Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

InnoTrans 2012

by DoDo Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 06:03:17 AM EST

InnoTrans, presently held every two years in Berlin, is the biggest trade fair of the rail industry. Although it focuses on the European market, manufacturers come from five continents, and show off novelties like at the aerospace industry equivalents in Paris and Farnborough. I visited this year's InnoTrans, which was held on 18 to 21 September. It was even bigger than the last time I was there (2006), but I must have walked past 95% of the stands, so my review below is only a small selection of the interesting innovations, ordered in the following eight themes:

  1. The expansion of Polish manufacturers
  2. Energy efficiency
  3. Locomotives for freight transport
  4. Noise protection
  5. Freight wagon bogies
  6. Trucks-on-trains systems
  7. Very-high-speed trains
  8. Crash optimization

A view over the facilities of Messe Berlin. It has 26 halls with one to three levels, this time 100% occupied by InnoTrans. The open-air exhibition is at top centre (with steam from a steam loco on the right)



1. The expansion of Polish manufacturers

After a brutal phase of mergers and closures, a decade ago, the (globally dominant) European rail industry seemed to consolidate towards three all-round manufacturers with at most niche suppliers around them: Germany-based Bombardier Transportation (belonging to Canada's Bombardier but headquartered in Berlin) and Siemens, and France-based Alstom. However, the picture changed again not only due to the export ambitions of makers from Japan, China and Korea, but also the expansion of the product palette and market reach of European niche makers like Switzerland's Stadler, Germany's Vossloh, Spain's CAF and Talgo, and the Czech Republic's Škoda. Fuelled by new vehicle orders in the wake of regionalisation, now Polish manufacturers are joining the fray (as first indicated in my diary on multiple units), and their expansion was particularly evident at the InnoTrans.

PESA, a maker previously successful with electric multiple units (EMUs) and more recently trams, also presented LINK, its new diesel multiple unit (DMU). The exhibited specimen (photo below) was already a Western export success: it was built for Oberpfalzbahn, one of the regional services operated by German "private" railway Netinera (which is majority-owned by Italian State Railways FS). A much bigger success was that at the InnoTrans, PESA signed a framework contract with German Railways (DB) about the delivery of up to 470 LINKs.

Out of the blue, PESA also presented the prototype of an electric locomotive family, named Gama (the prototype is suited for 3 kV DC supply only; more on it in the third section):

NEWAG, previously morein the last few years successful with DMUs and refurbishments but somewhat standing in PESA's shadow on the EMU market (though they also built the Papal Train EMU) presented a mid-size diesel locomotive, and a member of its new EMU family Impuls (this one for Warsaw's devolved commuter network):

At the last InnoTrans, Poland's traditional but post-1989 struggling locomotive builder ZNLE (owned by NEWAG since 2008) presented the (3 kV DC only) prototype of the six-axle electric loco Dragon (already mentioned here). They still haven't received two orders for that so far [see comments], but now they presented a triple-voltage, four-axle version named Griffin, which is a direct competition for the products of the three West European giants (including the Bombardier TRAXX for a Polish regional railway visible behind it):

There is a lot of ambition, but I have a feeling that by the time of the next recession, only one of the threetwo big Polish manufacturers will remain standing.


2. Energy efficiency

Reducing energy consumption was a popular theme this year. Bombardier presented a prototype of a heavy diesel locomotive for passenger service with four diesel engines, the TRAXX P140 DE MULTI-ENGINE (of which DB ordered up to 200 last year). The smaller diesel engines not only have lower specific emissions, but can be shut down separately when full power isn't needed. This can bring substantial benefits in train services not involving too frequent starts/stops.

The four engines also allow for the return to a straight central aisle in the machine room of TRAXX locos (in the current generation, a loco driver trying to escape a collision would have to turn left and right in the middle section).

German diesel locomotive manufacturer Vossloh also presented a multiple-engine locomotive: a two-engine diesel-electric version of its G6 shunter.

DB and German diesel engine manufacturer MTU presented a battery-diesel hybrid vehicle which is about to enter test service in regular traffic. It is a two-car Siemens Desiro DMU turned from diesel-mechanic into diesel-electric and fitted with a roof-mounted battery system (with two battery boxes above each car's door area) that can store 4.7 kWh, deliver up to 120 kW and has a mass of just 220 kg.

In the wake of the nuclear shutdowns after the Fukushima disaster, saving energy is a top theme in Japan. Mitsubishi Electric geared its entire exhibition around this theme, including:

  • 100% regenerative braking (no use of friction brakes) with efficient control electronics,
  • energy storage units at substations (so that the grid can absorb regenerative braking energy),
  • LED lights and roof-mounted solar cells at stations, combined with load-dependent operation of lights and air conditioning.


3. Locomotives for freight transport

Globally, the market for large diesel locomotives used to be dominated by US American manufacturers EMD (formerly a division of GM) and GE. For Europe, GE used to produce a state-of-the-art (but expensive) locomotive jointly with Bombardier, but the latter pulled out to sell a diesel TRAXX instead. GE is now returning to Europe with the PowerHaul, which already has a (narrower cross-section) British version, and now the "continental" version was presented:

I think GE came late in the game, however: the demand for large freight diesels is dropping strongly in (non-CIS) Europe. In fact, Alstom declared that they see such a low demand that instead of re-entering this market, they focus on the development of a new battery-diesel hybrid shunter, the H3.

One reason for the use of big freight diesels was non-electrified freight transit lines (those to a number of North Sea ports and to Poland), but these have been or are being electrified. Another use was on routes that are mostly electrified but necessitated a change to a diesel shunter at one or both ends (say a lightly used industrial track or a container terminal with cranes). But, with the development of small compact diesel engine blocks for multiple units and the reduced weight of electric components, you can put a so-called last-mile diesel engine on an electric loco.

Bombardier first implemented the idea last year in a TRAXX version (which was on display). PESA's Gama prototype had it, too. But the one that may enter commercial service first is a version of Siemens's new Vectron locomotive platform, which was also shown (see the two small air intakes on the roof incline above the "Vectron" script):


4. Noise protection

Noise is another environmental issue, and there were plenty of noise-reducing products in the infrastructure section: mats laid under the ballast, pads laid under the rails on sleepers, track covers used on light rail lines, noise-insulated track-mounted brakes for marshalling yards, and noise barriers.

Traditional noise barriers deal with noise but constitute visual pollution: obstructing the views of both the residents around the tracks and the travellers who'd like to enjoy sightseeing from the train window. Since up to about 200–250 km/h, the dominant type of train noise is rolling noise, lower noise barriers should be possible. A few years ago, DB felt forced to start a research program in search for these. One participating manufacturer is Tuxbel/Ekobel from Poland, which showed a full-scale section of its latest development, the INN-DB III (Katrin linked to a story on an earlier version).

The noise-absorbing element is just 53 cm high above the rail, and doubles as a walkway. The walkway has an up to 140 cm high inward-bent railing with acrylic glass cover, which reflects sound back on the absorber. The whole noise barrier lies close to the noise source on the side of the trackbed, fixed to an axis parallel to the track. It can be rotated outwards around this axis if track maintenance of special transports require more space.


5. Freight wagon bogies

As discussed last week too, freight wagons are especially noisy, which is mostly related to their running gear. This has to be as robust and simple as possible, unlike that of passenger vehicles which sees frequent (and thus expensive) check-ups and maintenance. The main problem is old brakes, made of iron and acting on wheel treads, which squeal during braking and the rough wheel surfaces they create increase running noise at speed. The second problem is the simple suspension, which causes many vibrations, and doesn't do much to align axles properly in curves.

There are now a number of new bogies in service or development which address these deficiencies with disc brakes or composite tread brakes, damped rather than steel coil spring primary suspension (the one between wheelsets and bogie frame) and an elastic rather than rigid secondary suspension (the one between bogie frame and carbody). Common to all of them is the increase of axle load (loaded wagon mass per wheelset) from 22.5 to 25 t and the possibility to increase top speed from 120 to 160 km/h (albeit that with an axle load of 20 t).

The first to mention is British maker Axiom's TF25 family, which is relatively complex (primary suspension is hydraulically damped metal coils) but can boast 13 years of practical operation in wagons in Britain and Sweden (the latter in postal trains at 160 km/h).

Another new bogie, currently in approval if I read documents right, is DB Waggonbau Niesky's DRRS 25 L (photo below). It is a further development of a bogie built by Talbot (now part of Alstom) two decades ago for DB's 160 km/h freight trains, which were discontinued a few years later for being uneconomical, and the construction wasn't the best either because the wagons were down-rated to 140 km/h. DRRS 25 L has rubber primary springs, and its great advantage is that it can be exchanged with the by far most common freight wagon bogie type in Europe, the Y 25 (which is of French origin).

Another East German maker, Eisenbahnlaufwerke Halle (recently acquired by Slovakian rival Tatravagónka) presented its RC25NT-D, which just got approval for normal 100–120 km/h service. (I asked about 160 km/h, for which they ran trials in Sweden, but was told the tests were insufficient for an approval and they plan another go for it.) In addition to rubber primary springs, this bogie has steel coil secondary springs.

A third(!) East German maker, TransTec Vetschau, presented a three-axle bogie with a two-part bogie frame. Each half-frame holds both ends of an end axle and one end of the central axle, and the two half-frames can swing relative to each other, so that axles align properly in curves. A third bogie piece connects the two half-frames. Primary suspension damping is hydraulic. The version shown at the InnoTrans, named HFB 3.25, is not on their webpage, but there is an apparent development version which I copy below.


6. Trucks-on-trains systems

If you want to put trucks on trains, as discussed recently, the main limitation is corner height: the upper corner of the trucks has to fit under the curved roof of older tunnels. In Europe, the most widespread solution is the RoLa system, which involves low-floor platform wagons with a floor height of 480 mm above rail at the bogies. This is often not enough for standard 4 m-high semi-trailers, for example, it only permits 3.8 m high trailers on Switzerland's Gotthard line.

In the most established post-RoLa system, the Modalohr of French maker Lohr, the low-floor part of the wagon holding the trucks (the "pocket") can be rotated sideways, so that all wagons can be loaded at the same time. Since there is no need for the trucks to drive over the bogies, floor level is lower than the RoLa's. Now French State Railways SNCF wants to launch a new Modalohr service across the Gotthard. At the InnoTrans, they presented the cut-away model of a modified version of Modalohr wagons for these services: floor height is kept at 225 mm above rail independently of load, and the sides are lower. The model had a 4 m high truck loaded on it, and was inside a cardboard showing the loading gauge:

Portuguese wagon builder MetalSines invented yet another new system, Eco-Picker, which is noteworthy for its simplicity and robustness. Here the bogies can be separated from or coupled to the pockets with a single pull resp. push of a shunter locomotive, and it's all mechanical. The separated pockets drop on the rail on miniature auxiliary wheels, and the truck can roll off – practically anywhere where there is pavement on the rails, there is no need for a big terminal.

Eco-Picker is almost as low-tech as the US American RoadRailer and Terminal Anywhere systems, but without the need for special semi-trailers. The only obvious downsides I can think of are that wagons can't be unloaded simultaneously and that the length of the bogies is wasted train length. What I suspect will be key to the success or failure of the idea is how the mechanical system for the coupling-uncoupling of bogies and pockets endures wear.


7. Very-high-speed trains

To keep up the competition against open access operator NTV, two years ago, Italian State Railways (FS) ordered 50 new high-speed trains with a maximum speed of 360 km/h from a consortium of Bombardier and Italy's AnsaldoBreda. At the InnoTrans, Bombardier showed a mock-up of the front end, which had a small movie theatre inside showing a 3D PR film about the train. Although the train, currently dubbed Frecciarossa 1000 by FS, is based on Bombardier's Zefiro 380 (one of the types ordered by China for 380 km/h operation before top speeds were cut to 300 km/h in the wake of the Wenzhou disaster), they went past South Korean rail nationalism in the PR material by claiming it to be "100% Italian".

Spain was the first country to aim for 350 km/h service top speed. Those plans were severely delayed due to the slow commissioning of the necessary train control system, but that was finally achieved 11 months ago, and they started to raise scheduled service top speed in 10 km/h increments. (I was told it's 330 km/h on some sections now, which is the current world best after the Chinese slowdown.)

Ambitions picked up on the manufacturer side, too. Talgo is a Spanish maker of special low-floor articulated trains with individual-suspension wheels, including the 330 km/h service top speed Talgo 350, in which such a trainset is sandwiched by two traction heads (this one will be exported to Saudi Arabia, too). Three years ago, Talgo announced its concept Avril for a 380 km/h train, in which propulsion would be concentrated under some high-floor sections at the ends and in the middle of the train. At the InnoTrans, they presented first cars of a more conventional prototype. It still has traction heads and is slower, however, it has more capacity: Talgo's designers utilised the extra width compared to other European trains (made possible by the shorter carbodies: less allowance is needed for curves) for a 3+2 seating arrangement. They told me that the original plans are still in the pipeline, but they divided development into two stages.

The centrepiece of the stand of CSR, one of China's two big manufacturers (which now lead the global industry by turnover), was the test train for speeds above 500 km/h which was presented last December. I was told that the vehicle is still in laboratory testing, during which it achieved a simulated 600 km/h in a rolling rig test. Asked about possible series successors, the CSR representative was rather negative, pointing out that its width (similar to European trains but some 30 cm narrower than normal Chinese or Japanese high-speed trains) limits capacity.


8. Crash optimization

Voith, which owns the license for the Scharfenberg type of automatic couplers (found on almost all modern multiple units), now also builds complete front ends, including crash elements. They displayed a cutaway model of an EMU front. You see

  • the coupler at the end of a deformation tube at centre,
  • a pair of glass fibre reinforced plastic crash energy-absorbing tubes in the line of the buffers, with so-called anti-climbers at their ends which shall prevent colliding trains from jumping up on the other,
  • another pair of carbon fibre compositealuminium honecomb elements protecting the
  • steelglass fibre reinforced plastic force-bearing columns,
  • a thick steelglass fibre reinforced plastic plate protecting the driver against metal parts acting as projectiles, and
  • a similar floor plate.

:: :: :: :: ::

Check the Train Blogging index page for a (hopefully) complete list of ET diaries and stories related to railways and trains.

Display:
During the entire fair, "Emma", a 87-year-old small two-axle stram loco restored in working order, was shuttling back and forth on the steep access tracks of the exhibition grounds.



*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 03:57:13 PM EST
During my travel, I shot photos of all the vehicles which would have been a good illustration for the story on open access competition in the Czech Republic in the diary Rail policy updates.

First, the train of the second private competitor, Leo Express (currently in testing), was exhibited at the InnoTrans. It is a member of Swiss maker Stadler's FLIRT family, with comfortable interior (which gives me doubts regarding whether they can cut out a big enough market share to even be profitable).

I met a train of the first private competitor, RegioJet, in Prague main station. The train is cheaper (used-refurbished Austrian coaches and used Czechoslovak locos re-imported from an Italian regional railway), and they go for low-budget passengers, which would be a good thing save for the side effects. I wonder how'D they survive a recession economically, though. I saw they are utilising the locos in freight service, too.

The incumbent, state railways CD, operates Pendolino tilting trains (photographed through the train window leaving Prague main station):

There are also the international EuroCity trains, including mine (consisting of a loco of Slovakia's ŽSR and 15-20-years-old coaches of Hungarys MÁV-START), wich were to get newer CD trains but are now to be replaced by services ending in Prague:

Those new CD trains were to be hauled by CD's new Class 380, a type made by Škoda with the same specifications as the best West European electric locos, but problems in commissioning restricts them to domestic services as on the photo below. (The future Prague-Vienna-Graz services which CD will run in cooperation with Austria's ÖBB will use Austrian locos instead, which are already approved to cross the border and indeed reach Prague.)



*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 03:57:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
There was one innovation recently reported in Railway Gazette and also shown at InnoTrans which I deemed pretty significant, but too technical and 'under-the-hood' to discuss in the main diary – but I hope the more technically minded will take interest.

Under AC power supply, the electrical system of a modern electric locomotive has the following four basic elements:

  1. the transformer (supplying a higher-frequency AC with a more manageable lower voltage and creating galvanic isolation),
  2. the rectifier (a group of semi-conductors that turn the AC into DC),
  3. the inverter (another group of semi-conductors to turn DC into a variable voltage, variable frequency [VVVF] AC, necessary to regulate output),
  4. induction motors.

Note that 2 and 3 are often in the same box, called the converter; and during braking, their roles are exchanged.

Of these, the part most resistant to size reduction is the transformer: for a defined input frequency and maximum power, its mass and size is pretty much a given. (For example, when Siemens developed a triple-voltage and slightly smaller cross-section variant of its standard 6.4 MW dual-voltage loco, it had to save mass and space on the transformer, reducing power to 6 MW.) Higher frequency means smaller mass. (For example, the first Thalys trains, which had transformers optimised for North France's 50 Hz system, had a limited top speed under 16.7 Hz in Germany.)

Swiss electronics giant is now trialling a new solution that reduces transformer size: ahead of the transformer, there is a second converter, one in which the high voltage is dealt with by switching the semiconductors in series. This converter supplies constant voltage constant frequency AC power, but of increased frequency, to a small medium-frequency transformer. ABB claims that this solution actually creates a better waveform (said differently, less harmonics that disturb other systems), significantly increasing converter efficiency.

The prototype under trial since February is built into a Swiss shunting locomotive, but ABB envisages its primary use as underfloor equipment in EMUs. I think it will be useful to further improve electric locos, too: the weight saved could be used to combine multi-voltage electronics and a last-mile diesel engine (not possible presently), or install a more powerful last-mile diesel engine (those in the first generation prototypes discussed in the diary range between 180-230 kW), or, in combination with permanent magnet electric motors, further boost maximum power (and thus acceleration at higher speeds).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 03:58:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This is standard practice for domestic power supplies now, the 'switch mode power supply' and even some larger power supplies in factories.  I've always wondered whether there was much benefit to the 16.7Hz supply given the larger amount of magnetic material required.

The better waveform thing is probably a reference to power factor correction, which can be added fairly easily to switch mode supplies.

by njh on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 09:43:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The low frequency of the 16.7 Hz (pre-1995: 16⅔ Hz) power supply is historical baggage: it was meant to prevent sparks on the commutators of early brushed universal motors. However, having a separate railway power supply system does have its benefits: the whole railway grid can be of the same phase, with no need for phase breaks in the catenary. (Rail passengers can notice phase breaks on multiple units with underfloor motors – motor noise stops – or most air-conditioned vehicles – ventilation stops.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Tue Oct 2nd, 2012 at 05:10:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't understand the bit about the phase changes not being required?  Why is it different for a separate supply compared with a grid supply?
by njh on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 02:34:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Power supply from large plants and high-voltage lines in the public grid are three-phase, and substations for the supply of the 25 kV/50 Hz grid can connect to either of the phases, and are actually connected to different phases on purpose so that there is a balanced load. In contrast, the 16.7 Hz railway supply system is single-phase.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 04:25:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
sure, but that has nothing to do with 16.7 vs 50.  The railway could choose to use a single phase at 50Hz.
by njh on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 09:57:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I wrote about the benefit of a separate railway system after giving the indeed separate, historical reason for 16.7 Hz. The deeper connection is that (1) the idea of a separate railway grid didn't arose because people foresaw its benefits but because the historical need for 16.7 Hz necessitated it, (2) connection to the public grid (with resulting savings in infrastructure investment for the railway) was the main selling point of the 50 ÍHz system at the time of its introduction. If we started today and we'd have a government willing to start major public investment with a long-term view on security of supply (rather than a short-term view on budget cuts), a 50 Hz or 100 Hz single-phase sytem would obviously make more sense, but we already have thousands of locomotives and substations (and power lines) not compatible with that.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 12:37:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ok, that makes sense, thanks.  high voltage DC might make more sense today, say 50kV.  DC would avoid the transmission line phase shifts and would have the built in cathodic protection we discussed a while ago.  Of course then you need dc-dc converters everywhere, which is still not quite more economical than transformers for large amounts of power.
by njh on Thu Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:45:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
By the way: the main innovation in the ABB system with two converters and a medium-frequency transformer is that the first converter deals with an input voltage that is too much for a single semi-conductor. I know little of the inside of home appliances, so I ask: do series-switched semi-conductors with sub-230 V limits appear in them?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:18:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, it's easy to get a single device rated to up to 6kV, here's a transistor rated to 1200V: http://www.suntekstore.com/goods-14005831-igbt_power_transistor_fga25n120_1200v_313w.html
and here's a 6.3kV 7500A monster for train motors:
http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/DS_FZ750R65KE3_2_3.PDF?folderId=db3a304412b407950112b4095b0601e3&fi leId=db3a304325afd6e00126461fd3936974

More typically consumer switchmodes would be 400V mosfets, remember that the peak voltage of 230VRMS is 230*sqrt(2)V = 325V and then you have some overhead to keep the transistor in a safe operating region.  These aren't stacked in the package because then they would become very hard to insulate and need more fancy gate drive circuits:  When you series stack you need an isolated drive for each gate, which in HVDC land usually means a laser through optic fibre onto a mini PV, or a tall transformer.

This is a well known approach (being used for 50 years or more), but I guess this is the first time that the economics have favoured this approach on trains (rather than just a big transformer).  I predict it will become the standard approach within a decade just like switchmodes have replaced transformers for almost all consumer equipment today.

by njh on Thu Oct 4th, 2012 at 12:10:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]
No, it's easy to get a single device rated to up to 6kV

But we are speaking about 15 kV resp. 25 kV here.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Oct 4th, 2012 at 02:14:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, a proper loco

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 05:03:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I thought you'd say that :-)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 05:13:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yea, well someone has to say the truth. Buzz-boxes and paraffin cans just aren't as interesting

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 05:30:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks as always for all the information and background. Fascinating stuff.

Wind power
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 04:14:27 PM EST
The only steam I see these days (not living in NY or White Horse), comes out of my iron. But I have travelled by steam engine, steam train and steam boat. I can still remember that special smell of stations in the late Fifties and Sixties. I was even a trainspotter for a while, before I discovered the Observers Book of Aircraft.

However, this well presented and well illustrated diary shows that the railway world remains very interesting.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 04:37:57 PM EST
Hi, I'd like to correct three things about Polish manufacturers:
  1. ZNLE received two orders for Dragon locomotive and now thwy are negotiating third, bigger one for Balkans. During Innotrans they also claimed that Dragon is finally available for different voltage systems (AC, DC, MS, just like Griffin), with more power (up to 8,4 MW) or as a diesel (2300kW).
  2. Newag isn't more successful in DMUs. They've already produced more EMUs than DMUs and now they're working on next order.
  3. There are two big Polish manufacturers, not three. ZNLE belongs to Newag and both companies will merge next year.

I don't expect an recession for Polish manufacturers in next couple of years because EU funds. Within current EU budget (2007-2014) local operators want to buy about 100 new EMUs and DMUs, and next perspective (2014-2020) will be even more rail oriented. If they don't forget about exports (especially Newag) they should easily survive until 2020.

PS. ZNLE expects that the first order for Griffin will be finalized to the end of this year.

by ko on Sun Sep 30th, 2012 at 08:02:29 PM EST
Thanks for the info and corrections! I have edited the diary accordingly.

  1. I directly asked the ZNLE representative in the Griffin prototype about further Dragons, but apparently he wasn't informed about the new orders. I find at RAILCOLOR.NET (couldn't find anything on the ZNLE site) the orders are for four resp. five units (the latter announced at the InnoTrans).
  2. I wrote "previously", but upon checking, I found more pre-2012 EMU orders for NEWAG (including a re-awarding of an EMU contract originally won by PESA).
  3. I had an inkling because NEWAG and ZNLE had a shared stand, but I couldn't find any indication in my brochures or on ZNLE's web page (though now I did find it on the Historia page).

Regarding a future recession, I am more sceptical. What I mean is the next recession of the total national economy affecting the rail industry, not a sector-only contraction. EU funds help, but there has to be a national/regional government share in the financing. That part can fall victim to austerity measures, especially if subsidized passenger services are cut, as currently experienced by some South European countries.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 04:42:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
#1 - Oficially there are only two orders for 9 Dragons (4 for STK and 5 for LOTOS). NEWAG/ZNLE owner oficially said that they are negotiating another one for Balkans (and it's completed in 70%, they just need to establish financing conditions with ING Lease). Unoficially there can be another one - DB Schenker Rail Polska was very impressed by Dragon and they are seriously considering it as a replacement for their current (very old) fleet.

I don't think there will be such strong recession, Poland was the only EU country that avoided recession 3 years ago. Polish economy is in good condition, national debt is in control, I don't think there will be serious problems like in Greece or Italy.

Oh, and Newag already survived hard times, between 2007 and 2009 there were basically no orders, they cut jobs by almost 50% and survived without serious losses.

by ko on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 09:47:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Newag already survived hard times, between 2007 and 2009 there were basically no orders

Was investment into development prior to that as significant as it is now? What were the profit margins on the initial orders in the post-regionalisation order wave? Would a PESA or NEWAG getting in financial difficulties in the medium-term not be a much more attractive target for a takeover by a rival (be it friendly or hostile) than they were a few years ago? I was also thinking of risks like this; and these adding up with unpredictable but not unlikely risks like losing big on an order with unexpected complications (like the Combino trams with cracks for Siemens or the brake commissioning problems for the Budapest metros for Alstom).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 10:11:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The investment into development was smaller because of lack of money. But they haven't stopped and they showed a new high floor EMU.

I think financial difficulties won't change much because now they're much bigger than just a few years ago. Only this year Newag expects to triple its total revenue (from 300 million zl in 2011 to ~800m zl in 2012). Pesa and Newag are pretty difficult to take over because they are private copmpanies owned by just a few guys with big ambitions. Newag is owned by one multimillionaire - Zbigniew Jakubas and they've already struggled from financial difficulties once and Jakubas said that selling Newag was never an option.

About complications. First - they haven't got so seriuous complications like Siemens with Combino. Newag had some with their first DMUs, it took them about 2 months to fix. To avoid such problems they produce prototypes to test them and results are pretty good - Newag 19WE (which has a prototype) is the most reliable Polish EMU, it's really close to Stadler Flirt. Now Newag is testing the prototype of their first tram.

PS. Two things about Pesa:

  1. They have one more order abroad for 30 Links for Czech Railways (CD).
  2. Link from Innotrans was produced for Zachodniopomorskie voivodship in Poland, they just painted it in Oberpfalzbahn livery.
by ko on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 07:52:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Incidentally, I saw two of the LINKs for CD (who named them RegioShark) on my travel to and from the InnoTrans. (The photo, being made hastily against the Sun in hazy weather through the train window, is not the best quality though.)



*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Tue Oct 2nd, 2012 at 05:19:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
By the way, perhaps you can answer these two questions of mine?

  1. Does ZNLE plan a Griffin version with last-mile diesel?
  2. What is the power rating of the last-mile diesel engine on the PESA Gama? (I didn't have the chance to ask at the InnoTrans; on the web, all I could find was a forum discussion in Polish where both a 403 kW and a 430 kW figure turn up.)


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Tue Oct 2nd, 2012 at 09:37:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
  1. I've never heard anything about it. I think they don't but since both Dragon and Griffin are modular platforms, high demand may convince them. But I think there's no actual demand for Last Mile locomotives, they're good for showing off but actual operators are not willing to buy them. For the last two years Bombardier sold just 5 Last Mile Traxxes to Railpool. Thing is, Railpool is not exactly independent from Bombardier. Maybe they are too expensive or too complicated?
  2. Gama Marathon has CAT C15 engine with 570HP (420kW). That's much more than Traxx Last Mile (240kW) so it can be pretty useable while shunting. It has two tanks with fuel (500l each) wchich gives the range of about 40 kilometers (that's why it's called Marathon).
by ko on Tue Oct 2nd, 2012 at 09:24:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ad 1: I think the problem is rather that all the locos with last-mile diesels don't yet have a certification (Bombardier's being part of the new TRAXX 3 product platform). Siemens' last-mile-equipped Vectron will probably be the first one to get certification. Certification matters: from what I can find, the entire Vectron product platform didn't get more than two orders for altogether eight units so far.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 04:07:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I should add I have a bit more info on this: on one of the Bombardier locos, I overheard a discussion in which they told the TRAXX 3 certification is on hold until they are done with the four-engine diesel TRAXX (they really don't want to get delayed with this big order for DB). Vectron certification trials are on-going full-throttle, however (though they modified some parts during the process), that's why I say they should be the first to be able to offer a service-ready last-mile version to customers.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Wed Oct 3rd, 2012 at 02:32:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think certification is a problem. Both multi-engine and Last Mile Traxxes were sold before they've got any certificates. About Vectron - I think private operators suffer from the crisis, in last year (or two) there were not many orders for brand new locomotives at all.

I just think last mile locos won't be as popular as producers would like them to be. They're not strong enough to operate on non electrified lines, moderately useful for shunting (I think Traxx Last Mile's 240kW isn't much, plus most stations have proper shunting locos), more expensive to buy and operate (inspections/repairs).

by ko on Fri Oct 5th, 2012 at 10:36:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
IMHO the orders for the multi-engine and last-mile diesel TRAXXes were quite different. The first was a classic major order from a former state railway after a procurement competition, in which Bombardier took up the financial risks of any delays and product problems. The launch customer for the last-mile diesel TRAXX 3 is a leasing company, which doesn't have any fixed plans to operate the locos (which would be delayed by certification problems and connected delivery problems) and whose risk in using a new development is reduced by the possibility to lease to different customers (if the first or second customer doesn't find it practical).

I agree that the power of the first last-mile diesels is low, certainly not enough for line operation, thus a true success of the idea won't be possible before 500 kW units can be installed. However, using shunters at stations is not for free, it costs time and money, money which includes the maintenance of those shunters. With the last-mile diesel, you spare the investment and maintenance cost of a second set of transmission/converter, running gear and vehicle body.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Sat Oct 6th, 2012 at 02:46:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And welcome to ET!

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 09:34:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Great diary as usual!

Given the enthusiasm for noise reduction, I wonder about all these "modern" designs that have very similar "open" undercarriage layouts as the stuff in museums.

Couldn't you have something like a barrier wall, say 200 mm high, at the edge of the roadbed, and then a curtain coming down from the side of the cars that overlaps the wall? It would provide a much better seal for sound control, and also offer significant airflow control for high speed operation. I would think that you could get the horizontal gap down to under 100 mm, perhaps...

Just because Stephenson thought up a roadbed layout in 1825 doesn't mean we can't improve on it a bit...

by asdf on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 11:29:09 AM EST
That would ruin loading gauge restrictions, which are much tighter in the US than here

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 12:39:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ummm, which are tighter here than in the US, I mean

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 12:42:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, that's a problem for old systems. For new dedicated high-speed passenger systems it would seem like more flexibility is possible...
by asdf on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 02:06:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Possibly but you'd have stiffness problems with a sleek slab effectively suspending a couple of metres away from the train body. At 300kph that'd be pretty prone to flapping

keep to the Fen Causeway
by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 02:57:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
For high-speed trains, the dominant noise source is aerodynamic noise, so underframe noise protection is insufficient. On conventional lines, you would need to empty the bottom corner of the loading gauge, which includes stuff like safety equipment, walkways (in particular in tunnels) and simple platforms on un-refurbished stations.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 04:31:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Two further notes on shrouds covering the running gear.

Such shrouds a long history running back to the streamlined steam locos of the 1930s. But historically, the shrouds have been removed more often than not for a reason unrelated to aerodynamics and noise: accessibility for maintenance.

The second issue is that even for high-speed trains where the maintenance difficulty may be an acceptable trade-off, the limitation is that parts of the bogie can protrude beyond the outer envelope of the carbody in curves. If the bogie shroud has to bump out significantly, then it will be a noise source itself. Of course, for normal-gauge vehicles, protruding bogie parts in curves are more likely the narrower the carbody, thus it is easier to design a bogie-shrouded high-speed train for Japan or China than continental Europe, and it is virtually impossible for Britain.

Now for some real-world examples:

  • A number of newer full-width Shinkensen types have end bogie shrouds (Series 500, Series 700, Series 800), and the two newest also partial (N700 Series) or complete (E5 Series) shrouds on the rest of the bogies. The narrower E6 Series has full bogie shrouds too, but unlike those of the E6, they protrude compared to the rest of the underframe.
  • China's CRH380A (developed on the basis of the E2 Series Shinkansen) and CRH380B (based on the Siemens Velaro) have rounded semi-shrouds on all bogies (covering the top and the outer end of the wheels only). In contrast, the narrower 500+km/h test train, which is based on the CRH380A, has a wider cut-out and some bogie parts protruding even on straight track.
  • The Bombardier Zefiro 380 (which shall run in China as CRH380D) have been originally designed (when 380 km/h was the goal) with complete bogie shrouds that protrude slightly, but now receive a partial shroud covering most of the wheels (but leaving the yaw damper accessible).
  • The Frecciarossa 1000 are to receive near-complete but protruding shrouds on the end bogies (also see the photo of the mock-up in the diary).
  • Alstom AGVs (like NTV's .Italos) have partial covers for the end bogies, which protrude, but are interesting for being an integral part of the aerodynamic design.
  • The other Spanish maker, CAF, is testing its new Oaris high-speed train. Like the Zefiro 380, this had first designs with complete shrouds on end bogies, but the prototype has only a partial shroud on photos shot during testing.


*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 05:43:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you very much; very informative!

I suppose the one good thing about all this--from the U.S. viewpoint--is that there appears to be a "last mover" advantage. Given that we have no high speed rail at all, and are building it from scratch, complications like this can be handled more easily..

by asdf on Mon Oct 1st, 2012 at 07:57:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Since US systems are to be connected to the existing conventional network, too, existing loading gauges should be the determining factor, again. However, those are closer in width to the Shinkansen and Chinese loading gauges, so an E5-Series-ish look is possible.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Tue Oct 2nd, 2012 at 05:54:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
... and it looks like it would be a natural fit to the CargoSprinter concept ...

... since the CargoSprinter builds longer trains by coupling independent push-me/pull-me consists.

Indeed, a siding long enough to open up all of the Eco-Pickers in a single CargoSprinter consist, and a single yard hauler, and you have a mini railhead where roadbound trailers can wait for its road hauler and railbound trailers can be waiting to be loaded.

A single crew that takes the CargoSprinter consist over when it is decoupled from the train and someone at the siding to do the paperwork with the drivers would seem like making up the workforce for a one to five trailer mini-railhead, with a yard hauler and a forklift (for containers) making up the equipment.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Tue Oct 2nd, 2012 at 01:19:38 PM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]