RMweb Premium melmerby Posted June 20, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Colin_McLeod said: It's a prototype; just like the APT-E which had massive tilting machinery and a whole coach full of "flashing lights" ( as modelled by Jason of Rapido) I expected some of the kit to be under the floor as on any production unit and mostly test gear inside. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted June 20, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 20, 2019 On 17/05/2018 at 08:47, GoingUnderground said: When the Hindenburg airship was destroyed there was no explosion, but it gave hydrogen a bad name that arguably it doesn't deserve. Most of the fire fatalaties were caused by burning diesel, not the hydrogen, which burned upwards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 Just now, melmerby said: I expected some of the kit to be under the floor as on any production unit and mostly test gear inside. The chap from Birmingham University did make the comment they need to get all the gear under the units ready for mainline testing. Your first task with an experiment is to prove the technology, the second is to make it usable. Keeping it within a carriage is useful whilst proving the technology, it's all easily accessible on the move and doesn't require the train over a pit or somewhere where modules can be removed. What happened to the experiments with charging coils that they were planning on a battery 230? 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
black and decker boy Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 50 minutes ago, Trog said: Just a thought but was the weight of the water tanks in the roof of the catering vehicle at Hatfield not given as one of the reasons that the coach turned over when derailed? Presumably tanks of liquid hydrogen are of similar weight and hence constitute a similar risk, if placed in the roof of the vehicle. I don’t think they use steel tanks on hydrogen buses, I think they are carbon fibre or similar? finding space for hydrogen storage sufficient to fulfill a daily diagram is why the 321 breeze loses 2/3rd of each driving car. There isn’t the room in UK loading gauge to put the tanks in the roof. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 20, 2019 Share Posted June 20, 2019 4 hours ago, Trog said: Just a thought but was the weight of the water tanks in the roof of the catering vehicle at Hatfield not given as one of the reasons that the coach turned over when derailed? Presumably tanks of liquid hydrogen are of similar weight and hence constitute a similar risk, if placed in the roof of the vehicle. Liquid hydrogen is less than 10% of the density of water. However its melting point is so low that it isn't practical to use it, so the hydrogen is a compressed gas which is even less dense. The tank itself, being a pressure vessel, may however be quite heavy! But if it works in hydrogen buses (which have been running on one route in London for several years although the route has just been cancelled) it should work in a train where the lateral forces on cornering are less and better controlled. Given the low probability of an accident any slight increase in tendency to overturn shouldn't really be an issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted August 30, 2020 Share Posted August 30, 2020 A report funded by the German Federal transport ministry has just been published by VDE - it concludes that Battery Electric Multiple Units are up to 35% cheaper (whole life) that their Hydrogen equivalents. Further details in Todays Railways - Europe, September edition. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted August 30, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2020 27 minutes ago, Mike Storey said: A report funded by the German Federal transport ministry has just been published by VDE - it concludes that Battery Electric Multiple Units are up to 35% cheaper (whole life) that their Hydrogen equivalents. Further details in Todays Railways - Europe, September edition. Best get this up and running again then: 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted August 31, 2020 Share Posted August 31, 2020 10 hours ago, Mike Storey said: A report funded by the German Federal transport ministry has just been published by VDE - it concludes that Battery Electric Multiple Units are up to 35% cheaper (whole life) that their Hydrogen equivalents. Further details in Todays Railways - Europe, September edition. And a news item in September's Modern Railways. Not clear from that piece if the conclusions would still apply if the hydrogen was a by-product of a chemical process that happens already, and would otherwise just be flared off. But of course even if such hydrogen is available today, as other industries also decarbonise it might not remain so over the lifetime of the train. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted August 31, 2020 Share Posted August 31, 2020 12 hours ago, Edwin_m said: And a news item in September's Modern Railways. Not clear from that piece if the conclusions would still apply if the hydrogen was a by-product of a chemical process that happens already, and would otherwise just be flared off. But of course even if such hydrogen is available today, as other industries also decarbonise it might not remain so over the lifetime of the train. The article in Todays Railways included that in its conclusions, and stated that the effects were marginal, in cost terms. It took a 30 year lifespan and concluded that there were three components which contributed to costs - initial cost (which was substantially higher for hydrogen) , ongoing energy costs (variable according to sources used - the aspect of OLE available at terminating points for re-charging of battery trains was emphasised) and mid-life replacement costs for fuel cells (noticeably higher for hydrogen). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hesperus Posted September 1, 2020 Share Posted September 1, 2020 I can see it as a potentially useful way to decarbonise a quiet line that has no chance of being electrified but as the fueling will be complicated and expensive to set up it would need to be somewhere with several of these lines heading out like Inverness. I'm somewhat sceptical about the benefits of hydrogen though as it's always the magic bullet that's 5 years away and has been for the last 40 years. It's also got a lot of the oil industry backing it which the sceptic in me sees as a way of preventing investment in electrical power. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trog Posted September 2, 2020 Share Posted September 2, 2020 Just a thought but if you were to put a hydrogen powered train into service and were stupid enough to ask the British public to name it. Is it almost certain that the winning name would be Hindenburg? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phatbob Posted September 2, 2020 RMweb Gold Share Posted September 2, 2020 1 hour ago, Trog said: Just a thought but if you were to put a hydrogen powered train into service and were stupid enough to ask the British public to name it. Is it almost certain that the winning name would be Hindenburg? See the 8th post in this thread. The hydrogen powered Dusty Bins have already been christened "Bindenburgs". 1 1 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frobisher Posted September 2, 2020 Share Posted September 2, 2020 On 01/09/2020 at 14:47, Hesperus said: I can see it as a potentially useful way to decarbonise a quiet line that has no chance of being electrified but as the fueling will be complicated and expensive to set up it would need to be somewhere with several of these lines heading out like Inverness. Given the region has abundant wind power generation facilities, it might make sense to have the primary refuelling at the end of the lines. Orkney famously has an excess of electricity production (more than can be sent south) currently which is why hydrogen production is being actively pursued here, and Caithness isn't too far behind that so a slight enlargement of some of the wind farms there would give you all the capacity you need. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Storey Posted September 2, 2020 Share Posted September 2, 2020 4 hours ago, frobisher said: Given the region has abundant wind power generation facilities, it might make sense to have the primary refuelling at the end of the lines. Orkney famously has an excess of electricity production (more than can be sent south) currently which is why hydrogen production is being actively pursued here, and Caithness isn't too far behind that so a slight enlargement of some of the wind farms there would give you all the capacity you need. Indeed. In the German case, for battery units, almost all the case studies provided re-charging capability only at one end of the line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hesperus Posted October 2, 2020 Share Posted October 2, 2020 (edited) https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/teesside-could-become-global-leader-19018326?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB Shows an artists impression of whatever they are calling an ex 321 EDIT no, its a 319, thanks Melmerby Edited October 3, 2020 by Hesperus Proper infomation 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted October 2, 2020 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 2, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Hesperus said: https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/teesside-could-become-global-leader-19018326?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB Shows an artists impression of whatever they are calling an ex 321 Looks like this (?) and it's a class 799 born out of a class 319 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business-54350046 This is Porterbrook's take on a hydrogen train. The 321 is Eversholt. Edited October 2, 2020 by melmerby 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now