urbancog
Active Member
The December 2025 Procurement Pipeline for Asset Management and Maintenance Services states that Metrolinx will be doing a pilot program with a diesel-battery hybrid loco starting with procurement in early 2027.
|
|
|
GO Transit Fleet Equipment and other
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
PL1
Senior Member
Are we sure they don't mean 12027? I'm not sure this can happen in less than 2 years, but I'll concede the possibility of 10,000 years...
lastcommodore
Active Member
Probably relevant article
It... is an interesting idea, though I'm generally not for it given the battery life. At the highest this means trains can run for 30 minutes at full load without catenary, otherwise the train is now running at half propulsion.
I wonder how they will work to tackle the short life of the battery. I have significant doubts that any line will have enough catenary to keep the battery charged by 2029.
Perhaps they will run this train on a 6 car consist, so even if the battery is dead the train still has good power.
generalcanada
Senior Member
this "pilot program" can be just that. A test. We are going to have enough gaps in the network that it could be useful in the future.
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Isn't the 2nd engine for HEP?
lastcommodore
Active Member
Not an expert in locos so please take with a grain of salt, but from my research while some MPXpresses do use a separate engine for HEP, the MP54AC does not and diverts power from the prime movers
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Thanks! My info was way out of date!
WB62
Senior Member
While not exactly related to the real equipment, i bet this would still be neat to some of you
I recently purchased these old paper trains I assume were made to promote the Metrolinx rebrand in 2013:
I recently purchased these old paper trains I assume were made to promote the Metrolinx rebrand in 2013:
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
This is correct.
The MP54s are capable of operating on one or the other of the two prime movers - and in fact, they are designed to alternate between them in order to equalize their operating time - or both together. But as they don't have a separate motor for providing HEP, it thus has to come off of one of the two.
And because they use inverters rather than rotary devices to convert from AC to DC and back, they also don't have to worry about constantly running at full speed and syncing up with the 60hz required for the onboard power. Which means that they don't lose as much HP from their traction output, either.
Dan
Bordercollie
Senior Member
It can use the batteries to get the train up to speed and then charge them until it gets to the next stop. Hopefully it has regenerative charging. I bet that could reduce fuel consumption by 25-50%.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
A diesel hybrid train would presumably save fuel for the same reason a Toyota Prius saves fuel even if you never plug it in. Most obviously, it captures braking energy that would otherwise be lost as heat. The other part is that it's more efficient to run an engine consistently at a medium power than it is to run alternately at high and low power. When the train is coasting, the engine can be running at medium power to charge the battery, so that energy becomes available for acceleration in the future.
Range is not really a thing for hybrids because the only energy you need in the battery is the amount for the next time you accelerate. If you're just cruising at constant speed, the diesel engine has plenty of power to do that on its own regardless of the battery state.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
This is a good idea and such trains are known as Electro {not electric} Diesel Multiple Units {EDMU} and the term is commonly used for locomotives. These are the trains I wrote about in the GO Electrification thread.
They are NOT battery trains but rather 100% ICE vehicles. They are essentially the train equivalent to your standard {non-plugin} hybrid cars. Typically, they are controlled by speed. So, for example, the train will be 100% electric powered thru the batteries on speeds up to 80km/hr and then after that the diesel takes over. This gives them superior de/acceleration coming into stations, greatly reduces GHG & particulate matter due to most happening near stations, and results in significantly less diesel consumption.
They have several advantages over BEMU and EMUs:
1} They don't require any new charging infrastructure due to the batteries constantly being recharged while the train is running on diesel
2} They don't have the range anxiety of battery trains nor the limitation of catenary routes
3} They do not requires as many batteries to carry the same weight as BEMUs
4} They are remarkably easy and cheap to incorporate into a standard locomotive
5} They do not require special training as these legally remain ICE vehicles.
6} The batteries themselves last longer than on BEMU trains
7} They are not susceptible to power outages like both BEMU & EMU
They also have disadvantages over BEMU and EMU:
1} They are not 100% clean
2} They still require buying diesel fuel, although significantly less than current GO models.
3} They do not enjoy as fast acceleration as either EMU or catenary locomotives due to having to haul around the extra dead weight of the batteries. Although some of that weight is of set by having to carry less diesel and no catenary connections, they still weigh more on a person carried basis.
In general, EDMU are an affordable, efficient, and reliable transition technology between full electrification and the current diesel system. Of course, why ML can only manage to test 1 within 2 years on proven technology, is anyone's guess.
They are NOT battery trains but rather 100% ICE vehicles. They are essentially the train equivalent to your standard {non-plugin} hybrid cars. Typically, they are controlled by speed. So, for example, the train will be 100% electric powered thru the batteries on speeds up to 80km/hr and then after that the diesel takes over. This gives them superior de/acceleration coming into stations, greatly reduces GHG & particulate matter due to most happening near stations, and results in significantly less diesel consumption.
They have several advantages over BEMU and EMUs:
1} They don't require any new charging infrastructure due to the batteries constantly being recharged while the train is running on diesel
2} They don't have the range anxiety of battery trains nor the limitation of catenary routes
3} They do not requires as many batteries to carry the same weight as BEMUs
4} They are remarkably easy and cheap to incorporate into a standard locomotive
5} They do not require special training as these legally remain ICE vehicles.
6} The batteries themselves last longer than on BEMU trains
7} They are not susceptible to power outages like both BEMU & EMU
They also have disadvantages over BEMU and EMU:
1} They are not 100% clean
2} They still require buying diesel fuel, although significantly less than current GO models.
3} They do not enjoy as fast acceleration as either EMU or catenary locomotives due to having to haul around the extra dead weight of the batteries. Although some of that weight is of set by having to carry less diesel and no catenary connections, they still weigh more on a person carried basis.
In general, EDMU are an affordable, efficient, and reliable transition technology between full electrification and the current diesel system. Of course, why ML can only manage to test 1 within 2 years on proven technology, is anyone's guess.
lastcommodore
Active Member
This is fair, i was operating under the assumption that the battery would be charged via catenary and not by the 2nd diesel engine or regenerative braking, or that the loco would not have enough time operating under 50% output to charge the battery. But this still runs into the issue i expand on below... To run the engine at medium power and max out electric engine, would be a downgrade in power from current MP54ACs.
I am on team EDMU over BEMU as well, although i have trouble calling this an EDMU at all. I don't think this applies to this situation... This is more a electro-diesel locomotive, if that. This is more equivalent to having a diesel locomotive and an electric locomotive on the same train.
For reference, the current MP54AC's are 2x2MW ICE. This "MP54ACE" is proposing 1x2MW ICE + 1x2MW battery. In other words, this MP54ACE's acceleration would be half as powerful if driven as electric than the MP54AC (2MW electric vs. 4MW diesel). Realistically, under operation both the ICE and battery would be operating, and when coasting under 50% utilisation, the ICE would recharge the battery.
Even then, this design wont improve acceleration at all. the engine output is the same under both scenarios, 4MW, and the body is the same, so same traction
Compare that to the Siemens Chargers, which the diesel-only variants hit 3.1MW, and the electro-diesel ones hit... 3.1MW ICE, 4.2MW electric. You can't operate both at the same time, as far as i'm aware- it's either running as a diesel or running electric.
In my opinion, the best option would be to build a power car, so you have the power car and the locomotive. This would mean under diesel the locomotive is hauling around a power car for nothing, but under electric it's able to draw much more power and utilise both power car and locomotive for even more traction and output. You also don't need to reduce the power of the main diesel locomotive, while not needing to run diesel on acceleration.
Basically, i think this is at best a sidegrade for the user experience. While it gives a lot back in efficiency and reduced volume near stations, it would still be running diesel even in acceleration because the battery engine alone is not powerful enough to replace the diesel engine. Even in tandem, the power output is the same as a diesel variant.
Last edited:
reaperexpress
Senior Member
The only time the battery needs to be used is under acceleration (i.e. whenever you want more than 2MW of output), which is much less than half the time considering the trains also need to travel at constant speed, decelerate (which charges the battery as well), and stand still at stations. It doesn't take anywhere near 2MW for a GO train to cruise at constant speed.
Agreed, based on the diagrams this is not a dual-mode locomotive, but rather an ordinary diesel-electric locomotive with a battery for extra power. Or in other words, a hybrid.
I think your math seems plausible. I agree with your hypothesis that the train would not provide any noticeable improvement in user experience compared to the current 2x2MW ICE setup. It would not accelerate any faster, the only difference would be that it consumes less fuel.
Yes if their goal was to actually improve travel times, it would be ideal to create a motorized coach with batteries that could link to the locomotive, similar to the setup on the upcoming dual-mode Amtrak Airo sets for the Empire / Maple Leaf / Adirondack corridor. That would double the number of powered axles from 4 to 8 and add the battery power in addition to the full power of the locomotive. The locomotive link would allow all 8 powered axles to provide regenerative braking power to the batteries.
But based on how GO assembles their trainsets, their objective seems to be to minimize operating expenses rather than attracting more riders. They seem to be satisfied with the absolutely glacial acceleration of the current trains.
ssiguy2
Senior Member
Yes, the current acceleration on the GO fleet is anemic but one has to remember that on the RER sections, GO will not be running the 12 car monsters they have now but probably 4 or 5 car trains so acceleration will improve.
The benefit of these EDMU/Loco is that their efficiency and operational performance will improve while prices actually go down. In 10 years when batteries have twice the power density but weigh half as much, the amount of diesel required will continue to decline, as will the size of the diesel engine, and the number and weight of the batteries.
By 2050 it is very possible that the size of the diesel engines won't be much larger than one for a car. The battery technology will have progressed so far, that the engine's sole purpose will simply be to continually charge the batteries, No expensive or weather sensitive catenary for EMUs while no range anxiety or recharging infrastructure of the BEMU. They could even be 100% clean if, instead of using small diesel engines, they used alternative bio-fuels.
BTW..........There are numerous ED locos already and the Netherlands runs EDMUs on regular routes. Stadler sells them as WINK trains which is part of the FLIRT family.
The benefit of these EDMU/Loco is that their efficiency and operational performance will improve while prices actually go down. In 10 years when batteries have twice the power density but weigh half as much, the amount of diesel required will continue to decline, as will the size of the diesel engine, and the number and weight of the batteries.
By 2050 it is very possible that the size of the diesel engines won't be much larger than one for a car. The battery technology will have progressed so far, that the engine's sole purpose will simply be to continually charge the batteries, No expensive or weather sensitive catenary for EMUs while no range anxiety or recharging infrastructure of the BEMU. They could even be 100% clean if, instead of using small diesel engines, they used alternative bio-fuels.
BTW..........There are numerous ED locos already and the Netherlands runs EDMUs on regular routes. Stadler sells them as WINK trains which is part of the FLIRT family.