New Zealand Palmerston North to Te Rapa electrification

You must be logged in to reply

  Search thread   Image gallery
« 1 2 of 2
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

It is known that the Ef's require modification to operate on the Auckland network but that anything that can operate on the Auckland network will be able to operate on the NIMT

 
Been_Benuane Junior Train Controller

It is known that the Ef's require modification to operate on the Auckland network

- wanderer53

Which means that they as good as can't run on the network. Would there be any microeconomic reason to extend the electrification and modify the EF's?

but that anything that can operate on the Auckland network will be able to operate on the NIMT
- wanderer53

And why would they want to? Why would an Auckland EMU want to go any further south than Pukekohe and any further north/west than Helensville in the foreseeable future?

 
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

It is known that the Ef's require modification to operate on the Auckland network

- wanderer53

Which means that they as good as can't run on the network. Would there be any microeconomic reason to extend the electrification and modify the EF's?

but that anything that can operate on the Auckland network will be able to operate on the NIMT
- wanderer53

And why would they want to? Why would an Auckland EMU want to go any further south than Pukekohe and any further north/west than Helensville in the foreseeable future?

- Been_Benuane



Given that kiwirail are currently saying possibly in the future, just not yet for Auckland to Tauranga electrification I suspect there is no need for any of us to answer any of these questions.

You may be interested to Know that Kiwirail wanted the Matangi's to be dual system capable but greater Wellington refused to pay any extra costs.

 
Been_Benuane Junior Train Controller

Given that kiwirail are currently saying possibly in the future, just not yet for Auckland to Tauranga electrification I suspect there is no need for any of us to answer any of these questions.

- wanderer53

How about you answer this question instead; aside form not making much grammatical sense, can you provide one piece of evidence that Kiwirail have ever made any real stated commitment to electrifying the NIMT between Papakura and Te Rapa?

Because there would be next-to-no benefit for the considerable required investment.

You may be interested to Know that Kiwirail wanted the Matangi's to be dual system capable but greater Wellington refused to pay any extra costs.
- wanderer53

Sorry, I'm frankly not interested in hearing fairy stories.

Kiwirail would have no reason whatsoever to desire the Matangi's to be dual-system capable, it would not be in their interests. The Matangis will not be going any further north than Waikanae, that's about their limit. No foreseeable demand further north and the Matangi's have no on-board toilet facilities for long-range journeys. There is no electrification between Waikanae and Palmerston North and nor does there need to be. There is only the 1500V DC supply available in the Wellington region and there probably only ever will be.
And even if Kiwirail ever had any desire, they'd know full-well how much more expensive it would make the Matangis.

 
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

I have already provided a quote from the kiwi rail staff newsletter saying that the Auckland to tauranga electrification is being kept under review.

As for the matangi's I suggest that you take that up with the Kiwi rail mechanical design team based in Wellington as you seem to know more about the subject than they do.

 
Been_Benuane Junior Train Controller

I have already provided a quote from the kiwi rail staff newsletter saying that the Auckland to tauranga electrification is being kept under review.

- wanderer53

Don't tell me you actually have completely misunderstood the following?

"When you look at the map of the North Island, the sections of line not electrified look small, particularly as the electrified Auckland and Wellington networks stretch southwards and northwards respectively. The point is not lost on advocates for the use of renewable energy who argue for the complete electrification of the line. Work done back in 2008 provides useful perspective to this argument. It concluded that to justify electrification, a route should be all or most of the following: at or near capacity, densely trafficked, steeply graded, involve a long tunnel or be adjacent to an existing electrified route. The routes to meet these criteria were Westfield-Te Rapa, Hamilton-Mt Maunganui and Otira-Arthur’s Pass. The first two (in practical terms one Westfield-Mt Maunganui route) meet the density and adjacency criteria while Otira-Arthur’s Pass meets the grade and tunnel test. This is deviating from the North Island Main Trunk, but given the density of traffic between Auckland and Mt Maunganui, it would make no sense to electrify simply to Hamilton. Another consideration is the incompatabilty between the Wellington network extending as far as Waikanae and the Trunk at Palmerston North. The cost estimate at the time for the two most likely routes was in the vicinity of $900 million – undoubtedly more at today’s prices. Obviously the lion’s share would be taken by the Westfield-Mt Mauganui route. The conclusion reached was that money on this scale could be spent on other projects which provided significant gains in transit time, capacity and reliability rather than on electrification. Of course, as the NIMT electrification project itself demonstrated, we don’t know what’s around the corner. One of the reasons why it got the green light originally was the impact on the country of rising oil prices. There are plenty of analysts thirty years later who have predicted the end of peak oil. But for a rail industry that always has to make the best of a tight budget, today’s realities are more urgent than tomorrow’s possibilities. Extension of electrification should remain an option but ultimately it ranks as a distant priority."
Kevin Ramshaw Express Editor.

I find it amazing that you could so completely miss the point of that article. Wakey wakey, what this Kevin Ramshaw (who is merely the editor of Kiwirail's newsletter) is saying is what I'm saying but in terms more diplomatic to people desiring more electrification. How on earth could you possibly interpret that to ever mean that electrification is being kept under review?
This isn't the first time I've wondered about your reading comprehension skills.

As for the matangi's I suggest that you take that up with the Kiwi rail mechanical design team based in Wellington as you seem to know more about the subject than they do.
- wanderer53

Laughing Now, why on earth are you bringing-up this "Kiwi rail mechanical design team based in Wellington" in the first place let alone implying that I'm even disagreeing with them or that you're speaking on their behalf?

I'm not seeing any "Kiwi rail mechanical design team based in Wellington" making some bollocks claim that Kiwirail wanted the Matangis to be dual system capable. I'm seeing YOU say this, so I'm taking this load of utter nonsense up with you instead.
Grow up, and don't try and run away from it.

 
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

A couple of quotes from the CBT forum that seem to be relevent.



That's the big difference between you and me, I'm prepared to learn everyday, where as you said it yourself in regards to RWC, that nothing needs to change from events encountered, so I take it you know everything already and aren't prepared to learn any further. So no need for us to quote each other.

- A user



It's a forum. It's not just about your point of view(which you seem to think anwers for everyone).

- A user

 
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

A couple of quotes from the CBT forum that seem to be relevent.



That's the big difference between you and me, I'm prepared to learn everyday, where as you said it yourself in regards to RWC, that nothing needs to change from events encountered, so I take it you know everything already and aren't prepared to learn any further. So no need for us to quote each other.

- A user



It's a forum. It's not just about your point of view(which you seem to think anwers for everyone).

- A user

 
Been_Benuane Junior Train Controller

A couple of quotes from the CBT forum that seem to be relevent.

That's the big difference between you and me, I'm prepared to learn everyday, where as you said it yourself in regards to RWC, that nothing needs to change from events encountered, so I take it you know everything already and aren't prepared to learn any further. So no need for us to quote each other.
- A user

It's a forum. It's not just about your point of view(which you seem to think anwers for everyone).

- A user

- wanderer53

Nah I didn't think you'd answer my question.

I don't know what this is supposed to be. But whatever it is, it appears that Wanderer cannot concede he's wrong and makes (extremely) outlandish claims and then doesn't back them up.

How could anyone claim what you have and expect to be taken seriously?

 
62440 Deputy Commissioner

of interest, the detailed design for the overhead was carried out in 1984 and the first masts were erected that year between Marton and Palmy. The first feeder station was at Bunnythorpe, hence that being the end of the test section.
The civil works were substantially complete including the Rangitikei viaducts but daylighting tunnels and other deviations were still happening. The curves were down to 160 and these were nearly all raised to at least 400m. The realignments cut several km off the route and that is why there are so many short kms of 600m, (they had to have a half-km each km).
Stage 1 was Palmy to Ohakune and that was being constructed before stage 2 to te rapa design started.

 
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

Braking Trains Feed Power Back to the National Grid

KiwiRail’s electric locomotives that operate

through the central North Island have been

providing a return of power back into the

national grid since they entered service.

Introduced because of their superior power

on the steep gradient of the NIMT between

Hamilton and Palmerston North, the EF

locomotives are also able to generate power

during braking. Regenerative braking means

that when the brakes are applied the motor

effectively becomes a generator.

The resulting power is used by auxiliary

loads (fans, light, etc), then any other EF

locomotive-hauled trains on the network.

Any surplus is fed back into the national

power grid.

A review of recent power bills shows energy

recovery of between eight and nine percent

in terms of surplus power that ends up in the

national grid.

Tests subsequent to original vehicle

commissioning recorded the regenerative

power an individual locomotive recovered

during braking was 13 percent of the power

it consumed. Regenerative braking is only

expected to achieve up to five percent power

recovery on a typical railroad.

EF locomotives are achieving significantly

higher gains which may be due to the steep

downhill gradients on this route.

When Auckland’s electrified network comes

on line in late 2013 the new EMUs will

also be providing surplus power back into

the national grid. Corporate Responsibility

Manager Karl Check says we will have to

wait until some testing has occurred to see

what the energy recovery amounts to.

The Matangi trains operating in Wellington

also regenerate power during braking although

due to the different DC technology surplus

power cannot be returned to the grid.

 
wanderer53 Sir Nigel Gresley

Location: front left seat EE set now departed

CAPITAL CONNECTIONS

The news that Auckland Transport and Greater Wellington Regional Council are looking at extending rail electrification in their region will excite those eager to see the entire North Island Main Trunk Line electrified. Pushed by people in the Franklin area, Auckland Transport are looking at the section between Papakura and Pukekohe. GWRC is looking at pushing north from Waikanae to Otaki and east from Upper Hutt to Timberlea. If it happens, it would mean about 70 percent of the distance between Auckland and Wellington would be electrified. The combined gap, north and south would only be around 150 kilometres. But there are obstacles to be overcome – apart from the fact that KiwiRail is investing in new diesel electric locomotives that have similar pulling power to the EFs. The Wellington network operates on DC current compared with the AC current in the central North Island and Auckland. The line between Pukekohe and Hamilton is double tracked which would add to the cost of electrification and there is bridge raising and re-signalling that would need to be carried out.

 

You must be logged in to reply

  Search thread   Image gallery
« 1 2 of 2
 
Display from:   
 

Don't forget to LIKE us on Facebook at: Railpage Facebook Feed