What is this weird lightweight train for?

Revolution VLR is a project for ultra lightweight trains for use on routes where traffic is relatively light. It is described as

“an innovative, lightweight, cost-effective rail vehicle that provides a compelling alternative to operating traditional heavy rail vehicles on branch lines. Its low mass reduces all aspects of operating costs and can significantly improve the business cases for line reopenings and extensions, enhancing local connectivity. RVLR’s innovative design combines automotive and rail technologies to provide an attractive, environmentally and economically sustainable product that can be deployed rapidly. RVLR facilitates modal shift and enhanced public transport connectivity. It supports a more affordable, greener future for our railways.”

I look at this and scratch my head. What were the designers thinking of? It is a curious design, with vehicles only 18.5 metres long (when the standard mark 1 length of 20 metres can run over the entire British system and another metre of length is probably possible. It appears to have no means of coupling it to another vehicle or locomotive, at least not in regular use. There is what looks like cramped seating for 56, and standing for 26. It compares unfavourably with the trains provided for this kind of service in the past, such as the GWR Auto trains which were used on little branch lines, and main line stopping services a century ago. These were 21.5 metre vehicles; those built in early BR days had extremely comfortable seating.

What is it for? There are hundreds of quite modern EMUs and DMUs coming out of service which have driving trailer cars which could be converted for use as control trailers for push-pull service for this kind of operation. Traction is another issue but the power requirements are about what was needed to run the GWR Auto-trains, which were pushed or pulled by very small steam locomotives such as the 1400 class.

A single de-rated HST power car (which would otherwise go for scrap) could handle up to three coaches with ease, with years of useful service ahead, so that passengers would not have be crammed in and stand, and there would be plenty of space for wheelchairs, prams and bicycles.

Dare one say it – very small steam locomotives such as the 1400 class used for auto-trains are very cheap to build, given a production run of 20 or more; when fuelled with light oil or diesel they actually use less fuel and produce a clean exhaust, and have a 60+ years life.

The project, sponsored by Eversholt Rail and Transport Design International, seems to be a good example of an inability to see wood from trees or to learn from history. Given the number of GWR Auto-trains which survive, one of these should at least have been brought out for use as a cost/performance benchmark. Whatever traction is used, the total carbon footprint of the operation is minuscule – just 0.7% of the UK total – in the overall scheme of things – the carbon footprint of this project is probably bigger when everything is factored in, including embedded energy. One would have thought that there were still a few people left at Eversholt Rail who were aware how this kind of thing was done in the past, but seemingly not. You can read about it here.

The Zombie Train that refuses to die

The Guardian has published a couple more articles against HS2, one by specialist rail commentator Christian Wolmar, and another today by journalist Simon Jenkins. The main arguments in favour will doubtless be wheeled out by the commentators: the need for capacity and the disruption caused by upgrading existing routes. HST itself will severely disrupt services to Euston during the construction period. Capacity can be increased at a fraction of the cost by a variety of measures, provided that it is accepted that the additional traffic will run at existing speeds. It is not generally known that the Midland main line is, or was, four track all the way from London to Trent Junction, between Nottingham and Derby. This is because the additional tracks are separate, having been added for coal trains which trundled down to Brent sidings, on the edge of London, from a collection point at Toton in Nottinghamshire, where the Midland Railway build a huge marshalling yard. Beyond Derby, the main l...

Läs mer

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...

Läs mer

Beyond electrification

In an earlier post I suggested a core list of lines which ought to be in an electrification programme spread over twenty years of so. This leaves a residue of routes which it is unlikely will ever be electrified. This include for example All lines beyond Glasgow, Stirling and Aberdeen All lines west of Exeter and Swansea All lines west of Chester Shrewsbury - Chester Everything not listed in my previous blog - electrification plans only scratch surface Some of these routes carry main line services to London and other cities on parts of the network that are already electrified or included in electrification plans. Others are self contained and others carry light traffic - less than a dozen trains a day. The current plan is that main line services will be operated with the hybrid trains on order from Hitachi, but this is a costly, wasteful and ineffective solution. The performance of the trains will be inferior to the present Inter-City 125 trains on non-electrified lines and the ...

Läs mer

AN OUTSIDE VIEW

Leta i den här bloggen