Streety McCarface
Senior Member
No Hitachi or Kawasaki heavy industries? What about Kinki Sharyo? I hope they don't go with CRRC and I'm glad Rotem isn't included. At least there's Siemens.
|
|
|
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
No Hitachi or Kawasaki heavy industries? What about Kinki Sharyo? I hope they don't go with CRRC and I'm glad Rotem isn't included. At least there's Siemens.
cplchanb
Senior Member
whats wrong with CRRC? the are one of the largest suppliers in the world so its a no brainer. whats progress rail and cad rail industries? havnt heard of them before
crs1026
Superstar
Progress Rail is the outfit that bought EMD (formerly in London) and builds EMD locos down south.
CAD Rail Industries is located in Montreal and has done lots of rebuilds, including on VIA equipment. Don't believe they have manufactured locos from scratch but they certainly rebuild from kits.
Both very credible suppliers.
- Paul
Streety McCarface
Senior Member
Larger doesn't always mean better; Walmart might be the largest retail company in the US, but that doesn't mean they sell items of the best quality. You cannot sacrifice quality when it comes to rolling stock; especially when considering the extremes in current and stresses. Their products have not been truly tested in North America and true lifespans are unknown as they are rather newer. My experiences with their products (especially non-HSR rolling stock) always tended towards KHI, Bombardier, or Siemens. Tokyo subway & regional rail trains are a joy to ride on, Bombardier Toronto Rockets and T1 subway trains have always been robust and comfortable, and Siemens Sprinters used by Amtrak are efficient, quiet, and clean.
cplchanb
Senior Member
I guess khi and Hitachi are either too busy with other larger orders or they've been scared away by the whole bbr debacle. Either way I'm hoping that they make the smart decision and go with multiple units. They're faster more modular and flexible in terms of bi directional operation
ssiguy2
Senior Member
I think a lot of people have criticised hydrogen over the last few weeks and that's good as long as their viewpoints and valid concerns are done so in measured and reasoned fashion. Whether Metrolinx decides to go with Hydrail or continue with catenary electrification should be decided on facts and not hyperbole from either side. Hydrail shows a lot of promise and it would be very short sighted and irresponsible for Metrolinx not to consider it when spending billions of taxpayers money.
Remember electrification was only really put on the table during McGuinty's reign and by the time RER opens that will be a 20 year gap between when the plan was announced and when it finally starts to get up and running. In the fast changing world of transportation, 20 years is a very long time.
A decision made 20 years ago may have been the best decision at the time but that doesn't mean it's the best decision now. It may still be the best course of action but to go ahead for the sole real being because the decision was made 20 years ago and just pretend that nothing technologically has changed is short sighted and does not serve the public interest or respect the tax payers who are paying for it or the riders who will benefit from it.
Last edited:
aquateam
Active Member
Maybe this thread should be renamed "GO transit hydrification" 
brh
New Member
Just out of curiosity if they are going to look at Hydrogen powered trains, why not battery powered.
It seems they already have some working units in the UK.
It seems they already have some working units in the UK.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
^ Very good point.
There have been huge advances in battery power, recharging abilities, and reduction in weight over the last decade and that of course will continue. Bombardier {although admittedly a justifiably dirty word at QP} is a leader in this area and particularly in recharging abilities. Effectively the trains require basic catenary like regular EMUs but the batteries are charged while travelling on the catenary resulting in electrified service run on batteries outside of areas that are electrified.
So for an example an electrified service could run from Union to Niagara by running catenary to Aldershot as planned but continue running electrically past that point running on the fully charged battery system. They offer the unique benefit of being able to run on a wider GO system where only the core area is electrified resulting in faster times from the outer areas, greatly reduced energy consumption due to not needing any diesel fuel, and of course all the environmental benefits of the entire GO network being electrified without the horrific costs of having to put catenaries across the entire 450km GO system. This makes them far more flexible in service than any purely catenary system and makes the eventual phase out of all diesel commuter GO service much more affordable and easy............as the current diesel locomotives are retired due to age they can be replaced with battery powered trains without any extra infrastructure needed.
There have been huge advances in battery power, recharging abilities, and reduction in weight over the last decade and that of course will continue. Bombardier {although admittedly a justifiably dirty word at QP} is a leader in this area and particularly in recharging abilities. Effectively the trains require basic catenary like regular EMUs but the batteries are charged while travelling on the catenary resulting in electrified service run on batteries outside of areas that are electrified.
So for an example an electrified service could run from Union to Niagara by running catenary to Aldershot as planned but continue running electrically past that point running on the fully charged battery system. They offer the unique benefit of being able to run on a wider GO system where only the core area is electrified resulting in faster times from the outer areas, greatly reduced energy consumption due to not needing any diesel fuel, and of course all the environmental benefits of the entire GO network being electrified without the horrific costs of having to put catenaries across the entire 450km GO system. This makes them far more flexible in service than any purely catenary system and makes the eventual phase out of all diesel commuter GO service much more affordable and easy............as the current diesel locomotives are retired due to age they can be replaced with battery powered trains without any extra infrastructure needed.
Last edited:
M636RF
New Member
crs1026
Superstar
^This. According to the ML Hydrail report, the battery technology already exists. So, mount the planned battery pack on a loco frame, and add a smallish diesel with output roughly equal to the intended H2 output. Try that concept to see if the batteries can keep up with the intended duty cycle. If they can't, there's no need to perfect a H2 power source.
- Paul
TransitBart
Senior Member
I have nothing but contempt for this strange distraction from getting the electrification job done. To me, it's a pie-in-the-sky distraction from planting poles in the ground and stringing wire. I really can't fathom it.
mdrejhon
Senior Member
I think this is a more practical solution than hydrail for the electric 15-min RER planned to Hamilton by year 2041.
(Hamilton 15-min train service was mentioned in the Metrolinx 2041 Regional Transportation Plan)
The trip between Union-Aldershot recharges the battery, for the small catenary-free run on freight tracks Aldershot-Hamilton. And maybe a small catenary at station Hamilton downtown for the overnight layovers/return trip.
The GO train only trundles that section anyway, so such a battery probably could fit entirely in an electric locomotive. It only needs 30 minutes of motion-time anyway (15 mins realworld + 15 min reserve).
The battery tech ought to be pretty mature by then.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
The stuff I have read on recharging rates for applications such as buses suggests that recharge times are getting pretty quick. So yeah, this is really doable. The fly in the ointment might be - someone (likely CN and CP, but maybe ML also) would want some basic "creep" mobility in the event that the battery fails to charge.... just so trains don't get "stuck" and block the line in the unpowered zone. Of course, a single small diesel emergency power supply in a single car might deliver enough power to meet this requirement.
- Paul
brh
New Member
Geoff Marshall of youtube does a lot of interesting videos about trains and stations etc in the UK. Here he's checking out a converted subway that's going to be used on national rail system. The spokeswoman has rated it for 40 miles on an 8 minute charge and goes over a number of charging scenarios. The whole video is quite interesting and the charging and options start around the 11:40 mark. While I don't think this would be a viable option for GO transit it's probably more so than hydrogen power.