The GWR class 230 BMU is now on test on the Greenford branch, mainly testing the fast charger. Here's some pics I took
yesterday:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72177720315304085

A few observations:

- The train is still very much under test, with about four engineers busily working on their laptops on-board
(presumably still working on Vivarail's famously buggy software). Many of the seats are lifted to access the equipment
underneath.

- There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the outer two are electrically joined. Each power car
has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly accurately.

- The RFID location tag strips retain Vivarail branding, and the train is called the Viva Venturer, with a proper metal
name plate, not just a transfer.

- It's a three-car unit, DM-T-DM. The trailer is the most modified above the floor, with the two intermediate doors
plated over, and a disabled toilet fitted in one of the former vestibules.

- The train is already set up for service on the Greenford branch, with route maps in place internally.

- The train is slightly wider than the already wide class 165 it will replace. This may be why the corner of one car has
been scuffed. The shiny GWR dark green (looks black in most lights, of course) paintwork has also suffered scratching
from lineside vegetation. I think it'll need some cosmetic work before entering service.

- The train is about 10m longer than the two-car 165 it will replace, but there's plenty of room for it in the
platforms.

- Most of the seats are transverse, and there are bays with tables. It's 2+2, so it's a more spacious layout than the
current 2+3 165.

- It's truly silent, very different to the noisy 165s.

On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>- There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the outer two
>are electrically joined. Each power car
>has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly
>accurately.

Not sure why viva felt the need to reinvent the wheel - could have just used
the LU 4th rail system the train came with and charge from short sections of
that. Also the rails look quite low so do the collector shoes dangle down or
are they retractable? If the former it might restrict where it can go.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the outer two
>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly
>> accurately.
>
> Not sure why viva felt the need to reinvent the wheel - could have just used
> the LU 4th rail system the train came with and charge from short sections of
> that. Also the rails look quite low so do the collector shoes dangle down or
> are they retractable? If the former it might restrict where it can go.

Yes, the shoes are retracted when the train is not on charge. The gear is
mounted on the underframe, not the bogies. No high voltage components are
publicly accessible at any time, and unlike with conventional third rail,
the shoes aren't vulnerable when the train is moving.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> The GWR class 230 BMU is now on test on the Greenford branch, mainly testing the fast charger. Here's some pics I took
> yesterday:
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72177720315304085
>
> A few observations:
>
> - The train is still very much under test, with about four engineers busily working on their laptops on-board
> (presumably still working on Vivarail's famously buggy software). Many of the seats are lifted to access the equipment
> underneath.

Your photo of that appears to be the pneumatic system: valves for brakes and
doors on the left of the door, compressor on the right.

> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the outer two are electrically joined. Each power car
> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly accurately.

I'd guess you need two outer rails because the train could be either way
round. Only one may be in use at any given time.

> - The train is slightly wider than the already wide class 165 it will replace. This may be why the corner of one car has
> been scuffed. The shiny GWR dark green (looks black in most lights, of course) paintwork has also suffered scratching
> from lineside vegetation. I think it'll need some cosmetic work before entering service.

Possibly the vegetation on the Long Marston branch hasn't been kept under
control. Seems less likely on the GWML.

Theo

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The GWR class 230 BMU is now on test on the Greenford branch, mainly
>> testing the fast charger. Here's some pics I took
>> yesterday:
>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72177720315304085
>>
>> A few observations:
>>
>> - The train is still very much under test, with about four engineers
>> busily working on their laptops on-board
>> (presumably still working on Vivarail's famously buggy software). Many
>> of the seats are lifted to access the equipment
>> underneath.
>
> Your photo of that appears to be the pneumatic system: valves for brakes and
> doors on the left of the door, compressor on the right.

I wonder if any of that kit was modified by Vivarail during the
conversation?

>
>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>> outer two are electrically joined. Each power car
>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly accurately.
>
> I'd guess you need two outer rails because the train could be either way
> round. Only one may be in use at any given time.

Yes, I assume the centre rail is the high voltage (positive?) line. The
outer two will be the neutral lines. I've not figured out why they're
deliberately shorter at one end.

>
>> - The train is slightly wider than the already wide class 165 it will
>> replace. This may be why the corner of one car has
>> been scuffed. The shiny GWR dark green (looks black in most lights, of
>> course) paintwork has also suffered scratching
>> from lineside vegetation. I think it'll need some cosmetic work before entering service.
>
> Possibly the vegetation on the Long Marston branch hasn't been kept under
> control. Seems less likely on the GWML.

Yes, though I'm not sure where else it's been test running before getting
to the branch. Perhaps some was on freight-only lines?

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The GWR class 230 BMU is now on test on the Greenford branch, mainly
>>> testing the fast charger. Here's some pics I took
>>> yesterday:
>>> https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/albums/72177720315304085
>>>
>>> A few observations:
>>>
>>> - The train is still very much under test, with about four engineers
>>> busily working on their laptops on-board
>>> (presumably still working on Vivarail's famously buggy software). Many
>>> of the seats are lifted to access the equipment
>>> underneath.
>>
>> Your photo of that appears to be the pneumatic system: valves for brakes and
>> doors on the left of the door, compressor on the right.
>
> I wonder if any of that kit was modified by Vivarail during the
> conversation?

Conversion!

> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the outer two
>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly
>> accurately.

What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
a 'shore supply' cable.

The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
but that should be easy to organise.

If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
the shelf' industrial switch gear.

On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>> outer two
>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>> fairly
>>> accurately.
>
> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
> a 'shore supply' cable.
>
> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
> but that should be easy to organise.
>
> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>
>

I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?

nib

Matthew Geier <matthew@sleeper.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the outer two
>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop fairly
>>> accurately.
>
> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
> a 'shore supply' cable.

I think that's very unlikely. There appear to be only two power cables
leading to the charger island, one to the centre rail, and the other to one
of the outside rails, which is connected by cable to the other outer rail.
In any case, the power is coming from the battery bank in the white
container, and charging DC batteries, so it makes sense to stick with DC.
I think this is the arrangement in many BEV charger stations, so it should
use standard kit.

>
> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
> but that should be easy to organise.

Yes, that's clearly the system, using the yellow RFID strips to detect the
train's presence above the charger rails. There's probably some
hand-shaking to ensure that the power is only turned on when the train is
in position, and stationary; when the driver wants to power up the train to
head back, the power will be cut, and shoes retracted, before the train
moves.

>
> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
> the shelf' industrial switch gear.

Remember, the charging current is coming from a large bank of DC batteries,
not the mains.

nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
> On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>>> outer two
>>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>>> fairly
>>>> accurately.
>>
>> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
>> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
>> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
>> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
>> a 'shore supply' cable.
>>
>> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
>> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
>> but that should be easy to organise.
>>
>> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
>> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
>> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
>> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>>
>>
>
> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?

Exactly

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>>>> outer two
>>>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>>>> fairly
>>>>> accurately.
>>>
>>> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
>>> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
>>> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
>>> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
>>> a 'shore supply' cable.
>>>
>>> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
>>> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
>>> but that should be easy to organise.
>>>
>>> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
>>> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
>>> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
>>> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>
> Exactly
>
>

Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>>>>> outer two
>>>>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>>>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>>>>> fairly
>>>>>> accurately.
>>>>
>>>> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
>>>> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
>>>> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
>>>> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
>>>> a 'shore supply' cable.
>>>>
>>>> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
>>>> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
>>>> but that should be easy to organise.
>>>>
>>>> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
>>>> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
>>>> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
>>>> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>>
>> Exactly
>>
>>
>
> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?
>
>

Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
its actual name is?
Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil

GH

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>>>>>> outer two
>>>>>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>>>>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>>>>>> fairly
>>>>>>> accurately.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
>>>>> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
>>>>> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
>>>>> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
>>>>> a 'shore supply' cable.
>>>>>
>>>>> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
>>>>> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
>>>>> but that should be easy to organise.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
>>>>> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
>>>>> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
>>>>> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>>>
>>> Exactly
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
>> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?
>>
>>
>
> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
> its actual name is?
> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>

I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
when the train was over it?

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>>>>> outer two
>>>>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>>>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>>>>> fairly
>>>>>> accurately.
>>>>
>>>> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
>>>> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
>>>> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
>>>> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
>>>> a 'shore supply' cable.
>>>>
>>>> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
>>>> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
>>>> but that should be easy to organise.
>>>>
>>>> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
>>>> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
>>>> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
>>>> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>>
>> Exactly
>>
>>
>
> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?

I assume so.

On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:01 GMT
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
>> its actual name is?
>> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
>> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
>> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>>
>
>I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
>Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
>publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
>when the train was over it?

Whats less publicly accessible about the way its done now? Seems to me its
a propriety pickup system - good luck getting the parts in 20 years time -
which also prevents running as a standard EMU on the 3rd/4th rail network.
Can't see the advantage.

On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:03 GMT
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 2024-03-08 21:44, Matthew Geier wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 08 Mar 2024 14:58:26 +0000
>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> - There are three aluminium power rails, not two. It looks like the
>>>>>>> outer two
>>>>>>> are electrically joined. Each power car
>>>>>>> has its own set. They're fairly short, so trains will need to stop
>>>>>>> fairly
>>>>>>> accurately.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's the chance that the charger is 'standard' industrial 400v 3 phase
>>>>> ?. Switch gear is easy and common - 'standard' 3 phase sockets can be
>>>>> had up to 63amps a phase relatively easily meaning the train could be
>>>>> plugged into a more is less standard 3 phase socket in the workshops via
>>>>> a 'shore supply' cable.
>>>>>
>>>>> The external charging point would need some sort of the pilot signal to
>>>>> turn it on so that the bus bars are not live when a train isn't on top,
>>>>> but that should be easy to organise.
>>>>>
>>>>> If they go for some sort of DC fast charger similar to electric cars
>>>>> they have a whole lot more mucking about developing custom equipment. If
>>>>> they stick with 400v 3 phase AC, most of the 'kit' will be standard 'off
>>>>> the shelf' industrial switch gear.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>>>
>>> Exactly
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
>> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?
>
>I assume so.

The correct polarity issue was solved by bridge rectifiers 100 years or so
ago and these days with modern electronics it shouldn't be an issue at all.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:03 GMT
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>
>>>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>>>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>>>>
>>>> Exactly
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
>>> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?
>>
>> I assume so.
>
> The correct polarity issue was solved by bridge rectifiers 100 years or so
> ago and these days with modern electronics it shouldn't be an issue at all.
>
>

I don’t think polarity is the issue anyway ,the + contact being in the
centre will aways be positioned correctly whatever way round the train
is,the - contact. is offset so you need to allow for both possible
positions the - negative contact may be in. I wonder if Recliner has more
photos of the rails.
The one I have seen already shows some slide marks on one negative rail, if
the train hasn’t been turned yet I would expect the other to be
unblemished.
As for you bridge rectifier that is a device for converting AC
to DC, fat lot of good in a circuit from a battery bank.
I did find Tweeds statement a little strange, replace the last word
“Polarity “with Position it makes better sense. Typo perhaps?

GH

On 09/03/2024 11:15, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:01 GMT
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
>>> its actual name is?
>>> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
>>> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
>>> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>>>
>>
>> I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
>> Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
>> publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
>> when the train was over it?
>
> Whats less publicly accessible about the way its done now?

Doesn't have a current rail to the side of the tracks.

Seems to me its
> a propriety pickup system - good luck getting the parts in 20 years time -
> which also prevents running as a standard EMU on the 3rd/4th rail network.
> Can't see the advantage.
>
>

Is it even possible to drive it direct from an external power source?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 09/03/2024 11:15, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:01 GMT
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
>>>> its actual name is?
>>>> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
>>>> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
>>>> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
>>> Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
>>> publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
>>> when the train was over it?
>>
>> Whats less publicly accessible about the way its done now?
>
>
> Doesn't have a current rail to the side of the tracks.

And I think the only high voltage rail is the centre one, which has the
yellow plastic insulator walls on both sides, insulated noses at both ends
and the neutral rails outside. So even if a suicidal trespasser tried to
touch the high voltage rail with a metal bar, or an inquisitive small
animal took a close interest, it would be quite hard to touch the live
metal rail.

>
> Seems to me its
>> a propriety pickup system - good luck getting the parts in 20 years time -
>> which also prevents running as a standard EMU on the 3rd/4th rail network.
>> Can't see the advantage.
>>
>>
>
> Is it even possible to drive it direct from an external power source?

I don't think so, and the retractable carbon ceramic pickup shoes are
designed to work only when the train is stationary.

However, I think it would be perfectly possible to design a conventional
third rail version without the fast charge capability. It would work like
the Merseyrail 777 BEMUs and would be suitable for trains that run on an
electrified line for most of the route, but need to run on to a
non-electrified section or branch. They could get fully charged during
their longer periods running on the mains, rather than needing a fast
re-charge while the unit prepares for the next run on entirely
non-electrified tracks.

On 09/03/2024 12:29, Recliner wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 09/03/2024 11:15, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:01 GMT
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
>>>>> its actual name is?
>>>>> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
>>>>> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
>>>>> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
>>>> Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
>>>> publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
>>>> when the train was over it?
>>>
>>> Whats less publicly accessible about the way its done now?
>>
>>
>> Doesn't have a current rail to the side of the tracks.
>
> And I think the only high voltage rail is the centre one, which has the
> yellow plastic insulator walls on both sides, insulated noses at both ends
> and the neutral rails outside. So even if a suicidal trespasser tried to
> touch the high voltage rail with a metal bar, or an inquisitive small
> animal took a close interest, it would be quite hard to touch the live
> metal rail.
>
>>
>> Seems to me its
>>> a propriety pickup system - good luck getting the parts in 20 years time -
>>> which also prevents running as a standard EMU on the 3rd/4th rail network.
>>> Can't see the advantage.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Is it even possible to drive it direct from an external power source?
>
> I don't think so, and the retractable carbon ceramic pickup shoes are
> designed to work only when the train is stationary.
>
> However, I think it would be perfectly possible to design a conventional
> third rail version without the fast charge capability. It would work like
> the Merseyrail 777 BEMUs and would be suitable for trains that run on an
> electrified line for most of the route, but need to run on to a
> non-electrified section or branch. They could get fully charged during
> their longer periods running on the mains, rather than needing a fast
> re-charge while the unit prepares for the next run on entirely
> non-electrified tracks.

Given that, as far as the GWR are concerned, their versions, apart from
at Greenford, are not going to come within 100 miles of 3rd and 4th rail
systems; there's no reason to worry about compatibility.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:01 GMT
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
>>> its actual name is?
>>> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
>>> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
>>> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>>>
>>
>> I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
>> Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
>> publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
>> when the train was over it?
>
> Whats less publicly accessible about the way its done now? Seems to me its
> a propriety pickup system - good luck getting the parts in 20 years time -
> which also prevents running as a standard EMU on the 3rd/4th rail network.
> Can't see the advantage.
>
>
>

One is that it can’t be in a position to breakdown on a busy railway which
electrified lines tend to be.
The various versions of the rebuilt District stock haven’t been that
reliable so far and that includes the straight electric versions on the
I.O.W and its not all down to flooding.Like you I think for that short
operation a body refurbishment would have been enough keeping the simple
traction controls rather than modern software controlled stuff that a man
with a spanner and hammer can’t fix.

This experiment is more a proof of concept exercise with GWR purchasing the
concept with some old trains thrown in for good measure. They won’t be
trying to flog any to the operators of the third rail network or LUL. If
the concept works well then it may be introduced elsewhere but on routes
like to Marlow or Truro-Falmouth which will never have third rail
electrification but could have odd bits of raised ballast that old
fashioned dangly shoes could foul so you need to add the cost of route
clearance. And if the concept gets that far it will likely be new build ,
it won’t be long before the remaining D78 cars have been sitting idle for a
decade. It was a good idea at the time to get some more life out of them
but has taken too long to be considered a success.
Adrian Shooter was highly regarded in the Rail industry and seemed to be a
genius to many, the same could be said of IK Brunel. Perhaps Vivarail was
Adrians Atmospheric Railway moment.

GH

On 2024-03-09 11:57, Marland wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:03 GMT
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from stationary
>>>>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>>>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current control?
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two pickups
>>>> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct polarity?
>>>
>>> I assume so.
>>
>> The correct polarity issue was solved by bridge rectifiers 100 years or so
>> ago and these days with modern electronics it shouldn't be an issue at all.
>>
>>
>
> I don’t think polarity is the issue anyway ,the + contact being in the
> centre will aways be positioned correctly whatever way round the train
> is,the - contact. is offset so you need to allow for both possible
> positions the - negative contact may be in. I wonder if Recliner has more
> photos of the rails.
> The one I have seen already shows some slide marks on one negative rail, if
> the train hasn’t been turned yet I would expect the other to be
> unblemished.
> As for you bridge rectifier that is a device for converting AC
> to DC, fat lot of good in a circuit from a battery bank.
> I did find Tweeds statement a little strange, replace the last word
> “Polarity “with Position it makes better sense. Typo perhaps?
>
> GH

Obviously you can use a bridge rectifier to make a DC circuit work with
either polarity, it is often done at low powers. The down side is that
is means it is impossible to know which side of the DC after the
rectifier is at ground potential, even if the input DC is referenced to
ground.

nib

On 2024-03-09 13:08, nib wrote:
> On 2024-03-09 11:57, Marland wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:03 GMT
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from
>>>>>>> stationary
>>>>>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>>>>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current
>>>>>>> control?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Exactly
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two
>>>>> pickups
>>>>> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct
>>>>> polarity?
>>>>
>>>> I assume so.
>>>
>>> The correct polarity issue was solved by bridge rectifiers 100 years
>>> or so
>>> ago and these days with modern electronics it shouldn't be an issue
>>> at all.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I don’t think polarity is the issue anyway ,the +  contact being in the
>> centre will aways be positioned correctly whatever way round the train
>> is,the - contact. is offset so you need to allow for both possible
>> positions the - negative contact may be in. I wonder if Recliner has more
>> photos of the rails.
>> The one I have seen already shows some slide marks on one negative
>> rail, if
>> the train hasn’t been turned yet I would expect the other to be
>> unblemished.
>> As for you bridge rectifier that is a device for converting AC
>> to DC, fat lot of good in a circuit from a battery bank.
>> I did find Tweeds statement a little strange, replace the last word
>> “Polarity “with Position it makes better sense. Typo perhaps?
>>
>> GH
>
> Obviously you can use a bridge rectifier to make a DC circuit work with
> either polarity, it is often done at low powers. The down side is that
> is means it is impossible to know which side of the DC after the
> rectifier is at ground potential, even if the input DC is referenced to
> ground.
>
> nib

My final sentence is mostly rubbish! It's the wiring from the contact
shoes to the rectifier that has to be treated as hot both sides.

nib

On Sat, 9 Mar 2024 12:50:28 +0000, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 09/03/2024 12:29, Recliner wrote:
>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 09/03/2024 11:15, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:01 GMT
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> Anyone know if this operation by GWR is done by a subsidiary and if so what
>>>>>> its actual name is?
>>>>>> Then you could see if anything is shown at the patent office.
>>>>>> Interestingly the Viva Rail oneGB2574264 shows the original plan to be LUL
>>>>>> 4 rail style which would have pleased Mutley Neil
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm pretty sure it evolved to the current arrangement while it was still
>>>>> Vivarail. Perhaps someone decided that it would not be acceptable to have a
>>>>> publicly accessible external high voltage rail, even if it was only live
>>>>> when the train was over it?
>>>>
>>>> Whats less publicly accessible about the way its done now?
>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't have a current rail to the side of the tracks.
>>
>> And I think the only high voltage rail is the centre one, which has the
>> yellow plastic insulator walls on both sides, insulated noses at both ends
>> and the neutral rails outside. So even if a suicidal trespasser tried to
>> touch the high voltage rail with a metal bar, or an inquisitive small
>> animal took a close interest, it would be quite hard to touch the live
>> metal rail.
>>
>>>
>>> Seems to me its
>>>> a propriety pickup system - good luck getting the parts in 20 years time -
>>>> which also prevents running as a standard EMU on the 3rd/4th rail network.
>>>> Can't see the advantage.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is it even possible to drive it direct from an external power source?
>>
>> I don't think so, and the retractable carbon ceramic pickup shoes are
>> designed to work only when the train is stationary.
>>
>> However, I think it would be perfectly possible to design a conventional
>> third rail version without the fast charge capability. It would work like
>> the Merseyrail 777 BEMUs and would be suitable for trains that run on an
>> electrified line for most of the route, but need to run on to a
>> non-electrified section or branch. They could get fully charged during
>> their longer periods running on the mains, rather than needing a fast
>> re-charge while the unit prepares for the next run on entirely
>> non-electrified tracks.
>
>Given that, as far as the GWR are concerned, their versions, apart from
>at Greenford, are not going to come within 100 miles of 3rd and 4th rail
>systems; there's no reason to worry about compatibility.

One possibility would be the Reading to Gatwick North Downs line. They might use 3rd rail electrified stock (ie, not
230s) and add batteries to them. No need for a fast charge, just re-charge while running on the third rail.

nib <news@caffnib.co.uk> wrote:
> On 2024-03-09 13:08, nib wrote:
>> On 2024-03-09 11:57, Marland wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 11:08:03 GMT
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I thought the idea was that the trains were fast charged from
>>>>>>>> stationary
>>>>>>>> batteries to remove the need for high-current mains. So it'll be DC
>>>>>>>> stationary battery to DC train battery, with special DC current
>>>>>>>> control?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Exactly
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are there three pickup rails simply to allow a connection from two
>>>>>> pickups
>>>>>> even if the vehicle is turned, and this always retain the correct
>>>>>> polarity?
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume so.
>>>>
>>>> The correct polarity issue was solved by bridge rectifiers 100 years
>>>> or so
>>>> ago and these days with modern electronics it shouldn't be an issue
>>>> at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don’t think polarity is the issue anyway ,the +  contact being in the
>>> centre will aways be positioned correctly whatever way round the train
>>> is,the - contact. is offset so you need to allow for both possible
>>> positions the - negative contact may be in. I wonder if Recliner has more
>>> photos of the rails.
>>> The one I have seen already shows some slide marks on one negative
>>> rail, if
>>> the train hasn’t been turned yet I would expect the other to be
>>> unblemished.
>>> As for you bridge rectifier that is a device for converting AC
>>> to DC, fat lot of good in a circuit from a battery bank.
>>> I did find Tweeds statement a little strange, replace the last word
>>> “Polarity “with Position it makes better sense. Typo perhaps?
>>>
>>> GH
>>
>> Obviously you can use a bridge rectifier to make a DC circuit work with
>> either polarity, it is often done at low powers. The down side is that
>> is means it is impossible to know which side of the DC after the
>> rectifier is at ground potential, even if the input DC is referenced to
>> ground.
>>
>> nib
>
> My final sentence is mostly rubbish! It's the wiring from the contact
> shoes to the rectifier that has to be treated as hot both sides.
>
> nib
>

If you didn’t care about polarity you could have to rails equally offset
from the centre line. A power diode will drop about 0.7V so with two in
circuit that’s 1.4V. Multiply that by the charging current and you have a
not insignificant heatsinking problem and just something else to go wrong.
Anyone know the charge current?