In message <mhh70hhm11i5144bcclof51plfjkjr89el@4ax.com>, at 13:51:34 on
Wed, 9 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 09:36:44 +0100, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>
>>Am 09.02.2022 um 02:09 schrieb Recliner:
>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 22:40:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>>
>>>> Wikipedia quotes 161 miles 11 chains (259.3 km) which is bit more than
>>>> the record breaking distance. Did you use the road distance - 104
>>>> miles according to Google Maps?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, the rail distance of 174:31, which is longer than the road distance:
>>> <https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P00185/2022-02-09/detailed>
>>
>>Plus, you have to take the altitude differences into account. Berlin -
>>Warnemünde is essentially flat, plus it's 40m downhill (which yould only
>>make a small impact).
>
>Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>hilly stretches in between.
>
>Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board.

In bottles perhaps?

>You can't design a system where they are routinely
>running at low charge as they get to the next charger.

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <su0gv9$dsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:41 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.electricandhybridrail.com/content/news/stadler-sets-world
>>>> -record-with-flirt-akku-for-longest-distance-travelled-by-a-train-in-b
>>>> attery-only-mode>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think this has been mentioned on this group before. Add 10-15%
>>>> to that and Inverness to Wick becomes possible.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>
>>> I suppose the solution would be to have 2-3 top-up stations en route, such
>>> that even if one isn't working, trains can still make it. They could use
>>> the Vivarail charging system, and only need a short charging stop. Maybe at
>>> places like Tain, Helmsdale and Thurso?
>>
>> Or to wire some (short-ish?) sections of the line, maybe on rising
>> gradients, to provide a boost to both the batteries and to the train
>> itself.
>
> How do you get the power to those sections of line? It's pretty isolated
> landscape.

Well, so long as you don’t accuse me of cutting the scope of the project if
these thoughts turn out to be unworkable, you could wire from Inverness to
Dingwall and the Kyle line junction, and from the north, probably at
Thurso, down to Georgemas Junction and to Wick; Orkney and the Pentland
Firth are prime development sites for ocean renewables. I don’t know if
you’d need another stage somewhere in between.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <su0l5a$b7o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:04:10 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <su0gv9$dsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:41 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://www.electricandhybridrail.com/content/news/stadler-sets-world
>>>>> -record-with-flirt-akku-for-longest-distance-travelled-by-a-train-in-b
>>>>> attery-only-mode>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think this has been mentioned on this group before. Add 10-15%
>>>>> to that and Inverness to Wick becomes possible.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>>
>>>> I suppose the solution would be to have 2-3 top-up stations en route, such
>>>> that even if one isn't working, trains can still make it. They could use
>>>> the Vivarail charging system, and only need a short charging stop. Maybe at
>>>> places like Tain, Helmsdale and Thurso?
>>>
>>> Or to wire some (short-ish?) sections of the line, maybe on rising
>>> gradients, to provide a boost to both the batteries and to the train
>>> itself.
>>
>> How do you get the power to those sections of line? It's pretty isolated
>> landscape.
>
>Well, so long as you don’t accuse me of cutting the scope of the project if
>these thoughts turn out to be unworkable, you could wire from Inverness to
>Dingwall and the Kyle line junction, and from the north, probably at
>Thurso, down to Georgemas Junction and to Wick; Orkney and the Pentland
>Firth are prime development sites for ocean renewables. I don’t know if
>you’d need another stage somewhere in between.

For four trains a day? Is really worth it. What's the carbon footprint
of all those works.
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:21:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <su0l5a$b7o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:04:10 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <su0gv9$dsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:41 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <https://www.electricandhybridrail.com/content/news/stadler-sets-world
>>>>>> -record-with-flirt-akku-for-longest-distance-travelled-by-a-train-in-b
>>>>>> attery-only-mode>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think this has been mentioned on this group before. Add 10-15%
>>>>>> to that and Inverness to Wick becomes possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose the solution would be to have 2-3 top-up stations en route, such
>>>>> that even if one isn't working, trains can still make it. They could use
>>>>> the Vivarail charging system, and only need a short charging stop. Maybe at
>>>>> places like Tain, Helmsdale and Thurso?
>>>>
>>>> Or to wire some (short-ish?) sections of the line, maybe on rising
>>>> gradients, to provide a boost to both the batteries and to the train
>>>> itself.
>>>
>>> How do you get the power to those sections of line? It's pretty isolated
>>> landscape.
>>
>>Well, so long as you don’t accuse me of cutting the scope of the project if
>>these thoughts turn out to be unworkable, you could wire from Inverness to
>>Dingwall and the Kyle line junction, and from the north, probably at
>>Thurso, down to Georgemas Junction and to Wick; Orkney and the Pentland
>>Firth are prime development sites for ocean renewables. I don’t know if
>>you’d need another stage somewhere in between.
>
>For four trains a day? Is really worth it. What's the carbon footprint
>of all those works.

I think a UK battery train a long way from normal OHLE would be more likely to use the Vivarail charger system, so the
installation would be relatively small and simple.

In message <4on70htkpg92ivk3thu8iqjsf7j6dqkvau@4ax.com>, at 15:36:30 on
Wed, 9 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:21:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <su0l5a$b7o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:04:10 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <su0gv9$dsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:41 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <https://www.electricandhybridrail.com/content/news/stadler-sets-world
>>>>>>> -record-with-flirt-akku-for-longest-distance-travelled-by-a-train-in-b
>>>>>>> attery-only-mode>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think this has been mentioned on this group before. Add 10-15%
>>>>>>> to that and Inverness to Wick becomes possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>>>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose the solution would be to have 2-3 top-up stations en
>>>>>>route, such
>>>>>> that even if one isn't working, trains can still make it. They could use
>>>>>> the Vivarail charging system, and only need a short charging
>>>>>>stop. Maybe at
>>>>>> places like Tain, Helmsdale and Thurso?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or to wire some (short-ish?) sections of the line, maybe on rising
>>>>> gradients, to provide a boost to both the batteries and to the train
>>>>> itself.
>>>>
>>>> How do you get the power to those sections of line? It's pretty isolated
>>>> landscape.
>>>
>>>Well, so long as you don’t accuse me of cutting the scope of the project if
>>>these thoughts turn out to be unworkable, you could wire from Inverness to
>>>Dingwall and the Kyle line junction, and from the north, probably at
>>>Thurso, down to Georgemas Junction and to Wick; Orkney and the Pentland
>>>Firth are prime development sites for ocean renewables. I don’t know if
>>>you’d need another stage somewhere in between.
>>
>>For four trains a day? Is really worth it. What's the carbon footprint
>>of all those works.
>
>I think a UK battery train a long way from normal OHLE would be more
>likely to use the Vivarail charger system, so the installation would be
>relatively small and simple.

So apart from "do nothing", we have two quite different proposals.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <4on70htkpg92ivk3thu8iqjsf7j6dqkvau@4ax.com>, at 15:36:30 on
> Wed, 9 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:21:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <su0l5a$b7o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:04:10 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <su0gv9$dsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:41 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://www.electricandhybridrail.com/content/news/stadler-sets-world
>>>>>>>> -record-with-flirt-akku-for-longest-distance-travelled-by-a-train-in-b
>>>>>>>> attery-only-mode>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think this has been mentioned on this group before. Add 10-15%
>>>>>>>> to that and Inverness to Wick becomes possible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>>>>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suppose the solution would be to have 2-3 top-up stations en
>>>>>>> route, such
>>>>>>> that even if one isn't working, trains can still make it. They could use
>>>>>>> the Vivarail charging system, and only need a short charging
>>>>>>> stop. Maybe at
>>>>>>> places like Tain, Helmsdale and Thurso?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or to wire some (short-ish?) sections of the line, maybe on rising
>>>>>> gradients, to provide a boost to both the batteries and to the train
>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> How do you get the power to those sections of line? It's pretty isolated
>>>>> landscape.
>>>>
>>>> Well, so long as you don’t accuse me of cutting the scope of the project if
>>>> these thoughts turn out to be unworkable, you could wire from Inverness to
>>>> Dingwall and the Kyle line junction, and from the north, probably at
>>>> Thurso, down to Georgemas Junction and to Wick; Orkney and the Pentland
>>>> Firth are prime development sites for ocean renewables. I don’t know if
>>>> you’d need another stage somewhere in between.
>>>
>>> For four trains a day? Is really worth it. What's the carbon footprint
>>> of all those works.
>>
>> I think a UK battery train a long way from normal OHLE would be more
>> likely to use the Vivarail charger system, so the installation would be
>> relatively small and simple.
>
> So apart from "do nothing", we have two quite different proposals.

We have some idle musing. There’s no point in burdening our thoughts here
with the weight of “proposal”.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

>We have some idle musing. There’s no point in burdening our thoughts here
>with the weight of “proposal”.

That;s correct! All we have is me looking at that Stadler train record
and saying blimey that's better than I expected and nearly (I accept
for some valve of nearly) enough to do Inverness to Wick.

One thing that might be relevant is that Stadler have a history of
small bespoke product runs. Many Swiss mountain railways etc. have
replaced their old stuff with new Stadler units with the required
quantity being 2off. They're not going to compete with Vivarail on
base cost but who knows. There is no harm in idle musing!

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <4on70htkpg92ivk3thu8iqjsf7j6dqkvau@4ax.com>, at 15:36:30 on
> Wed, 9 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:21:36 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <su0l5a$b7o$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:04:10 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <su0gv9$dsh$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:52:41 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Nigel Emery <nigele3@ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> <https://www.electricandhybridrail.com/content/news/stadler-sets-world
>>>>>>>> -record-with-flirt-akku-for-longest-distance-travelled-by-a-train-in-b
>>>>>>>> attery-only-mode>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think this has been mentioned on this group before. Add 10-15%
>>>>>>>> to that and Inverness to Wick becomes possible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That record-breaking distance is 25% higher than Inverness-Wick. The
>>>>>>> reliable, operational range will be much less, of course.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suppose the solution would be to have 2-3 top-up stations en
>>>>>>> route, such
>>>>>>> that even if one isn't working, trains can still make it. They could use
>>>>>>> the Vivarail charging system, and only need a short charging
>>>>>>> stop. Maybe at
>>>>>>> places like Tain, Helmsdale and Thurso?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or to wire some (short-ish?) sections of the line, maybe on rising
>>>>>> gradients, to provide a boost to both the batteries and to the train
>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> How do you get the power to those sections of line? It's pretty isolated
>>>>> landscape.
>>>>
>>>> Well, so long as you don’t accuse me of cutting the scope of the project if
>>>> these thoughts turn out to be unworkable, you could wire from Inverness to
>>>> Dingwall and the Kyle line junction, and from the north, probably at
>>>> Thurso, down to Georgemas Junction and to Wick; Orkney and the Pentland
>>>> Firth are prime development sites for ocean renewables. I don’t know if
>>>> you’d need another stage somewhere in between.
>>>
>>> For four trains a day? Is really worth it. What's the carbon footprint
>>> of all those works.
>>
>> I think a UK battery train a long way from normal OHLE would be more
>> likely to use the Vivarail charger system, so the installation would be
>> relatively small and simple.
>
> So apart from "do nothing", we have two quite different proposals.

Only two?? We've had at least four zero carbon options already in this
thread!

There's also the simpler option of using diesel hybrids, as Chiltern is
testing. That could become a standard upgrade option for Turbostars. It's
certainly not zero carbon, but cuts the CO2 and other pollution quite
significantly, particularly in stations. That would be the easiest,
cheapest way of improving that line's eco credentials.

In message <su0tna$atl$1@dont-email.me>, at 17:30:18 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>> So apart from "do nothing", we have two quite different proposals.
>
>Only two?? We've had at least four zero carbon options already in this
>thread!

Allegedly carbon neutral, and over what number of years amortising the
carbon used to implement them?
--
Roland Perry

On 09/02/2022 12:26, Recliner wrote:

> As for making a return on the investment, let's not kid ourselves that any
> of these zero carbon solutions will be cheaper than existing ICEs.

If they couldn't get them to St Pancras more than once, they won't get
them to Thurso.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 09/02/2022 16:22, Nigel Emery wrote:

> One thing that might be relevant is that Stadler have a history of
> small bespoke product runs. Many Swiss mountain railways etc. have
> replaced their old stuff with new Stadler units with the required
> quantity being 2off.

Though they now also churn out generic multiple units in quantities to
compete with Alstom and Siemens.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are hilly stretches in between.
>
> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You can't design a system where they are routinely
> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.

They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
charge point if there was any blockage.

On 09/02/2022 13:00, Recliner wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <su0bu6$cr6$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:26:46 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>> Is there enough demand from three short trains shuttling back and
>>>> forth, to make a return on such an investment?
>>>
>>> As for making a return on the investment, let's not kid ourselves that any
>>> of these zero carbon solutions will be cheaper than existing ICEs. They're
>>> favoured for other reasons, and will be a lower priority for
>>> decarbonisation than transport and heating in large cities.
>>
>> I'm suggesting it's so much lower, it's a waste of time imagining it
>> might happen at all in the foreseeable future.
>
> It depends on the political pressure for true net zero. That's currently
> high, but will probably drop very soon, when our leader and her big and
> small dogs are evicted from Downing St. None of her likely successors are
> so keen on it.
>

Seeing this thead talks of gthe line to Wick / Thurso, it is of
relevance that the Sturgeon is beholden to the Greens for her majority.
Accordingly she needs to keep up the political pressure (and I believe
that she is also in favour). So, whilst Downing Street may implode,
there will still be pressure.

--
Colin

On 09/02/2022 15:36, Recliner wrote:
> I think a UK battery train a long way from normal OHLE would be more likely to use the Vivarail charger system, so the
> installation would be relatively small and simple.

Hor does the train pick up the power in between charging points, the
website is a bit vague.

Don't forget that these lines often have had two locomotives to handle
the gradients and the Kyle line had special sidings so they could leave
half the trucks behind and then return for them.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 09/02/2022 15:36, Recliner wrote:
>> I think a UK battery train a long way from normal OHLE would be more
>> likely to use the Vivarail charger system, so the
>> installation would be relatively small and simple.
>
> How does the train pick up the power in between charging points, the
> website is a bit vague.

It doesn't.

>
> Don't forget that these lines often have had two locomotives to handle
> the gradients and the Kyle line had special sidings so they could leave
> half the trucks behind and then return for them.
>

Electric cars perform well at low speeds, with lots of torque. I assume
BETs will be the same.

ColinR <rail@greystane.shetland.co.uk> wrote:
> On 09/02/2022 13:00, Recliner wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <su0bu6$cr6$1@dont-email.me>, at 12:26:46 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> Is there enough demand from three short trains shuttling back and
>>>>> forth, to make a return on such an investment?
>>>>
>>>> As for making a return on the investment, let's not kid ourselves that any
>>>> of these zero carbon solutions will be cheaper than existing ICEs. They're
>>>> favoured for other reasons, and will be a lower priority for
>>>> decarbonisation than transport and heating in large cities.
>>>
>>> I'm suggesting it's so much lower, it's a waste of time imagining it
>>> might happen at all in the foreseeable future.
>>
>> It depends on the political pressure for true net zero. That's currently
>> high, but will probably drop very soon, when our leader and her big and
>> small dogs are evicted from Downing St. None of her likely successors are
>> so keen on it.
>>
>
> Seeing this thead talks of gthe line to Wick / Thurso, it is of
> relevance that the Sturgeon is beholden to the Greens for her majority.
> Accordingly she needs to keep up the political pressure (and I believe
> that she is also in favour). So, whilst Downing Street may implode,
> there will still be pressure.
>

Yes, that's a very good point.

I wonder if battery D-Trains would be suitable for those routes? Assume a
three-car unit (two DM cars plus a trailer carrying lots of batteries. I
wonder if it's suitable for use in very cold weather? Is the 60mph top
speed enough?

On 09/02/2022 22:26, MB wrote:
> On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>> hilly stretches in between.
>>
>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>> can't design a system where they are routinely
>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>
> They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
> charge point if there was any blockage.

They would also need enough capacity to operate the heating for a large
number of hours in event of becoming stranded.

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 09/02/2022 22:26, MB wrote:
>> On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>>> hilly stretches in between.
>>>
>>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>>> can't design a system where they are routinely
>>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>>
>> They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
>> charge point if there was any blockage.
>
> They would also need enough capacity to operate the heating for a large
> number of hours in event of becoming stranded.

Yes, that's definitely a key consideration for trains running long
distances through remote areas with extreme weather.

One other thought: the recharging system must be impervious to ice, snow,
wind and rain. You don't want connectors that ice up or stop working in
heavy snow.

On 09/02/2022 23:58, Recliner wrote:
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/02/2022 22:26, MB wrote:
>>> On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>>>> hilly stretches in between.
>>>>
>>>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>>>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>>>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>>>> can't design a system where they are routinely
>>>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>>>
>>> They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
>>> charge point if there was any blockage.
>>
>> They would also need enough capacity to operate the heating for a large
>> number of hours in event of becoming stranded.
>
> Yes, that's definitely a key consideration for trains running long
> distances through remote areas with extreme weather.
>
> One other thought: the recharging system must be impervious to ice, snow,
> wind and rain. You don't want connectors that ice up or stop working in
> heavy snow.

Basically, 1% of our trains should continue to run on diesel forever,
as it's less polluting than installing barely used infrastructure, and
the Far North lines are part of that 1%.

Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On 09/02/2022 23:58, Recliner wrote:
>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 09/02/2022 22:26, MB wrote:
>>>> On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>>>>> hilly stretches in between.
>>>>>
>>>>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>>>>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>>>>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>>>>> can't design a system where they are routinely
>>>>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>>>>
>>>> They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
>>>> charge point if there was any blockage.
>>>
>>> They would also need enough capacity to operate the heating for a large
>>> number of hours in event of becoming stranded.
>>
>> Yes, that's definitely a key consideration for trains running long
>> distances through remote areas with extreme weather.
>>
>> One other thought: the recharging system must be impervious to ice, snow,
>> wind and rain. You don't want connectors that ice up or stop working in
>> heavy snow.
>
> Basically, 1% of our trains should continue to run on diesel forever,
> as it's less polluting than installing barely used infrastructure, and
> the Far North lines are part of that 1%.
>

Agreed.

And, if zero carbon ever becomes mandatory, use zero carbon synthetic
diesel in efficient hybrid trains.

In message <su1f1u$hp1$1@dont-email.me>, at 22:26:06 on Wed, 9 Feb 2022,
MB <MB@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>>hilly stretches in between.
>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>>that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>>can't design a system where they are routinely
>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>
>They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
>charge point if there was any blockage.

That immediately doubles the range required. So for example a train
which set out from Wick/Thurso gets within a mile of Inverness, and
finds the line blocked, requiring a return to where it started.

Or would they in practice detrain the pax at the first opportunity
(modulo the almost statutory 3hr wait) and await a Thunderbird?
--
Roland Perry

In message <su1onp$7ce$1@dont-email.me>, at 01:11:21 on Thu, 10 Feb
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>> On 09/02/2022 23:58, Recliner wrote:
>>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 09/02/2022 22:26, MB wrote:
>>>>> On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>>>>>> hilly stretches in between.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>>>>>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>>>>>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>>>>>> can't design a system where they are routinely
>>>>>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>>>>>
>>>>> They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
>>>>> charge point if there was any blockage.
>>>>
>>>> They would also need enough capacity to operate the heating for a large
>>>> number of hours in event of becoming stranded.
>>>
>>> Yes, that's definitely a key consideration for trains running long
>>> distances through remote areas with extreme weather.
>>>
>>> One other thought: the recharging system must be impervious to ice, snow,
>>> wind and rain. You don't want connectors that ice up or stop working in
>>> heavy snow.
>>
>> Basically, 1% of our trains should continue to run on diesel forever,
>> as it's less polluting than installing barely used infrastructure, and
>> the Far North lines are part of that 1%.
>
>Agreed.
>
>And, if zero carbon ever becomes mandatory, use zero carbon synthetic
>diesel in efficient hybrid trains.

From National Grid website:

Given the impact that carbon emissions have on our planet, you
might wonder why we aren't aiming for zero, or gross zero,
rather than net zero. Gross zero would mean stopping all
emissions, which isn't realistically attainable across all
sectors of our lives and industry. Even with best efforts to
reduce them, there will still be some emissions.

Net zero looks at emissions overall, allowing for the removal of
any unavoidable emissions, such as those from aviation or
manufacturing. Removing greenhouse gases could be via nature, as
trees take carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or through new
technology or changing industrial processes.

Some trains (and their fuel supply systems) will never achieve gross
zero, especially if we count the emissions caused by their manufacture
and distribution. The National Grid site glosses over that aspect
somewhat.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <mhh70hhm11i5144bcclof51plfjkjr89el@4ax.com>, at 13:51:34 on
> Wed, 9 Feb 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 09:36:44 +0100, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:

>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board.
>
> In bottles perhaps?

Single Malt or blended?

GH

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/02/2022 22:26, MB wrote:
>>> On 09/02/2022 13:51, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Yes, Inverness and Wick are both close to sea level, but there are
>>>> hilly stretches in between.
>>>>
>>>> Another consideration is that these trains run through remote areas
>>>> that can get blocked with snow or other bad weather,
>>>> so you need to have quite a large reserve fuel supply on board. You
>>>> can't design a system where they are routinely
>>>> running at low charge as they get to the next charger.
>>>
>>> They would need to always have enough capacity to return to the last
>>> charge point if there was any blockage.
>>
>> They would also need enough capacity to operate the heating for a large
>> number of hours in event of becoming stranded.
>
> Yes, that's definitely a key consideration for trains running long
> distances through remote areas with extreme weather.
>

Have the heating work from oil or gas which would would leave the batteries
for traction ,lighting and a few other bits like the PA ,etc.

And don’t have the oil or gas as a back up system ,use it as the primary so
you know it is working
and gets regular attention and not something that lets you down when it is
suddenly needed because
it has been at the bottom of some maintenance list.

GH

In message <su1ob7$s93$1@dont-email.me>, at 01:04:39 on Thu, 10 Feb
2022, Certes <none@nowhere.net> remarked:

>Basically, 1% of our trains should continue to run on diesel forever,
>as it's less polluting than installing barely used infrastructure, and
>the Far North lines are part of that 1%.

According to the ORR, "rail"[1] comprises 0.4% of the UK's carbon
footprint, so we are fretting here about 1% of 0.4% - don't we have
anything better to do?

For the Scottish, 76% of all passenger journeys are already electrified.

[1] It's not entirely clear if that's just the trains, or also the
stations etc.
--
Roland Perry