London Banter

London Banter (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/forum.php)
-   London Transport (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/)
-   -   LO lines to be named (https://www.londonbanter.co.uk/london-transport/17850-lo-lines-named.html)

Roger Lynn[_2_] April 11th 21 12:52 PM

LO lines to be named
 
On 11/04/2021 12:04, Basil Jet wrote:
On 11/04/2021 11:46, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

Â*Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplyingÂ* every house be used?

Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it would.


I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are [still]
supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like phone cables,
unless you know better.


Can Mr Google's Streetview Emporium back you up on that?


You seriously doubt that overhead LV distribution is common in rural areas?

As well as supplying EV charging, the electricity infrastructure will also
be required to supply electric heat pumps for domestic heating in the not
too distant future. That presents a challenge at least as great as supplying
EV chargers.

Anna Noyd-Dryver April 11th 21 01:00 PM

LO lines to be named
 
Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/04/2021 12:28, Recliner wrote:
Marland wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.

Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.

Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.



Don’t know about that but now that having multi system trains is easier now
than it once was then I wonder if electrification at 25,0000 volt and all
the clearance work that has to be done thus raising costs is always the
best solution. If you are not building for high speed or heavy loads then
1500 or 3000 DC may suffice for short parts of the network. The tram train
concept in Yorkshire shows the electrical side is achievable. Just
surmising but if 25.000 ever gets to Penzance would you really need it to
Barnstaple , Okehampton Looe, Falmouth etc if using stock that could use
1500 DC with trolley wire electrification and no need to rebuild bridges
would save costs even though you may need a few more substations. OTOH
presumably it is easier to hook a DC substation into the existing
electricity supply network as the rectifiers connected to all 3 phases
don’t unbalance it in the way single phase 25,000 can without careful
planning.

The current bright idea is discontinuous electrifcation. Trains/trams are
fitted with short range batteries so the difficult/scenic bits don't need
OHL. The first UK example is the Birmingham Metro extension.

Hitachi is offering class 800 variants with traction batteries rather than
big diesel engines so they will be able to run for a few miles without OHL.
That will save the cost of rebuilding low bridges or disfiguring historic
areas.

It could also save money by bridging the non-electrified islands or
branches in otherwise electrified networks, such as the Uckfield or
Marshlink lines. The proposal is to retrofit batteries to some third rail
Electrostar units.


I wonder if that would work on the North Downs Line? I suspect the
section from Shalford to Redhill is probably too long for battery working.


Isn't that much shorter than the Marshlink line?



It's around 18 miles. There's another 11 miles non-electrified from
Wokingham to Ash.


Anna Noyd-Dryver


Roland Perry April 11th 21 01:15 PM

LO lines to be named
 
In message , at 12:04:10 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Basil Jet remarked:
On 11/04/2021 11:46, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

*Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplying* every house be used?

Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it would.


I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are
[still] supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like
phone cables, unless you know better.


Can Mr Google's Streetview Emporium back you up on that?


Another village, where I didn't end up living, (phone on the left, power
on the right) to answer both at once:

https://goo.gl/maps/wkbMByMYQzMx17Yw8
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry April 11th 21 01:16 PM

LO lines to be named
 
In message , at 11:47:47 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Marland remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplying every house be used?

Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it
would.


I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are [still]
supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like phone cables,
unless you know better.


I would think it is actually 415v ( if you are using 240).

Were your villages still 4 individual wire for the 3 phases and earth
mounted vertically?


Yes.

A lot like ours has been replaced by ABC cable. Has the disadvantage you
can’t nick electricity using some welding cables with clamps a wooden
ladder and thick rubber gloves, no I wouldn’t do it but I knew a farmer who
did. It wasn’t the cost of electric so much as it was a convenient way to
get electricity to a lambing shed for a few weeks to run a heater.


--
Roland Perry

Graeme Wall April 11th 21 01:41 PM

LO lines to be named
 
On 11/04/2021 13:06, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/04/2021 12:28, Recliner wrote:
Marland wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.

Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.

Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.



Don’t know about that but now that having multi system trains is easier now
than it once was then I wonder if electrification at 25,0000 volt and all
the clearance work that has to be done thus raising costs is always the
best solution. If you are not building for high speed or heavy loads then
1500 or 3000 DC may suffice for short parts of the network. The tram train
concept in Yorkshire shows the electrical side is achievable. Just
surmising but if 25.000 ever gets to Penzance would you really need it to
Barnstaple , Okehampton Looe, Falmouth etc if using stock that could use
1500 DC with trolley wire electrification and no need to rebuild bridges
would save costs even though you may need a few more substations. OTOH
presumably it is easier to hook a DC substation into the existing
electricity supply network as the rectifiers connected to all 3 phases
don’t unbalance it in the way single phase 25,000 can without careful
planning.

The current bright idea is discontinuous electrifcation. Trains/trams are
fitted with short range batteries so the difficult/scenic bits don't need
OHL. The first UK example is the Birmingham Metro extension.

Hitachi is offering class 800 variants with traction batteries rather than
big diesel engines so they will be able to run for a few miles without OHL.
That will save the cost of rebuilding low bridges or disfiguring historic
areas.

It could also save money by bridging the non-electrified islands or
branches in otherwise electrified networks, such as the Uckfield or
Marshlink lines. The proposal is to retrofit batteries to some third rail
Electrostar units.


I wonder if that would work on the North Downs Line? I suspect the
section from Shalford to Redhill is probably too long for battery working.


Isn't that much shorter than the Marshlink line?


Appears to be around 15-18 miles compared with 26 miles for Marshlink,
so yes.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.


Graeme Wall April 11th 21 01:42 PM

LO lines to be named
 
On 11/04/2021 14:00, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/04/2021 12:28, Recliner wrote:
Marland wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.

Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.

Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.



Don’t know about that but now that having multi system trains is easier now
than it once was then I wonder if electrification at 25,0000 volt and all
the clearance work that has to be done thus raising costs is always the
best solution. If you are not building for high speed or heavy loads then
1500 or 3000 DC may suffice for short parts of the network. The tram train
concept in Yorkshire shows the electrical side is achievable. Just
surmising but if 25.000 ever gets to Penzance would you really need it to
Barnstaple , Okehampton Looe, Falmouth etc if using stock that could use
1500 DC with trolley wire electrification and no need to rebuild bridges
would save costs even though you may need a few more substations. OTOH
presumably it is easier to hook a DC substation into the existing
electricity supply network as the rectifiers connected to all 3 phases
don’t unbalance it in the way single phase 25,000 can without careful
planning.

The current bright idea is discontinuous electrifcation. Trains/trams are
fitted with short range batteries so the difficult/scenic bits don't need
OHL. The first UK example is the Birmingham Metro extension.

Hitachi is offering class 800 variants with traction batteries rather than
big diesel engines so they will be able to run for a few miles without OHL.
That will save the cost of rebuilding low bridges or disfiguring historic
areas.

It could also save money by bridging the non-electrified islands or
branches in otherwise electrified networks, such as the Uckfield or
Marshlink lines. The proposal is to retrofit batteries to some third rail
Electrostar units.


I wonder if that would work on the North Downs Line? I suspect the
section from Shalford to Redhill is probably too long for battery working.


Isn't that much shorter than the Marshlink line?



It's around 18 miles. There's another 11 miles non-electrified from
Wokingham to Ash.


Ta, I was assuming the Wokingham-Ash section was within the capabilities
of a battery unit.



--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.


Roland Perry April 11th 21 01:43 PM

LO lines to be named
 
In message , at 14:16:50 on Sun, 11 Apr 2021,
Roland Perry remarked:
In message , at 11:47:47 on Sun, 11
Apr 2021, Marland remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplying every house be used?

Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it
would.

I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are [still]
supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like phone cables,
unless you know better.


I would think it is actually 415v ( if you are using 240).

Were your villages still 4 individual wire for the 3 phases and earth
mounted vertically?


Yes.

A lot like ours has been replaced by ABC cable. Has the disadvantage you
can’t nick electricity using some welding cables with clamps a wooden
ladder and thick rubber gloves, no I wouldn’t do it but I knew a farmer who
did. It wasn’t the cost of electric so much as it was a convenient way to
get electricity to a lambing shed for a few weeks to run a heater.


This is a pole not far from me:

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/overhead-wires.jpg

Which almost[1] hits the jackpot! Along the street are the 4-wires, to
two houses 2-wires, another a single twisted pair; and BT have bounced a
phone wire off it too.

[1] To do it fully you'd also need a street lamp on a bracket attached
to the same pole, but they don't seem to do that round here - I've
seen it in Essex though.
--
Roland Perry

Graeme Wall April 11th 21 01:54 PM

LO lines to be named
 
On 11/04/2021 12:08, Tweed wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplying every house be used?

Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it
would.


I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are [still]
supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like phone cables,
unless you know better.


Which reminds me....

It’s oft been stated that we can’t hang optic fibre cables off power poles
in rural areas (which would make it so very much cheaper and easier)
because we don’t/can’t possibly do that sort of thing because the power
companies and phone companies couldn’t possibly safely work together etc
etc.


Who said that?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.


Anna Noyd-Dryver April 11th 21 02:29 PM

LO lines to be named
 
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/04/2021 14:00, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 11/04/2021 12:28, Recliner wrote:
Marland wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2021 15:41:53 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
That matters for long distance lorries and buses for whom suitable batteries
would be a ridiculous size, but for cars its not even an issue right now,
never mind as technology advances. Yes, they're maybe half a ton heavier
than an equivalent ICE car at most, but the vehicle size is the same, if
not a bit smaller.

Which is why H2 is mainly being considered for larger, heavier vehicles:
trains, trucks, long distance buses, large SUVs, perhaps even short range
airliners. It's not needed nor viable for ordinary cars.

Hummer have already built 2 large battery SUVs. And H2 trains makes no
bloody sense whatsoever - just electric the damn lines and if its too
expensive for overhead then they should recind that moronic rule about
no more 3rd rail and lay that instead.



Don’t know about that but now that having multi system trains is easier now
than it once was then I wonder if electrification at 25,0000 volt and all
the clearance work that has to be done thus raising costs is always the
best solution. If you are not building for high speed or heavy loads then
1500 or 3000 DC may suffice for short parts of the network. The tram train
concept in Yorkshire shows the electrical side is achievable. Just
surmising but if 25.000 ever gets to Penzance would you really need it to
Barnstaple , Okehampton Looe, Falmouth etc if using stock that could use
1500 DC with trolley wire electrification and no need to rebuild bridges
would save costs even though you may need a few more substations. OTOH
presumably it is easier to hook a DC substation into the existing
electricity supply network as the rectifiers connected to all 3 phases
don’t unbalance it in the way single phase 25,000 can without careful
planning.

The current bright idea is discontinuous electrifcation. Trains/trams are
fitted with short range batteries so the difficult/scenic bits don't need
OHL. The first UK example is the Birmingham Metro extension.

Hitachi is offering class 800 variants with traction batteries rather than
big diesel engines so they will be able to run for a few miles without OHL.
That will save the cost of rebuilding low bridges or disfiguring historic
areas.

It could also save money by bridging the non-electrified islands or
branches in otherwise electrified networks, such as the Uckfield or
Marshlink lines. The proposal is to retrofit batteries to some third rail
Electrostar units.


I wonder if that would work on the North Downs Line? I suspect the
section from Shalford to Redhill is probably too long for battery working.


Isn't that much shorter than the Marshlink line?



It's around 18 miles. There's another 11 miles non-electrified from
Wokingham to Ash.


Ta, I was assuming the Wokingham-Ash section was within the capabilities
of a battery unit.




Though as they're only separated by around 5.5miles, you need to consider
the effect that one will have on the other (or effectively consider it as
one, 29-mile, section).


Anna Noyd-Dryver


Anna Noyd-Dryver April 11th 21 02:29 PM

LO lines to be named
 
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:16:50 on Sun, 11 Apr 2021,
Roland Perry remarked:
In message , at 11:47:47 on Sun, 11
Apr 2021, Marland remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:18 on Sun, 11 Apr
2021, Graeme Wall remarked:

Rather than laying a whole new cable, can't the existing cable
supplying every house be used?

Not enough capacity and doesn't necessarily go where you think it
would.

I've lived in two village now where about half the houses are [still]
supplied by 240v wiring on poles, which looks a bit like phone cables,
unless you know better.

I would think it is actually 415v ( if you are using 240).

Were your villages still 4 individual wire for the 3 phases and earth
mounted vertically?


Yes.

A lot like ours has been replaced by ABC cable. Has the disadvantage you
can’t nick electricity using some welding cables with clamps a wooden
ladder and thick rubber gloves, no I wouldn’t do it but I knew a farmer who
did. It wasn’t the cost of electric so much as it was a convenient way to
get electricity to a lambing shed for a few weeks to run a heater.


This is a pole not far from me:

http://www.perry.co.uk/images/overhead-wires.jpg

Which almost[1] hits the jackpot! Along the street are the 4-wires, to
two houses 2-wires, another a single twisted pair; and BT have bounced a
phone wire off it too.

[1] To do it fully you'd also need a street lamp on a bracket attached
to the same pole, but they don't seem to do that round here - I've
seen it in Essex though.


Aah, a classic land surveyor's nightmare - you try fitting annotations for
TP EP LP (and SP if it has a road sign attached too!) around one dot on the
plan!


Anna Noyd-Dryver



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk