[dowlingm]

This is very simplistic math - a 4000 hp locomotive is about three mw at full throttle.

Remember an MP40 has a 1000hp HEP engine along with the prime mover. A straight electric replacement would be something like an ALP46 or ACS64 which would draw more like 6-7MW.

 

[kEiThZ]

So I was looking over the implementation documents for the whole GO Network:

http://www.gotransit.com/electrification/en/project_history/Appendix Files/Appendix 10.pdf

If I am reading this right, they want 38 years to electrify all GO Rail lines???

Is that correct?

 

[kEiThZ]

Remember an MP40 has a 1000hp HEP engine along with the prime mover. A straight electric replacement would be something like an ALP46 or ACS64 which would draw more like 6-7MW.

That would be at peak right? Not while actually cruising betweens stations?

 

[Megaton327]

That would be at peak right? Not while actually cruising betweens stations?

Yes. 6-7 MW would be obscene for cruising...at subsonic speeds, anyways

 

[rbt]

If I am reading this right, they want 38 years to electrify all GO Rail lines???

Is that correct?

Yeah, that's correct for Option 18 which is electrify everything. That's probably very optimistic too because CN and CP still have some pretty negative things to say about electrification of their railway corridors, and it includes some non-trivial items like Niagara corridor (draw bridge currently, Hamilton tunnel, and Milton corridor as a whole).

They don't really say it but I'm pretty sure they knew when creating that document and CN and CP were not going to be cooperative; as we see with the Kitchener line (that small chunk CN still owns) it's going to be a royal PITA to actually electrify everything. That makes it more of a bridge/tunnel/corridor project and less to do with installing wires over the tracks.

 

[crs1026]

Yes. 6-7 MW would be obscene for cruising...at subsonic speeds, anyways

6-7 Mw for a minute or three while accelerating, then just the HEP load while cruising, and then 4-5 mw fed back into the grid while they brake....then idle for a minute while in the station..... I wonder how that nets out across all trains in one feed zone.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

I haven't compared to the material from the recent open houses to see if very much has changed. It appears they have fleshed out a lot more technical detail.

We don't know for sure what order they will do it in, although UPE has been said to be the first priority. Anything beyond Bramalea has to wait for the bypass, same with Milton. Barrie is a priority as ML has promised not to exceed a set number of diesel trains per day on the new Davenport overpass. Stouffville might be a priority to enable ST. LSE/LSW makes a lot of sense as high priority, but might have to wait until the new trackage is added.

So yeah, all in all, it is likely all up in the air.

- Paul

 

[mdrejhon]

If I am reading this right, they want 38 years to electrify all GO Rail lines???

Is that correct?

Not quite. Ignore all pre-2015 documents for the most part. Wynne accelerated part of the electrification. Although it's not the full $19bn electrification, they have approved a $13.5bn electrification.

This is the most complete "Electrification Bible" at the moment:
https://stevemunro.ca/2016/03/30/gorer-details-emerge-in-business-case-analysis/

 

[rbt]

Not quite. Ignore all pre-2015 documents for the most part. Wynne accelerated part of the electrification. Although it's not the full $19bn electrification, they have approved a $13.5bn electrification.[

Wynne (rightfully) purged the really difficult bits out of the "full" electrification schedule.

I'll be amazed (and standing on the sidelines cheering) if both the Niagara extension and Hamilton tunnel are electrified within 40 years. Actually, I'd expect the only way that Hamilton service will be fully electrified is if the James Street station is abandoned. Running on diesel created from algae seems more likely.

 

[mdrejhon]

An image from the big GO RER Business Case documents (our current de-facto "electrification bible")...

If this graph continues to be more-or-less accurate, it projects the huge 2017 capital spending surge -- supposedly planned to occur right before the 2018 election -- to help lock-in RER/electrification before the election, even if corridors don't get dug up until 2018-2019.

2017 is a big year -- expected to have ridership surge & capex spending surge (true RER spending begins).

 

[steveintoronto]

I'm the resident cynic in a number of these forums, and frankly, I don't see any "locking in". I'll believe those funds are disbursed when it actually happens. I can't justify it with reference or facts, but a lot of those 'projections' (manifest as 'promises') are no more solid than anything that's come before. At the very least, it will be so late as to be after the election, not before.

No shortage of 'theories'....very little proof. I'm more assured of seeing the Missing Link started, and if it is, it's going to take a lot more funding from the province than we're led to believe. And it should! When The Missing Link happens, I'll be a lot more amenable to believing other projects will fall into place.

 

[DonValleyRainbow]

This is very simplistic math - a 4000 hp locomotive is about three mw at full throttle. That's roughly equivalent to 2-3 winmills..... the ones that have to turn even though there is sufficient nuclear and hydro power on line. Each of the four reactors at Darlington put out about 800 mw, so a single Go train is lost in the noise.

GO trains don't run at full throttle continuously, and if electric they can feed power back into the grid while braking. And EMU's use less power. So the average load is much lower. Nevertheless, a 70 locomotive fleet all running in peak service would amount to a quarter of a reactor at the most extreme moment.... or a whack of windmills, or as much gas power as Mc Ginty cancelled in Mississauga.

I agree, it's a small fraction of the load represented by autos. Would we be better off taking the capital for GO electrification and just give people electric cars instead? Maybe....it's an interesting question. Getting drivers out of their cars and onto diesel GO trains is still the greatest incremental energy reduction, so maybe more track and more service is better use of the capital.

- Paul

A 12 car consist based on Alstom Coradia X40 would draw 9600kW (800kW / car)

Remember an MP40 has a 1000hp HEP engine along with the prime mover. A straight electric replacement would be something like an ALP46 or ACS64 which would draw more like 6-7MW.

Also remember that we should be differentiating between consists of heavy diesel locomotives w/ unpowered coaches vs. EMUs. The latter eliminates the loco and has more points of traction (potential for less peak power on takeoff), and perhaps less weight overall?

 

[dowlingm]

Emus are significantly lighter, just consider that they move all of the power generation and fuel off board.

12 car bilevel = 600 tonnes, plus an MP40 gives a total consist of 734 tonnes, or 692 tonnes with an ALP46A.
12 Coradia X40s (4 x 3 car) = 820 tonnes.

 

[steveintoronto]

12 car bilevel = 600 tonnes, plus an MP40 gives a total consist of 734 tonnes, or 692 tonnes with an ALP46A.
12 Coradia X40s (4 x 3 car) = 820 tonnes.

With a total of approx 4000HP traction (MP40) v. 7500HP (ALP46A) v. 13000 HP traction (4X triple X40)

The latter eliminates the loco and has more points of traction (potential for less peak power on takeoff),

Tractive force due to greater adhesion would be considerably higher with the EMUs.

This is the principle of 'slugs'...the adhesion is distributed:

A slug is used to increase adhesive weight, allowing full power to be applied at a lower speed, thus allowing a higher maximum tractive effort. They are often used in low-speed operations such as switching operations in yards. At low speeds, a diesel-electric locomotive prime mover is capable of producing more electricity than its traction motors can use effectively. Extra power would simply cause the wheels to slip and possibly overheat the traction motors. A slug increases the number of traction motors available to the locomotive, increasing both the pulling and braking power.

Slug shown behind a full-sized diesel. Note the cut-down shell of the slug, as it has no prime-mover.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slug_(railroad)

 

[mdrejhon]

12 car bilevel = 600 tonnes, plus an MP40 gives a total consist of 734 tonnes, or 692 tonnes with an ALP46A.
12 Coradia X40s (4 x 3 car) = 820 tonnes.

Hmmmm. Axle weight vs total weight....

Total weight: For a long train you are right. A huge number of light coaches can make up for a heavy locomotive!

Axle weight: The axle weight is often an important concern, and I should have worded for that too. Locomotives are much heavier than an EMU car, and axle weight can sometimes break things before total weight does...