[unimaginative2]

Yeah, totally unprecedented. Commuter rail systems have only been electrified around the world for the past 100 years or so...

GO studied electrifying the entire network in 1993. They produced a nice big report. If you can get their archive catalogue to work, just search "GO electrification" and you should find it. It's also in any big library.

 

[kettal]

... do you know what the word unprecedented means?

 

[RedRocket191]

Help with research

Advocacy for electric trains replacing diesel powered trains frequently mentions:

Electric trains are faster than diesel powered trains, and this will us to add more stops to the line without increasing overall travel time.

But, does this mean that we'll be able to add a stop every kilometre and still get to Aldershot in an hour?

I'm trying to research into the relationship between station spacing and travel time using electric regional trains in use today. My end goal is to use data regression to find a formula that shows what the expected average speed (Y) will be when average station spacing (X) is varied.

I am making the following assumptions:

• Only local electric services will be included, as a Lakeshore West weekend train is the control.
• Time required to board trains remains contant.
• The "typical" electric train's performance is an average of all vehicle used in the study.

Here's where I need help:

I need more data. I can use the published schedule to find end-to-end travel times and count the number of stations, but I need the line length to figure out average speed and average station spacing. Can anyone point me in the direction of information on the length of various individual commuter/regional rail lines that use electric locomotives?

Wikipedia articles do not always have this information.

Any help anyone can offer will be greatly appreciated!

 

[GregWTravels]

My understanding is not that they are faster, but rather than they can accelerate and decelerate quicker.

The BSA on electrification offers some travel times for Diesel vs. Electric Engines in the body, and EMU vs. Electrical Engines in the appendix. Times are from Union in minutes, making all stops.

Exhibition
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 3.00
EMU - 3.00
Diesel - 4.00

Mimico
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 9.00
EMU - 8.00
Diesel - 11.00

Long Branch
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 13.00
EMU - 12.00
Diesel - 16.00

Port Credit
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 18.00
EMU - 16.00
Diesel - 22.00

Clarkson
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 23.00
EMU - 21.00
Diesel - 28.00

Oakville
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 30.00
EMU - 26.00
Diesel - 36.00

Bronte
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 34.00
EMU - 30.00
Diesel - 41.00

Appleby
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 39.00
EMU - 34.00
Diesel - 47.00

Burlington
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 44.00
EMU - 39.00
Diesel - 53.00

Aldershot
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 48.00
EMU - 42.00
Diesel - 58.00

Hamilton Hunter
Electric Engine Hauling Cars - 64.00
EMU - 55.00
Diesel - 76.00

 

[RedRocket191]

Merci, but I really need actual data... not theoretical.

People usually argue "they can never achieve those numbers" and I want this to be defensible against that argument.

 

[CDL.TO]

Electric Locos are quite rare. Most places just use EMUs. Off the top of my head:
- NJ transit
- Metro North uses dual-mode (though I don't think they use them in electric mode for stopping services)

I think the real speed benefits of electrification comes from the use of EMUs.

 

[RedRocket191]

Electric Locos are quite rare. Most places just use EMUs. Off the top of my head:
- NJ transit
- Metro North uses dual-mode (though I don't think they use them in electric mode for stopping services)

I think the real speed benefits of electrification comes from the use of EMUs.

I've factored in Metro North's Hudson, Harlem and New Haven lines, all of Septa's regional rail lines, and Heathrow Connect. I can't find out which specific NJ Transit lines use the EMUs and which use electric locos, so I've not included it (for now).

 

[Second_in_pie]

Electric Locos are quite rare. Most places just use EMUs. Off the top of my head:
- NJ transit
- Metro North uses dual-mode (though I don't think they use them in electric mode for stopping services)

I think the real speed benefits of electrification comes from the use of EMUs.

Yeah, pretty much.
Electric locomotives have a slightly better acceleration, but otherwise they're not a huge service improvement over diesels. They do have more muscle than EMU though, and they also have the electric advantage of much lower maintenance costs and being more environmentally friendly.
The advantage of EMU is that there's a motor for every axle. This means that each driver has a lot less inertia to get moving, and has to put in much less torque. This equates to much higher acceleration times than Diesel and Electric locos can.

But both EMUs and Electric locomotives require the tracks to be wired. In these situations, passenger operations usually use EMUs, unless the trains are very long. In that case, the cost of EMUs and the space they take up mean it's sometimes more economical to use an Electric loco. So for instance, Go would definitely be best to use EMUs for it's service. But if the VIA Canadian got electrified (hopefully in my lifetime,) they'd want to use a locomotive, because they need to drag dining cars, baggage cars, sleepers, regular passenger cars, etc, in sets that can be 50 cars long!

 

[RedRocket191]

Yeah, pretty much.
Electric locomotives have a slightly better acceleration, but otherwise they're not a huge service improvement over diesels. They do have more muscle than EMU though, and they also have the electric advantage of much lower maintenance costs and being more environmentally friendly.
The advantage of EMU is that there's a motor for every axle. This means that each driver has a lot less inertia to get moving, and has to put in much less torque. This equates to much higher acceleration times than Diesel and Electric locos can.

All true, but I believe that there is a big difference between what they actually can achieve and what the popular belief says they can achieve... at least this is what I'm trying to find out.

 

[ShonTron]

You will be interested in CalTrain's studies for electrification of the San Francisco-San Jose corridor, which has similar operating characteristics to the Lakeshore Line.

http://www.caltrain.com/caltrain2025.html

 

[CDL.TO]

It seems I'm unclear about what you are asking, RR. You asked:

Can anyone point me in the direction of information on the length of various individual commuter/regional rail lines that use electric locomotives?

But then said that you've looked into several lines that don't use electric locos.

What are you actually trying to figure out?

 

[RedRocket191]

It seems I'm unclear about what you are asking, RR. You asked:


But then said that you've looked into several lines that don't use electric locos.

What are you actually trying to figure out?

What I am missing is data on the length (in miles or kilometres) of existing railway lines that use electric propelled trains. I have a preference for EMUs, but a beggar cannot be a chooser at this time.

IE "How many miles from Heathrow to Paddington using Heathrow Connect? How many miles from Chicago to Michigan City using the South Shore Line?"

All the other data I need I can obtain form published schedules.

 

[vegeta_skyline]

But, does this mean that we'll be able to add a stop every kilometre and still get to Aldershot in an hour?

Wow that would make for a lot of stops, an hour certainly wouldn't be possible. A stop every kilometre would mean 56 stops between Union and Aldershot. Kipling to St. George via the subway is only 16 stops in 13km and that takes 30 minutes. Union to Aldershot currently is 11 stops in 56km and takes 64 minutes long. A subway would probably take close to 2 hours to make those 56 stops. An EMU would be faster than our subways, 55mph max, but having 1km spacing means it probably won't get much faster than that. Plus the faster you go the more time you need to stop as braking distances increase exponentially. Contrary to popular belief electric trains don't brake better than diesel trains simply because they're electric as for the most part they employ the same type of braking system. There will be some reduction in brake distance because of their decreased weight and the use of dynamic brakes on several powered cars vs just the loco with diesel trains, but a lot will depend on the composition of a future GO EMU trainset. For a GO train to stop safely, smoothly and accurately from 80mph it needs three quarters of a mile. though using the maximum brake force its possible to stop in 1/2 a mile. But it won't be smooth and its very difficult to be accurate because we have a mini-ramp to spot for and if we miss that there are financial penalties so nobody goes that fast. You could do it with ATC. But thats not going to happen anytime soon, our subways don't even have ATC after 50 years of operation. Its finally coming to the Yonge-Spadina line, at a cost of over a billion! Eventually it'll come to the Lakeshore corridor but not for several decades as its 3 times the length of the subway line(meaning 3 times the cost) and the line would have to be electrified(mutli-billion project in and of itself which we won't see for a decade or more) and be completely grade-separated. Also frequencies would need to be less than 5 minutes to justify it and the demand for that kind of frequency won't exist for decades.

All this does not even take into consideration weather related impacts. A subway is for the most part unaffected by weather because of its enclosed environment. Trains on the other had are impacted greatly in poor conditions due to reduced acceleration times because of a lack of rail-wheel adhesion and greater stopping distances because of reduced friction between the wheel and brake shoes and between the wheels and the rails. Never mind other issues such as door problems cause by snow and other debris getting into the door wells.

An 6-car EMU could probably reach 70mph in 1/2 mile (vs only 50mph by 3/4 miles for an mp40 10-car consist). But it would then need the next 1/2 mile to stop for the next station. After factoring in station dwell time, your probably looking at a 30mph average at best. Which would make for a 75 minute trip to Union.

In any case I don't see how the densities along the route can possibly justify having a stop every km.

 

[Jayomatic]

Not sure if anyone has been following the problems happening in Europe this past week but quite an interesting situtation. Surprised they are having so many problems with the electrified trains.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8423442.stm

 

[GregWTravels]

There are a couple problems that seem to be wracking the UK (where I live) right now.

1) third-rail electric, which is very common for everything south of London. As a former resident of Yonge and St. Clair, I know all too well that too much snow on the ground and third-rail can be a bad combination.

2) the Chunnel. Apparently, there is a problem where the trains pick up snow on the outside portions, then when inside the chunnel, the snow ends up melting and interfering with electrical systems. A lot of experts quoted in the press put this down to a failure of accounting properly for drainage from melting snow from the trains. Hopefully it'll be fixed sooner rather than later.

For all that though, the ferries haven't been running either, and air travel has been sporadic at best, so trains are just one of many international travel options on their back foot with the snow recently here in the UK.

I am off to Morocco tomorrow if the flights are running out of Gatwick. It's been touch and go the past few days.

Greg