Prepare for XPT 2.0 + slight drop in regional patronage?

 
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The hunter car is only 6 tonnes heavier then an xplorer and the qsk-19r has 176 more kilowatts then the kta19. The power to weight ratio goes from 6.7kw a tonne in the xplorer to 8.8 in the hunter rail car. Both have auxiliary motors for electrics and air conditioning.

The new regional fleet with electric motors instead of hydraulic transmission should have a significantly easier time up hills then the xplorer.

Sponsored advertisement

  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Does the gearing in the hunters allow it obtain 160km/h? Or is the added power just dedicated to increased acceleration?  (i know there are rules and other stuff preventing this).
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

160km/h is possible but it wouldn't get up to this speed between stations since the hunter is a newcastle suburban service.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
I agree that having a 6-8 car train with two diesel engines in each car is probably not the smartest thing to do, but I think there are alternatives without going down the path of loco hauled or XPT style.

The XPT has 2 traction engines and two Aux power engines, so one failure will see the loss of 50% of the output and this means the train is either going see the significant loss of performance or heavily over powered most of the time. DMU's on the other hand are typically built with each car being an island in traction and Aux, but able to pull from the other cars if they fail.

So option
The Hunter Car QSK-19R appears to be a common engine used by DMU's for traction at 559kW plus Aux assumed sized to provide power for a 2nd car if required.
but the Prospector uses 2 x Cummins 386kW combined traction and Aux  
and the Explorer uses just 1 386kW for traction plus 80kW Aux engine (assume sized to provide power to a 2nd car if required.)

I'm going to assume larger engines are not available to sit under the floor of the train (I went through QSK catalog some time ago and didn't find a clear answer).

So my 3 car fixed sets would have a single QSK-19R under each car (assume DEL traction).
It would also power a alternator like the Prospector engine to run Aux load.
When traction requirements exceed the engine output with Aux load, the Aux load would switch to battery backup.
The small battery size used in the Tesla cars would power the Aux load for >1hr. Regen braking could also capture power for the Aux load and likely mean traction engine output for Aux is rarely required.
For emergencies, I suppose you could have a 120-140kW genset under the B car capable of powering the whole 3 car train.

For my 4 car fixed sets
You could probably leave it as above, the 4th car may have additional batteries for regen storage and acceleration boost.
The 4th car would also have a 2nd Aux genset of same size due to power requirements of 4 cars exceeding that used for 3 cars. Also with the extra load of the 4th car on traction engines, its likely one of the Aux gensets would need to run continuously.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The xplorer has a 135kw aux motor and the hunter a 150kw aux motor.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

So option
The Hunter Car QSK-19R appears to be a common engine used by DMU's for traction at 559kW plus Aux assumed sized to provide power for a 2nd car if required.
but the Prospector uses 2 x Cummins 386kW combined traction and Aux  
and the Explorer uses just 1 386kW for traction plus 80kW Aux engine (assume sized to provide power to a 2nd car if required.)

I'm going to assume larger engines are not available to sit under the floor of the train (I went through QSK catalog some time ago and didn't find a clear answer).

So my 3 car fixed sets would have a single QSK-19R under each car (assume DEL traction).
It would also power a alternator like the Prospector engine to run Aux load.
When traction requirements exceed the engine output with Aux load, the Aux load would switch to battery backup.
The small battery size used in the Tesla cars would power the Aux load for >1hr. Regen braking could also capture power for the Aux load and likely mean traction engine output for Aux is rarely required.
For emergencies, I suppose you could have a 120-140kW genset under the B car capable of powering the whole 3 car train.
RTT_Rules

I don't really want this to go too far down the track of the other thread on this topic, but if I were to slip Gladys $50 and be magically awarded the XPT/XPL replacement contract, this is what I'd do:

A-City/Class 4000 based units with a single QSK-19R under each floor in DEL format.  The QSK-19R is the only game in town really.  NSW doesn't need sustained 160kph operation, it's over powered, so Aux is drawn from this as well.  A-City is the latest V'Locity/XMU design in Australia, probably meets crash worthiness standards.  All that really needs to change is the added Genset and a change in fitout.

Only one of the two side doors on each car would be regularly usable, recovering more cabin space.  A DAA toilet and multi-use area at one cab end only.  A basic galley at one end of the cabless car extra toilet/luggage at the other.  Total crew of 2/3, seating for 180-200.

I'd run them are 3 car units, and just expand the timetable rather than couple extra units together.  This creates the extra services, while reducing the total car-km (NSWTrainLink's current preferred metric of cost).  

Currently the XPTs are allocated (roughly) 2 to the south, 5 to the North and 1 to Dubbo.  A 3 car DMU could be 3 to the south, 6 to the north: allowing for 3 day and 1 red-eye on the NCL (vs 2/1 now), 2 day and 1 red-eye on the south (vs 1/1 now).  That'd mean a day train Wagga-Sydney-Wagga.  The UP red-eye would be ex Grafton or ex Casino as now.  The Down Bris train becomes a day train, with an overnight layover and a (very) early AM departure.

Phase 1 is XPT replacement (12 units - 2 spares)
Phase 2 is XPL replacement (8 units - 1 more spare)
Phase 3/4 is END replacement (~15 units)

Phase 3 would enable some distance sets to go 4 car - part of the reasoning behind the layout allocation, as END units won't need a centre car with a galley

Phase 4 would have a different fitout for the centre cars: re-commissioning the second side doors at the expense of luggage space

I also think the platform would be ideal as a small EMU for non CBD services.  Like a Lithgow-Katoomba shuttle, Mt Kembla-Thirroul etc, the job the 2 car K sets used to do.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The HP is about acceleration out of the numerous curves and holding speed on the banks, not so much about top end speed, but yes 160km/h is more than enough. But otherwise I agree the QSK-19R is likely the engine of choice.

However in this day and age, the the Aux motor is redundant due to alternator and battery technology available today, but perhaps only 1 back up space per 3 car set under the B car.

Agree the V/locity is probably as good a platform as needed structure/bogie wise, the only difference is move away from the V/locity concept and more towards the British Virgin train where its built as a single train with each car part of that train, despite having their own traction engine.

NSW will however need some 4 car sets, as increasing frequency of 3 cars to cater for a slight increase or combining 2 x 3 cars maybe too much. For example Dubbo. The reason is the B car and C cars will loose a bit of space to buffet and luggage storage due to the significantly longer journey times. But agree only 2 doors per car is needed apart from driver access.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

NSW will however need some 4 car sets, as increasing frequency of 3 cars to cater for a slight increase or combining 2 x 3 cars maybe too much. For example Dubbo. The reason is the B car and C cars will loose a bit of space to buffet and luggage storage due to the significantly longer journey times. But agree only 2 doors per car is needed apart from driver access.
RTT_Rules
4 or 5 car DMU's trains is definitely needed in adddition to 3 car DMU.   You want to be getting intermediate cars over driver cars as they are so much cheaper and offer more space.   I still think the current model thats used for the xplorer is fairly good.   Have trains which you can add more intermediate carriages if needed, but only if its due to seasonal passenger load increase or isolated mechanical issues.  
However keep the sets isolated to certain runs.   Better to take the single carriage out for service than the whole set.  

In the new trains I would expect first class to be better than economy, not simply having wealthier people sit in the same seats like they do now just at the other end of the train.  So that would mean a capacity decrease.  Slightly larger buffet and luggage storage than what is currently in the XPL's.  

Ideally I would have combination of 3 and 4 car sets.  

Car A is a driving first class car with DDA toilet. 1 set of passenger doors.  Roughly 40 people in 2+1 proper first class seats
Car B is a intermediate car with buffet, luggage, 1 DDA toilet, some economy in remaining space.  2 sets of doors (due to luggage).   Roughly 20 people in economy.  have this area accessible for disable, elderly etc.
Car C is an intermediate car with economy only.   1 normal non-DDA toilet.  1 set of doors.   roughly 60 passengers
Car D is a driving car.   Economy only, 1 normal non-DDA toilet.  1 set of passenger doors.  Roughly 50 passengers.


A 3 car unit has the capacity of ~110 people while a 4 car unit has ~170 people

In comparison a 2 car XPL has 80 people, 3 car XPL has 144, 4 car XPl has 210, a normal 5 car XPT has 220.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

NSW will however need some 4 car sets, as increasing frequency of 3 cars to cater for a slight increase or combining 2 x 3 cars maybe too much. For example Dubbo. The reason is the B car and C cars will loose a bit of space to buffet and luggage storage due to the significantly longer journey times. But agree only 2 doors per car is needed apart from driver access.
RTT_Rules

In the grand scheme of things, NSW needs lots of things the new train set probably won't deliver.  4 car trains is way down that priority list.

A 180 seat train set to Dubbo is probably adequate as things stand, but I if they go ahead with their idea of their conveniently located maintenance centre in Orange, then there will need to be a movement in and out of there for fleet rotation.  In which case, the Dubbo XPT followed by the Bathurst Bullet (Up-Down ex Orange - ostensibly to rotate a set through maintenance) will be the first of the services replaced with the new fleet type.  Then the new Wagga service, then the Melb trains replaced, then a new lower north coast service, then gradual replacement of the XPT fleet.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Dubbo XPT was always the logical one to replace first, as a stuff up there wouldn't affect other services.   Probably the Grafton XPT's would follow for similar reasons.   I just hope they concentrate on getting a heap of new sets designed for regional travel and not Intercity travel, as we already have the Endeavours and explorers for that.   They should be getting enough to run a timetable that even the foamers would want to introduce.
  Newcastle Express Chief Commissioner

Can confirm that the XPL is gutless compared to XPT.   Have caught the END between kiama and nowra and it can barely get past 100km/h between the stops.
tazzer96
But are able to go fast on the beside the Hunter Coal Lines.

But I predict that a BIG announcement about these replacements will happen sometime in early 2019. I wonder why now, as if we didn't know. And if the Liberals get back in (oh wait did I say "if" with Luke Foley as Labor leader?) I wonder if they will announce the "rubbber-tyred" versions of trains, better known as coaches & buses after the election?
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Coach replacement isn't really the cool thing to do anymore.  So i doubt that will happen.   Only route I can see that happening is griffith.  Which for the most part has already happened.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Can confirm that the XPL is gutless compared to XPT.   Have caught the END between kiama and nowra and it can barely get past 100km/h between the stops.
But are able to go fast on the beside the Hunter Coal Lines.
Newcastle Express
Yes, but once it gets past the quadded section they grind to a halt because they're following an empty coal train.   And once that train turns off they get stuck doing 40 in a 130 zone due to a a TSR.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Can confirm that the XPL is gutless compared to XPT.   Have caught the END between kiama and nowra and it can barely get past 100km/h between the stops.
But are able to go fast on the beside the Hunter Coal Lines.

But I predict that a BIG announcement about these replacements will happen sometime in early 2019. I wonder why now, as if we didn't know. And if the Liberals get back in (oh wait did I say "if" with Luke Foley as Labor leader?) I wonder if they will announce the "rubbber-tyred" versions of trains, better known as coaches & buses after the election?
Newcastle Express
6 years of spending more on Rail than the last 30 years combined and the "rubber-tyre" plus repeated commitment to replace the XPT and XPT replacement gets thrown on the table, again! Seriously?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Dubbo XPT was always the logical one to replace first, as a stuff up there wouldn't affect other services.   Probably the Grafton XPT's would follow for similar reasons.   I just hope they concentrate on getting a heap of new sets designed for regional travel and not Intercity travel, as we already have the Endeavours and explorers for that.   They should be getting enough to run a timetable that even the foamers would want to introduce.
tazzer96
The Explorers will be converted to END and sent to work out the remainder of their lives on IU services such as South Coast and likely Bathurst.

There will be ONE train type for all the current (former name) Countrylink services, doing this makes the whole network significantly simply to manage and reduce delays and more efficient use of the fleet. For example, Wagga -> Sydney -> Armidale/Moree, Return the next day no more Xplorer network : XPT network separation.

Grafton is part of the whole XPT rotation so no different to replacing it over another service.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

The only sad thing about having a heap of extra DMU's to operate the intercity services mean there is no chance of electrification of any of these areas.

I said grafton XPT's would be next due to their overnight stabling at grafton, and daylight only service.   No need for sleepers.
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

To answer trainlovers original question about edi's proposal. It would be a dmu based on the hunter railcar and not a tilt train but again would be diesel electric with a pantograph option.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Please explain how something can be based upon the Hunter DMU and still be diesel electric?
  simstrain Chief Commissioner

The same way the vlocity and acity 4000 trains are similar. The propulsion system has nothing to do with the train family.
  a6et Minister for Railways

If a train arrives in Brisbane between the hours of 5:30am and 9:30pm you can catch a train almost anywhere apart from Doomben and not sure maybe Sunshine coast.

XPL is known to be gutless, I was told that by a driver when they were new, its kW to weight ratio is very low, its off-spring the V/locity has about 50% more kW from memory. I think its 375kW vs 500+kW as does the Hunter cars. The Prospector is even more so and it has better redundancy having two traction engines per car, not one . The more cars you have, if you loose one, the lessor the impact as the weight is distributed more. I think its safe to say the new trains will be at least 500kW per car and expect them to be a lot quieter than the 30 year old design in the XPL's. Both engine and sound insulation and vibration elimination.

The XPT has a reasonable power to weight ratio, but only applies it through 8 axles, so traction adhesion I think is more an issue.

I'm not sure why today you also can not use battery technology to boost the acceleration and hill climbing capacity as needed. This would also help when they have a engine down.
RTT_Rules
The XPT has enough grunt for most working, if and that is the big issue IF a replacement train was brought in with 6 wheel bogies and traction motors also a donk rating at a minimum of 2500hp improvements could be made, it could also help with the airconditioning output especially in the summer as I have found that the carriages even in first class are hot as the day goes on, at night they get to the opposite being quite cold, so you do not wear shorts and/or have a good towel to cover up.

One of the big things that the XPT was promoted on was the overall speed rather than just the starting factor, once you are in full throttle it has excellent pickup and depending on the grades and curves, you often have to power back to get to or under the speed boards.

Like some of the modern ETR trains, as drivers with the books and driving instructions, as against the old red sets where you had to notch them up at set speeds, we were told to go from standing start to full throttle/MC when everything was new and worked well, no problems but with some they would trip the power, but again we were told to just leave in full as they had auto resets, fine in theory but not in practice as complaints especially from passengers standing would get you a bung, if we were on a set that tripped, then you notched up in a step situation, and you had to do that in wet weather.

That also happened with the XPT at times and depending on weather conditions and grade where you started from, if a trip out happened then it was just a matter of allowing a slower acceleration until the 3rd notch from 2nd, pause and then lift each notch after a pause.  When at any speed another matter.  In many aspects similar to how it was with a steam locomotive where you eased the train to a start and gradually opened the regulator with bringing back the screw a bit at each opening point of the regulator, the thing was to prevent the engine from slipping, but that was not easy on some engines.
  a6et Minister for Railways

Can confirm that the XPL is gutless compared to XPT.   Have caught the END between kiama and nowra and it can barely get past 100km/h between the stops.
But are able to go fast on the beside the Hunter Coal Lines.

But I predict that a BIG announcement about these replacements will happen sometime in early 2019. I wonder why now, as if we didn't know. And if the Liberals get back in (oh wait did I say "if" with Luke Foley as Labor leader?) I wonder if they will announce the "rubbber-tyred" versions of trains, better known as coaches & buses after the election?
Newcastle Express
Yes the Hunter sets go well but, lets not forget that they are not faced with any real grades either.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
Can confirm that the XPL is gutless compared to XPT.   Have caught the END between kiama and nowra and it can barely get past 100km/h between the stops.
But are able to go fast on the beside the Hunter Coal Lines.

But I predict that a BIG announcement about these replacements will happen sometime in early 2019. I wonder why now, as if we didn't know. And if the Liberals get back in (oh wait did I say "if" with Luke Foley as Labor leader?) I wonder if they will announce the "rubbber-tyred" versions of trains, better known as coaches & buses after the election?
Yes the Hunter sets go well but, lets not forget that they are not faced with any real grades either.
a6et
Isn't stop/start the same thing?
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
The xplorer has a 135kw aux motor and the hunter a 150kw aux motor.
simstrain
Designed for N-1, ie two car set and one fails. The actual Aux load per car is less than half the above, most taken up by AC.

Also the Hunter has to deal with larger heat load. ie more frequent stopping and larger human heat source.

Issue with taking AC of traction engines is that it derates the traction engines unless you operate smartly. ie have heat sink for AC and have the AC shutdown during acceleration when the engine power output required for traction exceeds the amount left after Aux. OR you use battery technology and only recharge the batteries during coasting, braking, low power settings.  This is a far more smarter way to go these days over installing two engines.
  a6et Minister for Railways

Can confirm that the XPL is gutless compared to XPT.   Have caught the END between kiama and nowra and it can barely get past 100km/h between the stops.
But are able to go fast on the beside the Hunter Coal Lines.

But I predict that a BIG announcement about these replacements will happen sometime in early 2019. I wonder why now, as if we didn't know. And if the Liberals get back in (oh wait did I say "if" with Luke Foley as Labor leader?) I wonder if they will announce the "rubbber-tyred" versions of trains, better known as coaches & buses after the election?
Yes the Hunter sets go well but, lets not forget that they are not faced with any real grades either.
Isn't stop/start the same thing?
RTT_Rules
To an extent - Yes, the difference is that the lines the Hunter sets run over are really quite low in regards to grades along the section, especially with platforms on grades are quite easy really.  I cannot comment on how they go on the longer runs to Dungog and to Scone, again though even to Scone the stations are relatively flat with some distance to a grade easy pick ups and you get to speed fairly quick.  I am now catching these trains regularly from Victoria St and so far no loss in timetables.
  djf01 Chief Commissioner

Hi,

Before I get on to my main question, just want to say, get ready for XPT 2.0! As stated in this article by the Daily Liberal:

"After going to the market in September, on Thursday it announced the three successful applicants are Regional Futures, led by Downer, Bombardier Consortium and Momentum Trains, led by CAF."

Those companies are known for a couple of good trains. Bombardier? They made the VLocity, of course! Fun fact - that was based off the Xplorer, which the new trains will take over from!
TrainLover222

I think the discussion about seat layouts makes obvious a problem we've discussed at length in the other long running thread on this topic: if you add all the features of the XPT to a small DMU, there isn't enough space left for passengers.  You either compromise the features, make it a large DMU, or are left with an uneconomic platform - like the Xplorer.

Going back to the OP's speculation ...

Regional Futures/Downer?  This would have to be a brand new design.  Maybe tilting, probably not.
Bombardier: The new "Long Distance" V'Locities the Vic gvt has already commissioned.  They probably won't be long distance enough for NSW, but that foes back to my top point.
Momentum Trains/CAF?

CAF have a number of interesting products that fit this bill:  http://www.caf.net/upload/productos/slider[2].jpg


Built for Sardinia, using CAF's home grown tilting mechanism.  NB the use of single doors to make extra space.  This is basically and Pros,V'locitora type DMU though.  The more recent offering appear to be based on this though:

http://www.caf.net/img/all/productos_servicios/familia/civity/03imagenes.jpg


More like Stadler and Talent type articulated DMUs (ie modified trams).

I suspect Bombardier still have the inside running though

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.