Vline running 5 car sprinters

 
  freightgate Minister for Railways

Location: Albury, New South Wales
this seems very inefficient why is this happening ?

Sponsored advertisement

  TOQ-1 Deputy Commissioner

Location: Power Trainger
Because they can't make a 5 car Vlo any more?

5 Car Sprinters have been running for years.
  woodford Chief Commissioner

this seems very inefficient why is this happening ?
"freightgate"


While having 2 engines and cabs for each car in a multi car consist is something of a waste. The problem would be providing a dedicated consist for every service costs much money. A major advantage of things like the Sprinter and to a less extent VLocity, is the ability to build up a consist quickly for almost any service. Such flexibilty simplifies such a task out of site. The Sprinter also.is fast accelerating machine with a good top speed, much more suitable for a modern timetable.

woodford
  woodford Chief Commissioner

Something worth remembering is that both the Sprinter and the VLocity automaticly tests the systems on coupling, this saves a lot of oc healthy and safety issues and makes changing consists a none issue, this is NOT the case with N  series cars, if the consist is changed on these everything has to be tested to proves it works, as this can ONLY be done at the maintence depot it takes major amounts of time. Which is why its not done often theses days.

woodford
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

this seems very inefficient why is this happening ?
freightgate
The Sprinter cars can operate in consists of any size from 1 to 8 cars, but because of lx activation issues a 2 car consist is the minimum VLP allows .  A 5 car Sprinter set seating 450 +  operates on each way one Geelong Peak am and PM service on Weekdays .

With the V/Locities they can operate in consist of 3, 6 or 9 cars but many platform extensions would be required for 9 car operation , and 9 all motored cars are very expensive to operate .

VLP desperately needs NOW  to insert a trailer car in around 30 sets so that they end up with a fleet of 3 and 4 car VL sets.
This would give lower operating & capex costs and provide for operation of 7 and 8 car consists in peak periods on the Geelong & Ballarat lines . At Off Peak times train consists can be 3 or 4 cars, whereas now they have to be 3 or 6  incurring extra opex .  With this approach VLP would be able to run V/Locity consists of 3, 4, 6, 7 or 8 cars offering far more flexibility, and potentially lower operating costs .
For example an 8 car VL would give something like  630 seats , compared to 444 in a 6 car  set.
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

VLP desperately needs NOW  to insert a trailer car in around 30 sets so that they end up with a fleet of 3 and 4 car VL sets.
kuldalai
Not disagreeing with the need for more trailers, but the current mix of 3 or 6 car trains is inefficient. What about simply transferring some trailers from one set to another, giving some 2-car and 4-car sets. That would mean trains could be operated with 2,3,4,5 or 6 cars, perhaps better meeting the expected capacity
  YM-Mundrabilla Minister for Railways

Location: Mundrabilla but I'd rather be in Narvik
VLP desperately needs NOW  to insert a trailer car in around 30 sets so that they end up with a fleet of 3 and 4 car VL sets.
Not disagreeing with the need for more trailers, but the current mix of 3 or 6 car trains is inefficient. What about simply transferring some trailers from one set to another, giving some 2-car and 4-car sets. That would mean trains could be operated with 2,3,4,5 or 6 cars, perhaps better meeting the expected capacity
duttonbay
Much too simple. They could never roster the sets appropriately.
Is it not possible to simply shut down powering a varying number of cars depending on the terrain and the timetable. Or is that too hard too?
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
VLP desperately needs NOW  to insert a trailer car in around 30 sets so that they end up with a fleet of 3 and 4 car VL sets.
Not disagreeing with the need for more trailers, but the current mix of 3 or 6 car trains is inefficient. What about simply transferring some trailers from one set to another, giving some 2-car and 4-car sets. That would mean trains could be operated with 2,3,4,5 or 6 cars, perhaps better meeting the expected capacity
duttonbay
That option would be expensive due to costs associated with shunting carriages around.
  M636C Minister for Railways

It is misleading to speak of "trailer cars"

All Velocity cars have the same power equipment, both propulsion and auxiliary, for lighting and air conditioning.
Running an extra car will always use extra power for lighting and a/c.

However, much of the fuel usage is overcoming air resistance, which is not very different between two car and three car sets.
So the main extra cost of a three car train over a two car train is capital and depreciation and maintenance.
The extra operating costs are nil for the crew and relatively little for the fuel.

If you already own a number of cars, you are stuck with the capital and depreciation.
You won't save much fuel by taking one car out of a set.

So running only three car sets will not cost significantly more than running two car and three car sets.

The intermediate cars are slightly cheaper to buy since they don't have the cabs which contain expensive equipment.
So for a given number of seats, three car sets are cheaper to buy than two car sets.

There is no big saving to be made by leaving out one car that you already own out of a train.

If six car trains are overloaded, adding one or two intermediate cars would be cheaper than adding a third three car set, of course.

Peter
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
VLP desperately needs NOW  to insert a trailer car in around 30 sets so that they end up with a fleet of 3 and 4 car VL sets.
Not disagreeing with the need for more trailers, but the current mix of 3 or 6 car trains is inefficient. What about simply transferring some trailers from one set to another, giving some 2-car and 4-car sets. That would mean trains could be operated with 2,3,4,5 or 6 cars, perhaps better meeting the expected capacity
That option would be expensive due to costs associated with shunting carriages around.
railblogger

I have never understood this concept.  How could it be expensive when there are fixed labour costs?  V/Line have on staff shunters and train examiners.  Guess what, this is part of the cost of running a rail business.

I will never understand how this could be a possible cost.  Adding and removing coaches on the network is 101 rail work.
  BrentonGolding Chief Commissioner

Location: Maldon Junction
Not disagreeing with the need for more trailers, but the current mix of 3 or 6 car trains is inefficient. What about simply transferring some trailers from one set to another, giving some 2-car and 4-car sets. That would mean trains could be operated with 2,3,4,5 or 6 cars, perhaps better meeting the expected capacity
That option would be expensive due to costs associated with shunting carriages around.

I have never understood this concept.  How could it be expensive when there are fixed labour costs?  V/Line have on staff shunters and train examiners.  Guess what, this is part of the cost of running a rail business.

I will never understand how this could be a possible cost.  Adding and removing coaches on the network is 101 rail work.
x31
Is splitting VLocity consists even undertaken by V/Line or is it only done by Bombardier?

I thought that like Metro sets they were made up as a complete set by the manufacturer and that is how they are to be run all of the time, not designed to be split in the yards at all.

BG
  duttonbay Minister for Railways

My suggestion (more like a thought bubble) was to permanently switch one intermediate car from a number of sets into other sets to make sets of 2, 3 and 4 cars. Not shunt them as day-to-day exercise.

I understand that rostering might be tricky, but would give the opportunity to expand trains in a more incremental manner, rather than going from 3 to 6 and then 9.
  railblogger Chief Commissioner

Location: At the back of the train, quitely doing exactly what you'd expect.
VLP desperately needs NOW  to insert a trailer car in around 30 sets so that they end up with a fleet of 3 and 4 car VL sets.
Not disagreeing with the need for more trailers, but the current mix of 3 or 6 car trains is inefficient. What about simply transferring some trailers from one set to another, giving some 2-car and 4-car sets. That would mean trains could be operated with 2,3,4,5 or 6 cars, perhaps better meeting the expected capacity
That option would be expensive due to costs associated with shunting carriages around.

I have never understood this concept.  How could it be expensive when there are fixed labour costs?  V/Line have on staff shunters and train examiners.  Guess what, this is part of the cost of running a rail business.

I will never understand how this could be a possible cost.  Adding and removing coaches on the network is 101 rail work.
x31
As opposed to fixed consists? Less shunting required when operating fixed consists.
  x31 Chief Commissioner

Location: gallifrey
It is amazing how V/Line think they can run a railway without running a railway!

The adding and removal of coaches leads to a far more efficient use of assets as they are deployed on a demand basis.
  kuldalai Chief Commissioner

It is misleading to speak of "trailer cars"

All Velocity cars have the same power equipment, both propulsion and auxiliary, for lighting and air conditioning.
Running an extra car will always use extra power for lighting and a/c.

However, much of the fuel usage is overcoming air resistance, which is not very different between two car and three car sets.
So the main extra cost of a three car train over a two car train is capital and depreciation and maintenance.
The extra operating costs are nil for the crew and relatively little for the fuel.

If you already own a number of cars, you are stuck with the capital and depreciation.
You won't save much fuel by taking one car out of a set.

So running only three car sets will not cost significantly more than running two car and three car sets.

The intermediate cars are slightly cheaper to buy since they don't have the cabs which contain expensive equipment.
So for a given number of seats, three car sets are cheaper to buy than two car sets.

There is no big saving to be made by leaving out one car that you already own out of a train.

If six car trains are overloaded, adding one or two intermediate cars would be cheaper than adding a third three car set, of course.

Peter
M636C
All powered car trains are expensive to operate with big consists .

I am correct in my terminology in advocating 4 car V/locity sets with 3 powered cars and a strict trailer .  Cheapest way both capex wise and opex wise to increase peak hour capacity .

2x3  car set gives 444 seats, but 2x 4  would give something like  630  .

In Off Peak if a 3 car set is not enough then you have to run a 6 albeit the loading would only justify 4 cars.  All is fuel and maintenance is distance based, so economy in train size is an issue Off Peak .  On a return trip to Waurn Ponds running a 6 where a 4 would suffice would save over $ 1000 each return trip .  Multiply that by 250 Weekdays each year and many trips and VLP are wasting a lot of our taxpayer dollars .

At peak times the cheapest way to increase capacity is to increase train length . Running extra trips costs extra crews, and in most cases the peak period paths are simply not available .  

The issue is we now  have enough  V/Locity TRAINS, we now need to make half them longer, and the cheapest way to do that is to add a strict trailer car  into 25 - 30 sets .  

Trials were done some years ago reportedly on several commuter corridors and a 4 car set with 3 powered cars maintained the schedules, which VLP has repeatedly since extended those schedules to protect their timekeeping .  

Not an issue of making up two and 5 car sets by swapping around centre cars , as we still perpetuate high operating costs. In any case the ONLY lines on which a 2 car VL set would be sensible these days are Bendigo/Swan Hill and  Ballarat/Maryborough as dedicated shuttles.
  Radioman Chief Train Controller

Hello All,

I understand from both a time tabling and a train allocation perspective that the current 3car Vlocity sets are a lot easier diagram wise that the previous 2 and 3 car sets, especially as the 2 car sets were either full or overcrowded , hence the augmentation to enable all 3 car sets.

I agree that nine car sets would require platform extensions and I would imagine that only peak services would require nine cars , so that would result in lower utilisation . Having said that additional 3 car sets I would expect to get good loadings as additional services would absorb increasing demand.

Regards, Radioman
  hbedriver Chief Train Controller

referring to Kuldalai's post earlier;

2-car V'L would be fine also for Bendigo - Echuca and Ballaarat - Ararat.

In any case it won't happen; too much trouble to retain 2-car sets among all those 3 car sets.

4-car sets would make a lot of sense on all sorts of fronts, except that it would demonstrate the flawed thinking that contributed to recent design of fuel points and yards. Can't have that, can we!

Going back to the original topic; those 5-car Sprinters. We recently calculated the number of things that can fail while working in that configuration.

Take the number of driving cabs (10), multiply by the wheels (8 on each of those 5 cars equals 40); you get a sub-total of 400.

Add on the number of trailing vehicles (4) plus the number of intermediate couplers in use (8); that gives the second sub-total of 12.

Finally, add up the two sub-totals (12 plus the earlier 400). That gives 412, the Victorian gunzel's favourite number!
  HardWorkingMan Chief Commissioner

Location: Echuca
referring to Kuldalai's post earlier;

2-car V'L would be fine also for Bendigo - Echuca and Ballaarat - Ararat.

In any case it won't happen; too much trouble to retain 2-car sets among all those 3 car sets.

4-car sets would make a lot of sense on all sorts of fronts, except that it would demonstrate the flawed thinking that contributed to recent design of fuel points and yards. Can't have that, can we!

Going back to the original topic; those 5-car Sprinters. We recently calculated the number of things that can fail while working in that configuration.

Take the number of driving cabs (10), multiply by the wheels (8 on each of those 5 cars equals 40); you get a sub-total of 400.

Add on the number of trailing vehicles (4) plus the number of intermediate couplers in use (8); that gives the second sub-total of 12.

Finally, add up the two sub-totals (12 plus the earlier 400). That gives 412, the Victorian gunzel's favourite number!
hbedriver
If you reduce the weekday Echuca consist to a 2 car unit you will need to run extra trains.  The weekday services are standing room by Rochester (or Elmore on a quiet day) on the ups and the downs are usually standing room only leaving Bendigo. If you take out over 1/3rd of the trains capacity how are you going to fit everyone on?
  justapassenger Chief Commissioner

Is it not possible to simply shut down powering a varying number of cars depending on the terrain and the timetable. Or is that too hard too?
YM-Mundrabilla
Siemens and Stadler DMUs used overseas are capable of shutting down the traction power in selected cars when not needed.

It shouldn't be too hard for Bombardier to set up a similar software routine, but I agree it might be too hard for V/Line.
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

Is it not possible to simply shut down powering a varying number of cars depending on the terrain and the timetable. Or is that too hard too?
Siemens and Stadler DMUs used overseas are capable of shutting down the traction power in selected cars when not needed.

It shouldn't be too hard for Bombardier to set up a similar software routine, but I agree it might be too hard for V/Line.
justapassenger
It might be a case of excessive shut downs will cause an increase in total engine failure.   However being able to shut down 1 or two cars power would be very good on up ballarat services, express geelong services and all gippsland line services
  route14 Chief Commissioner

Shutting down engines on a power car actually create more resistance and wear comparing to having a strict trailer.  Shanghai bus drivers used to disconnect 2 cylinders during off peak to get the fuel saving bonus, which accelerated the wear and tare drastically.  (Of course, maintenance cost was none of the drivers' business)
  route14 Chief Commissioner

Sorry, creates.
  speedemon08 Mary

Location: I think by now you should have figured it out
Shutting down engines on a power car actually create more resistance and wear comparing to having a strict trailer.  Shanghai bus drivers used to disconnect 2 cylinders during off peak to get the fuel saving bonus, which accelerated the wear and tare drastically.  (Of course, maintenance cost was none of the drivers' business)
route14
Depends. Some engines are designed to run on minimal usage part of the time (AKA Chrysler Hemi engines).
  skitz Chief Commissioner

I note that on the Gippsland line that when a Velocity loses an engine it keeps the time table pretty well overall.   Why would they not make it normal practice to run two of the three engines when there is no performance advantage?
  tazzer96 Deputy Commissioner

I note that on the Gippsland line that when a Velocity loses an engine it keeps the time table pretty well overall.   Why would they not make it normal practice to run two of the three engines when there is no performance advantage?
skitz
About half of the gippsland line run is the engines more or less idling due to being stuck behind a spark.   Having only 2/3 of the engine power available means delays can't be recovered as easily either.

Other services which stop and start more often need that power, and ballart services need it to maintain speed up the steep grades

Sponsored advertisement

Subscribers: doyle, speedemon08, x31

Display from:   

Quick Reply

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