The document discusses the design and specifications of a new train by Porterbrook, emphasizing the importance of reliability, comfort, energy efficiency, and adaptability for various services. It outlines the challenges and considerations in the UK rolling stock market, including compliance with regulations and market demands. The design process involves balancing various factors such as speed, capacity, maintenance options, and financial implications for operators.

1. Designing a New Train
Ian Walmsley
Engineering Development Manager
Porterbrook
1

2. ROSCO - Our business








Simple business model
Long term assets
Short term customers
Straight Line depreciation
Gosplan economics
Market should be predictable
Policy isn’t
Pre-emptive work = high risk
2

3. What’s good for us?



Stock stays on lease for 35 years
Minimum changes to achieve this
Rolling stock should be: • Reliable
• Comfortable
• Energy efficient
• Low maintenance
• Coupling compatible
• Suitable for the service
• Adaptable for other services
3

4. An example







High reliability (90,000 mpc)
Regenerative Braking (15% less energy)
AC traction, low maintenance
Compliant to modern safety standards
Compliant to disability regulations
Air conditioned, good ride, modern interior
Perfectly designed for the service it operates

Risk of displacement?
4

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7

8. 8

9. 9

10. Lesson learned
 The best train doesn’t
always win
 Economy beats quality
The Department is particularly
interested to see rolling stock
used on airport services that is
better suited to the needs of
airport passengers; Page 81
TSGN ITT Sept 2013
10

11. The UK rolling stock market
is neither free nor controlled
11

12. Market and cost




12
Rail 2% of market
Modal transfer
CO2 Reduction
Capacity of system

13. Market and cost
Train is 15% of industry cost : 12% capital + 3% Maintenance
13

14. New train specification – Non-compliances






















GSM link to PIS
Coupling with doors open
GOP panel full function
Current standards
Ride better than 450
Inter-Vehicle damping
Noise – new standard
Reliability 340,000 MTIN
Water tank gauge
Insulation infra-red scan
Dead haulage in service to 90 mph
Light flash guard position
1450mm wide doors
Standbacks at doors
Footsteps cannot obstruct doors
Emergency brake in Neutral
No hill start button
Sanding – dedicated power supply
Low sand indicator
Sandbox trace heating
WSP failure alarm
P12 Profile wheels





















14
Wheelset coating to minimise UAT
Option for flange lubrication
GSMR radio fitted
Maintenance free batteries
PIS letter descenders uncompressed
Coach letter display in train
Side of train PIS displays
Wi-Fi remote upload PIS
OTMR – GSMR Interface
OTMR 7-day recording
OTMR flash card download
Train Manager’s office
275 seats (270)
Emergency light power supplies
No bonded glass
Ergonomic layout for vehicle on it’s side
Seat re-arrange with same body panels
Toilet flush with lid up
CCTV viewing screen
Power close cab door
ERTMS space provision and supply

15. New train requirement
 Use existing design?
•
•
•
•
•
 Produce new design?
•
•
•
•
•
Capacity
Acceleration
24 tph
New technology
Competition
15
Higher risk
Design costs
Safety Case
Potential market
Maintenance cost

16. Safety is a “given”








Rail Group Standards
Codes of practice
European standards
Disabled legislation
Fire regulations
Accident reports
Design review
Acceptance bodies








16
Crashworthiness
Materials used
Control logic
Redundancy
Human Factors
Stepping distances
Electrical Interference
Kinematic Envelope

17. Market divisions




High Speed Lines
Inter-City
Outer Suburban Commuter
Inner Suburban Metro
17

18. What do you want? – Passenger focus
18

19. What do you want? (Leeds area figures)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Spring
Autumn
Spring
Autumn
Spring
Autumn
Spring
Autumn
Spring
Autumn
Satisfied
n/a
86%
84%
78%
83%
87%
87%
78%
75%
78%
Neutral
n/a
10%
10%
11%
12%
8%
9%
14%
16%
11%
Dissatisfi
ed
n/a
5%
6%
11%
6%
6%
5%
8%
9%
11%
19

20. What do you want?
20

21. New train decisions - speed
 Maximum Speed
•
•
•
•
•
•
140 mph
125 mph
118 mph
100 mph
90 mph
75 mph







21
Track costs
Train weight limits
Installed power
Braking ability
Acceleration
No. Powered axles
Cost

22. New train decisions - length





3, 4 or 5 car
20m long
23m long
26m long
16.6m long







22
Platform Lengths
Selective Door Opening
Station dwell times
No. of bogies
Weight (Energy, track)
Axle load (speed)
Expected capacity need

23. New train decisions - doors






End or 1/3 – 2/3?
How many?
How wide?
Standbacks?
Swing/Slide
Control






23
Doorway = 8 seats
Standbacks = 8 seats
Weight (Pass/m2)
Speed of operation
Reliability
FASDO

24. New train decisions - Seats





How many?
Legroom
Rake angle
Armrests
Tables





24
Less seats, More people
Crashworthiness
Weight
Cost
Resistance to damage

25. 25

26. Limiting case design
26

27. Limiting case design





Centre section peak operation sets design
Bedford – Brighton 2 hrs 15 min
Thameslink & Crossrail – same problem
Not ideal for off-peak journeys
Is there a choice?
27

28. The “Platform”




Need to spread design cost
Make design flexible around a fixed “platform”
New trains around country will be similar
Platform designs usually last about 10 years
1970s
1960s
1990s
1980s
28
2000s

29. Maintenance Options - 1
 All inclusive deal with manufacturer
•
•
•
•
•




Capital
Depots
Materials
Depot maintenance
Major overhaul
Only specify number of diagrams to be covered
Best incentive to minimise maintenance cost
Usually most expensive deal – risk brings reward
“Wet” lease with ROSCO “Power by the hour”
29

30. Maintenance Options - 2
 “Soggy” lease with ROSCO
•
•
•
•
•




Capital rental
Non-cap for overhaul
Operator maintains
Network Rail facilities
Contract sets responsibility
Operator controls daily availability
“Lumpy” overhaul and repair costs smoothed out
Terms to fit franchises
System used when privatised in 1994
30

31. Maintenance Options - 3
 “Dry” lease with ROSCO
•
•
•
•
•




Capital rental only
No “maintenance reserve”
Operator maintains
ROSCO audits asset
Redelivery inspections
Operator controls all aspects
Lower initial cost
Higher risk to operator – design and endemic faults
Operators often expect support not paid for
31

32. Residual Value
 Franchise operators come and go
 ROSCO carries residual value
 Example:-
•
•
•
•
200 vehicles at £1.7m each = £340M investment.
Assumed a 35 year life
After 7 year franchise residual value is 28/35 of £340M
£272M
 Risk may be backed off to Government
 No more diesels
32

33. Conclusions
 Designing a train is a series of compromises
 Designs will primarily aim at one of 4 markets
•
•
•
•
High Speed
Inter City
Suburban
Metro
 Adaptable for different routes – the “Platform”
 Residual Value (i.e. life) very important
33

34. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVQYldQpeKY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZqsdOEdUuA
34

35. Thank you
35