Talk:List of railway electrification systems

WKD (EKD) in Warsaw, Poland

I think it has 600 V DC. http://www.kolej.one.pl/index.php?dzial=linie&id=329&okno=historia&od=0&do=31 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.24.167.98 (talk) 17:11, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Chetchnya? No -- The Czech Republic

User:RHaworth just deleted "Tschechien" (which I assume refers to Chetchnya). I could see doing this because Russia still lays claim to Chetchnya, but the deletion piqued my interest none-the-less.

What does everyone think? Or is there a more-obvious reason that I'm missing (such as "Chechnya was included here instead!")?

Atlant 12:40, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• According to TU Chemnitz, Tschechien is Czechia or the Czech Republic. I have re-instated it.

I would hate to see edit wars over Chetchnya (if there are any) spill over on to this page - "former Soviet Union" covers Chetchnya without any controversy - I hope. (The babel fish had not translated "GUS-Staaten" and it took me a while to work out what they were.)

-- RHaworth 18:36, 2005 Apr 4 (UTC)

The Czech Republic? I never would have guessed! On Wikipedia, you can learn something new every day! :-)

And I, like you, don't want to see "spillage" of any flame wars -- thanks for doing the research and taking action! (I've updated our local header here in the talk page.)

Atlant 18:42, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

750 V DC versus 25 KV AC for modern city sytems

750 v dc (or rather 600 v dc) was the standard for tramcars. Later, the same was adopted for underground metro as well as elevated LRT/MRTS systems as well possibly due to ready availability of the technology. But now AC supply voltage systems and compatible rail traction vevicles are available, I believe. What are the comparitive technical and commercial features and what are the current trends worldwide?

In the UK, the HSE has banned any new third rail systems on safety grounds, only permitting extensions of existing systems. Thus leaving the choice to be what system of overhead electrification (which i do believe has varied - see the Tyne and Wear Metro (the first) compared to Midlands Metro, the Croydon Tram link, The Nottingham Tram, The Manchester Tram, etc --Pickle 15:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

1500v DC in the UK

As i understand it some original form of electrification from Liverpool Street to Shenfield, around the 1930s using (i think) 1500v DC. I've only found a handful of mentions of it eg (p11 of [1] ) and any more details would be appreciated (eg when it was replaced by 25Kv AC) --Pickle 15:19, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

It is mentioned here on p10 [2] (1959) that 1500v DC has been started in the early 1950s and when the rest of the Liverpool street system is electrified to 25Kv AC (adopted standard in 1954 BTC modernisation plan) the 1500v DC system will have to replaced. --Pickle 15:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

on p34 [3] (1959), it states Liverpool street to Shenfield was electrified at 1500v DC in 1949, and this system was extended Chemslford and Southend Victoria in 1956. Passengers and receipts "more than doubled".Pickle 16:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

The line from Liverpool Street to Shenfield (including the line from Fenchurch Street to Bow Junction via Gas Factory Jn) was electrified in 1949. In 1956 the system was extended from Shenfield to Chelmsford and Southend Victoria. All of this, apart from the Shenfield to Chelmsford section was converted to 6.25kV, 50Hz AC, Overhead in 1960. The Shenfield to Chelmsford section was converted to 25kV, 50Hz AC, Overhead in 1962. The rest of the system was converted from 6.25 kV to 25kV between 1976 and 1980 in various stages. ALECTRIC451 23:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Southern Railway

I think the 'Southern Railway' references should be replaced with something linking to the present day UK rail network and not a company that hasn't existed since 1948 - say 'southern region' or 'southern and merseyside areas of British Rail' for 750V DC. User:Tom walker11:04 23 August 2006

I don't think anyone has developed a phrase that nicely encompasses the geographic areas in the UK that still use third rail. back then it was southern, the merseryrail system and tyneside (and 4 rail for commuter network out of Euston and broad street to Watford junction). the southern region of BR has been abolished and no phrase encompasses the area severed. Network rial has its "routes" but that hardly helps (as there are 3 with third rail, the non third rial bits of LSWR around Salisbury hived off), we've also gained 3rd rail on the tunnel into moorgate from kings cross - the Northern City Line) but lost tyneside electrics. I've approached it differently in this new article (which is far form complete) - Railway electrification in Great Britain. Pickle 16:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

According to information in Underground News (March 2007, p151), as published by the London Underground Railway Society the old Southern area was split into 3 areas. The inner includes the locations where LUL trains share tracks, and is electrified at 660v dc. Then there is a grading area which is electrified at 690v dc and the rest of the system is at 750v dc. Spsmiler 11:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)spsmiler

LUL dosen't share many lines (WLL with district and NLL with district into richmond), but it worth a mention at the same point as the Watford Dc line shared with the Barkerloo line. Pickle 14:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The Southern Region was (and still is) split into three maintenance areas: Kent, Sussex and Wessex. It has been this way since 1948 (at least), and will not change. The inner London area is electrified at 660V, and does grade to 750V, but it is more complicated than 660-690-750, as it depends on the rectifier type and the tappings available. By the time you get to the M25 motorway, the change is more or less complete. I do have a detailed map, but to explain it would take more text then this article needs. To say that there is a grading area is sufficient. There are eleven interfaces between Network Rail and LUL (but not all are electrified). They are at Queens Park, Stonebridge Park, Waterloo & City Line, Wimbledon Park, Wimbledon Station, East Putney, Putney Bridge, Acton Lane Junction (between Turnham Green & Gunnersbury on the way to Richmond), Harrow South Junction, Amersham (Mantles Wood) and West Ruislip. The line north of Queens Park on the Bakerloo line is technically Network Rail, so the connection at Watford does not count (but it might do if LUL runs north of Harrow & Wealdstone), in which case the interface at Stonebridge Park Depot would disappear. Like I said, its complicated!! ALECTRIC451 17:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I meant to say south of the river! I appreciate it's very complex!!! Pickle 13:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Venezuela

Yesterday, october 15 2006, Venezuela has opened the first electric train line (ignoring subways) in almost a century, connecting the Capital city of Caracas with the town of Cua in the south. Future growth will connect this town (and Caracas) with the rest of the country, including all major cities and towns. Exact technical details for this line were not given, but we can safely assume 20kVA 60Hz because: 1) It is based on Japanese techonology; 2) they mentioned 20000 volts; 3) we use 60hz for alternating current. This is the first 41 Kilometers of a national plan for building at least 13600 Km (for the entire country); most likely to use the same technology. The system clearly shows the use of two overhead wires; maybe something else in the ground? Here is an article.

Surely 25kV not 20kVA! Tabletop 23:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Improvements and 3-Ph.traction

Today I find the list in a mess which I cannot follow, i.e. the bottom lists for non-standard systems repeat a heading such as 1500V dc which is a standard system. Another misunderstanding is the word current: does it stand for actual? which is not true, as the list is of actual and obsolete systems, or for electrical current? which is redundant. So a plea to the original writer: rearrange everything in order. Please simplify headings:it's better 1,500Vdc than 1500 V, d.c. How about using electrical drawing notation for ac ? Remember the bars crossing the circuit line to indicate lines? 1 bar =1 line, 2 bars =2 lines, 3bars =3 lines, so 25,000V/50 Hz for single-phase, and 3,600V///16.7Hz for three-phase. Please change 16 2/3 to 16.7 everywhere, as the metric system allows decimals only and fractions are deprecated. It's true German Railways only aligned themselves in 1995, but there is no point in continuing with this mistake.

Here's a full list of 3-phase traction:

   ?  V///??Hz Siemens Factory Experiment 1892 (variable V and F)
   200V///25Hz Panama Canal 1915
   350V///40Hz Lugano Tramway 1895
   460V///60Hz Panama Canal Authority circa 1970's
   500V///??Hz Ganz Factory Experiment 1896
   550V///40Hz Gornergratbahn originally 1898
   725V///50Hz Gornergratbahn currently  (active)
   750V///40Hz Burgdorf-Thun  1899
   800V///60Hz Corcovado Rack Rly, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (active)
 1,125V///50Hz Matterhorn Rly and Jungfrau Rly (CH)(both active) 
 3,000V///50Hz Chemin de Fer de la Rhune (F)  (active)
 3,000V///15Hz Valtellina electrification in N.Italy FS 1902-1917
 3,300V///16.7Hz Simplon Tunnel and swiss links, SBB 1906-1930
 3,000V///15.8Hz Valtellina FS 1917-1930
 3,600V///16.7Hz Valtellina FS 1930-1953
 3,600V///16.7Hz Genoa-Turin, Turin-Frejus Tunnel-Modane(F),and
 other FS lines in Piedmont and Riviera Ligure from 1910 to 1976
 3,600V///16.7Hz Trento-Bolzano-Brennero, Bolzano-Merano FS 1929-1965
 3,600V///16.7Hz Genoa-Leghorn and Fornovo antenna FS 1926-1948
 3,600V///16.7Hz Bologna-Porretta-Firenze FS 1927-1935
 3,600V///16.7Hz Sondrio-Tirano (Ferrovia Alta Valtellina) 1932-1980
 5,200V///25Hz Gergal-SantaFe FC Sur - Spain
 6,600V///25Hz Cascade Range (Great Northern) - USA 1909-1927
 7,000V///50Hz experimental switchover Turin-Bussoleno FS 1927-1928
10,000V///45Hz Roma-Sulmona FS 1929-1944
10,000V///50Hz Berlin-Lichtenhain 1898-1901 (variable voltage and frequency)
14,000V///50Hz Zossen-Marienfelde 1901-1904 (variable voltage between 
     10,000 and 14,000 volt and frequency between 38 and 48 hertz)

The above must fit as a whole sub-table, I reckon. Please Make wikipedia excellent! Ciao from Dario Romani daromany@tiscali.it 17:53 10 feb 2007 amended 13 feb 2007

I have made most of the recent changes, and I respond as follows:

(1) "Today I find the list in a mess which I cannot follow". The list has been improved, but it still a "work in progress". The single table, that was almost impossible to read, has been replaced by many, simpler tables, and the formatting improved. I have also given better and clearer information on each system (i.e. country and location).

(2) The original table has not yet been fully decomposed into separate tables, this is why the 1500V d.c. system appears twice. I aim to complete the decomposition soon, and then the original table will be removed.

(3) I am not sure what you mean about "current"?

(4) The actual and obsolete systems are based on information provided in the original table. By your words, you are providing evidence of how poor the original table was.

(5) "it's better 1,500Vdc than 1500 V, d.c.": A little pedantic, but problem. Do it yourself!

(6) "16 2/3 to 16.7". Again, a little pedantic, but I have no major issues. So, change it yourself!!

I believe that I have improved the table. If you think otherwise then you can revert it. I am happy to provide a copy of the article as it was before I started changing it (for the better). --ALECTRIC451 17:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

OK calm down people - the table was very large and unwiedly and needed work on. Slowly the new tables are shaping up but aren't there yet. You can still see the old versions by trawling through the page's hsitory - eg http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=List_of_current_systems_for_electric_rail_traction&oldid=78284320 When we get there we can then sor tout the little things, such as whether active and inactive should be sepreated, standard and non standard voltages is the best approach, etc Pickle 18:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Continuing on 3-Phase Traction

I forgot to mention Panama Canal Authority 200V///25Hz system, which drew power from the running rails and two other surface rails. From their website www.pancanal.com, it appears that today's operations are quite different, so I have asked them for details. There are many lacks in the article as it concerns many systems: for instance, in Italy we had quite few 6,600V/25Hz systems. Also, Costa Rica had a unique 15,000V/20Hz system by AEG from 1930 until the '70's. Ciao from Dario Romani daromany@tiscali.it 17:02 11 feb 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.221.9.209 (talk) 16:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Update on Panama

Very kindly Panama Canal Authority, in the person of Maria E. Ruiz, Engineer in Charge of Locomotives, have informed me that today's supply is 460V///60Hz, from the running rails and two flush contact rails, one outside and one inside. So this must also be mentioned in the uncommon supply systems. This can be seen on their website.

A further point on uncommon supply systems: the 3 overhead conductors on one side were not limited to the experimental German lines and Bahntagebau Gruhlwerk, but were common in many industrial works. I remember one factory close to the Aversa-Napoli mainline which had such a system until the '80's.

As for other amendments, I will login as wikipedia contributor and make as many to differentiate this from "Liste der gegenwaertigen Systeme fur elektrische Schiene Zugkraft" in the One Million Facts website if no one else does it.

Ciao from Dario Romani daromany at tiscali dot it 12:46 13 feb 2007

List is very much improved

The list has now a character of its own, and is easily readable. Thanks. I suggest to add a 3-phase list on its own, from the proof-table above.

In the meanders of change, the private railway Rheinbraun AG now appears under Russia instead of Germany, but is actually 6,000V/50Hz not 6,250V (see http://de.wiki.x.io/wiki/Schienenfahrzeuge_von_Rheinbraun).

As far as 6,000Vdc in Russia is concerned, it was only a temporary experiment, and eventually no line has been converted from 3,000Vdc.

Ciao from Dario Romani 17:07 CEST 15 feb 2007

"Today I find the list in a mess which I cannot follow ..."

"So a plea to the original writer: rearrange everything in order ..."

--ALECTRIC451 17:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I have made the three changes above 6000V and 6250V. The list is just about perfect to my knowledge, thanks to ALECTRIC451.

Ciao from Dario Romani 19:47 CEST 25 feb 2007

Pakistan

What about Pakistan?

Tabletop 23:53, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

DC, two electric rails for current supply

"(rv, tube is 630V dc 4 rail (already listed above), IIRC; one rail is +ve and the extra 4th rail -ve (ie return rather than using the running rails))"

Like in Milan...and it couldn't be different.

And I think that on Paris (Lyon, Marseille, Toulouse, Montréal, ...) rubber tyred lines return is via the traditional steel rails.

Coccodrillo 17:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:Pickle UK#List of current systems for electric rail traction for more talk / reply to above. Pickle 18:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Bordeaux tram APS uses two rails for power supply and return. So have amended the page. The two rails are clearly visible in this image on the Wikipedia Commons

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image%3ABordeaux-aps%2Bisolation%26joint.jpg

Simon Citytransport.info 20:05, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Bordeaux uses one conductor rail, return current runs via the standard rail. The greatest part of the netowrk uses a traditional overhead line. Coccodrillo 22:24, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Amtrak NEC

Amtrak Northeast Corridor is listed three times:

• 11000 / 25 Hz (DC to NYC)
• 12500 / 60 Hz (not specified)
• 25000 / 60 Hz (New Haven to Boston)

I suspect the first and third are correct. I wonder about the second. Rees11 15:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

What point are you trying to make??? Why not go an do some research and then tell us. Or is this a, "why don't use guys look this up for me, because I want to know, but I've got to go out and have some fun, and I really need to someone to cover for me." Canterberry 15:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The middle one looks odd, on the voltage but the 60Hz i think is on New Jersey bits of extended electrification (more research needed) 91.111.115.161 (talk) 19:54, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The table lists "Metro-North Railroad New York City to New Haven Amtrak NEC trains also operate on these tracks" as 25kV 60 Hz. I believe that is incorrect. This segment is 12.5 kV 60 Hz. (It was 25 Hz originally). It is the missing middle segment in the list above. Here is a ref [4]. Also see AEM-7.--agr (talk) 23:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

These days, the trolley voltage in the "25 Hz" region has been raised to 12 KV. See Amtrak's 25 Hz traction power system. Atlant (talk) 17:09, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Overhead nonstandard

Any objections if I split this into AC & DC? Hugo999 (talk) 22:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

koklota metro

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Kolkata_Metro and their website both say it is still on DC give them a call and ask them if you please :) other than Delhi metro none of the mass transport rails within a city use AC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.18.17.40 (talk) 09:16, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

3000 V in Germany

I find this "National Standard, although near future some lines convert to 3kV DC (north) or 25kV AC (south), Planned new High Speed Lines (including 1520mm broad gauge) will use 25 kV AC" in the 15kV/16.7 Hz table for Germany.

Is there any evidence of lines in Germany being converted from 15 kV to 3 kV or to 25 kV? Or has this entry moved to a wrong table cell? Also, what are the 1520mm-gauge lines in Germany?

Btw. I understand that Germany and Switzerland have changed the frequency from $16{\tfrac {2}{3}}$ Hz to 16.7 Hz--Bk1 168 (talk) 14:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I have seen that we have a strange guy who correlates railroad electrification systems to nordic, alpine and mediterranic races or so, which I think most of us agree is quite absurd. So I assume that this mention of 3kV and 25 kV for Germany has been introduced in an act of vandalism or something that at least looks like vandalism to me by that IP-address-user. So I removed it. Hope that is ok.--Bk1 168 (talk) 06:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

15 kV in Mexico

I have never heard of this. Is this just a mistake or is there any evidence for usage of 15 kV/16.x Hz in Mexico. I have a tendency to remove this line in a week or so, unless somebody has reasons to keep it.--Bk1 168 (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

There is no 50kV electrification in India

Contrary to what the table claims there is no 50kV electrification in India. The article quoted says that 2^25kV is being installed. That is statement about a specific power feeding setup. The catenary voltage is 25kV. Most modern 25kV systems are actually fed using the 2*25kV setup. So the entry about Indian Railways should be removed from the50kV table. (jis (talk) 21:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC))

Agreed. Fixed it, preserving the reference to the quoted article. Tim PF (talk) 14:20, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Systems using standard voltages

See also: Railway electrification system § Voltage

The Systems using standard voltages appears to have grown to include several non-standard voltages, and some (eg 50kV) are listed in both sections. I suspect that it is because the standard voltages were only referenced, rather than itemised. So for the moment, I've added the above {{see also}} tag to the start of the section, where the standard voltages are tabulated. I did think about copying the table in, but if it's going to be used in more than one location, it probably should be converted to a template, and then it'd need a {{split-section}} tag, etc..

The second thing to do is to move the non-standard voltage systems into the Systems using non-standard voltages section (removing or merging duplicates), and then make a big note so that it doesn't happen again.

One small query is that 25 kV AC at 60 Hz is non-standard according to the table, but appears to be treated as standard (I guess that most 50Hz trains could use 60Hz without any problems, although 60Hz may need a heavier transformer). Anyone know the answer to this? Tim PF (talk) 01:35, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Oops, the last paragraph should have read:

• One small query is that 25 kV AC at 60 Hz is non-standard according to the table, but appears to be treated as standard (I guess that most 50Hz trains could use 60Hz without any problems, although 60Hz trains may need a heavier transformer to use 50Hz). Anyone know the answer to this?

Another reason for not copying in the table is that the figures for 3 kV seem odd. I'm sure I've read somewhere recently that the voltage can go up to 4 kV (which would be a reasonable extrapolation from the other DC voltages). I'd love to check out the sources, but the IEC wants CHF70 for the privilege. Anyone know the answer to this too?

More fundamentally is how standard are those standards? Have all IEC member states agreed to not use other systems, and did the standard predate parts of Kent (UK) having their 750 V boosted to 850 V for Eurostar? Tim PF (talk) 00:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

AC on street running systems

Is there any street running system (light rail, tram, street car, conventional railway, etc.; excluding at-grade crossings of conventional railways) that uses AC electrification system? Is it very rare? 203.198.25.249 (talk) 03:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the Chur stadtbahn, which is a ~2km street-running section of the Arosa line of the Rhaetian Railway, which since 1997 has been electrified at 11 kV 16.7 Hz AC overhead lines.

I suspect that these will be fairly rare and either short street running sections of heavy rail with normal high voltage AC as above, or lower voltage polyphase supplies. This is because almost any rail system designed for street running will be electrified at relatively low voltages (below 1 kV) for safety reasons, and there is usually little point in using single phase AC below about 2 kV.

Most of the low voltage three-phase systems are on older rack railways, which are usually relatively short but can take advantage of three-phase power, but cannot really use a rack for street running. Tim PF (talk) 16:41, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you elaborate a little bit about the safety concerns of AC on street running systems, and possibly incorporate it into the article too? 203.198.25.249 (talk) 04:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

In short, no and no, since both would transgress Wikipedia:No original research.

However, to clarify one point, my safety concerns are over high voltages, rather than AC.

I don't know what your background is, but I suggest that you start reading up on subjects such as electric power transmission, etc., and then you might be able to update the article yourself. Tim PF (talk) 12:06, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. 203.198.25.249 (talk) 12:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Why would there be little point to have AC below 2,000 V? 203.198.25.249 (talk) 12:45, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Traction motors must be able to provide torque and be effective at a wild range of speeds from zero to the maximum design speed of a given vehicle. Electric powered rail vehicles don't switch gear, so there must be a way to control the speed of a traction motors. For AC motors you have to vary the frequency which is fixed for AC systems (50/60/16.7 Hz), and there was no compact and lightweight variable frequency drive until the advent of high power semiconductors like in the late eighties (a ballpark figure). So the engineers were stuck with DC motors. DC motors' speed can be easily controlled by varying the applied voltage, like first adding a large series resistance at start and gradually removing it until none remains, and switching the motors in groups (all motors wired in series/several grades of series-parallell combination/all parallel). There is an inherent limit of like 300-900 volts per a brushed motor because of //slip ring brush fire// and related issues. And then there also was was a tradeoff: either leave a heavy transformer and rectifier on the ground and build a low voltage system that requires thicker wiring, and copper is money (Ohm's law, anyone?), but this is okay for streetcar/city tram/subway type setups (you can place more less-powered traction transformer/rectifier substations densely around the city yet saving on overhead wire copper; and lighter rolling stock means better acceleration and overal efficiency). Or carry the bulky transformer/rectifier aboard, which gives a bonus though: you can vary motor voltage by switching transformer winding taps with less series resistors involvement (they do eat efficiency), also you save on copper in overhead wires and can set up larger transformer substations in a sparser pattern which is more energy efficient too (yes, you still need to lower voltage from distribution grid's 100-200 kV to like 15...30 kV, higher voltages are inefficient due to insulation and safety issues). Therefore, for large rail networks with heavy freight traffic like in Russia and other CIS countries, it is logical that diesel-powered lines get electrified in 27.5 kV AC, and existing 3 kV DC lines get modernized to high voltage AC. Only the mountainous areas are out of luck: lots of old tunnels, whose dimensions often prohibit placing a high voltage catenary which needs much larger clearances (think significantly longer insulator chains etc). And with the advent of high power electronics, one can make almost identical locos for HV AC/LV DC operation with differences in the catenary voltage part only, as well as double and even triple voltage ones as long as that's economically reasonable. Anyway they'll have a variable frequency drive with be multi-phase AC asynchronous motors. (Wow, that's quite a post. Guess that IP user is long gone, but I still hope that helps anyone understand something.) Sashman (talk) 04:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Good explanation! As for the multiple voltage locomotives: there are already affordable quad voltage units in use - mostly in Europe due to the widely differing systems in use there - the Siemens Eurosprinter, Bombardier TRAXX and Alstom Prima are examples, there are a more types around than these though. 82.139.114.136 (talk) 18:19, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

The Hong Kong Tramways has proposed to use AC motors instead. Would that involve changing their way of power supply? If not, will DC-to-AC convertors be required on the trams? 203.198.25.249 (talk) 11:36, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

No. The new traction motors will probably be 3-phase AC, and many electric trains already use inverters to convert from DC (even if running from a single phase AC power supply). Tim PF (talk) 15:47, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

So the overhead cable and pantograph can still be DC while the traction motors are replaced by AC ones, am I right? 203.198.25.249 (talk) 09:47, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yep, lots of DC-powered rolling stock is AC inside. Especially if they make variable-frequency whining noise when accelerating and decelerating Sashman (talk) 04:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

825 V

Post-Soviet subway systems, including Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian and others, have a 825 V (not 750 V) nominal third rail voltage with equipment required to operate between 550 to 950 V. Does that qualify for separate section? Sashman (talk) 23:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd suggest putting it in the 750V section as there are already exceptions there and the 825V voltage doesn't make it fundamentally different in technology or age from other 750V systems.Alex Sims (talk) 05:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I think it depends on the method of measuring the nominal voltage – in many electrification systems a substation's unloaded output would be 10% above nominal voltage. 750 V + 10% (= 75 V) = 825 V.06:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.246.52.152 (talk)

It's probably not as simple, because this 825 V specification appears on all systems running Metrovagonmash trainsets. This includes, beyond the 1520 mm gauge systems, also the 1435 mm systems in Warsaw, Prague, Budapest and Sofia. As an example here's a source for Prague: [5]. So I would indeed single out 825 V from 750 V systems. 2003:45:455D:AF71:208F:9EED:8311:B20E (talk) 18:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Shenzhen incorrect

Bad formatting for Shenzhen. Tabletop (talk) 07:33, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Flagicons

I would point out that the last attempt to change WP:MOSFLAG to permit flags in lists like this was unanimously opposed. Consensus can change, of course... bobrayner (talk) 16:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Flags feature up and down the whole page, the only difference in the place you removed them is that country features in the third and not first box. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 23:36, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I have read WP:MOSFLAG, and can find nothing that supports any kind of argument to remove them. This page has had flag icons for a very long time, and with almost no opposition to them. All I see is a user that is looking for an argument. Bhtpbank (talk) 00:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

I would go as far as to say the MOS page promotes the use of flags here. Take the following passage as on the current revision:

• In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 04:50, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

That argument might be coherent if there were some kind of 1:1 relationship between voltages (etc) and nationalities; Danish trains using Danish sine-waves, and so on. But there isn't. It's a list of current systems for electric rail traction, grouped by technical, electrical qualities. bobrayner (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I would make the case that the addition of flag icons in the tables does not break-up or takaeaway from the information being presented in the table. In other words having the flag icons does not distract or diminish the information that the table presents. On this basis, I would claim that the use of icons stays well within the Manual of Style. I think that you really need to make a much stronger case for their removal. In fact, I would be happy to break the 3RR code in order to have a fuller discussion on this matter and open up the topic for wider debate. I feel that the case for keeping them is strong. Bhtpbank (talk) 20:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

That's the second time you've suggested you're happy to break 3RR in order to keep the article how you like it. Probably not a good idea. I was hoping we could make progress based on discussion and guidelines, rather than granting victory to whoever hits the revert button most. bobrayner (talk) 21:50, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Having seen your history, I would say that it takes one to know one. Your record has more in common with argument and disagreement than it does with seeking consensus and working with others. Bhtpbank (talk) 00:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Bhtpbank, I strongly recommend you don't venture beyond 3RR because it will land you with the block. I'm saying this as someone who was recently blocked myself for doing that and I am on a 1RR restriction. Keep it cool, there are other ways we can ensure the relevant revision remain in place, and believe me, I favour the flags' inclusion all the way. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 00:21, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Seriously, though, does anybody have a good reason why this article shouldn't comply with WP:MOSFLAG? bobrayner (talk) 21:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I do! (1) I don't agree that it is non-compliant. Please clarify why it is non-compliant. Bhtpbank (talk) 00:13, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Pakistan 60 Hz?

Pakistan uses 50 Hz as the electric mains grid frequency, it’s doubtful they would use 60 Hz for the railway network (although not entirely impossible). 05:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.43.200 (talk)

Use of 850 volts DC third rail in UK

I have deleted the claim in the table that third rail lines used by the Eurostar trains were converted to 850 volts. There are many reasons that suggest that the claim is at best dubious or at worst bogus.

• The Eurostar service over the third rail network of the former Southern region was never intended to be anything but a short term measure until dedicated 'high speed' lines were constructed. It would have been an expensive proposition to replace all the substations on the route with 850 volt versions.
• The Eurostar trains are subject to the same line speed restrictions as the rolling stock with which it had to share the line (to a maximum of 100 miles per hour (160 km/h)). There would therefore be no advantage to be gained in raising the voltage.
• The existing stock using the lines (and some of it was quite old when Eurostar was first introduced) would have to have had all the traction motors and switchgear replaced to cope with the raised voltage. Apart from adding greatly to the capital cost, there is no evidence that any such conversion took place.
• Any new rolling stock acquired for use on the lines would have to have been built for 850 volt operation. There is no evidence that any newer rolling stock was specified let alone built for operation in excess of 750 volts.
• There was only one short section of line in the original scheme that was built exclusively for use by Eurostar - the section between Nine Elms junction and Linford Street junction (just west of Waterloo). There is no evidence that this short stretch was electrified at 850 volts. There would be no advantage in electrifying this 400 odd yard stretch to a different voltage than the rest of the network especially as the tight curve radius gives rise to a 20 miles per hour (32 km/h) speed limit and a convenient existing sub station was nearby (660 volt when the stretch was built - later upgraded to 750 volt). Note: that there was no exclusive 3rd rail stretch of track between Sandling station and the Tunnel track work as the 25kV overhead wire system actually started before Saltwood junction where the Eurostar line branched off the original third rail line for Folkestone West station.
• A short exclusive section was subsequently built between Fawkham junction (south of Farningham Road station) to meet with 25kV overhead line before joining the high speed line at Southfleet junction. There is no evidence that this short stretch was electrified at 850 volts. Again there would be little point in electrifying this 300 odd yard stretch at 850 volts as it would have required a dedicated sub station. Also, the Eurostar trains had little opportunity to build up any speed before negotiating another junction. –LiveRail < Talk > 12:21, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it's beyond the realms of possibility. I have a book somewhere (which I can't find) that says that the Bournemouth line west of Pirbright Junction is 850 volts. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:44, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Nope: That line is electrified at 750 volts DC in common with all other South West Trains lines (except Wimbledon to Putney Bridge). This would be just as well as the class 450 and class 444 trains that operate the line are only specified and built to operate from 660-750 volts (nominally). Since those classes of trains have a maximum speed of 100 miles per hour (160 km/h) on all lines that they operate on, and as there is a blanket maximum speed of 100 miles per hour (160 km/h) on any third rail electrified line, there would be no advantage in operating from a higher voltage.

Further, the electrification of that line beyond Southampton is a relatively recent event (late 1990's). At that time the line was operated by class 442 trains. Although new build some ten years earlier, the traction motors and control gear were not new being salvaged from the earlier class 432 'slam door' stock which had been phased out (recycling traction gear was quite common at this time by the penny conscious BR Souther region - especially as the three phase AC motor revolution had yet to happen). These old traction units were never designed to operate at 850 volts, being designed to operate from a maximum of 750 volts which had become the new standard voltage at the time of that class's build (mid 1960's). Re-electrifying such a recently electrified line to 850 volts would never have made it past the bean counters.

Next time I am west of Pirbright junction, I'll put my Network Rail approved multimeter on the 3rd rail. I can guarantee that it won't read 850 volts unless something odd is going on (it does happen occasionally). I read all sorts of fantastic and untrue claims in all sorts of books and on rail fansites. Some of it never fails to raise a smile at best or an eyebrow at worst! –LiveRail < Talk > 18:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

EDLC "electrified" lines

It looks like both Circular Line in Kaohsiung and Haizhu Tram are neither having conductors, nor overhead lines, but per their official sites' documents they should also be considered as electrified rail systems. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:35, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of current systems for electric rail traction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070213151651/http://www.bsistandards.co.uk/ to http://www.bsistandards.co.uk/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:39, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of current systems for electric rail traction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150123141407/http://menarailpost.com/2014/03/cairo-metro-tender-new-rolling-stock/ to http://menarailpost.com/2014/03/cairo-metro-tender-new-rolling-stock/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110519014210/http://www.southernelectric.org.uk/histfeat/seginfohistory.html to http://www.southernelectric.org.uk/histfeat/seginfohistory.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:36, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

600V AC in Singapore

The Bukit Panjang LRT line in Singapore uses a 600V AC conductor rail system to deliver power to its Bombardier Innovia APM 100 C801 and Bombardier Innovia APM 100 C801A trains, but the frequency used is unknown. I wasn't sure if I should go ahead and edit the page, so I'm just leaving this here on the talk page.

Fire Snyper (talk) 14:54, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

750 v dc

750 volts is in use in the uk but isn't put down 2006toyotacorrola (talk) 09:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

RhB + MGB 11 kV 16.7 Hz

I believe there should be a table under “Systems using standard voltages” for:

Overhead Systems 11 kV 16.7 Hz for the RhB and MGB in Switzerland 62.3.245.53 (talk) 07:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

And the entry for these railways under “Systems using non-standard voltages” should be removed.

What is the definition of a “Standard voltage”?