My idea for: Pendolinos for Norwich!

[Dave1987]

Hi you have some very good points but take the chiltern 168's, they are modern with wifi etc but are extremely comfortable. I appreciate we cannot keep refurbing old stock forever but do we need to spend huge amounts of money where it is not necessary like bringing pendo's onto the GEML. I still maintain that the pendo's are really badly designed. Lol

 

[HSTEd]

2hrs for London-Norwich really is ridiculous though.

It should be closer to 1hr30 at the very most.

 

[Dave1987]

2hrs for London-Norwich really is ridiculous though.

It should be closer to 1hr30 at the very most.

Unfortunately the infrastructure on the GEML just isnt up to enabling that journey time. And the cost of upgrading it would be enormous! I would much rather they spent the money on HS2. Then we might just keep up with the rest of Europe then.

 

[w0033944]

I think that it'd be a lot easier to justify increased line speeds if the level crossing situation was sorted out. There may be some electric 125mph stock available in a few years time (i.e. the 91/ Mk4s, depending on the IEP situation), which would give the GEML a decent case for an upgrade.

Even 90s can do 110 okay, so there's scope for speed improvements with the existing stock.

But one problem it'll always have is that the fast Norwich service is going to be the only "Inter City" service for the Liverpool Street TOC (however you split up TOC boundaries), which may make EMUs more tempting.

(as for "topography" - I know a few people who moved from East Anglia to South Yorkshire when Norwich Union were shifting jobs around a few years ago and like to complain about the hills here )

Absolutely - the route needs moderate investment to enable refurbished stock to maximise its potential. According to the Trackmaps Atlas 2nd Edition, there are 16 AHBs between Chelmsford and Nowich, all but 2 of those being between Ipswich and Norwich.

 

[LE Greys]

Absolutely - the route needs moderate investment to enable refurbished stock to maximise its potential. According to the Trackmaps Atlas 2nd Edition, there are 16 AHBs between Chelmsford and Nowich, all but 2 of those being between Ipswich and Norwich.

Whenever this route gets to the front of the upgrade queue, they need to become CCTV full-barrier. However, the highest priority in the area ought to be providing an electrified route to Felixstowe that does not conflict with the expresses, either by wiring Ely-Needham Market or quadrupling Shenfield-Colchester, whichever is more cost-effective. Linking Braintree and Stansted would also help in clearing out the NLL, as well as replacing a coach link.

 

[eastdyke]

Whenever this route gets to the front of the upgrade queue, they need to become CCTV full-barrier. However, the highest priority in the area ought to be providing an electrified route to Felixstowe that does not conflict with the expresses, either by wiring Ely-Needham Market or quadrupling Shenfield-Colchester, whichever is more cost-effective. Linking Braintree and Stansted would also help in clearing out the NLL, as well as replacing a coach link.

Whatever you do by way of 'Electrification' there will be conflict with 'Expresses'. ie Bacon Chord (Ipswich) - Haughley Junc.

Electrification would need to be Felixstowe - Bacon Chord (Ipswich) then Haughley Junc. - Nuneaton (give or take the odd mile), its going to be a while yet.

And then there's all those wretched outer suburban services. Lets say no more commuting from south of Ipswich?

 

[LE Greys]

Whatever you do by way of 'Electrification' there will be conflict with 'Expresses'. ie Bacon Chord (Ipswich) - Haughley Junc.

Electrification would need to be Felixstowe - Bacon Chord (Ipswich) then Haughley Junc. - Nuneaton (give or take the odd mile), its going to be a while yet.

And then there's all those wretched outer suburban services. Lets say no more commuting from south of Ipswich?

Maybe I should have said 'minimises conflict' (by 'express', I mean Class 1 passenger train, I'm one of the few people who still talks about 'goods' instead of 'freight'). Under the four-track solution, there would still be a double-track section from Ipswich to Colchester. The north curve should help, but without Peterborough-Ely-Needham Market electrification, that simply means more diesel haulage on Freightliners.

 

[90sWereBetter]

Bah humbug, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the MK3s other than a lack of TLC. Give 'em a good clean, fit power doors, a new lick of paint and then they're good for the next 20 years.

Class 90s are barely halfway through their operational lives as well. Brilliant workhorses.

Other than that, what needs to be done, and I echo several of the comments already in this thread, is to upgrade the GEML to 110/125mph. But there's probably more chance of Pacers taking over the Wherry lines than that happening...

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Then we might just keep up with the rest of Europe then.

What exactly does that mean? Is there a race on?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
What a horrible idea. What kind of an impression does that make when your previous train was an IC3 to Esbjerg? First you get a clapped-out 321 to Manningtree which is bad enough but the mark 3 sets redeem the situation somewhat if the connecting train is from Norwich. Otherwise one's first impression of the railways of Britain is most unfavourable. Pendolinos would confirm that.

 

[Dave1987]

What exactly does that mean? Is there a race on?

Er yeah! All our competitors in the world for business have high speed rail, even Taiwan have a high speed rail line for god sakes. We are about 30 years behind the rest when it comes to high speed rail, broadband, or roads even! Mostly cos we have a serious NIMBY problem in this country hampering progress.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Er yeah! All our competitors in the world for business have high speed rail, even Taiwan have a high speed rail line for god sakes. We are about 30 years behind the rest when it comes to high speed rail, broadband, or roads even!

So how exactly does high speed rail lead to more saleable products in world markets, which seems to be what you are saying?

Surely the main factors in commercial competitiveness are the price and quality of the goods produced in the countries in question? Where and how does high speed rail lead to reduce prices or increased quality of the goods?

 

[eastdyke]

So how exactly does high speed rail lead to more saleable products in world markets, which seems to be what you are saying?

Surely the main factors in commercial competitiveness are the price and quality of the goods produced in the countries in question? Where and how does high speed rail lead to reduce prices or increased quality of the goods?

The only area that I can think of would be tourism.

But that would only apply to some people because as a tourist I often prefer the 'slow train'. Price and quality still matter though and RAGNARØKR makes a good point.

 

[D365]

Er yeah! All our competitors in the world for business have high speed rail, even Taiwan have a high speed rail line for god sakes. We are about 30 years behind the rest when it comes to high speed rail, broadband, or roads even! Mostly cos we have a serious NIMBY problem in this country hampering progress.

IIRC we still have one of, if not the highest average rail service speeds in the world. Crossrail is the biggest infrastructure project in Europe currently. £9.6bn of investment in our rail network is being delivered, and that's just until 2020, not even accounting for HS2. Yes, there's being a lot of dithering with decisions such as on franchises (not just in railways) and rolling stock procurement. That doesn't stop the money being pumped in though.

And may I ask that you not place the blame for all project delays on "NIMBYs". Nobody can keep building without the ability to sustain.

 

[Manchester77]

Er yeah! All our competitors in the world for business have high speed rail, even Taiwan have a high speed rail line for god sakes. We are about 30 years behind the rest when it comes to high speed rail, broadband, or roads even! Mostly cos we have a serious NIMBY problem in this country hampering progress.

No were not. We have the seventh largest economy and are a major world country dispite our geographical size. An technically we have high speed lines in the form of the great western, east and west coast main lines as they operate at over 124 mph they are high speed lines. 4g goes live in I think 7 of our big cities soon and her in manchester we already have 4g. We have motorways so what do you mean by high speed roads? The Chunnel and HS1 have shown that we are well caiplable of handling big Inferstructure projects and putting us forward in the worlds spectrum. Oh yeah, we also managed to pull off a highly successful thing the the summer, THE OLYMPICS. This proves how when we put our minds to something we can pull it off. So I really cannot see what you're complaining about....

 

[Dave1987]

Taiwan introduced 100 miles of high speed railway line and immediately saw £30 billion in economic growth from it. It still takes 4 hours to get from London to edinburgh. Ppl are choosing to fly it which is ridiculous but that is not an argument for this thread. If we build a hs2 it will stop or reduce the short haul flights. Cross rail was first considered in 1980's, it has taken 30 years for it finally to finally start. Is that not slow? If hs2 takes 30 years to approve god help us the japanese will be using maglev trains by then!

 

[Manchester77]

Taiwan introduced 100 miles of high speed railway line and immediately saw £30 billion in economic growth from it. It still takes 4 hours to get from London to edinburgh. people are choosing to fly it which is ridiculous but that is not an argument for this thread. If we build a hs2 it will stop or reduce the short haul flights. Crossrail was first considered in 1980's, it has taken 30 years for it finally to finally start. Is that not slow? If hs2 takes 30 years to approve god help us the japanese will be using maglev trains by then!

wait you're comparing the twenty-sixth largest economy with the seventh? seems legit...

a short haul flight from Edinburgh to London takes around one hour fifteen minutes, the flying Scotsman takes four hours and with high speed two to Leeds and then running over classic lines it still would take three hours thirty-nine minutes. Planes run at four hundred miles per hour (?) i don't really know because i'm not an aviation person but they run quicker than conventional high speed trains. Actually crossrail was first considered in 1948, however only one of the routes from that proposal was constructed, option C the Victoria Lines. It next came up in 1974 however along came the Jubilee line. In 1989 it was again proposed by NSE and LU. The bill was rejected. It's not always that we don't accept it, thing get in the way or other projects come out of it.

 

[Dave1987]

wait you're comparing the twenty-sixth largest economy with the seventh? seems legit...

a short haul flight from Edinburgh to London takes around one hour fifteen minutes, the flying Scotsman takes four hours and with high speed two to Leeds and then running over classic lines it still would take three hours thirty-nine minutes. Planes run at four hundred miles per hour (?) i don't really know because i'm not an aviation person but they run quicker than conventional high speed trains. Actually crossrail was first considered in 1948, however only one of the routes from that proposal was constructed, option C the Victoria Lines. It next came up in 1974 however along came the Jubilee line. In 1989 it was again proposed by NSE and LU. The bill was rejected. It's not always that we don't accept it, thing get in the way or other projects come out of it.

You average jet cruises at around 300 knots (I used to be an aircraft technician, long story!) the whole point is we want to get ppl out of planes and onto trains. On GEML the line was built on the cheap so would required enormous amount of money to upgrade. Money much better spend on a dedicated high speed line from north to south. I just hope the politicians don't dither as much as they did on cross rail and as much as they are currently doing on renewing nuclear power plants. Otherwise we might end up 40-50 years behind rest. I mean we are only just starting to electrify a lot of main lines.

 

[Manchester77]

You average jet cruises at around 300 knots (I used to be an aircraft technician, long story!) the whole point is we want to get ppl out of planes and onto trains. On GEML the line was built on the cheap so would required enormous amount of money to upgrade. Money much better spend on a dedicated high speed line from north to south. I just hope the politicians don't dither as much as they did on cross rail and as much as they are currently doing on renewing nuclear power plants*.Otherwise we might end up 40-50 years behind rest. I mean we are only just starting to electrify a lot of main lines.

Exactly but we cannot just neglect lines to build a new high speed line. We have to have a happy medium, some money spent on existing Inferstructure improving what we have and some spent on new things. We should be building our way out of this economic dip. The thing with this country is that there is a lack of confidence about pulling off these big projects. But when we put our heads to it we can really do good. High Speed One, London 2012, ECML electrification are all proof we can pull off important projects and they are a success. But we need to be realistic, we can't just neglect an InterCity route just because we're building High Speed Two. Sure pendolinios are a bit excessive but we need some form of investment. 10 coached, 125 mph caipable** EMUs (444 derrived) are perfect for the route not Italian (technically British derived) tilting trains!!

* - I would actually like us to dither with nuclear because I think we should invest in more long term projects such as tidal power. But that's a whole separate issue

** - 125 mph so they're future proofed for future upgrade / cascade

 

[D365]

The 444-derived 10x23m EMU sounds rather like it should be IEP, if you want it to be 'cascadeable', and cheaper. Although that would require infrastructure work, the work would tie in with an upgrade. None of them any more British than each other really - aside from IEP being built in Newton Ayrcliffe.

I don't think flat cabs work efficiently over 110mph - but 67s? Agree that we do get things done when they're approved and underway though. We're not as bad at this as the media can claim!

 

[Dave1987]

I agree money should not be neglected from the line in favour of hs2. But I question why Norwich services need to stop at Chelmsford at all let alone the current one an hour. They have services from Ipswich, Colchester town, Clacton and Braintree that already stop there do they really need the intercities to stop there?

 

[captainbigun]

Chelmsford is the busiest two platform station after city Thameslink.....I've said it before as far as the GE is concerned Norwich really isn't that important. There are more punters and more revenue from other stations on the route. That's not to say that it shouldn't receive a reasonable service. However that service should not be at the expense of everything else.

 

[Trainfan344]

Tbh, Cambridge to Norwich needs electrifying, then you have two routes to Norwich.

 

[tbtc]

Exactly but we cannot just neglect lines to build a new high speed line. We have to have a happy medium, some money spent on existing Inferstructure improving what we have and some spent on new things

We are spending a lot on existing lines over the next decade - the question is what would be a reasonable cost to spend on the GEML to Norwich and what benefit you'd be expecting for your money.

Crossrail should mean more platform space at Liverpool Street, but the problem that the Norwich services have is platform length - hence the suggestions for getting rid of the 90s/ DVTs in favour of something EMU based.

 

[D365]

If extra passenger space is required soon, convert (as much as possible of) the DVTs into passenger accomodation. Brand new models wouldn't be worthwhile due to the cost of remaking them for modern regulations, I suppose.

 

[David Goddard]

The development of an AC variant of the Class 444 (naturally to be numbered 344) is well overdue. Such a fleet could find work on all manner of fast services going North from London, particularly
*Liverpool Street to Norwich (as suggested in this thread)
*Kings Cross to King's Lynn, and also peak time fasts to Peterborough. (essentially what will be left of the Great Northern once Thameslink has taken its bite)
*Euston to Birmingham &Crewe (To enhance present longer distance services and enable strengthening of Outer Suburbans to Milton Keynes & Northampton)

 

[D365]

So pretty much filling a (supposed?) gap between suburban and intercity EMUs. What would the advantages of this proposal be? On ECML at least, I reckon IEP would be a much better idea for King's Cross-Cambridge-King's Lynn/Peterborough as this would ensure a common fleet, and with the common characteristics, allow better pathing of the fast lines. Plus government and such would be happy for the work in Newton Ayrcliffe.

 

[ainsworth74]

Though the last I heard there remain (not insignificant) concerns about the capacity of a ten-car IEP versus a twelve-car 365.

 

[dk1]

If extra passenger space is required soon, convert (as much as possible of) the DVTs into passenger accomodation. Brand new models wouldn't be worthwhile due to the cost of remaking them for modern regulations, I suppose.

Cannot be done. NX had the bright idea of converting to part kitchen but that too was a non-starter. Latest plan is for a Chinese built vehicle but re-using the current bogies.

 

[HSTEd]

Does reusing bogies actually save a significant amount of money?

 

[dk1]

Does reusing bogies actually save a significant amount of money?

Would imagine it is reasonably worth doing. This was announced in the latest MR magazine.