sunday offered sightseeing with a purpose. The funicular ride up the hill to Prague’s Petřin Tower viewpoint showed why this type of railway needs wheelsets with one double flanged wheel (to run on the continuous outside rail) and the other with no flanges (to cross breaks for cables in its fixed switches).

In the afternoon, the group visited the Prague public transport museum. This had many tram vehicles, illustrating the expansion of the city’s substantial tram system, which started in 1875 with the first horse drawn tram and had its first electric tram operating in 1891. Prague’s tram network now covers 141 kilometres with 35 lines.

The numerous trams, and other artefacts, in the museum showed how these vehicles had developed. They included a motor tramcar dating from 1901 and specialist vehicles such as

a substation car, which had a transformer and rotary converter so that it could be connected to an AC substation to boost the overhead supply when required, such as during major sporting events.

The tour left the museum on the 1915-built tram 349 and its trailer car for a tour of the Prague tram system. Our driver, Helga, demonstrated the hard work and skill that is required to drive such historic trams.

Škoda Monday started with a train ride to Pilsen to visit Škoda’s rolling stock plant on which Emma Armstrong, a graduate engineer from ScotRail, reports: Continuing Škoda’s long tradition at Pilsen, Škoda Transportation has been manufacturing rolling stock here since the 1990s, particularly electric rail vehicles for suburban transport. The site runs an end-to-end process in the production of tram and locomotive vehicles, with EMU and carriages being manufactured at other sites throughout the Czech Republic. There is also a subsidiary company in Finland Transtech Oy.

The factory consists of several sheds used in the building of coaches, refurbishment of vehicles and overhaul of bogies.

The tour was limited to the assembly halls, paint shed and testing track. On display were vehicles at varying stages of assembly or overhaul including the Emil Zatopek locomotive (named after the famous Czech long-distance runner) and driving coaches from double-decker EMUs that are supplied to Deutsche Bahn and are capable of a top speed of 189km/h.

Interestingly, only electric traction vehicles are currently produced at this site. Although Škoda can produce diesel hybrid vehicles, customer demand remains focused on electric vehicles.

The current rolling stock manufacturing process begins with the welding of the initial body shell which is then transported through the plant for low-level equipment fitment, interior cabling and high-level fitment such as HVAC (heating/ ventilation/air-conditioning) and pantograph assemblies. Škoda uses a 36-metre covered traverser to move vehicles during manufacturing.

The funicular’s unusual wheelsets and fixed switches.

Tram driver Helga.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

27

28

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Examining high-speed tram switch in Brno.

Completed vehicles are initially tested using a short onsite test track. For more intense testing, the heavy rail rolling stock is sent to the Velim test track at Cerhenice, 150km away to the east. Škoda manufactures almost all the required components, either at this site or other locations, to enable them to produce a fully Škoda product.

From Plzen, it was a 1¼-hour train ride back to Prague, then another 2½-hour train journey to Olomouc, in the southeastern part of the Czech Republic.

Olomouc’s unusual crossing

Olomouc’s tram train crossing.

Tuesday saw the tour in the city of Olomouc, where the group split into two.

One party visited the OLTIS group headquarters to see its IT solutions for railway performance and operational management. The other group visited an unusual level crossing, as Nadeem Ahmed, a Network Rail graduate electrical engineer, reports: In 2013, an extension to one of Olomouc’s tram lines crossed a single-track railway that catered for 28 trains per day. The resultant tram/train crossing was designed so that the tram wheel flanges run across the head of the heavy rail. As it does so, the tram wheel is not constrained.

However, as the crossing is angled at 60 degrees, the other tram wheel is in the tram track.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

The Olomouc council funded and built the level crossing over six months. The formation of the crossing began with a geo cell layer, with additional layers consisting of sand, concrete and steel meshes to provide enough strength to withstand the various loads. Trains go over this crossing at 80km/h, whilst trams cross it at 10 km/h.

Afterwards, the group visited the Olomouc’s public transport control centre to learn how timekeeping of trams and buses is monitored and controlled.

Olomouc has a 31-kilometre tram network with 75 switches, two thirds of which have switch heaters as winter temperatures are typically -10°C. The city has 71 trams and 59 buses.

Brno’s trams A 1½-hour train ride took the group to Brno, the Czech Republic’s second city with a population of about 400,000.

Brno has a 70-kilometre tram network on which a fleet of 300 trams operate. It also has a 60-kilometre trolley bus network, with 140 trolley buses, and 46 bus routes. Ten trolley buses with batteries are being procured to allow for network disruption during road works.

Another chartered tram took the group to the main depot, with a stop to examine a newly installed 80km/h switch. For trams, this is a high-speed switch as the normal speed through street switches is 15km/h on the straight and 10km/h on the curve.

At the depot, the systems used to monitor the timekeeping of each vehicle were explained, as were the ways in which passengers are kept informed. Five buses and four trams are kept on standby around the city, ready to be quickly brought into service in the event of any disruption.

The control room also closely monitors power consumption, with drivers receiving bonuses for low electricity use. Interestingly, control can temporarily switch off the heating on trolley buses and trams remotely if overall power consumption is too high.

During the depot tour, there was an opportunity to examine old and new tram bogies.

Notable were the large braking solenoids on the trailer bogies, which are needed as the trams have no air system.

A second 1½-hour train journey took the group from Brno to Vienna.

Wiener Linien Vienna’s public transport system consists of a 29line tram network of 181 kilometres, five U-Bahn lines totalling 65 kilometres and 43 daytime bus routes. It is operated by Wiener Linien, which has 526 trams, of which 168 have low floors. The tour visited the main workshops in Vienna, which undertakes tram heavy maintenance and component repairs, including bogies, traction motors, wheelsets and brake gear.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Of particular interest was the opportunity to inspect the unusual suspension and drive system of the ultra-low-floor trams supplied by Siemens between 2006 and 2015. These consist of a series of vehicle modules with portal running gear in between. There is a rigid connection between the driving cab module and the adjacent module, between which is the portal gear with single trailing wheels. Other modules are supported at one end by the portal gear through the secondary suspension and flexibly coupled to the next one. These portals have 52kW asynchronous traction motors driving each single wheel.

These trams are 36 metres long, which presents a problem as the workshop traverser, constrained by the workshop’s columns, is only 30 metres long.

For this reason, the traverser is about as wide as it is long to accommodate trams on its curved track.

Traktionssysteme Austria The group’s next call in Vienna was to the manufacturing plant of Traktionssysteme Austria

(TSA) as Franziska Schmuecker, a project engineer for Eversholt Rail, reports: TSA is an independent manufacturer of traction motors and gearboxes for rolling stock and road vehicles. The company’s values - “Innovative.

Independent. Impassioned.”

- were clear from the start of the visit, which was split in two parts: a series of presentations on the history of the company and its products (including UK products such as those for the new Glasgow Subway trains) followed by a tour of the production facilities.

The first technical presentation outlined the different traction motor cooling concepts used by TSA, which included self-ventilation, forced ventilation, liquid cooling and air cooling. Motors can be either an enclosed design or an open design using fresh air to cool the motor. Another presentation explained the advantages and disadvantages of different motor suspension arrangements.

One presentation explained the latest permanent-magnet traction motors, which provide

a superior power output (up to 67 per cent increase) and torque (48 per cent increase) for the same motor size.

Where size and weight are constraining factors, this is a great advantage.

As with all innovations, there are challenges to overcome, mainly controlling the induced voltage at higher speeds, which leads to the need for a separate traction inverter to control each motor. From all the presentations, it was clear that TSA is highly flexible in the projects and types of motor it delivers.

The presentations were followed by a tour through the production facilities, following the manufacturing process from the stamping of the rotor and stator laminations to the finished motor. Almost everything, except for the production of the standard coils, is done in-house, including the testing of the finished motor. TSA produces around 6,000 motors per year in this facility.

(Left) Portal running gear, including traction motor of an Ultra Low floor tram.

(Right) Bogie with independent wheels, another form of running gear for low floor trams.

Producing yellow plant Thursday started with a 200-kilometre train ride, at up to 250km/h, on the upgraded Austrian West Railway to Linz. Here, the tour visited a well-known manufacturer of yellow plant as Calum McLean, an assistant electrical project engineer with Network Rail describes: Plasser and Theurer manufactures a major proportion of the world’s track

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

29

30

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Group photograph at Plasser and Theurer.

(Left) Double-decker OBB nightjet schlafwagen.

(Right) Rebuilt 1974 tram at the Pöstlingbergbahn museum.

maintenance machines. The range includes tampers, for which the company is perhaps best known, as well as machines for ballast management, stabilisation and control, ballast bed cleaning, formation rehabilitation, material logistics, the renewal and laying of tracks and turnouts, mobile rail treatment and the measurement, installation and maintenance of overhead lines.

If a customer’s requirements are not fulfilled by the standard range, special purpose machines can be manufactured as well. In any case, all machines are custom built to individual customer requirements and training is provided at the Linz plant for each machine.

It is not necessary to be a track engineer to appreciate how these machines have revolutionised track renewals and maintenance. For example, Plasser and Theurer advises that its machines can renew 2.6km of track per hour, compared

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

with a 100 metres of track per hour when such machines were not available.

It was impressive to see the work that goes into manufacturing these machines, particularly as the company manufactures nearly all its own parts to ensure product quality. Every year, the Linz site produces around 150 machines of varying types with a workforce of 1,800. Despite this apparent complexity, bogie production has been standardised - there are only two basic types of bogies for all types of machine, albeit with varying track gauges.

Linzer Linien Unlike other trams seen on the tour, those in Linz are 900 mm gauge. The city has a five-line, 61-kilometre tram network with 62 trams. 56 of these are low-flow single ended trams built by Bombardier, including Cityrunner trams, supplied from 2002, and Flexity Outlook 2, delivered from 2011.

There are also four double ended Flexity Outlook trams with modifications for steep

gradients as well as three 1974 trams that were rebuilt in 2010 with new running gear which are also suitable for steep gradients.

After a depot tour, the group boarded one of the rebuilt 1974 trams for a ride to the Pöstlingbergbahn museum, which explains the history of one of the world’s steepest adhesion railways. This opened in 1898 and climbs 255 metres in 2.9 kilometres, with a maximum gradient of 11.8 per cent (1 in 8.5). After seeing the museum, the tram took the group to the top of the Pöstlingberg, a hill overlooking the Danube valley.

From Linz, the group travelled overnight to Switzerland on cramped double-decker sleepers.

Stadler After the sleeper arrived at Buch early on Friday, a local train and bus took the group to the site of a former seaplane factory on Lake Constance that is now Stadler’s manufacturing plant. Abigail Carson, a consultant engineer for Ricardo Rail, reports on the tour’s visit to this facility which, for her, was the highlight of the tour: What impresses about Stadler is its lean production and how it achieves mass production combined with tailor-made solutions. The variety of rolling stock Stadler produces is impressive, from locomotives bound for California, Merseyrail’s new trains, doubledecker KISS trains and compact Glasgow Subway trains - all with completely different body structures and sizes with vastly different design requirements.

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS Walking through the facility, it was interesting to see how the mass-produced, bare aluminium sections were transformed into such widely differing trains.

It was clear that Stadler is growing and expanding with ease, supplying rolling stock globally.

The production layout is simple, logical, and easily adaptable. Each step of the manufacturing process is lean and efficiently timed. There is a coherent system, with a well-disciplined workforce and robust processes. The entire facility is spotless and has an almost clinical feel.

It was interesting to learn how Stadler utilises its expensive machinery by overlapping shifts. However, there are noise challenges associated with the surrounding villages, so sequencing the processes for the time of day is vital.

Appenzeller Bahnen The remainder of the tour was spent in the rolling hills of eastern Switzerland, where train services are provided

by Appenzeller Bahnen.

Friday afternoon was spent experiencing the company’s two rack railways. The first, from Rheineck, by Lake Constance, was the 1.9-kilometre rack railway to Walzenhausen, which climbs 272 metres at a maximum gradient of 25 per cent.

From here, the group, and its luggage, just fitted onto a PostBus for a 20-minute ride

to Heiden, which is 794 metres above sea level and the upper terminus of the 7.2-kilometre rack railway that descends 396 metres to Rorschach at a maximum gradient of nine per cent. The rack railway depot at Heiden, which was commissioning double-deck buses made in Scotland for the Swiss PostBus system, provided an insight into rack railway traction and braking systems. An examination of one of the motor bogies showed its braking system and the complex drive that enables the trains to be driven by either their rack or rail wheels.

The future of both these rack railways is currently being assessed, as they only cover about 30 per cent of their operating costs. Options under consideration include closure, automatic operation or, for the Heiden railway, which only has

an hourly service, investment in extra capacity to generate extra revenue.

Whilst there is some doubt about the future of the Appenzeller Bahnen’s two rack railways, Saturday’s tour revealed the significant recent investment in its one-metre gauge adhesion railways. At St Gallen, the party’s train went through a 705-metre tunnel, opened in October last year, to replace a steeply graded part of the route that was a rack railway. This enabled a 15-minute service frequency to be introduced.

From St Gallen to the depot at Gais, the group travelled on a Stadler-built ‘Tango’ low-floor light-rail vehicle, which was one of eleven such trains delivered last year at a total cost of £66 million. These 53-metre-long units consist of two sets of three modules. The centre module of each set is mounted on a bogie

Inspecting a rack railway motor bogie.

Rack railway switch outside Heiden depot.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

31

32

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS and supports the adjacent modules, which each have only one bogie. This gives the six-module unit six bogies in a configuration that is designed for the sharp 30-metre radius curves on the route, which has a maximum gradient of eight per cent.

At Gais, there was an opportunity for a detailed examination of these units, together with the larger, 59-metre-long ‘Walzer’ low-floor EMU, five of which were also delivered last year at a cost of £31 million. The group travelled on one of these units from Appenzell to Gossau, to change onto the Swiss equivalent of a Pendolino (RABDe 500 jointly developed

by Bombardier and Alstom) to Zurich and the end of the tour.

Shared learning After seven intense days, it was clear that everyone had learned much from the visits and from each other. The 14 visits were a rare opportunity to study heavy and light rail maintenance and production outside the UK. The young engineers on the tour commented that they particularly appreciated the opportunity to see rail vehicle manufacturing at Škoda, Stadler and Plasser & Theurer, as well as the traction motor production at Traktionssysteme Austria.

Close scrutiny of the tram systems in Prague, Olomouc, Brno, Vienna and Linz showed the differences between

main line and light rail practice. Many commented on the portal suspension of Vienna’s ultra low floor trams, Olomouc’s tram train crossing and the wide variety of tram bogies seen.

The tour also highlighted the lack of light rail systems in the UK. Brno, for example, has a 70-kilometre tram network and is the same size as tramfree Leicester.

The way that Apenzellerland railways overcome the challenges of the Swiss terrain was also impressive and thought provoking. Indeed, one senior group of engineers debated the workings of rack and pinion traction well into the night.

Although it was unclear whether the new Tango units were trains or trams, they are perfectly adapted to their sharply curved, one-metre gauge track with impressive acceleration up an eight per cent grade.

As one younger member of the tour put it, “we can learn so much from how things are done in different countries”.

Providing such an opportunity was just one reason why the Railway Division’s Annual Technical Tour is such a worthwhile event.

Participants in the IMechE Technical Tour would like to thank Felix Schmid and Bridget Eickhoff, who organised and led the tour, all the group’s hosts in the Czech Republic, Austria and Switzerland, the event’s sponsors: Angel Trains, Beeston Rail Standards, Birmingham University Alumni, Eversholt Rail, Malcolm Dobell Consulting Ltd, Manchester Engineering Consultancy and Unipart Rail.

Thanks also to Emma Armstrong, Nadeem Ahmed, Franziska Schmuecker, Calum McLean and Abigail Carson for their contributions to this feature.

Walzer EMU ‘heavy rail’ type train.

Tango light rail vehicle.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

Depot Control for the 21st Century! ”In an industry where there can be no compromise on system performance or safety!

Tie-FenLock is a name to trust with over 30 year’s operational use in the UK and over a 1,000 systems deployed worldwide.

Tie-FenLock systems are developed specifically for railway depots, stabling, steelworks, ports, freight terminals and similar facilities. The system provides a cost effective, highly reliable train control solution that has bespoke functionality driven by client requirements.

Fenix Rail Systems provide a collaborative approach to projects, our clients benefit from our expertise in rail signalling, enabling Fenix to deliver a cost effective turnkey train control solution which includes signalling alterations and interfaces to any mainline interlocking. Our service includes design, installation testing and commissioning.”

03300 580180

fenixrailsystems.com

enquiries@fenixrailsystems.com

When there must be a light at the end of the tunnel

The alternative is unthinkable Make it Morris Site Machinery The SMC TL55 Battery www.morrismachinery.co.uk

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

33

34

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

On the up down under ZONEGREEN PROTECTION SYSTEM INSTALLED AT MELBOURNE’S PACKENHAM EAST DEPOT

R

ail safety is not only a constant concern for managers everywhere, it is very much in the news after a couple of notable recent accidents. But, of course, this is not just a UK problem. Breaches of rules on safe working procedures have increased by 47 per cent in Australia’s rail industry since 2016. This concerning statistic was revealed in the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator’s (ONRSR) Safety Report for 2017-18, which also highlighted that one in six of these breaches posed a significant level of threat, including failures that could have resulted in workers being struck by a moving vehicle.

It is difficult to put a precise figure on the cost of a fatality. In addition to the unquantifiable, enormous human grief and suffering, there is the cost of legal proceedings, medical and emergency services charges, associated damage to equipment, loss of production and insurance costs to consider. All in all, a seven-figure sum would not be unreasonable.

Depot worker safety is currently considered a national priority in Australia and an industry-wide safety improvement proposal has been announced by the ONRSR. With that in mind, ensuring personnel at Melbourne’s new maintenance facility, Pakenham East, were afforded the highest levels of protection was a priority for operator Evolution Rail, a consortium comprising Downer Group, CRRC and Plenary.

Depots are inherently dangerous places to work, with hazards including moving trains and high voltage equipment part and parcel of everyday life. However, advances in technology mean the risks to staff can be almost eradicated by removing the human element in safety procedures.

Leading this revolution are the specialist engineers at Sheffield-based Zonegreen.

The firm is recognised as the creator of modern depot protection and its flagship system has now widely replaced traditional methods of safeguarding maintenance staff in the UK. Working with Australian partner Andrew Engineering, Zonegreen’s Depot Personnel Protection System (DPPS) has been installed at Pakenham East, ensuring depot worker safety in Australia continues to grow in line with the sector’s ambition and the delivery of ground breaking projects.

Melbourne moves forward Packenham is being constructed to serve the State Government’s High Capacity Metro Trains project, which is introducing 65 bigger, better trains into Melbourne to meet its growing needs.

The A$2.3 billion project is working towards reducing congestion and travel times for commuters and will initially run on the city’s busiest rail corridor to the South East and eventually head north through a new metro tunnel that is currently being built.

This is the second Australian depot to be equipped with Zonegreen’s technology.

DPPS was installed at Wulkuraka in Ipswich, Queensland, three years ago and the Bombardier facility retains an unblemished safety record. Unsurprisingly, Pakenham’s operators were keen to introduce the same levels of staff safety.

Ground breaking depot protection DPPS is a standard product that provides the safest and easiest method of controlling train movements in rail depots.

It combines powered derailers, road end control panels, train detection equipment, warning signals and personal datakeys to protect staff and infrastructure and is the most advanced, reliable and tested product of its type.

Zonegreen has spent many years and hundreds of thousands of pounds on research and development, using customer feedback to ensure it moves with the times, makes the most of advances in technology and remains relevant in this ever-evolving industry.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

LIFE IS PRICELESS.

zonegreen safe working solutions

SMART DEPOT PERSONNEL PROTECTION SYSTEM (DPPS™) Renowned as the global market leading depot protection system, the SMART DPPS™ delivers physical protection from vehicle movements to rail depot staff whilst providing visual and audible warnings.

www.zonegreen.co.uk

The Smart DPPS™: • Protects staff and equipment • Ensures safe and controlled movement of rail vehicles into and out of the depot • Allows train maintenance operations to be conducted without endangering the safety of staff or damaging infrastructure

Tel: +44 (0)114 230 0822

It is: • Fully configurable, flexible and functional • Proven in use and installed globally • Capable of interfacing with third party equipment including signalling systems.

• Adaptable to the safe requirements of the depot

info@zonegreen.co.uk

36

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS and provided an interlocking solution that links DPPS to the overhead lines (OLE), preventing personnel and machinery from coming into contact with high voltage equipment. They will also be undertaking routine maintenance.

Looking to the future

The result is a dynamic, intuitive, userfriendly system that allows depots to provide the highest standards of safety for staff.

By utilising modern electronics, DPPS provides excellent reliability and functionality and incorporates remote diagnostic features that make it easier to maintain, expanding the lifetime of the product. Standardised software means that, whilst the system can be configured to the unique layout of each facility, it is proven, tried and tested so any updates or improvements can be rolled out with ease and minimal expense.

This innovative software reduces the cabling and electrical components required of DPPS, making it more resilient and able to withstand the rigours of a rail depot. It is based on an intuitive four-button graphical user interface that can be programmed in any language and has been designed to ensure future modifications or expansions are simple to undertake.

Providing an overview of DPPS at Packenham is Zonegreen’s monitoring, planning and analytical tool, Depot Manager. This identifies where staff are logged onto the safety system and offers advanced traceability by recording all actions, displaying the status of plant and equipment and delivering easy to interpret data that is accurate and readily accessible should an incident occur.

Depot Manager also boasts a ‘remote move’ function. This enables train movements on sidings roads to be controlled from the supervisor’s office, allowing shunt signal aspects to be changed and warning beacons initiated when it is safe to do so. If a worker is logged onto a maintenance road, however, train movements are blocked until they have confirmed the area is clear.

As part of Zonegreen’s commitment

to further lowering the number of injuries and accidents in depots, all of its software is tested rigorously and repeatedly by in-house experts to minimise errors.

Continued testing is carried out after installation and the firm works closely with all of its clients to ensure their systems are operating efficiently and effectively to protect staff at all times.

Protection for Pakenham Pakenham is being specially constructed to maintain Melbourne’s new high capacity trains. The 118-hectare site can accommodate 30 of the seven-car electric vehicles and will include a wheel lathe, bio and graffiti cleaning and a test track.

As part of the build process, Zonegreen has tailored its technology to the new depot’s unique needs. DPPS has been installed on 16 road ends within the main shed, ten of which boast physical protection via powered derailers. They are operated by road-end panels, controlled by the system’s personalised datakeys, enabling the safe and efficient passage of trains in and out of the depot.

The datakeys are programmed with varying levels of access, commensurate to the user’s job role, that allow staff to create safe zones in which to work. They contain advanced encryption, providing additional security, although temporary keys can also be made available, granting visitors access for a limited period and mitigating the distribution of duplicates, should a member of staff forget their original.

Protection at Packenham has also been boosted by the incorporation of visual and audible warnings in the form of beacons and klaxons, indicating when vehicle movements have been authorised.

In addition, DPPS is interfaced with the signalling system, preventing routes being set into the main shed if personnel are logged onto specific roads.

Zonegreen’s Australian colleagues, Andrew Engineering, carried out the physical installation of the safety system

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

Christian Fletcher, Zonegreen’s technical director, said: ‘We are really pleased to have been specified for Pakenham

by Evolution Rail. The installation ran smoothly and we look forward to building a long and successful relationship with the depot. The project marks a significant milestone in our development overseas, helping us gain traction in another important export market.”

The firm has recently celebrated DPPS’ 20th anniversary by launching a new roadend panel, operated via radio frequency identification (RFID) cards, which utilise a unique, proprietary RFID reader that has been incorporated into the system. This latest version of DPPS also offers verbal warnings of vehicle movements, making it easier to distinguish areas of risk.

Christian added: “Our work at Pakenham will no doubt act as a springboard into future facilities across the country as the local rail industry becomes more aware of our advanced technology, its capability and flexibility to work with existing systems.

“We believe our ability to protect staff and equipment, by eradicating any margin for human error, is unrivalled and will continue to improve, as we find new ways to make rail depots safer and more productive.”

RAISING STANDARDS RAILWAY LIFTING JACKS

With 40 years’ experience in heavy duty lifting solutions, TotalKare combines world class products with industry leading support to facilitate effective maintenance and repair, keeping you on track for success.

CALL 0121 585 2724 VISIT WWW.TOTALKARE.CO.UK

38

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS

New Tyne & Wear

depot at Howdon

T

he Tyne and Wear Metro serves the area surrounding Newcastle upon Tyne, Gateshead and Sunderland.

It is the largest metro system in the UK after London Underground, with a network length of 77.5 kilometres, split between two lines, and 60 stations.

Artists impressions on how the trains that will shortly be ordered for Tyne & Wear metro could look.

Rolling stock dates from the opening of the network. 90 ‘Metrocars’ were built by Metro Cammell in Birmingham, with the first two being prototypes that were only added to the fleet, after modification, in 1987. Normally coupled together in pairs, the cars can operate independently or in rakes of up to four.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

The Class 599 Metrocars are stabled, maintained and repaired at Gosforth depot, just north of South Gosforth station. It is an older depot, built in 1923 to service the Tyneside Electrics that ran on much of what is today the Metro network.

Nexus, the Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive, operates the Metro. It is buying a new fleet of trains, although whether CAF, Hitachi or Stadler

will supply the £362 million new fleet has yet to be announced.

Whichever bidder is successful, the first trains are expected by the end of 2021 with the whole fleet replaced by 2024.

One is not enough As part of this process, the Gosforth depot will be completely rebuilt for the new fleet.

Which leaves two problems.

What to do with the existing fleet in terms of stabling, maintenance and repair? And where to accommodate the new trains once they start arriving?

Tel: 01280 823355 www.buckinghamgroup.co.uk

Total Construction Solutions for the Rail Industry

Multi-disciplinary rail construction services include:

Allerton Depot

Rail engineering; civil & structural engineering Depots & trainwash facilities Stations and passenger area construction and refurbishment Station car parks; at grade, decked & multi-storey Platform construction and extensions

Blackburn Depot

Permanent way, construction, raising & lowering Bridge structures & retaining walls, including piling Lineside structures, foundations, culverts Earthworks, embankments & cuttings Embankment construction, stabilisation & protection

Wakefield Westgate Station

Railway track beds & ballast operations Major re-signalling schemes Troughing route

Alstom Depot

Buckingham Group hold a full, Network Rail approved, Principal Contractors Licence (PCL) and all appropriate, audited and verified RISQS RICCL / Product Codes

40

ROLLING STOCK/DEPOTS The Tyne and Wear Metro therefore needs a second, albeit temporary, depot.

A former landfill site at Howdon in North Tyneside has been selected and Buckingham Group Contracting will be building the temporary Metro depot on behalf of Nexus.

Nexus managing director Tobyn Hughes explained: “We need a temporary Metro depot while we transition to permanent new maintenance facilities and the new Metro train fleet.

“Our main depot in Gosforth is going to be completely rebuilt and this work will happen in stages, so we must have a bespoke location to store and maintain our trains while that project is delivered over the next few years.

“The site in North Tyneside is ideal for us, and it can also be used as the delivery point when the Metro new trains start arriving.”

Nexus has secured Government grant funding of £337 million towards the projected £362 million cost of designing and building a new train fleet and depot.

This, and the ongoing maintenance of the fleet over 35 years, makes the total budget about £500 million.

Planning The first task is for the design of the new depot and preparation of the land.

Buckingham Group Contracting will manage the process through both the outline and detailed design stages. The company’s in-house team will deliver the temporary works design and carry out land remediation for the former waste tip area, improving the ground using vibro-stone columns and lime and cement stabilisation.

The new facility will be used to accept the delivery of the new fleet, assemble the new fleet and stable a number of vehicles away from the main depot site at Gosforth during the construction phase. It will therefore need to include a new light maintenance building and the surrounding roads will need to be able to accommodate the new trains when they arrive by road. Once they arrive, there will have to be provision to ontrack the new trains.

The railway facilities at the new depot will have to include a new crossover and depot entry/exit turnout, fully signalled and controlled from Nexus’ control centre at Gosforth. The depot track layout includes 50-metre radius turnouts, to be

Aerial view of the current Gosforth depot, which will be rebuilt once the temporary depot at Howdon is operational.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

manufactured by Vossloh, to allow the 10 stabling roads to be accommodated on the site.

A 1,500V DV overhead line system will be supplied by a new 11kV substation.

The depot will have its own signalling and control room, to be provided by Fenix Rail Systems, and a fully integrated Depot Personnel Protection System. The SCADA (supervisory control and data acquisition) and telecoms systems will need updating, as will the Nexus Rail Traffic Management System, which will be carried out in partnership with Resonate.

Four weekend Extended Closures of the Line (ECoLs) will be needed at various stages of the build process, which is scheduled to be complete by 29 May 2020.

Challenging time Rob Harwood, Buckingham’s rail contract director, said: “It’s a very challenging project for us. We need to finish on time with the new rolling stock coming in. We need to work really closely with our client Nexus.

It’s challenging for many reasons. The first is there are butterflies on the site, and we need to look after them and not interrupt their habitat. It’s a brilliant project for us and I’m really excited about next year.”

The site will have room to stable about 10 of the existing trains, away from Gosforth while the work to demolish and reconstruct the depot takes place, and will be the first home for the new trains once they start arriving in two years’ time.

Work to rebuild Gosforth will be the responsibility of the manufacturer selected to supply the new fleet of trains.

net.cert.uk

Assuring railway safety for everyone’s peace of mind

Network Certification Body (NCB) provides a system-wide approach to railway assurance and certification on infrastructure and vehicle projects, both UK and worldwide.

NCB is accredited as a Notified Body, Designated Body, Assessment Body and a Plant Assessment Body to give an unrivalled level of services across the railway system.

As industry experts, our business reduces risk, inspires trust and increases value for people who depend upon safe rail networks.

Get in touch to discuss how we can help. ncbenquiries@networkrail.co.uk. 01908 784002

A Rail Infrastructure

Rail Systems

Rail Vehicle

Rail Plant

Company

42

FEATURE

COLLIN CARR

Dawlish Sea Wall The Start of a 100-Year Plan

O PHOTO: ISTOCKPHOTO.COM

ver the last few years, Rail Engineer has written a number of articles about the Dawlish sea wall. There have been many pictures showing this vulnerable piece of infrastructure with lengths of wall being breached by storms and high seas and with rail tracks suspended in mid-air, no longer protected by the ageing sea wall.

The sea wall protects the high Devon cliffs, the town of Dawlish itself and its local inhabitants. It also provides a vital rail trade route into west Devon and Cornwall, helping to connect many west-country communities with the rest of the UK. Emergency action taken to limit the effects of storm damage in 2014 involved the importation of old shipping containers filled with rock. The containers were designed to absorb temporarily the forces of the tides and provided an engineering lifeline to those involved in saving the Dawlish sea wall from total collapse.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

These concerns must be seen against a backcloth of rising sea levels and more extreme weather patterns predicted for the future. These are messages that we cannot escape and that is why Network Rail has decided that the warning signs are clear and that a detailed plan needs to be developed now, to ensure that this railway route is fit for purpose for the next 100 years.

Key areas of concern Detailed studies, designs and joint working between world-leading marine, coastal and railway engineering experts instigated by Network Rail are well

underway. Three key areas of concern are emerging, although there may be more to follow.

The first relates to the coastal resilience of this section of railway, specifically, in the short term, around Dawlish – Marine Parade and Dawlish Station. The second is the condition of the tunnel portals and geotechnical risk between Kennaway and Parsons tunnel, this covers five tunnels in all on the coastal route. The third concern is the instability of the cliffs behind the railway formation in the Holcombe area between Parsons tunnel and Teignmouth.

Detailed proposals for the resilience of the sea wall in Dawlish – Marine Parade have been developed by engineering consultants from Arup, the outcome of which was to build a new sea wall, 2.5 metres higher than the existing wall.

FEATURE

The new wall The profile of the proposed wall includes a curved upper edge, designed to direct the waves back towards the sea. There will also be a wider, safer promenade, with seating, which will enable visitors and locals to continue to enjoy the clear views of the coast. The plan is that a new coastal defence will be constructed in two phases, at Marine Parade and around Dawlish station. However, it was agreed that work would stop during the peak summer season from July to September this year, to minimise disruption to the local community and tourism in the area.

The new wall will cost around £80 million. The first phase extends from the Colonnade underpass, west of Dawlish station, to Boat Cove, a length of approximately 360 metres, and will

take nine months to complete. The first phase of the work, valued at £25 million, was awarded to BAM Nuttall, with work starting on 1 June and completion planned for spring 2020.

The second phase, which is currently being planned, will extend the defences from Dawlish station to Coastguards Breakwater, around 420 metres, and cost

an estimated £5 million. Dawlish station is a listed building and Network Rail is determined to dramatically improve the access to, and mobility within, the station as part of the work, the planning of which is proving to be quite a challenge for Arup. Network Rail expect to share more information on phase two in the summer 2020.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

43

44

FEATURE

PHOTO: ISTOCKPHOTO.COM

Site preparation BAM Nuttall is now well established on site, concentrating on preparing for work and mobilisation. Access to the sea wall is a significant challenge. Pipework has been installed around and under the tracks, so that concrete could be pumped from mixers into the foundations at the foot of the new sea wall.

As substantial volumes of concrete would need to be delivered, appropriate routes through the sensitive, local countryside, had to be established for the delivery vehicles, with Newton Abbot emerging as a more favourable route than Exeter.

Noise, vibration, track and structural monitoring equipment needed to be installed to ensure that, once the excavation of sand and rock to construct the new foundations started, the overall structural integrity of the sea wall remained intact ready to withstand the next incoming tide.

The workforce is required to work 10-hour shifts, planned to coincide with the timing of the tides. Close monitoring of the tides was necessary as the specification stated that no work could take place on the foundations if the forecasted significant wave height was greater than 0.9 metres within the next 24 hours. This is due to the temporary stability of the sea wall during the works while the new concrete foundations are gaining strength. A 36-hour advance warning of wave height was therefore introduced. A small number of shifts have already had to be cancelled and winter has yet to come!

Competent rock

Dangerous ‘swallow’ holes

The work that has been carried out so far has focussed on the new sea wall foundations and well over 300 metres of foundation work has been completed.

After clearing the existing beach material, the sand in front of the existing sea wall is excavated to a depth of five metres, down through the sand to competent rock.

Excavation then continues, another two metres down into the rock.

Timber shuttering is then installed and held in temporary position by concrete Jersey Barriers, designed to add additional stability.

A specially designed concrete mix is then pumped into the excavation, displacing both water and slurry. Once the concrete has cured, the top 150mm, which includes the slurry, is removed using a milling machine, leaving a strong and firm foundation. Each foundation is constructed in intermittent five-metre bays to ensure that the stability of the existing wall is not compromised. With favourable conditions, up to two bays can be cast in one shift.

Engineers who have been involved in maintaining sea wall structures will be interested to know that, during investigations, a number of voids have been identified with ground-penetrating radar (GPR) within the existing wall. When coupled with tidal energy, small holes in the face of the wall can result in the washout of large volumes of material from behind the sea wall, with minimal visual signs. Usually, they are hidden by sand and evidence of their existence is only revealed when a significant amount of track formation has suddenly disappeared.

Voids that could accommodate a double decker bus are not unknown and, of course, it means that, when the backing to a sea wall is removed, the stability of the wall itself becomes very fragile when the next tide comes in. Suffice it to say, Network Rail has ensured that every such hole has been well grouted as part of the process.

The design then requires the installation of vertical dowels that will anchor precast concrete U-channel units to the in-situ

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

FEATURE pumped concrete foundations and form a base for the new precast concrete wall.

As has been mentioned, the wall will be 2.5 metres higher than the existing one and designed with a distinctive recurve to deflect the waves back into the sea.

Also, the front of the precast units will be scarified to create a rough stone finish.

the site as well the engineering solution.

Access to these tunnels is very difficult and there is a specific requirement to build a 210-metre structure at the Dawlish end of Parsons tunnel, designed to capture the regular rock fall and protect trains. Detailed plans are expected to be ready before the end of the year.

Improvements for residents

Moving the railway?

The new walkway promenade will be raised by 1.4 metres and there will be a 1.1-metre parapet wall that will form part of the overhang that will deflect the waves.

Improved lighting and seating will help to enhance the image of this new sea wall.

As stated, plans for stage two are well advanced and significant efforts are being taken by Network Rail to keep the local community well informed and up to date.

Monthly newsletters are published for the residents and alongside the station is a community information hub that is open on Wednesdays from 11:00 to 14:00.

Network Rail staff are on hand to answer any questions or to discuss any concerns.

In addition, Network Rail is hosting an evening session from 17:00 until 19:00, giving commuters an opportunity to talk to the team.

The second area of concern, tunnel portals and the geotechnical risk between Kennaway and Parsons tunnel, centres round the limited construction access to

Then there are the cliffs at Holcombe.

These have been a worry for engineers for many years and close monitoring of movement has been in place since 2014, with drones regularly surveying the site and monitoring for live feedback on any cliff movements.

The solution proposed by design consultancy Arcadis is to move the tracks 30 to 40 metres out to sea, leaving room to stabilise the cliffs. This is a significant undertaking that will involve constructing

a new length of railway, although it will be only 5-10 metres longer than the existing track due to it taking a straighter route across the bay. Apart from the obvious engineering challenges, there is a 400-year-old shipwreck in the way, along with a whole host of marine related issues.

Network Rail’s senior programme manager David Lovell and project manager Phil Morton, who kindly outlined all the detail for Rail Engineer, have an enthusiasm for the success of this programme that was clearly evident, as was their appreciation of the challenges ahead if all that is being proposed comes to fruition.

Given the opportunity and the funding, there will be many exciting challenges for engineers to overcome ensuring that there will be a vibrant railway service along the Dawlish coast for at least the next 100 years.

PHOTO: ISTOCKPHOTO.COM

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

45

46

FEATURE

Gateline throughput

at stations

R

ecent articles in Rail Engineer have brought out how capacity gains may be achieved through timetabling, signalling, train length, dwell times, platform utilisation and such like. With ever-increasing rail and metro usage, all of these may be used as ways of getting more people onto trains and through the system.

However, more people bring more challenges - have they all got tickets? have they paid the right fare? can they access the station? is the station customer friendly? and so on.

Station management and ticketing are vital factors that operators have to get right to meet the capacity challenge. Mobility as a Service (MaaS) solutions may be the key to demand responsive transit that brings together passenger actions with station technologies.

In 2017, Rail Engineer attended a presentation initiated by the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) that looked at how technology might improve the ease with which passengers pass through ticket gates. Then known as Key Pass, the system used a Bluetooth connection between the gate and the ‘ticket’ for both validation and barrier activation, so it didn’t slow down the flow of people whilst they fumbled in pockets for paper, card or mobile travel documents.

Developed by Bytemark, which is now a subsidiary of Siemens Mobility, this was an experiment to determine whether ‘tickets’ could be read without the traveller having to do anything except walk through. A description of the system was given in issue 150 (April 2017).

Back then, the demonstration was based around ‘channelling’ the passenger towards one of the gates, whereupon a number of sensors - four on the approach walk and two on an overhead column - would read the ‘ticket’ on a person and, if valid, open the gate accordingly. This would speed up the process of getting people through.

It was recognised that several factors could happen that disturbed the flow - a passenger with the wrong ticket, an unfamiliar traveller hesitating in front of the gate not knowing what to do, a passenger not approaching the gate at the right angle and, of course, the ever-present threat of someone intent on fraudulent travel. The system would be best suited to everyday commuters who all tended to be doing the same thing.

Although intended to go forward as a trial at a suitable chosen station, this never happened as ongoing considerations revealed a number of drawbacks that would be hard to resolve. A re-think on both system operation and physical layout was needed.

The Emergence of Air Gate The revamped system was showcased

by Bytemark and Siemens Mobility at the Transport Ticketing Global event in London during January 2019. As part of

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

CLIVE KESSELL

the organization’s emphasis on connected mobility, it is committed to ensuring that its MaaS offerings are not only the latest in digital technologies, but are also increasing value sustainably for transit operators while enhancing the passenger experience.

As demand continues to increase, transportation providers will need to offer demand-responsive transit in order to guarantee availability to passengers and keep the systems running efficiently.

Air Gate, as it is now branded, offers a Bluetooth activation that is almost invisible to passengers. The earlier individual channels and sensors associated with each barrier or gate are dispensed with, and the arch now contains many more sensing beacons than hitherto, identifying

FEATURE more accurately the position of travellers who approach the gate line from different angles.

Once in the barrier area, the Bluetoothconnected ticket or smartphone is sensed by the beacons, which search for a valid travel authorisation. Once a ‘ticket’ is identified, these beacons begin the validation process and continue to monitor the traveller up to the chosen gate for entry or exit.

If the ticket or smartphone is validated, the gate will open automatically without the passenger having to produce any ticket or device from a pocket or bag. If the ticket is incorrect or invalid, then the gate remains shut and the traveller must go to a manned barrier for the circumstances to be investigated.

Infrared technology is deployed to determine whether or not an approaching traveller has a Bluetooth device on their person. If one can’t be found, the passenger will be directed away from these gates towards a conventional barrier.

For those who have the right connectivity, the Bluetooth locators will pass positioning data to a centralised controller. The validation process may be carried out onsite by the Air Gate controller, or by a fare validation contained within the fare gate, or by a back-office system via an online connection. Whichever method is selected, the time to do this with modern communications is just microseconds and the connected back-office system will produce travel and ticketing statistics.

If a rail or metro operator chooses to have non-gated access to trains, the Air Gate system can still be used to measure the number of people not having a valid travel authority. It is recognised that catching fare

dodgers is always more difficult without gates, but the scale of the problem will be better understood.

Operational realism Clearly, such a system can never be introduced overnight and it must coexist with other ticket types, certainly for many years, if not for ever. Intended as a throughput improvement, measurements have indicated that it will achieve one person per second as against a typical Oyster transaction of 2.3 seconds, so getting on for nearly a three times improvement.

Consider a motorway toll plaza. Typically, this will have three sets of ‘gates’ - one using the toll road’s own smart token ‘drive through’ system, one for drivers paying by credit card, and one for cash. Similarly, station gatelines are likely to have two or even three alternative paths - Bluetooth, contactless cards such as Oyster and ITSO, and paper tickets.

Uptake will be slow, but this will increase as travellers turn to having tickets as mobile apps, with the smartphone having

Bluetooth connectivity. Season ticket holders and rail staff are predicted to be the first batch of users and word will soon get around that this new technology speeds up the entry or exit process Combating fraud is always a challenge and this system will not prevent ‘hugging’, whereby a fraudster closely follows a genuine ticket holder through the gate, although the movement of the unticketed person will be monitored and alarms set off. It is, however, entirely possible that, if a stolen mobile is used and has been reported, then the system can wipe any ticket information from this.

Although education and associated publicity will all be part of the introduction, the end objective of everyone having a Bluetooth enabled ticket will probably never be achieved. The need for an alternative means of entry and exit with nearby staff assistance will remain, as indeed it is with present day barrier and ticketing technology.

Close liaison with the barrier provision suppliers is essential and Siemens Mobility has a working relationship with others in the industry. As gate line and ticketing technology increases in sophistication, so barrier and gate line control must align with this. Passenger counting is another distinct possibility, at least for those who pass through the Bluetooth barriers.

Next steps Siemens Mobility is exploring the possibility of trials with potential customers.

It is also constantly innovating to provide other demand-responsive MaaS offerings.

In Denmark, for instance, the entire country is utilizing one of its mobile ticketing and payment platforms to ensure that passengers can transition seamlessly between different modes of transit.

As demand continues to increase, the reliance on digital solutions to manage capacity will become increasingly critical.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

47

48

FEATURE

Restoring the roof at Aberdeen station

A

s well as building a huge railway network in a very short space of time, Victorian engineers and architects also built some great stations. Many are still in everyday use today, restored, listed, and a credit to the nation.

Aberdeen Joint station was built comparatively late - between 1913 and 1916. It replaced an earlier station, opened in 1867 on the same site, a station close-by on Guild Street and Aberdeen Waterloo station near the harbour.

Aberdeen Joint thus became the city’s sole station, and was renamed simply Aberdeen in 1952.

Although originally built with 13 platforms, there are now only seven, two through platforms and five bays. A ‘Category A’ listed building, the station is the busiest north of Glasgow and Edinburgh and handles nearly three million passengers a year.

was adopted was to use an innovative rolling access platform to carry out the work. This gave access to one third of the main concourse roof from below and allowed the works to progress more quickly and safely due to fewer dismantling and erecting phases.

The glazed panels were replaced with approximately 8,000 square metres of Twinfix’s Multi-Link-Panel NF (NonFragile) roof-glazing system with 6mm solid obscure Georgian wired-effect polycarbonate.

As well as Aberdeen, this system has been installed at many stations across the UK including Stirling (issue 141, July 2016). It is an aluminium-framed

Replacing the glass Last year, £8 million was invested in a twelve-month programme to refurbish the station roof and replace 10,000 existing glass panels which were prone to cracking, leaking and discolouration. Story Contracting was the principal contractor for the project, Twinfix supplied the roof-glazing system and Macleod Roofing installed it.

The main challenge faced by Story Contracting was how to access the works at height safely, so as to carry out the glazing replacement with as little impact as possible on the daily operation of the station and passengers. The solution that

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

modular rooflight system, designed with a patented fixing method that results in incredibly quick installation times - a real bonus when working with limited possession times. It is a cleverly designed and well-engineered roofglazing concept that combines simplicity with sophistication, which has long been available as a non-fragile system that conforms to the HSE’s approved drop test for non-fragility, ACR[M]001:2014.

Twinfix offers a range of different glazing options for these non-fragile rooflight panels: multiwall polycarbonate, which is very lightweight, solid polycarbonate - a clear product that looks like laminated glass but is virtually unbreakable, and 6mm solid obscure Georgian wired-effect polycarbonate.

The light weight and simple design meant that Macleod Roofing could easily install a large number of panels each

Innovative, quick to fit, safe roof-glazing Multi-Link-Panel Non-Fragile Twinfix supply modular polycarbonate panels for use as rooflights in railway stations and depots. The polycarbonate used to glaze these panels can either look like the original Georgian wired glass or appear as clear as plate glass, depending on the grade of polycarbonate glazing specified.

The chosen product for rail and depot rooflights is the innovative Multi-Link-Panel NF (Non Fragile), its fix and link method of installation is incredibly quick to fit, making it an excellent choice for installation in stations where possession times are an issue.

The Multi-Link-Panel system features the following benefits: Fast installation

Recyclable

Non-Fragile

Long lasting and durable glazing

Modular pre-assembled panels

Light weight

Virtually unbreakable polycarbonate

UV coated polycarbonate

For more information contact us on:

Tel: 01925 811311

Email: enquiries@twinfix.co.uk

www.twinfix.co.uk

50

FEATURE night, maximising the possession time.

David Mackinnon, general manager for Macleod Roofing, said: “We have worked with Twinfix on several large projects to date. Due to the lightweight nature, strength and versatility of the Twinfix product, you can cover large areas in a limited time, this is really helpful when working on live railway stations, when you are restricted to night shifts and trackside possession hours.”

Looking good The Georgian wired polycarbonate glazing combines the appearance of Georgian wired glass with all the material benefits of polycarbonate. Quite simply, it’s a 6mm thick dimpled surface solid polycarbonate with the traditional look of Georgian wired glass.

It is the ideal material for station canopy glazing because the combination of its light weight of just 7.2kg/m2, which is substantially less than the glass alternative, and impact resistance make it safer to install than the glass alternative.

Being virtually unbreakable also negates future costly broken glazing replacement.

It can withstand natural forces, such as severe wind, hail and snowstorms, and absorbs vibrations caused by train movements without cracking, crazing or breaking. It also provides a lowmaintenance, long-lasting rail roof solution, which is strong, corrosionresistant and self-cleaning.

Story Contracting contracts manager Eddie Esdale said: “The finished results at Aberdeen station are fantastic. The key challenge for the project was to keep passenger disruption to a minimum and we were able to maintain good light levels and good pedestrian flow throughout the work. We were also able to take experience from the canopy replacement works we previously delivered at Stirling,

where we installed almost 5,000 new Twinfix polycarbonate glazing panels in the busy central Scotland station.”

As well as improving the overall environment in a lighter, brighter station, the addition of the Twinfix Georgian wired polycarbonate at Aberdeen has preserved the listed building’s unique appearance and character while providing modern levels of safety for passengers and staff. A further improvement at Aberdeen was the introduction of 482 hatches, enabling staff to safely carry out gutter cleaning without having to gain access above the glazing something that wasn’t previously possible at the station.

Andy Savage, executive director of the Railway Heritage Trust (RHT), said: “The restoration of the Aberdeen canopies is not a project that we were involved in funding, but the RHT is delighted that Network Rail has restored the canopy glazing, especially over the unglazed section of canopy on Platform 7. The RHT is most happy with the finished work, in its appearance as a structure, in improving the passenger experience, and in making future gutter maintenance so much easier and safer.”

Over the years, the Multi-Link-Panel NF (Non-Fragile) roof-glazing system with 6mm solid obscure Georgian wired effect polycarbonate has been installed in many listed stations, maintaining the

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

historic look of these stations but, at the same time, enabling them to be improved to meet modern day safety standards. Network Rail asset manager Valerie McMillan commented: “Twinfix

provided an excellent service throughout the project. From designing a solution specific to Aberdeen station with larger access hatches for safe roof cleaning, to visiting the site regularly to oversee the installation and provide expert advice to the contractor as required.

“As a client, this was important and provided us with the assurance that a quality solution was implemented. The Georgian wired-effect polycarbonate is indistinguishable from the traditional Georgian wired glass, which appeased the planners and means that cracked and leaking panels will be a thing of the past.

“The new roofs provide a muchimproved station environment for our customers and passengers to enjoy.”

FEATURE

Performance Matters It doesn’t happen by chance At Generac we fine tune the details and use the latest technologies to build robust tower lights. With telemetry for live tracking and fleet management, alternative fuel choices with hybrid and electric options and even dimmable light configurations.

We light motorways, we keep teams working and we help you stay safe at night.

The powerful lighting company.

+44(0)1270 445 777 www.generacmobileproducts.co.uk

V20 - Made for Performance

IQ20 - Made for Economy

V20 Hybrid - Made for Progress

Redi-Rock modular retaining wall system

...with the look of natural stone!

Build Faster Build Leaner Build Geener Build Quality Build Smarter Build to Last 1066kg

Download BIM and free Redi-Rock™ design software at www.cpm-group.com

T: 01179 814500 E: redirock@marshalls.co.uk W: www.cpm-group.com Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

51

52

FEATURE

Cornwall’s

Capacity Triumph CLIVE KESSELL

Plymouth power box.

B

ack in January 2018 (issue 159), Rail Engineer reported on a plan to increase the capacity of rail operations in Cornwall by upgrading and modernising the existing signalling.

At that time, the plans were almost finalised but work had yet to start.

A subsequent article in October 2018 (issue 168) described the data communication links associated with the scheme and how these were enabling the signalling to be interconnected.

The project work was completed by October 2018 and thus an enhanced train timetable has existed throughout the recent summer. So how has it worked out in practice, what benefits have been realised, does the new technology fit in with the old and have any downsides been noticed?

Rail Engineer spent a day touring the various sites to see the signalling in action and to talk with the people involved.

Project Background In later BR days, much of the signalling in Cornwall was rationalised, with many boxes being closed and long block sections created. The line from Burngullow (near St Austell) to Probus

(just short of Truro) was even singled, which resulted in operating chaos if trains ran late, that could have knock-on effects right across the rail network.

After living with this nightmare for a few years, the section was redoubled, with some intermediate signal sections incorporated between Par and Truro, which perhaps set the scene for what was to come.

For some time, ways to improve Cornwall’s signalling had been under discussion, even including thinking ‘outside the box’ by outsourcing the upgrade and subsequent operation to one of the signalling suppliers. Quickly dismissed as impractical on a number of counts, a revised proposal was investigated to completely re-signal the route with track circuit block, colour light signals and a single control centre. Whilst perfectly possible, it would have been an expensive project and the business case

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

did not stack up. Could there be a more pragmatic solution?

The answer was yes, by retaining the existing signal boxes, shortening the block sections to create around a six-minute headway, modernising some of the level crossings and utilising the recently provided telecom transmission links to join it all up.

Plans reached an advanced stage by the middle of 2017 and two contracts were let, one for the eastern (Amey) and the other for the western (Atkins) sections.

These companies would work with Network Rail to design, install and test the new additions, engaging specialist subcontractors as required to supply the necessary component parts.

The eastern section (Plymouth to Lostwithiel) was commissioned in three stages during the Spring of 2018 and the western section in a single stage by means of a short blockade in Autumn

FEATURE 2018. Using the winter of 2018/9 to bed the systems in, an improved timetable has been in place during the summer and a further timetable enhancement will take place in December 2019.

Signal boxes and the control Eight signal boxes remain on Cornwall’s main line – Plymouth Power Signal Box, Liskeard, Lostwithiel, Par, Truro, Roskear, St Erth and Penzance. All these have different characteristics and have needed to be modified in different ways.

Taking each in turn: Plymouth Power Box must be one of the oldest power boxes still in existence, having been commissioned in November 1960. Although extended in operation both eastwards and westwards, it remains the same basic equipment with the former Western Region ‘push and turn’ button route setting. By careful manipulation of the panel tiles, the extensions have been accommodated within the same panel framework.

The latest work has been to provide an additional signal section of home and distant signals on both lines at Menheniot between St Germans (the original fringe point) and Liskeard. At the same time, the existing Alcatel 70/30 type axle counters have been replaced with the current Thales K type, these being more reliable and enabling a standard to be set for all of Cornwall.

Henry Williams did the alterations to include the new panel and the changeover was achieved during a night-time period. SPTs (signal post telephones) have been deemed necessary at the new home signals, although the comment was made that these are rarely used – perhaps prompting a general thought as to the continuing necessity of these in general.

Liskeard signal box.

Liskeard is still a mechanical box, with traditional lever frame and lower quadrant signals in the immediate station area.

Other than shortening the section towards Plymouth, by moving the last Up signal nearer to the box and thus taking account of the new section at Menheniot, the operation is largely unchanged. Track circuits remain in the station area but axle counters exist for the sections east and west, under the control of Plymouth and Lostwithiel respectively.

A new Train Describer video screen is provided for descriptions from Plymouth, but thereafter it is old-fashioned block bell signals that give details of trains to the west. The headway towards Plymouth has been reduced from 11 to five minutes.

Liskeard is also the junction for the Looe branch line which still sees occasional freight traffic to Moorswater; the operation of this line remains something of an anachronism, see separate boxed article.

Lostwithiel supplementary panel.

Lostwithiel, although it still has a mechanical box for the station area, with track circuits and lower quadrant signals also has had a separate panel since 1991that uses axle counters to control the eastern section up to the single line over two viaducts. This signalling was originally controlled from Largin box, but that eventually had to be closed because it had no running water and was denounced by the environmental authorities. The opportunity was taken at the time, to control the section with an original Mark 1 SSI (solid state interlocking) which, for convenience, was located at Par. The section to Largin has been further shortened by an additional home and distant signal section at Bodmin Parkway, which also has a ground frame to control access to the Bodmin and Wenford Heritage line. At that station, ‘off’ indicators are provided for train despatch and a white/ green banner signal is provided on the down line to improve signal sighting. The SSI has been upgraded and reprogrammed but remains a Mark 1 version. A new panel has been provided by Henry Williams to accommodate the additional signalling and the axle counters have been changed for the more modern K type.

The station at Lostwithiel has no footbridge so passengers have to use the adjacent level crossing to get to an opposite platform. With the increase in rail traffic, the barriers can be down for an extended period, thus leading to some complaints. A new footbridge would be welcome but, mindful of the disabled access regulations, it would be expensive.

Anyone know of a second hand one that might be available?

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

53

54

FEATURE

Roskear box and barrier.

Lostwithiel is also the junction for the freight-only line to Fowey, so dealing with the considerable freight movements has meant keeping the Up and Down loops on the eastern side of the crossing, again lengthening the crossing closure time. The plea was made for more passenger trains to stop at Lostwithiel and perhaps also to restore the passenger service to Fowey.

Par is basically unaltered, being only a short block section from Lostwithiel, with the box retaining mechanical signals and track circuits in the station area. The line to Newquay diverges at this point. New signal sections were introduced at St Austell, Burngullow and Probus when the line was redoubled in 2005 using twoaspect home and distant signals and axle counters, all controlled by a local panel.

No further work has been necessary.

Truro is the busiest box on the line as it controls the half-hourly service on the Falmouth branch line as well as the main line trains, all of which amount to 1,000 lever movements each day. The station area has mechanical signals and track circuits as elsewhere.

The Truro control area extends westwards to include a user-worked crossing (UWC) at Paradise (lovely name) which has been converted to miniature light operation. This has helped eliminate the constant phone calls from users of the crossing, thus easing the signaller’s workload.

To shorten the very long block section westwards to Roskear, additional signal sections have been introduced at Chacewater and Redruth, with home and distant signals and axle counters controlled by Roskear. Truro has a level crossing at the east of the platforms that controls entry to the station car park and some commercial premises. As at Lostwithiel, the barriers can be down for a considerable time, meaning that

passengers have insufficient time to park their cars and may catch the intended train. More thought must be given to solving this problem.

Roskear signal box is just to the east of Camborne station and was originally a junction for some local freight lines.

The immediate area abounds in level crossings, so the lever frame was abolished some years ago and replaced by switches mounted on the block shelf for the colour light signals and motorised points. With the advent of the eastward two signal sections and another one westward at Gwinear Road, this arrangement was not practical, so a new panel has been provided with a completely new relay-based interlocking.

The design of this was carried out by Atkins signal engineers with Unipart Rail providing the panel. The block shelf was raised up during the installation work to facilitate the provision of the panel. Two level crossings are controlled directly, one immediately outside the box, the other at Camborne station, monitored by CCTV. A further crossing at Dolcoath, to the east but still in the Camborne urban area, was originally an AHB (automatic half-

Roskear new panel with duty signaller.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

barrier crossing), but misuse and some near misses led to this being converted to a full barrier crossing with obstacle detection. While this has led to longer down times and some complaints, the safety risk has largely been eliminated.

The crossing has the usual radar and LiDAR sensors, with the latter having motorised shutters to prevent the ingress of dirt when not needed for sensing purposes.

A number of user-worked crossings are also in the vicinity, all of which have been converted to miniature light operation, with a consequential safety improvement.

From Roskear westwards, after the Gwinear Road signal section, the line reverts to absolute block operation with non-continuous detection of trains. To ensure safe operation, a tail light viewing camera is provided at Camborne so that the signaller can see that the train is complete before giving a line clear bell code back to St Erth. As stated before, no train describer system exists west of Liskeard but TRUST (a nationwide computerised train reporting system) screens are provided here and elsewhere to give signallers an overview of train movements.

St Erth has seen no significant change to the signalling, with mechanical lower-quadrant signals and track circuits retained in the station area, but recent work to upgrade the St Ives branch ‘park and ride’ operation has been introduced for the summer of 2019, see boxed article.

Penzance has also not been changed, so it retains an annoying single-line section into the station throat, which will become a greater nuisance now that the train service is enhanced. A depot maintains the new IEP trains that now operate the London service.

FEATURE

Higher Speed Installing, operating and maintaining rail infrastructure safely, quickly and efficiently, with minimal disruption is a big challenge.

SLEEPER SPACING INDEPENDENT

Innovative solutions are needed.

Whether it’s a temporary, semi-permanent or permanent access point, whatever the sleeper spacing, our customers can install a 10.8m RRAP in less than 90 minutes, reducing possession times and costs.

Rosehill Rail – Setting New Standards For more information, or to enquire about training, please call the Rosehill Rail sales team on +44 (0)1422 317 473, or email info@rosehillrail.com Come and visit us at:

27 - 29 November

21 November

3 - 5 December

Road Crossings

//

Road Rail Access

//

Pedestrian Crossings

Rosehill Rail_Rail Engineer Half Page Advert NOV2019_Higher Speed.indd 1

//

Anti-Trespass

18/10/2019 11:17

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

55

56

FEATURE Equipment

Since commissioning, all equipment has performed remarkably well and is maintained by a Network Rail team based in Plymouth.

Other than the SSI controlling Largin and Bodmin Parkway, the signalling is all relaybased free wiring, modifications to existing interlockings and the new interlocking at Roskear being designed and implemented

by Amey or Atkins under the supervision of Network Rail engineers. The new signalsection signals have been provided by Collis Engineering, using a lightweight structure, with axle counters being the Thales AzLM-K type.

At the new signal sections, the REBs were provided by MGB Signalling and wired off-site before being brought to site by lorry. Power is provided from the domestic mains but with a USB battery providing a 12-hour backup supply. Any power failure is reported back to Swindon control which then takes steps to remedy the problem.

If need be, petrol generators can be brought to site should the outage be for an extended time.

Network Rail Telecom’s FTNx data network is the ‘digital pipe’ that links it all together with Siemens Westplex TDM (time-division multiplex) systems borne upon it to control the signalling commands.

The IP (internet protocol) networking is carried on Westermo Lynx switches that configure the linkage in a ring formation to give maximum resilience.

As has been mentioned, barrier down times have been lengthened and will increase further as more trains are put into the timetable. This will result in an increase in the number of complaints; one partial solution could be to have a call-on signal where a train is booked to stop at a station platform immediately followed by the crossing. The signaller could then keep the barriers up until the train is ready to re-start.

Level crossings This article has commented on the numerous level crossings that exist on the Cornwall main line and the longer barrier downtime that occurs with the improved train service. The signaller-controlled crossings adjacent to Lostwithiel, Truro and Roskear boxes, the latter including Camborne by CCTV surveillance, all have to have barriers proved in the lowered position before the protecting signals can be cleared. Signallers commented that, with the shortened sections, they need to get the barriers down in good time to avoid delaying trains.

The OD crossing at Dolcoath similarly requires the barriers to be down and no obstacle detected before the signals can be cleared.

The UWCs, of which there are six in total (three for footpaths, three for access roads), previously required a phone call to the signaller before permission to cross safely could be granted. This could add a significant workload to the signaller, so the provision of red and green crossing lights negates this need. The chosen system is the Schweizer VAMOS product, activated when approaching trains pass over a rail mounted treadle, in this case a Frauscher axle counter suitably adapted.

The UWCs retain unlocked gates, so are still something of a risk where stopping trains at a previous station can cause the red light to show for a much longer time.

Ways of overcoming this using a form of approach control are being investigated, but the overall safety is much improved.

Finance, benefits and future potential The project has cost around £30 million.

Cornwall Council has contributed £15.1 million (of which £11.9 million was from the European Regional Development Fund) with the remainder funded by the Department for Transport. In monetary terms, this is moderate expenditure and represents good value. The extreme rationalisation of BR days has been reversed by a pragmatic approach.

Perhaps more importantly, the impact of almost making this a local scheme, where changes to requirements can be discussed and agreed between the Network Rail project engineering staff and the contractor, has yielded considerable benefits to both time and cost.

OK, the technology is not the latest (some of it remains from the Victorian era) and it is a million miles away from an ETCS-controlled railway, but does it really matter? If the train service provision can be delivered to meet customer requirements and the equipment can be maintained in a reliable condition, then so what?

Thanks to Paul Mundy, the project engineer for the scheme, and to the many signallers for sharing their experiences and opinions.

Dartmoor A30(T)

Nationa Park

Gunnislake Calstock 4 signals + banner repeater

LiDAR detector at Dolcoath with shutters open.

Newquay Quintrel Downs

St.Columb Road Parkandillack

Bodmin Parkway Roche Bugle Goonbarrow Junction SB

Lostwithiel Luxulyan

St. Blazey SB

Coombe

Liskeard

Liskeard SB

St.Keyne Lostwithiel SB

Menheniot

Sandplace

Par Fowby Dock

Par SB

Truro SB

Looe

4 signals

Lelant Hayle Lelant Saltings St. Erth SB St.Erth

Penzance signal SB box Penzance

KEY

Camborne

Perranwell

Roskear Junction SB

Signal Box (SB) Area controlled by Plymouth PSB

Penryn Penmere

Penzance

Phase 2 East

Truro

Redruth

St.Ives Carbis Bay

Phase 1 West

Falmouth Docks Falmouth Town

Area controlled by Liskeard SB Area controlled by Lostwithiel SB Area controlled by Par SB Area controlled by Truro SB Area controlled by Roskear Jn SB Area controlled by St Erth SB Area controlled by Penzance SB Area controlled by St Blazey SB Area controlled by Goonbarrow SB Intermediate block signalling islands

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

Plymouth St.Budeaux Victoria Road St.Budeaux Ferry Road Keyham Dockyard Plymouth Devonport

Saltash St.Germans

St.Austell

8 signals

Bere Ferrers

4 signals

Causeland

Bere Alston

Plymouth power SB

Ivybridge

FEATURE

ADComms, a Panasonic company, applies technology and technical expertise to the UK Rail industry that delivers solutions for: • Safety Critical & Security • Customer Experience • Infrastructure & Operations Connectivity enables innovation, and innovation delivers safer operations and journeys – we blend technology to deliver CCTV analytics, access control, onboard security and customer experience with resilient network infrastructure.

Tel: 01724 292200 Website: www.alandickcomms.com Email: info@adcomms.eu.panasonic.com

Key Clamp Handrail System Manufactured with simplicity and ease of installation in mind With only an Allen key or ratchet key required to assemble and tighten grub screws or join galvanised tubes, you can install this handrail system in a matter of seconds! Available in a range of polyester powder coated colours and finished with a weather resistant galvanised coating.

• Handrails • Pedestrian & safety barriers • Roof Edge Protection

GOT A PROJECT IN MIND? CALL US ON 0117 970 2420

Visit us online today at eziklampsystems.com Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

57

FEATURE

CLIVE KESSELL

lin es

br a s ’ l n l c a h w n r Co

PHOTO: BEN HARRIS

The Calstock viaduct in May 2005.

As there is no signal box at Coombe junction, the guard has to operate the points. Here, he has set them back for the ‘main line’ up to Liskeard (on the left behind the ground frame hut) so climbs back aboard First Great Western’s 153380 for the journey down to Looe. (November 2013)

A

s well as the upgrade of the Cornish main line, several of its branch lines have also received modifications in the recent past. There are five of them, not including the Bodmin and Wenford heritage line and the Fowey freight branch.

The Tamar line (Plymouth - Gunnislake)

Looe Valley line (Liskeard - Looe)

This 14-mile branch line, which once ran on a further five miles to Callington, owes its survival to the Grade II* listed viaduct across the Tamar river at Calstock. Without the rail link, several local communities would have no easy access by public transport into Plymouth.

Leaving Plymouth to the west, the first section runs on the old L&SWR main line rail route as far as Bere Alston, where the train reverses to cross the Tamar and on to Gunnislake.

Plans have existed for some time to extend the line on from Bere Alston to Tavistock, where a housing scheme would provide some finance.

Longer-term plans include extending to Okehampton and thus create a diversionary route should problems re-occur along the Teignmouth - Dawlish sea wall.

Something of an anachronism, the Looe Valley line leaves Liskeard station in a northwards direction before circling round on a steep gradient underneath the main line before once again facing north at Coombe Junction. Here the train reverses and proceeds in a

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

PHOTO: GEOF SHEPPARD

58

southerly direction alongside the Looe river into Looe station, around 100 metres short of where the original station was sited.

Heavily used in the holiday season, the 8¾-mile community railway can just about manage an hourly service.

Operations could be speeded up if the reversal at Coombe could be transferred to Liskeard signal box, as currently the train crew have to operate the points by means of a ground frame and change tokens.

FEATURE

Probably the busiest line when considered on a year-round basis, the ‘one train working’ operation used when the line was rationalised in BR days was unable to cope with recent increases in traffic that required a half-hourly service. A passing loop has been re-instated at Penryn where the obvious option of rebuilding the disused Up platform was discarded as it would have meant a disabled footbridge being required.

Instead, the novel alternative of extending the Down platform to accommodate a second train has been adopted, with the passing loop joining this half-way along its length.

The train from Falmouth arrives and occupies the north end of the platform whilst the train from Truro passes it and enters the southern end. Signalling is controlled from Truro box with continuous track circuiting provided between Penryn and Truro.

Penryn serves a University campus so the line is always busy with students as well as tourists and shoppers.

St Ives Bay line (St Erth - St Ives)

Lostwithiel and Fowey Railway

The line closed in 1983 and was acquired by the Bodmin Railway Preservation Society.

Services from Bodmin Parkway (the renamed Bodmin Road) to Bodmin General recommenced in 1990 and reached Boscarne Junction in 1996.

Class 150 on the St Ives Bay line above Porthminster Beach.

PHOTO: GEOF SHEPPARD

Maritime line (Truro - Falmouth)

the recent winter period and the St Ives bay platform has been widened to cater for the crowds.

This change enables a half=hour service throughout the day with all trains now calling at Carbis Bay, which previously some missed out in order to maintain the timetable.

Such is the traffic level, that a four-car train is needed in the summer season.

Built in 1869 to connect the port of Fowey with the main line at Lostwithiel, passenger services closed in 1965.

However, china clay is still transported along the line as far as Carne Point.

Bodmin and Wenford Railway The Great Western Railway opened a branch line from Bodmin Road to Bodmin General in 1887 and, the following year, extended it to connect with the Bodmin and Wadebridge Railway.

The passing loop at Penryn with a Falmouthbound train on the left passing another Class 153 waiting to depart for Truro.

Truro: panel for Penryn Loop on Falmouth Branch.

PHOTO: GEOF SHEPPARD

This lengthy (20.3/4 miles) line has the least-frequent service of the five branches but still boasts two intermediate signal boxes (St Blazey and Goonbarrow) and through trains from London on summer Saturdays in the peak holiday season.

Plans for a Newquay Parkway station exist but are unlikely to be realised in the near future.

A three-car train on the Atlantic Coast line line runs alongside the Par Canal and has just passed over St Blazey Bridge level crossing.

PHOTO: GEOF SHEPPARD

Atlantic Coast line (Par - Newquay)

During the summer season, this branch transports large numbers of people who take advantage of the ‘park and ride’ service that was first offered at Lelant Saltings but was abandoned in June 2019 in favour of expanded facilities at St Erth. Here, a large tarmacked car park has been built during

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

59

60

FEATURE

Enhanced

intrusion management

through innovation

T

he railway’s unprecedented growth over the last two decades has accelerated the uptake of innovation and provided greater confidence to invest in new

technologies for more effective and efficient management.

This trend is being met by flourishing companies of all sizes that are delivering worldleading, key technology expertise to transform rail technology and innovation in the UK. Established rail operators and system providers are now collaborating with disruptive, young businesses in areas such as advanced monitoring and control to unleash the potential of the digital railway.

With connectivity and productivity going hand in hand, one such Internet of Things specialist caught the attention of Network Rail with its RODIO sensor system for monitoring and detection of intrusions. Vortex IoT has developed brand-new technology designed to automatically and remotely detect and categorise track obstructions and intrusions such as fallen trees, landslides, trespassers, vehicles and maintenance workers.

RODIO (Railway Optical Detection of Intrusions and Obstructions) offers several key advantages over the current state of the art. The groundbreaking, cost-effective RODIO system allows the industry to detect any obstacles that may interfere with train journeys in real-time and therefore deal with them in a timely manner and reduce the overall delay. The system also includes an early alert system for theft detection, trespass and intrusions and guarantees high precision data even in low-visibility and dark conditions.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

Providing cost savings from reduced delays and safety enhancement, the potential of RODIO’s novel features was recognised by Innovate UK, which funded an 18-month development project that included co-development with Network Rail and culminated in a demonstration day at RIDC Tuxford in September 2019.

Gregan Quick, Network Rail’s research, development and technology project manager, said: “Network Rail welcomes technological advances in safety, and putting passengers and freight users first. RIDC Tuxford is facilitating the trial of this IoT based solution.”

Emerging technologies Vortex IoT specialises in creating innovative artificial intelligence (AI) solutions to a wide range of problems faced by businesses.

Founded by managing director Adrian Sutton, Behzad Heravi and Nick Beckett, Vortex IoT is made up of a highly skilled team of engineers with expertise in emerging technologies, AI and machine learning.

FEATURE Since forming in 2017, the firm has built a reputation of finding pioneering solutions to a wide range of problems faced by businesses and service providers, designing cost-effective and scalable networks alongside robust products which meet the often extremely challenging needs of a variety of industries and have the option to be cost effectively deployed on existing infrastructure.

Vortex developments often provide a solution for harsh environments, where conditions are hostile, power supply is limited, AI is needed, or data security is critical. Talks have taken place around testing the RODIO system in the challenging environment of Tata Steel’s integrated steel production plant in Port Talbot.

Gareth Osmond, software development manager process control & automation for Tata Steel, said: “The RODIO product is an ideal fit for Tata Steel. As a heavy manufacturing organisation, we are reliant on rail, which is integrated into our production plants. From a logistics perspective, we have one of the largest private rail networks in Europe, all geared toward market and supply chain fulfilment. The opportunity to get involved as a partner in the RODIO

project was a simple choice for Tata Steel and the work done by Vortex IoT has been exemplary.”

Vortex’s unique, IoT-based solutions are largely anchored by its patented ‘selfhealing secure’ mesh network. Prototype devices are created by the team in the company HQ in Swansea with a product range that comprises Air Quality Measurement (AQM) platforms, and integrated Smart Parking optimisation.

Vortex IoT managing director Adrian Sutton concluded: “It’s satisfying to work for an industry that is so key to society and forms an important part of

the UK’s clean growth goals. We hope RODIO contributes to reducing the rail delay minutes that cost the industry approximately £300 million per annum and maintaining the UK’s reputation as the safest railway network in Europe.”

However, with the world rail market forecast to increase by 2.6 per cent by 2021 and the total market forecast to be £128 billion a year over the period 2017 to 2019, this presents a huge opportunity for Vortex to build its success by exploring and so introducing UK technology expertise to major projects being undertaken across the globe.

AI driven REMOTE CONDITION MONITORING RODIO® is an innovative and highly versatile Internet of Things solution that uses a combination of LiDAR and Artificial Intelligence to tackle the many complex challenges which stem from the remote condition monitoring of railway infrastructure.

•

AI enables the classification of obstructions and intrusions, delivering fully automated data-driven alerts and notifications.

•

Worker safety and new ways of working can be greatly improved.

•

The combination of LiDAR and AI significantly reduces the need for manual intervention and, in so doing, prevents false-positive errors.

•

One system covers many scenarios and can be used for the detection of trespass, cable-theft, earth movements and landslides, as well as for people counting and condition monitoring in low-light conditions and tunnels.

Vortex IoT products are designed to withstand harsh operational environments and their efficiency is further enhanced by our unique wireless mesh network – a rapidly deployed, self-organising and self-healing communications infrastructure to maintain real-time notifications.

www.vortexiot.com

+44 (0) 1792 732 053

info@vortexiot.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

61

62

FEATURE

Ferriby to Gilberdyke RESIGNALLING

PAUL DARLINGTON

Acronyms and explanations

T

he resignalling of the line between Ferriby to Gilberdyke (F2G), on the north side of the River Humber, has now been completed. Although the re-signalled route area is only approximately 20 miles long, signalling technology new to the British main line network has been deployed, which has required some creative and innovative engineering.

The overall objective of the scheme was to undertake the resignalling and renewal of life-expired assets, which included some fine mechanical signalling dating back to the 19th century, while delivering the signalling and telecommunications preparatory works for elements of the proposed future electrification of the Selby to Hull route.

The HS1 route had successfully implemented the SEI computer-based interlocking technology into the UK produced by Hitachi Rail STS. This used TVM-430 and KVB, as installed on French TGV lines, to provide train control and protection in the St Pancras International station area. SEI had also been used on the Cambrian line for European Train Control System (ETCS) level 2 operation.

Network Rail therefore selected the SEI interlocking to control the new signalling for F2G. This provides a flexible architecture utilising modern tools and techniques for the delivery of the safety software, and a platform that is ‘digital ready’ for ETCS, however due to F2G being a conventional scheme the SEI interlocking product was developed for this purpose and designated SEI-CLSS.

No relays The client remit required that, to maximise reliability, the number of relays used in the new signalling and levelcrossing control equipment would be minimal and only proven lineside signal, train detection and point operating equipment would be deployed.

This was a very sensible decision by the asset manager. Relay equipment is generally not as reliable as modern solid-state assets, they are expensive to maintain and service, and take up more equipment space. The existing lineside products approved for use in the UK are among the best in the world, particularly UK-specification LED signals.

The asset manager also required the control interface in the York railway operating centre (ROC) to be the same as all the other workstations in the centre.

All this meant that some new interfaces were required to successfully network the assets together.

The Hitachi Rail STS SEI interlocking uses ‘two out of three’ processor safety architecture technology for reliability and is able to interface with up to 100 Hitachi object controllers if required - 84

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

» ASP - Auxiliary Supply Points » CBI - Computer-Based Interlocking » DNO - Distribution Network Operator (companies licensed to distribute electricity) » ETCS - European Train Control System » FTNx - Network Rail’s Fixed Telecoms Network (FTN) with IP high-speed overlay. » Hitachi Rail STS - formerly Italian company Ansaldo STS » IP - Internet Protocol » KVB - Contrôle de Vitesse par Balises (speed control using balises) » LED - Light-Emitting Diode (used in solidstate coloured-aspect signal heads) » MCB - Manually Controlled Barrier level crossing » MCB-OD - MCB with obstacle detection » MTOR - Module Toute ou Rien (all or nothing module) object controller » PSP - Principal Supply Point » RRI - Route Relay Interlocking » SEI - Système d’Enclenchement Informatique (computer interlocking) » SEI-CLSS - SEI Colour Light Signalling System » STS - Signalling & Transportation Systems » TCV-430 - 1980s development of earlier TVM-300 in-cab signalling system first developed by French group Compagnie de Signaux et d’Entreprises Electriques (CSEE), later acquired by Ansaldo STS. » TDM - Time-Division Multiplexing (allows independent signals to routed over a common path) » TVM - Transmission Voie-Machine (trackto-train transmission)

FEATURE are used on F2G. Each controller can support 20 vital outputs - ‘objects’ such as signals, points, and fringe interfaces – as well as 26 vital inputs and eight non-vital inputs, allowing each object controller to interface with multiple signalling assets depending on their input/output requirements.

Known as the MTOR, each object controller supports standard data communications interfaces and can take advantage of modern IP ‘off the shelf’ telecoms switches (Cisco in this case).

They use the newly installed Network Rail FTNx for communications between the central SEI equipment at York ROC and the lineside, removing the need for dedicated datalink cables between the central safety processor and the object controllers.

Maintenance is enhanced by comprehensive TT (technicians’ terminal) event-recording and decision-support tools providing an overview of health indication of equipment and links to other equipment, along with access to the status of external and internal system variables. Maintenance is further enhanced by the provision of a facility dedicated to the maintenance of the MTORs in the form of a laptop connected locally via a designated access port on the ethernet switch.

The SEI interlocking system was originally developed in France and is not the same as the Hitachi Rail STS ‘ACC’ computer-based interlocking system installed between Crewe and Stockport.

Known as the ‘Manchester South ACC’ this only controls Hitachi Rail STS lineside assets. However, the SEI system is able to control Network Rail standard catalogueitem lineside assets, albeit with some new interfaces, so standard UK-specification LED signals and clamp lock points could be used.

Complex project The project has been delivered by a consortium of Hitachi Rail STS and Linbrooke Services - with Arup providing design deliverables consisting of signalling (including SEI interlocking data verification), lineside civils, buildings, level crossing ground plan, E&P and track. Arup also played a key role in the project by being the system coordinating ‘glue’, ensuring all the various product specifications worked together successfully. This included the Hitachi Rail SEI interlocking, Siemens Westcad at York ROC, Dorman LED signals, clamp lock points, Frauscher axle counters, Bombardier EBI Gate 2000 level crossing controllers, lockout devices and track circuits, together with the various interfaces/fringes within the renewal area.

Working with Network Rail Telecom, Linbrooke provided the detailed design for the telecoms IP FTNx sub-access layer between Howden station and North Ferriby, as well as between Gilberdyke junction and Goole signal box, to support the signalling assets and nodes with data connections.

Linbrooke also undertook the role of the overall tester in charge and provided a high-availability lineside power supply system for the resignalled assets, including the delivery of a manually reconfigurable signalling power supply distribution system and the associated distribution network operator (DNO) connections. This included one new brick-built principal supply point (PSP), three new auxiliary supply points (ASPs) and 40km of new 650V class II signalling power cable, installed in a high-security buried route, together with the associated route-wide earthing and bonding arrangements.

The project replaced the life-expired signalling equipment associated with Gilberdyke Junction signal box, Oxmardyke gate box, Broomfleet signal box, Cave Crossing gate box, Crabley Creek signal

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

63

64

FEATURE box (although retained as a gate box), Brough East signal box, Welton gate box, Melton Lane signal box and Green Oak Goit gate box, and transferred control to a new workstation at York ROC with automatic route setting, known as the ‘Brough workstation’.

Saltmarshe route relay interlocking (RRI), at the southwestern fringe, was only around 10 years old and, while renewal with CBI interlocking was desirable and would have made interfacing easier, its condition was such that the cost involved could not be justified. The interlocking only controlled four signals and Saltmarshe crossing, so it has been retained but is now controlled remotely from York ROC via a Siemens Westronic 1024 time-division multiplexing (TDM) system.

The level crossing at Saltmarshe has been upgraded, along with all the other manually controlled barriers (MCBs), to obstacle detection operation (MCB-OD) and interfaced to the new Hitachi Rail SEI CBI interlocking.

Level crossings The new CBI signalling fringes with Selby RRI to the west and Hessle Road RRI in the east. Between Ferriby and Gilberdyke, nine MCB-OD crossings have replaced the manually controlled gate/barrier crossings, together with the provision of two complex miniature stop light (MSL) crossings. Crabley Creek crossing was originally proposed to be replaced by a bridge but, due to problems with land acquisition, it has been retained as a manual gate box.

Eleven crossings within 20 miles of railway is a lot, which illustrates how difficult and expensive it can be to modernise routes such as Ferriby to Gilberdyke. With the crossings being so close together, the timing and ‘strike in’ and ‘strike out’ design, coupled with stopping and non-stopping selection controls and crossing SPAD mitigation measures, were a significant challenges.

Bombardier EBI Gate 2000 controllers were used to control the MCB-ODs crossings, which was another first for the project. As EBI Gate 2000 is solidstate interfaced to the Hitachi object controller devices, no conventional relays are required, thereby improving reliability and reducing maintenance requirements.

The system is designed in accordance with CENELEC standards to SIL4 (safety integrity level 4) and has a product design life of 25 years.

Staged approach As with many re-signalling schemes, the volume of work required could not be accommodated in one possession, so a staged approach was adopted. The switches and crossings on the route were mostly mechanically operated, therefore the points at Gilberdyke and Brough East were converted to power clamp-lock operation and controlled from the existing mechanical interlockings, prior to the final recontrol to the SEI CBI interlocking and York ROC later in the project.

The main, overarching requirement of the F2G project was to achieve operating savings through rationalisation of the control points (signal boxes). The

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

signals within the renewals area have been spaced, where possible, to allow passive provision for possible future linespeed improvements up to 100mph for passenger services and 75mph for freight.

Although the project had no specific requirements to improve existing headways within the area, significant improvements have been achieved by the removal of the existing absoluteblock working and the introduction of track-circuit block throughout the project area, with the provision of a four-aspect signalling system between Ferriby Junction and Gilberdyke Junction.

Interestingly, the requirement that drove the provision of a four-aspect signalling system was neither headway nor capacity, but was the positioning constraint imposed by the level crossing locations and requirement to accommodate (where possible) future line speed improvements.

The project testing and commissioning was achieved in six stages: Stage 0 - Melton Lane power upgrade; Stage 1 - Saltmarshe Recontrol / rehearsal and power upgrades; Stage 2 - Level crossing decommissioning stages; Stage 3 - Point conversions; Stage 4 - final commissioning part 1 (signalling); Stage 5 - Final commissioning part 2 (level crossings).

The final commissioning stages utilised two 54-hour possessions over the weekends of 23 November to 26 November and 30 November to 3 December 2018.

FEATURE

While versions of the SEI interlocking had been approved for HS1 and the Cambrian line, those routes have no lineside signals, whereas Ferriby to Gilberdyke required conventional LED coloured-aspect signals. This requirement led to the development of the SEI-CLSS, essentially adding an aspect level to the CBI interlocking and associated interfaces to the lineside equipment.

This was based upon a design already used in other countries for such applications, but this had a relay interface which did not meet the asset manager’s remit for ‘no relays’. This challenge resulted in new interface products being developed specifically for the UK - the SEI-CLSS - in record time. New cards were developed and approved for signals (IOM SX) and points (IOM AG), together with a new CPM (current-proving module) for signals and MSL level crossing lamps (LEDs). The only relays used in the system are for heavy-current contacts, for point operation and driving long-distance AWS (Automatic Warning System) equipment.

SEI equipment is generally designed to be located in equipment rooms, but, to make the scheme cost effective, new lineside IP54-rated temperaturecontrolled location cases (TCL) had to be designed and approved.

The cases that Arup came up with are approximately 1.5 times the size of a normal lineside case, are multi-discipline and split into three sections. The one on the left contains the telecoms fibre terminations, switches, patch panels and axle counter equipment. The middle contains the Hitachi SEI MTOR, CLSS, IOM SX and IOM AGF together with battery backup supplies for the switches, and the right-hand section contains the

power supplies, TPWS modules, relays, contactors and cable terminations to the lineside equipment.

The FAdC axle-counter system from Frauscher uses a decentralised architecture, so a track section can be evaluated locally using the latest FSE (Frauscher Safe Ethernet) protocol. Once again, everything is solid state, with no relay equipment. The lineside architecture also deployed the use of ‘long’ - up to 500 metre - tail cables, which reduced the number of apparatus case housings.

Integration Arup provided all the signalling design, including the new TCLs, associated ancillary civil works, level crossing designs and ground plans, electrical power design and all the fringe box ergonomic requirements. The system integration was challenging, as all the elements of the project had to be assembled in such a way that allowed them to interface and work together to achieve the client’s remit.

The York ROC signaller display system uses Westcad workstations supplied by Siemens. A Hitachi RCCS (route control centre system) workstation could have been used for F2G, but Network Rail required all the York ROC workstations to be the same. As the interfaces for equipment of

this type are all bespoke to the individual manufacture’s specifications, this required a new standalone protocol conversion railway interface (RIF) to be developed to link the Westcad workstation to the SEI interlocking, taking into account the upstream Hitachi automatic route setting ARS system and the need to interface with the EBI Gate 2000 level crossings. York ROC was also provided with an SEI TT maintenance terminal.

The SEI interlocking wide-area network connectivity utilised the Network Rail FTNx IP network to the lineside. A sub-access layer of the FTNx network was configured as a dual network for resilience.

The communication was then organised into several virtual local area networks or VLANs. These are installed at the central equipment location at York ROC with remote sites at Hull and at Knottingley for the EBI Gate 2000 maintenance tool and the Frausher FAdC diagnostic system. The sheer scale of the installation meant that extensive soak and integration testing was required, especially between the Siemens Westcad and the SEI data.

An emerging issue relating to EMI, caused by back emf generated by the AWS electro-magnet de-energising, was quickly dealt with by introducing temporary interface relays and wire segregation. These are currently being replaced by a new EMI filter system as the long term solution.

Despite this issue, reliability has been excellent and general overall feedback of the system has been extremely positive from the various stakeholders.This was a complex scheme, with a number of level crossings close together, new interface requirements and equipment location designs, and novel technology. It also introduced a new computer-based interlocking into the UK, one which was controlled by another manufacturer’s workstation.

To have it all successfully delivered in less than three years from a standing start is an achievement of which all in the project should be proud.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

65

66

FEATURE

ECML Upgrade

Progress and Plans for the Future

T

he East Coast main line (ECML) is 393 miles long and is a key element of the UK railway network, carrying more than 20 million passengers and 58 million tonnes of freight a year. It connects London and Edinburgh with key intermediate locations including Peterborough, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham and Newcastle.

It is estimated that more than 30 per cent of the UK’s population lives within 20 miles of an ECML station, which helps to justify the £1.2 billion cost of the project to upgrade the ECML that is underway.

The route was electrified and completed in the early 1990s, nearly 30 years ago, and now Network Rail is developing and implementing detailed plans to upgrade the ECML in order to allow more trains to run whilst delivering quicker journey times along the route.

Once completed, the aim is for an additional two longdistance services to run each

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

COLLIN CARR

hour into and out of London.

The plans are also designed to significantly improve train service reliability and capacity.

Work started in 2018 and is expected to be completed

by December 2021, when the timetable will change significantly.

The Rail Electrification Alliance To deliver this upgrade, the Rail Electrification Alliance (REAL) was formed in 2014. The alliance is designed to deliver all aspects of the project including design, civils, electrification and power.

The alliance includes:

» Network Rail » Siemens - responsible for traction power design, supply, installation and SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) » J Murphy and Sons responsible for civil works and structures, cable and cable routes » VolkerRail - responsible for overhead line equipment works and signalling works » TSP Projects - responsible for professional consultancy and design support » Jacobs - responsible for professional consultancy and design support

FEATURE Kings Cross Station The project consists of four clearly defined components of work, the first of which is Kings Cross station. Network Rail has developed a £260 million programme of work involving the redesign of the approach to King’s Cross station, known as the “Kings Cross Throat” - a troublesome location which includes two tunnels, Copenhagen tunnel and Gas Works tunnel, on the approach to the station.

The existing track layout includes only four lines for the operators to use for all the train services into and out of Kings Cross station. Also, while the station itself was modernised in 2012, handling 38 million passengers a year, the track layout has now reached the end of its design life. As a consequence, the layout is becoming much harder to maintain and the existing track and signalling, which was installed over 40 years ago, is nearing the end of its operational life.

When it is completed, there will be a mile and a half of new track while the associated signalling and overhead line equipment will have been redesigned and replaced. The number of point ends requiring maintenance will reduce from 53 to 32.

Five new Relocatable Equipment Buildings (REBs), which have already been installed, will replace the myriad of signal location boxes that are currently located trackside.

This will ensure that future maintenance of the signalling system will be easier and also safer to carry out as the new signalling design only requires one trackside location box in the whole station throat area.

Slab track in disused tunnel In addition to the above, Network Rail has started work on adding two new lines by re-opening a disused Gas Works tunnel on the approach to King’s Cross. Morgan Sindall, the principal contractor for

all the project work in the King's Cross area, is currently overseeing the removal of 10,500 tonnes of spoil from the tunnel - track renewals contractor the Central Alliance (Network Rail/Balfour Beatty/ TSO) is digging down to a depth of 1.8 metres. Logistically, this is very challenging because of the lack of space available to stack material and clear it from site, as road haulage is unsuitable.

All this excavation work is in preparation for a Slab Track Austria track system, supplied

by PORR, to be installed by Rhomberg Sersa in the coming months. Morgan Sindall is also having to install a special drainage system to remove water dripping into the tunnel

from a canal located at the station end of the tunnel.

Morgan Sindall is also having to install a special drainage system to remove water dripping into the tunnel from a canal located at the station end of the tunnel.

There was an intense activity of work over two weekends in July and August 2019, when significant progress was made. The work included track renewal in Copenhagen tunnel, transfer of overhead lines and moving control of part of the railway from King’s Cross signal box to the new Rail Operating Centre in York. Apparently, the King's Cross signal box is now looking quite forlorn with only two remaining panels in operation.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

67

68

FEATURE However, time is moving on and there is still much preparation work to do leading up to a ‘Partial Closure’ of the station in 14 months’ time, over the Christmas period 2020, when work on the currently inaccessible parts of the station will be addressed. This includes realigning Platforms 0 and 1 and increasing the track access into the station from four to six tracks, after which one fewer platform will be needed.

(The current Platform 10 is to be taken out of use, and the platforms numbered from 0-10).

Stevenage station In addition to the work at King’s Cross, a further £40 million of work is planned 26 miles to the north, in and around Stevenage station. Here, Network Rail is building a new platform and realigning track to enable trains from the Hertford North line (known as the Hertford Loop) to terminate and go back towards London without using up capacity on the existing tracks. When completed, this will enable more services to run whilst improving resilience and reliability.

Although that sounds fairly straight forward, the work to enable trains to access the platform will include the construction of almost two kilometres of new railway line,

from Broadhall Way Bridge to Stevenage station, and a set of track points.

Earthworks are also being carried out to the existing embankment, with track drainage on the left-hand side of the track travelling north into Stevenage, as well as alterations to existing signalling infrastructure.

Additionally, new overhead line equipment will need to be installed and plans to modify two existing overbridge structures, Broadhall Bridge and Six Hills Bridge, are well advanced.

All this work is planned for completion by spring 2020.

Werrington junction The third element of the project lies further north again.

Network Rail is building a new two-track railway line and a new three-kilometre ‘dive-under’ to run under the ECML just north of Peterborough at Werrington junction. This will allow highspeed trains to pass over the Great Northern Great Eastern

line (GNGE) for a total cost of approximately £200 million.

Currently, movement across the existing flat junction can cause delays, and constraints to the timetable, as freight trains, and occasional passenger services, running on the GNGE route, currently have to pass over the high-speed East Coast lines.

Werrington Grade Separation will remove this conflict. North of the newly extended Cock Lane footbridge, the Stamford lines will be widened to the west to create four tracks. The central pair of tracks will then dive into a new underpass, below the ECML, and rise to meet the GNGE line approximately 600 metres after Lincoln Road.

The plans for Werrington Jn were approved by the Secretary of State in August 2018, following a successful application for a Transport and Works Act Order.

This involved extensive public consultation and engagement with stakeholders, including the local community, that will continue throughout the work.

Work started in autumn 2018 and a tunnel boring machine is currently being erected on site ready to tunnel under the ECML. The planned work is on time and expected to take three years to complete in 2021.

Overhead power supply In addition to all of the track remodelling already described, the fourth component of the scheme is the upgrade of the overhead power supply. This is planned to be completed in two phases - phase 1 will cover the route between Wood Green, London to Bawtry near Doncaster while phase 2 will stretch from Doncaster to Edinburgh.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

FEATURE

Phase 1 Phase 1 of the project began in 2014 and is planned to be completed by early 2020. With six months to go, upgrades already completed include the installation of 23 substations along the route, laying 600km of new cabling, construction of foundations and structures to support the new overhead line equipment and a new 400kV connection to the main National Grid.

Further upgrades, which are planned to increase resilience and reliability along the route, include additional sub-stations, track based cabinets and feeder stations.

supply to the rolling stock whilst While the second phase of being designed to contribute to the project is currently in its carbon footprint targets. design stages, and dates for So, a reasonable amount carrying out the work are still of work has been carried being finalised, it will deliver out. Without doubt the upgraded power to the planned ‘Partial Closure’ over East Coast main line railway Christmas 2020 will be a major between Bawtry and Edinburgh Phase 2 undertaking, as will many other and will include the installation Phase 2 of the project will aspects of this work. of 27 new traction substations involve the installation of This will all add to the further and 1,000km of new cabling, feeders and substations along enhancement of our railway including feeder cables and the route, capacity upgrades, network which, hopefully, will telecoms cabling. a new 132kV connection benefit all those who live within The total value of this work at Hambleton junction and 20 miles of an ECML station, is estimated at £650 million. It upgrades to existing power and many will offer more efficient power supply connections.

RS0001_Adhesion_RailEngineer_190x130mm_AW_V1_Outlined.pdf 1 04/07/2019 14:06more besides.

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

69

FEATURE

Network Rail's DIGITAL ETCS SIGNALLING long-term deployment plan PAUL DARLINGTON

D

igital railway, and the benefits of in-cab signalling and ETCS (European Train Control System) have featured in Rail Engineer many times. Finally, a long-term deployment plan for ETCS is now in place. Claire Beranek, one of the Network Rail route asset managers for signalling, recently delivered a presentation to the Institution of Railway Signal Engineers to explain the infrastructure owner’s current thinking.

Asset sustainability Claire explained that several attempts have been made to produce a plan to roll out ETCS in Great Britain, but they haven’t succeeded due to being either undeliverable or too costly.

There are several benefits of providing ETCS, but the most urgent need is signalling asset sustainability. Within the next 15 years, 55 per cent of all signalling lineside assets are expected to be life expired, with the figure rising to 86 per cent in 20 years, based on current renewal plans (figure 1), and government funding is unlikely to rise to meet the costs of conventional signalling renewals.

1 - Signalling asset remaining life.

In a letter to Network Rail’s chief executive dated 19 March 2018, the Secretary of State for Transport requested the production of a long-term ETCS digital deployment plan to be delivered by March 2019. The plan was to be aligned with both rolling stock and infrastructure fitment and to be developed with input and agreement from the wider rail industry, and at the lowest whole life cost.

The UK government funds the railway in five-year control periods (CP), so the plan was to consider the period from CP7 (April 2024) onwards, and not to change approved work bank for CP6 (April 2019 – March 2024). CP6 renewals were to continue line with a standard ‘digitalready’ specification, so that any signalling Historic

16

Forecast

15

Remaining Life (Years)

70

14 13 12 11 10 9 8

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 CP5

CP6

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

CP7

delivered in CP6 would be ready for ETCS. The plan, which was developed by Network Rail along with RIA (the Rail Industry Association), representing the supply chain, and RDG (the Rail Delivery Group) representing the train and freight operating companies, was to be infrastructure renewals-based. This would maximise the life of current signalling assets and only re-signal with ETCS at the point that the current assets’ life expired.

Enhancement-driven re-signalling, on the other hand, intended to increase capacity or line speed, would require a separate overlay to the plan. ETCS Level 2 must be cheaper than a conventional signalling solution, as it has no lineside signals, but this would require all trains passing through a digitally re-signalled area to be fitted with in-cab ETCS prior to the re-signalling date. This approach will require close liaison with the RDG to understand which trains are equipped with ETCS, to ensure exact alignment between train and infrastructure fitment.

Deliverability and affordability Network Rail’s latest plan will be based on deliverability and affordability. The CP6 signalling budget was agreed to be indicative for future control periods, and a ‘unit cost to the business’ was calculated to compare a conventional signalling renewal cost with ETCS. This was developed based on recent tender returns and received buy-in from all stakeholders, and was in line with the GB Rail sector deal (the agreement between the government and the rail industry).

The ETCS unit rate is estimated at £315,000 per SEU (Signalling Equivalent Unit) as compared to a rate of £419,000 per SEU for a conventional re-signalling.

Recent re-signalling projects have actually averaged an SEU rate of £459,000, but it has been agreed with all stakeholders that £419,000/SEU is a more representative figure for the purposes of the long-term deployment plan.

FEATURE 7000

Western

6000

Wessex

Volumne (SEU)

2 - First pass of Network Rail’s ETCS delivery plan.

Wales

5000

South East LNW S

4000 3000

LNW N

2000

LNE

1000

East Midlands Anglia

2055

2053

2050

2048

2046

2044

2042

2040

2038

2036

2034

2032

2030

2028

2026

2024

2019

0

Year 8,000 7,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054

Volume (SEU)

6,000

CP6

ETCS

CP7

Compatible

CP8

CP9

Life Extension

by deliverability and based only on the need for renewal.

The problem with this is that it created a ‘bow wave’ of renewals, with work volumes increasing through CP7 to a peak in CP8.

This would be unsustainable to any supply chain programme and contribute to the ‘boom and bust’ scenario so unloved

by RIA, so a process of renewal deferral was agreed with each route asset manager, assessed on performance criticality and obsolescence risks.

The signalling supply chain needs a fairly constant delivery programme, both geographically and over time. The agreed plan is based on each of the routes in the country requiring 300 SEUs per annum, a total of around

CP10

CP11

Conventional External

CP12

Work Volume Limit

4 – ETCS rollout from CP7.

3,000 SEUs nationally, with some flexibility allowing partneringup of delivery areas and route boundaries.

This roll-out required considerable smoothing, so a performance criticality rating was applied to each interlocking, based on five years of performance data and on the amount of work requiring deferral in each year.

Interlockings were proposed for deferral by up to seven years depending on risk, with high criticality interlockings receiving less deferral than low criticality interlockings.

The delivery plan is shown in figure 3 and meets the deliverability constraint, with ETCS interventions ramping up in CP7 (figure 4).

3 - Constrained deliverability plan.

Western Wessex

3000

Wales

308

239

258

307

275

300

373.3 345.5

248 266

267

500

323

526

291

266

392

417 225

210

471

406

322.2

339

319

173 399

303

349

400 127

370

289

201 153

506

166

370 101

124

158

155

499 308

444

115 466 365

109

332 335

124

453.2

443

158 450

344

131

167.5

378 193

298 400

106 99

112

266

360

32 193

254

201

198

2055

395

2054

212.3 395.3

274

2053

225

Anglia

253

2052

279

204

2050

628

194 238

464

156 312

341

323

280

615

305

319

166 341

535

East Midlands 252

2049

169

283

467.5

329

419

2048

205

227

LNE

191

2047

135

2030

290

2029

204

2027

2026

221

2025

283

2024

2023

197

290

2028

221

300

502

2032

433

536

242 289

LNW N

295

450 242

218 235

327

539.6 470

481.6

504.9 468.6

366 240

180 238

266

171

141

2038

217

547.2 448.8 346.5

599.5

600

260

188

424 151

136

900

303

293

2031

544.4

366

245

2051

535

2034

1200

338

222

400

2037

145 301

2033

101 101

242

2046

402 526

1500

149

451

289

2042

280

599

189

580

2036

585

316

2041

411

240

295

2045

269

379

LNW S

235

199

2044

181

133

1800

360

2035

2100

253

278

2040

218

239

418

2039

2400

0

South East

337

2043

2700

Volume (SEU)

An SEU is used to estimate and compare the cost of signalling projects. The number of component parts of a signalling project at sub-system level – points, signals and level crossings - are calculated to establish the total number of SEUs. Dividing the total cost of the project by the number of SEUs determines the SEU rate which, in very simple terms, is the cost of each single point end, signal or level crossing and includes funds to cover items such as the required interlocking, supplementary detectors, cables and equipment rooms.

ETCS doesn’t have signals so the ‘ETCS SEU rate’ is a high-level rate to provide all the necessary ETCS infrastructure to re-signal a conventionally signalled route with ETCS. The SEU volumes for ETCS renewals were identified across all routes and integrated into a national ETCS work bank. A deliverability ceiling per annum was agreed with RIA at 3,000 SEUs for ETCS and 1,800 SEUs for conventional signalling.

Eventual fitment of ETCS to the entire UK train fleet will be greatly helped by the opportunity to fit ETCS to new trains that, in a few years’ time, will replace half the UK’s passenger trains. The government has also agreed to fund a programme of ETCS fitment to freight locomotives.

Nevertheless, a significant train retro-fitment delivery schedule is required. This was built up on the assumption that one unit of one class of train per operator at any one time could be fitted, with the maximum number of trains to be retrofitted in one year limited to 251. This deliverability plan has been supported by RIA, RDG and the National Joint Rolling Stock Project. The plan has also been agreed with all stakeholders, including areas such as driver training, franchise renewal dates, expected train life, and signalling renewal cycles.

The initial first pass of the plan (figure 2) was unconstrained

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

71

FEATURE 2,000 1,800 1,600 1,400 Cost (ÂŁ/M)

1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054

72

CP6

CP7

CP8

Digital Infrastructure Life extension work will still be required to keep some interlockings going until the deferred ETCS date, and some ETCScompatible work will be needed, such as re-controls or partial digital renewals, so the total signalling work bank is shown in figure 6.

The cost of train fitment is in addition with the infrastructure fitment, and the plan assumes that train fitment would commence in CP6 to facilitate the infrastructure ETCS roll-out from CP7 onwards.

The problem, however, is that, at current ETCS unit rates, the plan still exceeds the budgetary constraints set by the government and so is unaffordable.

This workbank and these limits apply to England and Wales. Network Rail Scotland will be subject to a separate plan to include signalling enhancements.

CP9

CP10

Train Fitment

Next steps The challenge is therefore to reduce the cost of ETCS deployment. The government has provided research and development funding in CP6 to look at creative and innovative ways to bring down the unit rate cost of ETCS resignalling.

Digital ETCS signalling will deliver higher performance, improved safety and a foundation for signalling enhancements.

Train fitment and infrastructure renewal plans have been aligned and, while this is a baseline integrated ETCS renewals plan, further work will be required to understand enhancement opportunities.

A robust change control mechanism will be essential to manage and coordinate the interests of train and infrastructure stakeholders, and this is currently being developed.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

CP11 CP6 Budget 5 - ETCS plan with funding target.

Although the plan, as developed, provides ETCS roll-out for every interlocking in the country from the start of CP7 up to 2055, and is aligned with train fitment, it requires a significant investment by the government in CP6 to fit large numbers of trains. The government has indicated that its latest thinking is a more measured approach to train fitment, still holding to the philosophy that all trains passing through a site are ETCS-fitted prior to the interlocking being renewed with an ETCS solution.

The RDG and Network Rail have therefore commenced looking at the early deployments in the plan, and are considering three sites so that they can recommend to government the required train fitments that will enable infrastructure renewals in CP7. Further consideration will need to be made by the government as to policy decisions around fitting new trains with ETCS at the point of manufacture, as well as long-term funding of the freight fitment programme, which precedes CP7.

The plan now needs to be embedded in route plans, with a change control process coordinated centrally.

Integration of the plan with enhancement opportunities is also required, to seek better value solutions and better outcomes for both passengers and freight users, and a technology roadmap has been created to co-ordinate and make the best use of research and development funding to improve ETCS technology and reduce deployment costs.

FEATURE

Brand-independent repair, service and overhaul Santon offers repairs, maintenance and overhaul for our own designed and manufactured products but also offers a repair, service and overhaul program for products that are not manufactured by Santon. Our engineers are very experienced in analysing a product, re-engineering the product, analysing obsolescence risks and improving the TCO for the customer.

The products that we maintain: • Master controllers • Direction controllers

• Control panels • Un-coupler switches

• High power DC contactors and breakers

• Electrical control assemblies • And many other applications

Santon offer three types of programs which are fully transparent and easy to understand.

1. Repair of a product after a failure: The unit is checked and the damaged part is repaired. The product is returned with an in-and-outgoing inspection report and advice when to service the unit.

2. Service of a product (and repair if needed): The unit is checked and all parts that have been worn out are replaced. The product is returned with an in-and-outgoing inspection report and advice when to overhaul the unit. All replaced parts are sent back to the customer to make the process fully transparent.

3. Overhaul of the product: The unit is analysed and checked for weaknesses. We listen to the Operators and look at repair/incident report history. Our engineers upgrade the unit accordingly to make sure it’s built to the most modern standards. Part of the project is to fully type test the unit, perform a risk analysis, provide a maintenance/lifecycle cost analysis, new maintenance document and drawing sets. All this is documented fully with an in-and-outgoing inspection report to make sure you have the best quality information available!

We meet all Rail group standards and we also hold IRIS and IRIS 6.1 for safety critical competence. tel: 01633 252 371 info@santonswitchgear.co.uk www.santonswitchgear.com

Subscribe to our free publications at www.railsubs.com

Structural Precast for Railways

www.rail-media.com

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

73

74

FEATURE

NIGEL WORDSWORTH

Brits at

Trako E

very other year, the Polish city of Gdansk hosts Trako, reputedly the second-biggest rail industry exhibition in Europe after InnoTrans. It is held in the years in between the Berlin shows and on almost the same dates - the 2019 exhibition ran for four days from 24 to 27 September.

In sheer physical terms, Trako is a 1.35kg show. That’s if you judge an exhibition by the weight of its catalogue. For comparison, InnoTrans, with a two-volume catalogue and a separate directory, is a massive 5.9kg show!

Trako takes place at the purpose-built AmberExpo facility.

It takes up all three permanent halls and four more temporary ones, that’s over 30,000 square metres, with over 1,000 metres of display tracks outside.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

700 exhibitors from 30 countries booked space, and 16,000 people attended to see the latest innovations that were on offer. Rail Engineer was one of them.

Pre-show Although the show started on Tuesday 24 September, the Brits were busy from the day before. “The Railway Sector in Poland and Central Europe - opportunities for the UK companies” was the title of a

series of seminars promoted by the Department for International Trade on the Monday afternoon.

Timed so that exhibitors could attend before the show got busy the next day, it did perhaps mean that some visitors, who had arranged to arrive for Tuesday, missed out. It’s difficult to get timings for these things completely right.

In any case, the seminar was quite well attended. Lech Kaczanowski, the acting director for central Europe from the British Embassy in Warsaw, opened proceedings and described the Central European market. Neil Walker, exports director of the Railway Industry Association (RIA), talked of the support available to British exporters.

FEATURE

There followed several talks on specific topics. Grzegorz Witkowsi from the Polish Ministry of Infrastructure was followed by a speaker from Gysev - the Hungarian-Austrian cross border railway company.

Polish public procurement law was covered by a local associate from Linklaters.

Other Polish companies (PKP Cargo, PESA, PKP Intercity) followed, and the seminar concluded with an address

by Nikola Mishev from the international affairs department of the Bulgarian national railway infrastructure company.

It was all very interesting.

Delegates learned how similar, and how different, Eastern European railways are, with many taking notes or photos of the slides used in the presentations.

Tuesday was the start of the exhibition itself. There were queues for the trams from the city centre, nowhere to stand, and then the half-mile walk from the tram stop to the exhibition itself.

On arrival, registration was simple, and prearranged, and then it was into Hall A, first aisle, where we found - the British Pavilion! Eye-catching with its GREAT Britain branding, 28 organisations had stands and displays. It was a great location and a sure way to draw in the biggest number of show visitors.

Organisers Intec and RIA did a good job.

It was an interesting range of exhibitors too, and very representative of the UK industry.

British Steel was there, represented by staff from the UK, France and Poland. It was good to see them, and surely indicative of the confidence in the company’s future by the special managers that had released the funds for them to attend.

One of the larger companies represented was Hitachi Information Control Systems Europe (HICSE, but pronounced ‘Hicksy’). The stand was busy throughout the show. Business development manager Denise

Watkins said: “Trako 2019 was a great success from our point of view, the booth positioning within the UK Pavilion was excellent and the level of interest in our products from organisations located throughout Europe was exciting.

“We were able to demonstrate a range of digital design tools on the stand and also held a breakfast briefing to introduce the latest addition to our rail design software suite, dessan Reveal. This is a new concept which will integrate, enrich and activate large complex data sets from multiple sources and provide intelligent analysis to deliver valuable insight into what’s happening across rail networks.

“We don’t exhibit too often, as the costs can sometimes outweigh the benefits, but Trako for us this year has really created some fantastic opportunities which we will be busy following up on over the next few weeks and months.”

Hepworth’s stand had a couple of full-sized windscreens dressed up and display banners - or were they banners made to look like windscreens? Whichever, they had working windscreen wipers.

“Trako for Hepworth was a complete success,” reported senior sales manager Ian Lockett.

“I would put this down to the amount of OEMs we already deal with in Europe and the relationships we have built with these.

“Although there were only a few enquiries received from the show, which are already materializing in worthwhile

Lech Kaczanowski opened the seminar.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

75

76

FEATURE

Rail Minister Chris HeatonHarris on the RS Clare stand at Trako 2019.

projects, it also gave us the chance to have a local meeting point to greet all our customers and progress with the projects and relationship building.

“I think the setup of the British pavilion is perfect, as it is located on the main hall and entices people to come and view what we have to offer, even if it’s just out of curiosity.

This is also complemented by the show not being too big in terms of ground layout, which means people are willing to make the effort to walk around.

“Overall, I would recommend the show to any company looking to branch out into Europe.”

Staytite was showing off its Hardlock nuts. They also liked the British Pavilion, saying it “works really well and was a great atmosphere”.

Thomson Engineering Design, manufacturers of specialist attachments for road-rail vehicles, was one of many SMEs present. David Thomson was impressed, not only by the show, but by the support for it from the UK. “The exhibition was strongly supported by the presence of the Minister, the Ambassador and by a number of senior staff from British embassies throughout the region,” he explained, “which clearly demonstrates the Government’s commitment to the SME sector.”

Rail minister Chris HeatonHarris did indeed attend. He flew out on the Tuesday to be ready for a formal visit to the show on Wednesday.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

However, while en route, he heard that Parliament had been recalled and he needed to be back in London for 10:30 on Wednesday morning.

So, as soon as he landed at Gdansk, he headed for the show, arriving in the jeans and sweater he had travelled in. Still, he made a point of meeting as many UK exhibitors as possible, even asking Rail Engineer if there was anyone else he should see. Still, time for him was short and he was gone a few hours after his arrival. Full marks though for insisting that he went through with as much of the programme as possible.

“I was pleased to attend Trako this year,” he told Rail Engineer afterwards, “where I received a real insight into some of today’s latest technologies, as well as seeing what some of tomorrow’s state of the art transport systems have to offer.

“The UK Pavilion was a clear example of our long-standing relationship with Poland and a demonstration of the UK companies who are investing in the Polish market. It was great to see so many British businesses exhibiting their services and goods and demonstrating the superb innovation that exists in our rail sector.”

All of the British stands were busy. The Birmingham Centre for Railway Research and Education (BCCRE) had a stand, promoting not only the University of Birmingham but UKRRIN - the UK Rail Research and Innovation Network, for which Birmingham is one of the centres of excellence.

Progress Rail, actually part of American group Caterpillar but with several factories in the UK, had several team members from the Sandiacre, Nottingham, site on hand to discuss everything from track manufacture and design to the supply of freight locomotives. All from one threemetre-square stand.

From the Midlands to Gdansk One exhibitor was just listed as “Midlands UK”. This was a reception desk on the UK Pavilion’s networking area where Midlands companies were basing themselves.

One of these was exhaust systems specialist Eminox from Gainsborough in Lincolnshire.

Carlos Vicente, retrofit sales

FEATURE director, said: “Being able to speak to visitors at Trako has confirmed to us that, like the UK, the rail industry across Europe is looking for solutions to play its part in reducing air pollution.

The cost-effective approach of using retrofit emissions solutions has generated positive interest and we are already planning follow up discussions.”

ABI Electronics (from Barnsley) was another ‘Midlands Engine’ participant. “Trako was a fantastic opportunity to demonstrate ABI’s exclusive technologies for the repair and maintenance rail electronics,” commented William Santos. “We had some of Europe’s largest operators and contractors on our stand who were truly amazed by the real cost-savings that ABI products deliver to the industry.

One locomotive repair specialist even stated that ABI’s universal PCB tester BoardMaster and reverse engineering system RevEng will be true ‘lifesavers’ in their business!”

Direct Access (Nantwich, Cheshire) delivers accessibility services to rail projects as well as in other sectors. Managing director Steven Mifsud was pleased with the show. “Trako was an excellent opportunity for Direct Access to share their experiences on how they helped the London Underground, Network Rail and Luas Trams become accessible for disabled people,” he said. “Also, as the Access Consultants for Virgin Trains, they spoke about how they helped to design the first ‘Calm Corner’, which is a room for people with hidden disabilities.”

Elsewhere While the UK Pavilion was an undoubted success as a focus for British exhibitors, it wasn’t the only place to find a well-known face.

Whitmore Europe was in Hall F, supporting its Polish distributor Rail Tech Papla DP.zoo, promoting its full range of Rail lubrication equipment and rail grease for gauge face & top of rail friction management.

“As always, it was a very busy show with lots of pre-planned meetings over the duration of the show,” said Whitmore UK sales manager Ray Perkins. “We look forward to following the meetings with visit to the clients soon.”

Rosehill Rail was also on a stand with its Polish distributor, Doraco Infrastruktura in Hall C. The highlight of the display was a scale model of a level crossing, complete with removable panels made from the same material as the full-size Rosehill product, which export manager Andrew Knight was proudly displaying.

Made to fit in a large car or small van, it will help Rosehill show off its product at exhibitions all over the world.

LC Switchgear had its own stand in Hall D. Engineering director Andy Seccombe and business development manager Bob Whelan explained that they had taken the decision to attend to promote the range of ‘Whole Life Cost Effective Solutions’ that is designed to provide low maintenance, cost effective, long life solutions for railway isolation and bonding requirements.

They reported that, while they hadn’t exactly been overrun with

visitors, the ones they had seen were of good quality and it was well worthwhile attending the show.

Outside

Dariusz Grajda, president of the Polish Association of Local Government Railway Carriers, touring the UK Pavilion with presidents from the regional TOCs.

The weather was good so it was a pleasure to visit the outside exhibits, both on-track and on the roadway between Halls A/B/C and G. Plasser & Theurer had an 09-3X tamper on display, belonging to ZRK-DOM of Poznan. There were also new trains from Bombardier, Stadler and Polish companies PESA and Newag.

A number of smaller exhibitors were outside as well, showing off generators, equipment for vegetation control and a host of other attachments and devices.

Inside the halls, the usual suspects had stands. Global companies Voith, ABB, Westermo were all in evidence and had plenty of staff on hand to field interested enquiries in a variety of languages.

All in all, Trako was an interesting experience, both to visit and at which to exhibit.

The people were friendly, the food in Gdansk in the evening was good, and there were even dancing girls in this lesspolitically-correct corner of Europe.

If you haven’t been, put it in your diary for 2021 - 21-24 September, Gdansk.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

77

78

FEATURE

ROD MUTTRAM

Where are we now?

Lessons learned from Ladbroke Grove and other accidents, 20 years on

T

wenty years ago, on Tuesday 5 October 1999, the UK rail industry was shaken by a head-on collision that occurred on the Great Western main line between London’s Paddington station and the West Country.

The event led to a lot of negative publicity for the railway, challenged perceptions about the safety of the network, and led to increasing calls for the application of automatic train protection.

At approximately 08:09, on a bright sunny morning, a Thames Turbo train leaving Paddington passed signal SN109 at danger and, a short time later, collided head-on with an inbound high-speed train (HST). The collision speed was in excess of 130mph. 31 people, including both drivers, died and hundreds were injured.

The damage to the Thames Turbo train was so severe that, when the Railtrack (the predecessor to Network Rail) zone director arrived on site, he thought it was a two-car train. In fact, it was a three-car unit but the damage to the front carriage was catastrophic – the diesel fuel in its tank had been atomised resulting in a huge fireball which also engulfed coach H of the HST.

What has happened since?

At the time of writing, those fatalities were the last in an Automatic Train Protection (ATP) preventable accident in the UK and Britain’s railways are now amongst the safest in the world.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

Indeed, the single passenger fatality in the Grayrigg derailment (when a high speed passenger train was derailed due to a defective set of points on the West Coast main line) was in February 2007, which means that it is now not only 20 years since there was an ATP preventable fatality but also over 12 years since there were any passenger fatalities in the UK resulting from a collision or derailment.

However, there can be no room for complacency. The improvement has come, not from one ‘magic bullet’ measure, but from a very large number of improvements working in combination, and sustaining all of them requires constant vigilance.

In the aftermath of the Ladbroke Grove collision there were three Public Inquiries: Ladbroke Grove Part 1 into the specific circumstances of the accident, Part 2 into the industry safety structure and the Joint Inquiry into Train Protection Systems (jointly with the inquiry into the Southall Collision (pictured below) on 19 September 1997). Those inquires drove many improvements (as did the main part of

79

FEATURE

PHOTO: LONDON FIRE BRIGADE

the Southall inquiry) but it is important to also recognise that many, including the key Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS), were already being developed before that and were scrutinised by the inquiries.

The Joint Inquiry into Train Protection Systems considered both TPWS and the European Train Control System (ETCS) as part of its deliberations and it was seriously suggested by many that TPWS should be abandoned in favour of accelerating ETCS. Fortunately, the evidence given by people like Sir David Davies and the author prevailed and TPWS was recommended as the short-term system, with ETCS to follow.

Time and time again, we see that the gestation and implementation times for these systems is very long. Implementation of the Automatic Warning System (AWS), which still works in combination with TPWS, took over 50 years.

It is worth remembering that the Joint Inquiry also recommended the implementation of ETCS on the East Coast, West Coast and Great Western main lines by 2008. That was not achieved and, eleven years on from the deadline, ETCS is only just coming into UK service on the likes of Thameslink and Crossrail.

TPWS success factors

Ladbroke Grove.

Recommendation 48 of the Inquiry into the Clapham Junction accident, which occurred on 12 December 1988, stated: “The Department of Transport and BRB (the British Railways Board) shall make a thorough study of appraisal procedure for safety elements of investment proposals so that the cost-effectiveness of safe operation of the railway occupies its proper place in a business-led operation.”

As part of the response, a report was published in 1994 on the use of safety cost/benefit analysis (CBA) to rank and prioritise safety investment.

It used the two BR-ATP (British Rail – Automatic Train Protection) pilot schemes on the Great Western and Chiltern lines as case studies and showed that they were much too expensive to be justified against other potential safety investments (some to six to seven times more than the benchmark).

Secretary of State for Transport Brian Mawhinney, now Lord Mawhinney, endorsed the decision that BR-ATP should not be deployed further.

The late Dr Peter Watson, then the engineering director of British Rail, recognised that the risks associated with Signals Passed at Danger (SPADs) remained high because, whilst the average risk supported the CBA conclusion not to extend

A TPWS grid in the track below a signal gantry.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

FEATURE

PHOTO: THALES

Students learning the intricacies of TPWS at the Thales Academy.

TPWS Train Stop loop alongside a signal.

BR-ATP, within the risk population there remained the risk of a large multi-fatality accident similar in consequences to Clapham (how prophetic that turned out to be).

He, on behalf of British Rail, and I, on behalf of Railtrack, agreed to jointly fund a package of R&D to look at reducing SPAD risk and the SPADRAM (Signals Passed At Danger Reduction And Mitigation) project was born from, which TPWS and a host of other measures emerged.

Railtrack later took over full sponsorship under the guidance of the pan-industry Train Protection Steering Group (TPSG), which the author chaired.

One of the potential measures evaluated was enhancing the functionality of the existing AWS system by adding a ‘train stop’ and a ‘speed trap’ which could not be overridden by the driver in the way that the AWS warning could be, even for a red signal. Ladbroke Grove data recorder evidence showed that the driver of the Thames Turbo overrode the AWS warning at SN109 which was at Danger and drove on.

Exactly why we shall never know; there were many potentially contributing factors, but the fact that the warning for a stop signal could be overridden is AWS’s ‘Achilles Heel’.

Such an enhanced AWS system would reduce risk even if not deployed at every signal - it did not need full deployment to start to deliver benefits and the modelling showed that, by targeting the deployment at high risk signals such as those controlling junctions, it was theoretically possible to deliver 80 per cent of the benefit of ATP for around 20 per cent of the cost. The key thing was to get the system level cost as low as possible. That meant ensuring simple and quick installation as well as getting the component costs right.

The project name was changed from Enhanced AWS to TPWS, a performance specification was written and, following competitive tender, a contract was awarded to Redifon MEL, now part of Thales.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

Redifon’s proposal was based on a right-side door enable system it had developed for London Underground. It was a simple system, based on electronic timers with no complex processing.

Loops in the track passed signal status to the train.

Two loops co-located made a train stop, spaced apart gave a speed trap, with the speed set easily by the distance between the loops. The electrical interface to the lineside signalling was simple and, critically for keeping the system cost low, the onboard unit was a simple bolt-in replacement for the AWS relay box, needing only a subsidiary antenna under the train, a small additional control unit in the cab, and minimal additional wiring. Trains could be retro fitted within a single overnight shift, keeping the ‘disruption costs’ low.

In the aftermath of the Southall accident, HM Railway Inspectorate produced the Railway Safety Regulations 1999, which were laid before parliament in August of that year. These mandated fitment of some form of train protection within five years of their coming into force on the 30 January 2000.

The Regulations did not mandate TPWS specifically, but were written in a way that it was a permissible solution whilst leaving room for something technically better. Except where the BRATP pilots were already fitted, nothing else could have met the timescale.

Shortly after the Regulations were enacted, and with the Southall Inquiry having just started, Ladbroke Grove happened. The size of the public outcry, stoked by those hostile to privatisation who accused the industry of ‘putting profit before safety’ - all of the subsequent inquiries concluded that had no foundation, but it has stuck in the public psyche - meant that Railtrack committed to implementation in four years. Apart from a few problem areas, that was essentially achieved.

So, TPWS really had the wind behind it – it was designed to be simple to install, particularly to retrofit rolling stock; it met the (then) cost criteria for being ‘reasonably practicable’ and, anyway, it was really the only credible response to a mandatory Regulation. Whilst installation was achieved in around five years, much of the ‘ground-work’ had been done before the Regulation was written.

PHOTO: VMS

80

FEATURE Other factors Many other things have contributed to the improvement in safety performance that has been achieved. Other technical measures include the Driver Reminder Appliance (DRA), also a SPADRAM development, which reduces platform starter SPAD risk, and the work that has been done to remove or mitigate sub-standard signal overlaps. The national roll-out of GSM-R radio has greatly improved communication while better data analysis led to specific measures to reduce risk at multi-SPAD signals and control centre alarms were made clearer and easier to distinguish, particularly SPAD Alarms.

The Railway Safety Regulations 1999 also mandated the end of Mk1 ‘Slam door’ rolling stock. The fleets of new trains brought in since the time of Ladbroke Grove have better braking with almost universal Wheel Slide Protection (WSP) and automatic sanders as well as improved crashworthiness if the worst does ever happen.

So, why do we still need ETCS? TPWS was only ever intended to be a stop gap until ETCS, mandated by European law to be used for all significant upgrades, became stable and readily available. As stated above, the Joint Inquiry into Train Protection systems

recommended fitment on the three major main lines by 2008. In the event, it has taken much longer for the ETCS specifications to mature than anyone could have predicted in the late 1990s.

It must be remembered that ETCS started its life as a common system for high-speed lines: its use for those was mandated in 1996. It was not until 2001 that the mandate was extended to conventional lines.

In the mid-1990s, it was identified that, for even moderately dense conventional lines, the GSM-R radio communication from track to train had insufficient allocated channels to support operation in the ‘circuit switched’ mode that had been envisaged for high speed lines. Given the number of communicating trains that would be within a communication area, particularly close to major termini, the system would need

to use the General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) (2G/3G data).

It was not until 2015/2016, with the production and release of ETCS Baseline 3 maintenance release 2 and GSM-R Baseline 1, that EGPRS (Edge enabled GPRS) formed part of the specification, rendering the compliant system really ‘fit for purpose’ in a UK network context.

The extension to conventional lines, and the need for compatibility with the operating rules of the railways of 27 member states, has driven a very complex set of requirements and thus a very expensive and complex solution.

Because ETCS is complex, and provides continuous protection, transition strategies that provide benefits incrementally (as was the case for TPWS) are very hard to find, so wide scale fitment is needed before benefits are delivered. The success of TPWS means there is very little incremental safety benefit to be had, so ETCS has to be justified by other benefits, such as capacity improvement.

Whilst there is real pressure for increased capacity on many routes, there are also many that are still under-utilised and so making a system-wide business case for ETCS is difficult.

Nonetheless, ETCS is the only way forward. From a technical perspective, the existing UK system still depends on AWS which, certainly from a wayside

ERTMS (right) in a modern cab.

TPWS single loop.

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

81

82

PHOTO: LONDON FIRE BRIGADE

PHOTO: LONDON FIRE BRIGADE

FEATURE

Three views of the aftermath of Ladbroke Grove.

Recommendation

perspective, relies on magnetic technology from the 1950s. The investment decision needs to be made on a ‘modern equivalent replacement’ basis, based on the cost of all of the systems and measures that ETCS would replace.

Also, ETCS is now really the ‘only game in town’. However, manufacturers must play their part. The trend away from dedicated hardware, with a high risk of obsolescence, towards architectures that support commercial-off-theself (COTS) implementations must continue for both wayside and on-board. There has been a massive investment in the ETCS software and that is what now needs to be stabilised and preserved so that, eventually, implementation costs will fall as the past cost of software production and homologation are amortised.

In addition, the only really effective way to fight the skills shortages that undoubtedly exist for these ‘new’ technologies in the rail sector is to start to create a consistent market by having a steady and planned programme of deployments.

PHOTO: LONDON FIRE BRIGADE

Rail Engineer | Issue 179 | November 2019

20 years after the Ladbroke Grove collision, UK’s record on rail safety performance improvement is one of which the whole industry can be proud, but the recent tragic loss of two trackworkers near Port Talbot reminds us that we can never be complacent.

The record on investment in modern protection systems is less impressive, for a wide variety of reasons, although much has been done in some areas.

I believe it is time to stop agonising over the business case, accept ETCS as the future system on a modern equivalent asset basis and plan a steady deployment process across the network.

We owe it to those who died and were injured, and to all the families and friends affected by failures like Ladbroke Grove, not to let performance slip.

With the capacity pressures on many parts of the railway, a modern ATP system is the only sensible way forward and ETCS is the only ‘game in town’. Government, suppliers, train operators and Network Rail must all play their parts to make that deliverable without waiting for the painful incentive of another tragedy.

Rod Muttram is an independent consultant with over 40 years’ experience as a systems and safety engineer. He has previously held roles as a vice president with Bombardier, chief executive of Railway Safety - an independent subsidiary of Railtrack which became the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB), director of safety and standards at Railtrack and director of electrical engineering and control systems, also at Railtrack.

An extended version of this article was published in IRSE News in October 2019 and thanks are extended to the Institution of Railway Signal Engineers for permission to include it here.

way People.com

At the heart of UK rail‌

RailwayPeople.com is the largest dedicated rail job site in the UK. With thousands of job opportunities updated daily, your next career is a fingertip away.

Visit RailwayPeople.com to find your next role today.

Velaro Novo It’s time to rethink velocity Discover a train that offers a whole new perspective on high-speed and intercity transportation. 30% lower energy consumption,10% more available space and lower maintenance costs: these and many other benefits make the Velaro Novo unique when it comes to increasing value sustainably over the entire lifecycle and enhanced passenger experience. siemens.com/velaro-novo