Home >Documents >Preliminary Evaluation of Double Deck & Extra Long /http:/ : Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007...

Preliminary Evaluation of Double Deck & Extra Long /http:/ : Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007...

Date post:30-Mar-2018
Category:
View:215 times
Download:2 times
Share this document with a friend
Transcript:
  • Project: Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007

    Version: 1.21

    Preliminary Evaluation of Double Deck

    & Extra Long Train Operations

    Project: DfT Capacity Development Options

    Project: DfT Capacity Development Options Double Deck and Extra Long Train Operations

    Task Deliverable Element Lead: Andrew Coombes

    Signature

    Name: Bob Murton

    Job Title: Enhancement Engineer (Civils)

    Prepared By

    Date: 24/07/07

    Endorsed By Name: Andrew Coombes

    1 of 89

  • Project: Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007

    Version: 1.21

    Job Title: Head of Enhancement Engineering

    Date: 24/07/07

    2 of 89

  • Project: Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007

    Version: 1.21

    DfT Foreword

    In developing the White Paper Delivering a Sustainable Railway the Department for Transport asked Network Rail to carry out some preliminary work to assess the case for longer or double deck trains as a way of providing additional carrying capacity on the rail network in the longer term.

    The work was to focus on a range of medium distance corridors where it was possible that longer term demand trends could result in further crowding. Whilst accepting that other parts of the strategy, such as cab based signalling, could provide additional capacity it was important to assess what other solutions could be used.

    Importantly the study was also asked to consider the passenger acceptability of any train design that resulted. Previous designs of Double Deck trains which used the existing gauge were criticised as being cramped and stuffy. The White Paper makes it clear that over time passenger expectations of the railway are likely to increase and these considerations needed to be included within new train designs.

    The report that follows is a high level assessment of the case for longer or double deck trains. The report does not attempt to answer every question, and in some cases innovative designs could tackle some of the issues raised. But the report attempts to highlight the key issues to be considered when assessing double deck or extra long trains and makes conclusions based on an initial assessment of implementation costs and additional capacity delivered whilst considering the needs of passengers.

    3 of 89

  • Project: Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007

    Version: 1.21

    Contents

    1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 6 1.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FOR UK DOUBLE DECK VEHICLE ................................... 7 1.2 SUMMARY OF ROUTES ASSESSED FOR DOUBLE DECK ......................................... 9 1.3 SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT OF LONG TRAIN OPERATION AND WORKS ................. 10 1.4 SUPPORTING ISSUES AND COMMENT ................................................................ 11

    2 PURPOSE.......................................................................................................... 13

    3 METHODOLOGY............................................................................................... 15 3.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF DOUBLE DECK VEHICLE.................................................. 15 3.2 CONCEPT DESIGN FOR UK DOUBLE DECK VEHICLES ......................................... 16 3.3 EXTRA LONG TRAIN OPERATION ...................................................................... 17 3.4 EVALUATION OF WORK SCOPE......................................................................... 18 3.5 COSTING OF WORK......................................................................................... 18

    4 FINDINGS CONCEPT DESIGN FOR DOUBLE DECK VEHICLES ............... 20 4.1 KEY FEATURES OF EUROPEAN MAINLAND DOUBLE DECK ROLLING STOCK ............. 20 4.2 KEY EXTERNAL DIMENSIONS OF CURRENT UK PASSENGER ROLLING STOCK.......... 21 4.3 KEY INTERNAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT OF CURRENT UK PASSENGER ROLLING STOCK .................................................................................................................... 22 4.4 PROVISION FOR STANDING PASSENGERS IN CURRENT UK ROLLING STOCK ........... 23 4.5 CONCEPT DESIGN FOR UK PROFILE DOUBLE DECK VEHICLE ............................. 24 4.6 POTENTIAL FOR USE OF STANDARD EUROPEAN MAINLAND VEHICLES.................. 28

    5 ESTIMATE OF SEATING CAPACITY OF UK PROFILE DOUBLE DECK VEHICLES ............................................................................................................... 29

    5.1 BASE ANALYSIS VEHICLE ................................................................................. 29 5.2 ANALYSIS OF THE 23M VEHICLE........................................................................ 29 5.3 ANALYSIS OF THE 20M VEHICLE........................................................................ 29 5.4 COMPARISON OF SEATING CAPACITIES BETWEEN UK SAMPLE VEHICLES AND PROPOSED UK DOUBLE DECK VEHICLE ...................................................................... 30 5.5 ASSESSMENT OF SEATING CAPACITY FOR PROPOSED UK PROFILE DOUBLE DECK TRAIN FORMATIONS ................................................................................................. 31

    6 LONG TRAINS .................................................................................................. 33

    7 COMPARISON OF TRAIN CAPACITIES .......................................................... 35

    8 INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT................................................................. 36 8.1 DOUBLE DECK WORK ITEMS ......................................................................... 36 8.2 LONG TRAIN WORK ITEMS ............................................................................... 40 8.3 COST ESTIMATION .......................................................................................... 40

    9 SUMMARY OF INFRASTRUCTURE ITEMS..................................................... 43

    4 of 89

  • Project: Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007

    Version: 1.21

    APPENDIX A FRENCH NATIONAL RAILWAYS CLASS Z20500 EMU.............. 46

    APPENDIX B - GERMAN RAILWAYS BOMBARDIER DOUBLE DECK PUSH PULL COACHES..................................................................................................... 51

    APPENDIX C - COMPARISON OF MAINLAND EUROPE PASSENGER VEHICLE DIMENSIONS .......................................................................................................... 52

    APPENDIX D PROPOSED UK PROFILE VEHICLE CROSS-SECTIONS........... 55

    APPENDIX E LONDON VICTORIA AND LONDON BRIDGE TO BRIGHTON ROUTE..................................................................................................................... 57

    APPENDIX F LONDON LIVERPOOL STREET TO IPSWICH ROUTE................ 63

    APPENDIX G LONDON PADDINGTON TO READING AND OXFORD .............. 68

    APPENDIX H LONDON WATERLOO TO SOUTHAMPTON ............................... 71

    APPENDIX I RISKS AND OPPORTUNITIES REGISTER.................................... 75

    APPENDIX J - DIMENSIONAL RELATIONSHIP OF OVERHEAD LINE ELECTRIFICATION TO OVERLINE STRUCTURES .............................................. 76

    APPENDIX K - BACKGROUND TO MAINLAND EUROPE VEHICLE GAUGES... 78

    APPENDIX L - APPLICATION OF THE UIC REFERENCE PROFILES IN THE U.K. .......................................................................................................................... 81

    APPENDIX M - DEVELOPMENT OF VEHICLE AND STRUCTURE GAUGES IN THE U.K.80

    APPENDIX N SUMMARY OF UK PASSENGER ROLLING STOCK DIMENSIONS....84

    APPENDIX O SUMMARY OF UK PASSENGER SEATING ARRANGEMENTS AND CAPACITIES86

    5 of 89

  • Project: Double Deck Date: 03/08/2007

    Version: 1.21

    1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    This concept study considers the alternatives of using Double Deck vehicles or longer trains (12-16 coaches) to address the increased capacity needed for a selection of London outer suburban routes. These routes have high growth forecasts and as a base it is assumed that the services will have expanded to12 coach operation. The selected routes also provided a range of current infrastructure configurations to test the proposals against. (Inner suburban, London, routes were not considered as many have more scope for growth by increasing to 10 or 12 car length.)

    For Double Deck the study proposes a vehicle which is considered to be a best fit of the available infrastructure and still providing the expected quality of passenger environment. To establish a suitable design the vehicles currently in use, or being developed, in Europe were reviewed and an existing French vehicle used as a design reference. This UK proposed vehicle was then assessed on each route and the works required to accommodate it were assessed and costs established at an outline level. The conclusion of this analysis is that the constraints on vehicle size (width) and length (curvature and bogie spacing) result in a relatively inefficient vehicle with seating benefits around 8% per 20m vehicle or 24% per 23m vehicle. These compare with values of about 50% for a typical European vehicle. The comparison costs for route conversions range from 500m to around 1,300m with a work scope dominated by civil engineering activity.

    For Longer trains the study used a train sized at 16 coaches, which would provide a passenger carrying benefit of around 33%, to assess the impact on the infrastructure facilities. Again scope and comparison costs were collated at an outline level for two routes and ranged from 720m to 1200m with work scopes which include significant specialist rail construction costs. However, no detailed consideration was given to the passenger dispersal and handling issues which are considered a significant issue with the appli

Click here to load reader

Reader Image
Embed Size (px)
Recommended