DART+ (DART Expansion)

end of the road

Sam Russell wrote: »

That woul be 30 km or so. What would that cost? I suppose, putting up O/H cable would be a must.

oh absolutely. may as well do the whole thing while equipment and man power are around. yes it would add extra cost to what is being done but at least the lot would be done instead of having to come back and do it later which would cost more over all i would imagine. that would be the kildare services ready to massively bump up when new stock arrives.
i know it's not going to happen though.

Sam Russell

bk wrote: »

Those Stadler FLIRT trains actually have a corridor going through the middle of the "powerpack" section that allows passengers pass from one side to the other.

These sections actually contain four relatively small (for a train) Diesel engines, two on each side of the corridor. Nice design and would allow for redundancy (e.g. one engine fails, the train can still continue).

https://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/5519/first-view-of-swiss-built-bi-mode-units-for-greater-anglia/

Check out this pic:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcQq8KlX0AAmtEf.jpg

And here is a diagram of a regular 4 carriage layout. See the pass through section in the middle:



You do have a point about the length. An 8 carriage train would require two "powerpack" sections as they call them, looks like they would take up about the space of 2/3rds of one carriage.

One option if the platforms aren't long enough to handle that, is to start of with 7 carriages + 2 "powerpacks" and once they go all electric and they remove the two powerpack sections, they can add in an 8th carriage.



High speed rail to Cork would require billions, just electrification a lot less. But then if you aren't doing HSR, there isn't much point to electrifying a service like Cork to Dublin.

Electrification is most useful for HSR or for services that stop frequently like DART. The service to Cork would gain very little from just electrification.

Great to hear that there is finally some progress on DART electrification.

The trains look good. The pictures do not show pantographs, but they are not fiished.

I would think a srvice only using just four coach sets would do a lot for IR. At €10 million or so per train, it would certainly not be cheap. How many would they need? 20 trains? I assume they would replace the ICR sets on the PPT service including off peak service.

L1011

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I heard somewhere it too low to electrify part of the reason they need hybrids.

That has been claimed in the past, but they also claimed the tunnel was unsafe to use for passenger trains until relatively recently... some recent documents show it as fully electrified

You can use overhead beam contact through low tunnels that don't have the headroom for wires and catenery

alias no.9

cgcsb wrote: »

It'll mean closing of some lanes of the N4, CPO of some back gardens in Ballyer and a few bridges demolished and reconstructed. No doubt it will be disruptive, hence why it's been left until now.

I think there's a change of tack coming in how these projects are done. Between BusConnects, Metrolink and DART expansion more less everyone in the city will see some disruption, a sort of even spread if you will. This removes the whole, 'what about my estate Joe' mentality because pretty much everyone is giving up something, the only people who seem to have a major issue with it are the socialists of Terenure/Ranelagh.

I'm not sure any gardens will need CPO'd. Almost every pinch is a road bridge, rail under bridges at Le Fanu (currently 2 tracks no room for more), Kylemore (currently 2 tracks, room for maybe 3), an over bridge at Sarsfield Road (currently 3 tracks, no room for more) and two more under bridges at Memorial Road (currently 3 tracks, no room for more) and South Circular Road (looks like 3 tracks, not sure about room for more).

The under bridge at South Circular Road exiting Heuston is potentially the biggest challenge. If this can't take 4 tracks, it'll cause major disruption if it needs replacing. If that isn't necessary, Kylemore is probably the next biggest disruption.The other bridges are minor works in the grand scheme of things.

Retaining walls should be sufficient along the rest of the route with the exception of these buildings in the Inchicore Works



Even still, it may be possible to squeeze 4 tracks through

Pete_Cavan

I doubt that there will be much disruption to the N4 when adding tracks. The bus lane may have to be closed for a period but that would probably only be for the time it takes to dig out the bank and install a retaining structure along the 650m adjacent to the N4. Once the additional space is created, I'd imagine preparing trackbed, installing utilities and drainage, laying track, etc. can be done without effecting the N4.

Qrt

So has there been a tender for constructing four tracks from Heuston to Park West or have I misunderstood greatly?

thebsharp

There hasn't been a Tender for the Kildare 4 Tracking - Heuston to Park West but there is design work ongoing.

Sam Russell

bk wrote: »

Those Stadler FLIRT trains actually have a corridor going through the middle of the "powerpack" section that allows passengers pass from one side to the other.

These sections actually contain four relatively small (for a train) Diesel engines, two on each side of the corridor. Nice design and would allow for redundancy (e.g. one engine fails, the train can still continue).

https://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/5519/first-view-of-swiss-built-bi-mode-units-for-greater-anglia/

Check out this pic:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DcQq8KlX0AAmtEf.jpg

And here is a diagram of a regular 4 carriage layout. See the pass through section in the middle:



You do have a point about the length. An 8 carriage train would require two "powerpack" sections as they call them, looks like they would take up about the space of 2/3rds of one carriage.

One option if the platforms aren't long enough to handle that, is to start of with 7 carriages + 2 "powerpacks" and once they go all electric and they remove the two powerpack sections, they can add in an 8th carriage.

Those trains look more interesting the more one looks. They have fewer bogies than Dart trains, which makes change of guage slightly less of an issue. The power pack would cut down noise for passengers, and instead of diesel motors, it could house battery packs. Looks like a future path for the design. It only needs to be made driverless and IR have a winner.

Hope they are considered.

loyatemu

Sam Russell wrote: »

Those trains look more interesting the more one looks. They have fewer bogies than Dart trains, which makes change of guage slightly less of an issue. The power pack would cut down noise for passengers, and instead of diesel motors, it could house battery packs. Looks like a future path for the design. It only needs to be made driverless and IR have a winner.

Hope they are considered.

only 4 doors per train isn't great.

Sam Russell

loyatemu wrote: »

only 4 doors per train isn't great.

Yes, I noticed that, but it gives more seating. If they are used for longer commuter type distances, it might be OK.

If they do not need the power pack, it could be replaced with a same length coach, without doors or perhaps just a single door, or just omit it, or make it a toilet section and bike storage.

loyatemu

Sam Russell wrote: »

Yes, I noticed that, but it gives more seating. If they are used for longer commuter type distances, it might be OK.

you've still got to board people in the city centre stations.

Just from experience of the 22Ks on commuter service, lack of doors is a real issue.

Sam Russell

loyatemu wrote: »

you've still got to board people in the city centre stations.

Just from experience of the 22Ks on commuter service, lack of doors is a real issue.

22Ks have the doors at the ends of carriages which is no use for getting passengers on and off. The Darts have standing spaces in front of the doors, and IR expanded those spaces by taking seats out. The same approach could be done with these trains by providing standing areas either side of the doors, or else put more doors in.

The USP with these is the power pack in the middle of the train.

bk

I'd say the above train could easily be spec'd to have more doors if required. The above spec is just one example, of a particular spec for a particular service. A big selling point of this train is that it is a modular design for different needs. Here is an example of one (all electric) with two doors per carriage in the Netherlands:



I agree, the more I think about this design, at least on paper, it seems like an excellent design.

The reason IR went for DMU's, is reliability. One engine can fail and a DMU can continue on, unlike a classic push-pull. Since reliability is vital on very busy lines, where you have trains every few minutes. A train breaking down causes mayhem to multiple trains and tens of thousands of people.

But the downside of DMU's is that you have an engine in each carriage, which is noisy and causes vibrations and leads to a less pleasant passenger experience.

These "powerpacks" are sort of the best of both worlds. You have the redundancy of four engines, so if one fails, you can still continue, just like a DMU, but the engines are out of the carriages, so should be less noise and vibrations for passengers. Great, sounds like the best of both worlds.

Also it can have some great maintenance advantages. Depending on how easy it is to change "powerpacks", you could have some spare powerpacks, so that if there is a failure of one of the engines, just swap out the faulty unit for maintenance and put the train straight back into service with a new powerpack. With the traditional design, you would lose a whole passenger carriage when an engine needed maintenance. This design should allow the carriages to get more usage.

Also in future, as battery tech matures (or hydrogen) you could swap out the Diesel "powerpack" for a battery/hydrogen one, for non electrified sections of track.

It seems like a really nice design.

Sam Russell

bk wrote: »

I'd say the above train could easily be spec'd to have more doors if required. The above spec is just one example, of a particular spec for a particular service. A big selling point of this train is that it is a modular design for different needs. Here is an example of one (all electric) with two doors per carriage in the Netherlands:



I agree, the more I think about this design, at least on paper, it seems like an excellent design.

The reason IR went for DMU's, is reliability. One engine can fail and a DMU can continue on, unlike a classic push-pull. Since reliability is vital on very busy lines, where you have trains every few minutes. A train breaking down causes mayhem to multiple trains and tens of thousands of people.

But the downside of DMU's is that you have an engine in each carriage, which is noisy and causes vibrations and leads to a less pleasant passenger experience.

These "powerpacks" are sort of the best of both worlds. You have the redundancy of four engines, so if one fails, you can still continue, just like a DMU, but the engines are out of the carriages, so should be less noise and vibrations for passengers. Great, sounds like the best of both worlds.

Also it can have some great maintenance advantages. Depending on how easy it is to change "powerpacks", you could have some spare powerpacks, so that if there is a failure of one of the engines, just swap out the faulty unit for maintenance and put the train straight back into service with a new powerpack. With the traditional design, you would lose a whole passenger carriage when an engine needed maintenance. This design should allow the carriages to get more usage.

Also in future, as battery tech matures (or hydrogen) you could swap out the Diesel "powerpack" for a battery/hydrogen one, for non electrified sections of track.

It seems like a really nice design.

Unless it is part of the design, I cannot see how swapping the power packs would be an easy job. Remember there is only one bogey between carriages. That means the power pack would need to be lifted out of the train by crane and a new one craned in. Not impossible, but not easy unless designed in from the beginning.

I like the idea of them, particularly if battery packs were possible. And even better if they were run autonomously, then even better. The driver/attendant could be used to check tickets, and close doors, and keep order.

I personally think the 22k trains are horrid and noisy.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

Unless it is part of the design, I cannot see how swapping the power packs would be an easy job. Remember there is only one bogey between carriages. That means the power pack would need to be lifted out of the train by crane and a new one craned in. Not impossible, but not easy unless designed in from the beginning.

Ah right, I didn't spot that.

BTW Interesting piece of info I just spotted on the FLIRT wiki:

On 23 April 2015 the Netherlands' railway operator Nederlandse Spoorwegen announced that it was ordering 58 Stadler FLIRT EMUs, comprising 25 four-car units and 33 three-car units, to be delivered by the end of 2016.[54][55] The very short delivery deadline (20 months), to meet capacity needs, allowed NS to invoke 'urgency mode' provisions in EU procurement rules and place the order without tendering.

Interesting that they placed the order without any tendering. I didn't know you could do that. Capacity on our lines is certainly at 'urgency mode' levels, perhaps we should be doing the same.

end of the road

powerpacks likely could have bogies if it is requested they do so. i would also think that train sets as a whole could have conventional bogies if that is also requested.

Sam Russell

end of the road wrote: »

powerpacks likely could have bogies if it is requested they do so. i would also think that train sets as a whole could have conventional bogies if that is also requested.

Wouldn't that require a whole new design?

end of the road

Sam Russell wrote: »

Wouldn't that require a whole new design?

i don't know. i guess it will depend on where any other equipment under the cars is placed?

Sam Russell

end of the road wrote: »

i don't know. i guess it will depend on where any other equipment under the cars is placed?

Surely if you have two bogies, the articulation is between coaches. With a single bogie design, the articulation is between the bogie and each of the coaches. That is a totally different design principle. It would be difficult to combine the articulation of a double bogie with passengers passing from coach to coach. Also, such a modification would introduce two extra bogies.

Using a crane would not be a show stopper of itself.

end of the road

Sam Russell wrote: »

Surely if you have two bogies, the articulation is between coaches. With a single bogie design, the articulation is between the bogie and each of the coaches. That is a totally different design principle.

i don't think a 2 bogy design is classed as articulation. but maybe it is, which if so, i didn't know this. i always understood that articulation was a single bogy design between carrages.
if i am thinking correctly, the walk through with a train with a single bogy between carrages is an open walk through? so no doors or gangway. so yes there would be some redesign needed. as to how big or difficult that would be i cannot say.

Sam Russell wrote: »

It would be difficult to combine the articulation of a double bogie with passengers passing from coach to coach. Also, such a modification would introduce two extra bogies.

it may be . admittidly it's not an area i know very much about so i can't say either way. a conventional design would mean 2 extra bogies yes but i think it probably does make things easier in terms of splitting sets up at the depot where that is required, for example removing a faulty carrage.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Using a crane would not be a show stopper of itself.

but it does make things a bit more complex then it needs to be i think.

DoctorPan

If anyone has attended Peter Smyth's talks to Engineers Ireland last year or this year, he did speak about those designs and he was very impressed with the design of them and ability to convert to pure EMUs once wires have gone up fully.

However with the experience of the 800/802s in the UK, the appeal of Bi-modal DEMUs has diminished in the CME's eyes. BEMUs is what he's pushing for as the first order as part of DART expansion, 4 or 8 fixed piece sets.

bk

DoctorPan wrote: »

If anyone has attended Peter Smyth's talks to Engineers Ireland last year or this year, he did speak about those designs and he was very impressed with the design of them and ability to convert to pure EMUs once wires have gone up fully.

However with the experience of the 800/802s in the UK, the appeal of Bi-modal DEMUs has diminished in the CME's eyes. BEMUs is what he's pushing for as the first order as part of DART expansion, 4 or 8 fixed piece sets.

BEMU's as in Battery EMU's?

While cool, that would be quiet radical and perhaps risky. It is pretty new technology and there aren't many major examples out there actually in service.

Though I do see lots of orders for this sort of design to start coming on stream in 2019. So maybe it is finally here.

Though that would raise the question, will they even bother to fully electrify these lines? You only need to partly electrify them to charge the trains.

Dats me

bk wrote: »

BEMU's as in Battery EMU's?

While cool, that would be quiet radical and perhaps risky. It is pretty new technology and there aren't many major examples out there actually in service.

Though I do see lots of orders for this sort of design to start coming on stream in 2019. So maybe it is finally here.

Though that would raise the question, will they even bother to fully electrify these lines? You only need to partly electrify them to charge the trains.

We should know soon enough, when the NTA were at the Oireachtas transport committee for MetroLink (end of March I think?), they said the Bi-Mode tender would go out "next month" which probably means in the next couple of weeks

DoctorPan

bk wrote: »

BEMU's as in Battery EMU's?

While cool, that would be quiet radical and perhaps risky. It is pretty new technology and there aren't many major examples out there actually in service.

Though I do see lots of orders for this sort of design to start coming on stream in 2019. So maybe it is finally here.

Though that would raise the question, will they even bother to fully electrify these lines? You only need to partly electrify them to charge the trains.

Peter Smyth's thought process outlined last Tuesday night for battery EMUs is thus: he can't and doesn't want to buy new diesel stock, and EMUs are cheaper to run compared to DMUs. What he orders has to last 40 years minimum as the NTA does not open the chequebook for new stock often, so what he orders has to be future proof and he can't wait for OHLE to go up in 2025 when these are meant to arrive in 2023. His plan once the wires are up is to pull them into Inchicore and remove the batteries and have them be pure EMUs. These are also to feature a first for DART stock, toilets! 1 per each 4 piece sets

L1011

Will a battery EMU make it to Maynooth and back maybe twice in peak with a full load in Winter? Theres no turnaround time for more than flash charging and that's a minefield currently

bk

DoctorPan wrote: »

Peter Smyth's thought process outlined last Tuesday night for battery EMUs is thus: he can't and doesn't want to buy new diesel stock, and EMUs are cheaper to run compared to DMUs. What he orders has to last 40 years minimum as the NTA does not open the chequebook for new stock often, so what he orders has to be future proof and he can't wait for OHLE to go up in 2025 when these are meant to arrive in 2023. His plan once the wires are up is to pull them into Inchicore and remove the batteries and have them be pure EMUs. These are also to feature a first for DART stock, toilets! 1 per each 4 piece sets

It makes sense, it just seems a bit risky to me. In the past we have generally been conservative about new designs, here we would be one of the first to do this.

It would probably be less risky to go with Diesel FLIRT and then switch out the Diesel powerpacks in 2025 when the OHLE is in place.

I'd agree with L1011, while on paper they might have the range, I'd worry if they will have the range with a full load in winter.

And then there is the question, if it works, why bother with electrification? I know the batteries need to be replaced every 10 years or so, but that might still be cheaper then putting up the OHLE.

BTW I assume they will at least put OHLE in the stations to charge the batteries when stopped.

Interestingly it seems those FLIRT trains can be ordered as BMU's. Where the four Diesel engines go in the power pack, you can instead put batteries.

Even more interestingly you can also order them as Tri-mode trains. It seems in Wales they have ordered a spec where three of the spaces have batteries and the fourth has a single Diesel engine. I'd assume in this config, the Diesel engine is rarely used, but is there as a backup to crawl home if the batteries run out, great idea IMO, at least on paper.

Don't get me wrong, I'm very pleasantly surprised to hear we are leading the charge on this front. I'm a great believer that the future of cars, buses and yes even some trains is EV, I just wasn't sure we are there yet for trains. But hopefully I'm proven wrong and they work well and are reliable.

DoctorPan

bk wrote: »

And then there is the question, if it works, why bother with electrification? I know the batteries need to be replaced every 10 years or so, but that might still be cheaper then putting up the OHLE.

BTW I assume they will at least put OHLE in the stations to charge the batteries when stopped.

Cost of batteries and business case for replacement of the 8100s and cascement of 29000s to Cork to allow redrawal of the 2600s.

Regarding why bother with electrification when we have BEMUs is Cork/Belfast/Limerick/Galway services. He hopes that money will be forthcoming to allow Cork and Belfast be under the wires by 2035 and new locos to replace the 201s coming on stream at the same time.

Bus bars is what he said will go up at Maynooth/M3 Parkway and Drogheda to charge the BEMUs during each turn run to top them up to get back for the wires.

bk

DoctorPan wrote: »

Regarding why bother with electrification when we have BEMUs is Cork/Belfast/Limerick/Galway services. He hopes that money will be forthcoming to allow Cork and Belfast be under the wires by 2035 and new locos to replace the 201s coming on stream at the same time.

It is a great idea, but I'd say very unlikely to happen. It is an awful lot of money, for little relative benefit. I'd be surprised if the money was forthcoming.

And I'd worry if the battery works, that the NTA/TII/DoT will just say great, job done so and not bother with the electrification work.

Source, working in IT, we will put this temporary solution in place, 30 years later it is still there and now a business critical system that no one has a clue about. Seen it happen dozens of times.

But I hope I'm wrong on that, it all sounds great, I'd love for us to have battery trains and fully electrified network, I'm just a little dubious about how these things work out.

highdef

I'm open to correction but aren't the floors on the FLIRT trains too low for the Irish platform height of 91.5cm?

FLIRT: "Standard floor height is 57 cm (22.4 in), but 78 cm (30.7 in) high floors are also available for platform heights of 76 cm (29.9 in)."

DoctorPan

bk wrote: »

I
And I'd worry if the battery works, that the NTA/TII/DoT will just say great, job done so and not bother with the electrification work.

Source, working in IT, we will put this temporary solution in place, 30 years later it is still there and now a business critical system that no one has a clue about. Seen it happen dozens of times.

True, but tenders have gone out for DART Expansion.

He's stuck in a uncomfortable position, the network needs new trains but the wires aren't where they're meant to be but he can't wait to order and CIE board policy is preventing new diesel orders, best of a bad lot.


Anyways I forgot another nugget of info he dropped during the talk, he can't order new trains until IE sort out a new signalling system as CAWS is obsolete and no safety certs for new stock until TPS is brought in.