Future of the Intercity 125s

[DXMachina]

Assuming that the maximum output power of a power car is constant, the top speed would reduce by a factor of the cube root of two and so be 99 mph instead of 125 mph.

One problem with that comes to mind (I'm no mathematician)
The rear end. A flat ended vehicle creates a vortex of drag behind is as vacuum is created by a flat vertical object moving, against its rear face, exerting extra drag.

Vehicle ends that taper need less effort to draw them - so one of your 5 cars would have to incorporate a sloped cab, ideally without a weight penalty...

 

[JamesRowden]

One problem with that comes to mind (I'm no mathematician)
The rear end. A flat ended vehicle creates a vortex of drag behind is as vacuum is created by a flat vertical object moving, against its rear face, exerting extra drag.

Vehicle ends that taper need less effort to draw them - so one of your 5 cars would have to incorporate a sloped cab, ideally without a weight penalty...

See my post after that.......

 

[ainsworth74]

That means that when paired they have enough power to run at 157 mph!

Well the record is what? 148mph? Doesn't seem totally unreasonable that they might be able to get to 150+ (though mechanically I'd imagine that could be quite fun). Either way my understanding remains that an individual power car is capable of 125mph.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

One problem with that comes to mind (I'm no mathematician)
The rear end. A flat ended vehicle creates a vortex of drag behind is as vacuum is created by a flat vertical object moving, against its rear face, exerting extra drag.

Vehicle ends that taper need less effort to draw them - so one of your 5 cars would have to incorporate a sloped cab, ideally without a weight penalty...

Trains running at more than about 110 mph seem to have a wedge-shaped front end, so a driving trailer would need one and as you say, there is the drag at the tail end.

However... there is a lot of turbulence beneath and between the vehicles, plus skin resistance, so can someone please put some figures to these various components of air resistance?

 

[The Planner]

Well the record is what? 148mph? Doesn't seem totally unreasonable that they might be able to get to 150+ (though mechanically I'd imagine that could be quite fun). Either way my understanding remains that an individual power car is capable of 125mph.

It can, and as speculated takes longer to get there. There are/were FGW empty sets that are timed as one engine only.

 

[ainsworth74]

Ah good, thanks for the confirmation

 

[LE Greys]

It can, and as speculated takes longer to get there. There are/were FGW empty sets that are timed as one engine only.

Interesting. I always thought that when running on one end only, they had to stick to 100. On thinking about it, all the equipment is set up for 125, but staying at a lower speed would avoid over-stressing the remaining engine.

 

[The Ham]

I imagine they'd be pretty slow off the mark. One assumes that a 1+4 set would be roughly equivalent to a 2+8 set for performance, so if you stretch that to 1+5, you'll be slower at accelerating. Don't forget you'd also need to factor in a controlling trailer on the other end of the formation, which will provide additional weight that needs to be hauled.

However they could be useful for routes where there isn't much need to go very quickly (either due to a limited top speed or where even if you were to run quickly the train would just site idle until it was needed again).

if you were able to run 2x 1+4's you'd basicly have 2+8, which could enable split portion working, so for instance you could run as a full IC125 to Plymouth, split it and have one half run to Penzance and the other run to Newquay (assuming that the middle coaches could split and had a control cab built into). Which would enable balanced loads on lines where the top speeds are fairly low.

 

[AndyLandy]

However they could be useful for routes where there isn't much need to go very quickly (either due to a limited top speed or where even if you were to run quickly the train would just site idle until it was needed again).

if you were able to run 2x 1+4's you'd basicly have 2+8, which could enable split portion working, so for instance you could run as a full IC125 to Plymouth, split it and have one half run to Penzance and the other run to Newquay (assuming that the middle coaches could split and had a control cab built into). Which would enable balanced loads on lines where the top speeds are fairly low.

Is there much demand for direct services to London from the Atlantic Coast Line? Doing HST splits and portion working seems like a remarkably convoluted solution.

As for the general case, for routes that have speed restrictions but still should have stock more suited to longer distances, we have the perfect trains already, in the form of Class 156s. Of course, whether we have enough of them is an entirely separate matter...

 

[The Ham]

Is there much demand for direct services to London from the Atlantic Coast Line? Doing HST splits and portion working seems like a remarkably convoluted solution.

There may not be a lot of demand during the winter, but it could be argued that it is a better use of stock than running a full length IC125 all the way down to Penzance with a lot of empty seats.

As for the general case, for routes that have speed restrictions but still should have stock more suited to longer distances, we have the perfect trains already, in the form of Class 156s. Of course, whether we have enough of them is an entirely separate matter...

The advantage of IC125's that could split over class 156's is that they could (if joined up to a full IC125) run at much higher top speeds. Which could make direct services to two locations from a major city possible whilst running on higher speed lines (90+mph) to the point where the train splits.

Depending on how many Sprinters are needed to replace Pacers, there could be a short term need (until more wires can go up) for some short formed loco hauled stock. Although the cost of converting the IC125's may be quite high, it might be cheaper than a new class of DMU's which could only have a short working life.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also, with regards to Newquay, it could also free up other stock to be used elsewhere.

 

[Goatboy]

Is there much demand for direct services to London from the Atlantic Coast Line? Doing HST splits and portion working seems like a remarkably convoluted solution.

There is - but its very seasonal. In the summer months these services are absolutely rammed. The demand is so great that they even remove most if not all of the local calling services on the branch on certain days because there simply are not enough remaining paths once all the IC traffic is accounted for. Whereas in the winter months the demand drops off a cliff such that they are not even operated.

Everyone who lives in Devon and uses the train to travel knows to avoid a down/up Newquay Summer Saturday service unless they really need it!

 

[Zoe]

When the Greater Western franchise was let in 2005, it was hoped there would be a London to Newquay service all year.

http://www.lgcplus.com/lgc-news/win...meslink/gn-franchise-announced/517687.article

A year round London to Newquay service will not be possible whilst substantial maintenance work is taking place to the branch line. It is hoped this could be introduced on completion of the works. In the interim, Newquay will continue to be served four times a day outside the summer peak, and a daily London Newquay service will run in July and August 2007.

 

[AndyLandy]

I don't recall DDA ever being cited as a specific issue, if anything it's extending the life of the power cars that's the major expense - its also worth remembering that IEP will not be replacing HST's on West Country services anyway.

Sorry, I should clarify that point. I don't believe the DDA legislation is the reason, but it is quite likely to influence timings. If it were not for DDA, we could probably have gotten away with running more HSTs past 2020, and be replacing them with more EMUs and fewer bi-modes.

There is - but its very seasonal. In the summer months these services are absolutely rammed. The demand is so great that they even remove most if not all of the local calling services on the branch on certain days because there simply are not enough remaining paths once all the IC traffic is accounted for. Whereas in the winter months the demand drops off a cliff such that they are not even operated.

Everyone who lives in Devon and uses the train to travel knows to avoid a down/up Newquay Summer Saturday service unless they really need it!

I assume that PAD-NQY trains are therefore run at the expense of PAD-PNZ services, occupying the equivalent paths between London and Par? What are the loadings like during the Summer months? Are the trains rammed from end to end, or just specific stretches of the route?

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Sorry, I should clarify that point. I don't believe the DDA legislation is the reason, but it is quite likely to influence timings. If it were not for DDA, we could probably have gotten away with running more HSTs past 2020, and be replacing them with more EMUs and fewer bi-modes.

Do you really believe this date will be held to? And what sanctions are there if it slips? Will the TOCs be fined or their directors sent to prison? Will they be forced to close down their operations?

 

[ainsworth74]

Stop asking the questions that the DfT don't want asking about this deadline!

 

[starrymarkb]

Stop asking the questions that the DfT don't want asking about this deadline!

lol.. Pity Gwyneth Dunwoody isn't still on the Transport Committee. The DfT must have been relieved when she passed away

 

[tbtc]

Do you really believe this date will be held to? And what sanctions are there if it slips? Will the TOCs be fined or their directors sent to prison? Will they be forced to close down their operations?

The bellweather will be how non-DDA buses are treated after their respective dates:

• 1 January 2015 – all buses and coaches up to 7.5 tonnes GVW
• 1 January 2016 – single-deck buses over 7.5 tonnes GVW
• 1 January 2017 – double-deck buses
• 1 January 2020 – coaches (same as trains)

It was easy to set 2016/2017 as dates a decade ago, when they seemed like a long way away. When we get closer to the dates and find some companies unable to withdraw old buses (lack of money to invest in new ones etc), we may see fudges.

If the bus dates are strictly adhered to then I'd expect no flexibility for TOCs though.

 

[Zoe]

I assume that PAD-NQY trains are therefore run at the expense of PAD-PNZ services, occupying the equivalent paths between London and Par? What are the loadings like during the Summer months? Are the trains rammed from end to end, or just specific stretches of the route?

The Newquay service is an extension of the 09:06 Paddingnton to Plymouth service and only runs in the summer. It does not run instead of a Paddington to Penzance service.

 

[Rich McLean]

In the summer, FGW extend some of the Plymouth Terminators to Newquay, and also double up the Locals from a single 153 to 2 x 150s where possible, plus the extra services

 

[AndyLandy]

Do you really believe this date will be held to? And what sanctions are there if it slips? Will the TOCs be fined or their directors sent to prison? Will they be forced to close down their operations?

Well, quite. DDA legislation is a good thing to aspire to, but I'm skeptical over whether we'll see a fully-DDA railway by the stated deadline. I suspect when it comes to the crunch, we'd see operators and government preferring to put out a Pacer rather than not run a service at all.

The Newquay service is an extension of the 09:06 Paddingnton to Plymouth service and only runs in the summer. It does not run instead of a Paddington to Penzance service.

OK, thanks for that. That makes a lot of sense.

 

[The Ham]

In the summer, FGW extend some of the Plymouth Terminators to Newquay, and also double up the Locals from a single 153 to 2 x 150s where possible, plus the extra services

All in all a IC125 which split at or after Plymouth with half running to Newquay for every service from London to Cornwall would be well used in the summer and would free up 2 class 150's which could be used elsewhere. It still allows the full length summer IC125's to Newquay to run and because there should be a load of spare IC125's there could be more services.

During the winter it is likely to still be lightly used, although with a direct service beyond Par this could attract a few more passengers.

However the big plus is that you save on costs, as the IC125 will be being leased and paying track access charges anyway (and Plymouth to Newquay is a shorter distance than to Penzance). Which will mean that it is cheaper to run both services, you free up stock to be used elsewhere and you are likely to attract more passengers on the Newquay line.

 

[AndyLandy]

All in all a IC125 which split at or after Plymouth with half running to Newquay for every service from London to Cornwall would be well used in the summer and would free up 2 class 150's which could be used elsewhere. It still allows the full length summer IC125's to Newquay to run and because there should be a load of spare IC125's there could be more services.

During the winter it is likely to still be lightly used, although with a direct service beyond Par this could attract a few more passengers.

However the big plus is that you save on costs, as the IC125 will be being leased and paying track access charges anyway (and Plymouth to Newquay is a shorter distance than to Penzance). Which will mean that it is cheaper to run both services, you free up stock to be used elsewhere and you are likely to attract more passengers on the Newquay line.

I'm still skeptical of what's involved to make an HST suitable for this kind of operation, but at least I understand better what you're trying to achieve here. I'd have thought that 5-car 22x sets (or eventually, bi-mode IEPs) would be more suitable for this sort of operation. Run a 10-car set from Paddington to Plymouth (or Par) and split with one set going on to Penzance and the other to Newquay.

 

[The Ham]

I'm still skeptical of what's involved to make an HST suitable for this kind of operation, but at least I understand better what you're trying to achieve here. I'd have thought that 5-car 22x sets (or eventually, bi-mode IEPs) would be more suitable for this sort of operation. Run a 10-car set from Paddington to Plymouth (or Par) and split with one set going on to Penzance and the other to Newquay.

I agree that the IC125's would require a bit of work to get them to do it, but the 22x's and quite possibly IEP probably will be post 2019 before they are running to Cornwall.

I was thinking of introducing the split-able IC125's in the following sort of time-frame:

Mid 2014 franchise is awarded and hopefully singed soon after!!!
(assuming FGW retain it they could start work soon after signing)

Early 2015 franchise starts, work starts to Chilternise and enable splitting of the IC125's which are to be retained for the Cornish services (extra Mark 3's may need to be leased to enable this)

2015 summer timetable has trains as they are

2015 winter timetable would require 5 trains able to split to maintain the current Newquay timetable, may result in a few services early on requiring the DMU stock to still run them

2016 summer timetable fully operational with all services to Cornwall splitting (probably not all to Newquay some running to Falmouth)

2017 winter timetable IEP starts to be introduced on GW

2018 summer timetable more services to Cornwall by extending existing Plymouth services

2020 summer timetable possible first date the the 222's could take over from IC125's assuming that new EMU's for MML are available. 220's & 221's would probably be later than this as XC would need theirs (and quite possibly those form ICWC due to passenger growth and/or extending their network's reach) until the gaps in their network are filled in and they can run EMU's.

Even if it was winter 2016 (if they need more time to do the works) that is still a full year before IEP's are being used in the timetable and it will be some time before they are all delivered. Winter 2016 would also mean 3 and a half years of use before the 22x's are first likely to be available (4 and a half if winter 2015).

Although under the best case that is 5 years of IC use (which in no way would justify the cost) it would leave a fleet of say 15 full length IC125's, which can be split to provide 30 shorter trains. Assuming that 2020 is when the pacers are all got rid of because of DDA rules. They can be used to help the sprinters out on running services for a good few years after that.

At present the lease of a DMU is £110,000 per year, so a doubled up train would be £220,000 per year. Meaning that if the lease of the 1/2 IC125's (with four couches) was less than a doubled up sprinter (when track access charges where taken into account), I would have thought that there would have been a good market for such trains post 2020 (although not suitable for some services due to acceleration issues).

Even if they only make it to 2025 (when CP7 starts and a lot more services are hopefully able run as EMU's) that's basicly 10 years of service in their new form which hopefuly is enough time for the rebuild costs to have been taken on board. Especially with the savings of not having to lease and run DMU's for the Newquay line for 5 years at the beginning.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

I'm still skeptical of what's involved to make an HST suitable for this kind of operation, but at least I understand better what you're trying to achieve here. I'd have thought that 5-car 22x sets (or eventually, bi-mode IEPs) would be more suitable for this sort of operation. Run a 10-car set from Paddington to Plymouth (or Par) and split with one set going on to Penzance and the other to Newquay.

I seem to recall that in the early 1990s there was a proposal to make some of the HSTs into half-sets for just this kind of operation.

 

[ChilternHenry]

The only way any of these ideas about splitting hsts will work is if it is cost effective. Turning the end of a mk3 into a cab is probably cost prohibitive, and reduces the capactiy of an existing coach. The only way this idea is viable would be to convert some power cars into dvts, put some seating in them, and have the two dvts sandwiched together in the middle of the train. But either way, would it not be more simple to order some sort of dmu like the 22x series. Diesel can run under wires, don't see the need for all this bi-mode traction

 

[RAGNARØKR]

The only way any of these ideas about splitting hsts will work is if it is cost effective. Turning the end of a mk3 into a cab is probably cost prohibitive, and reduces the capactiy of an existing coach

How much longer are the class 442s going to last? That will yield some gangwayed driving trailers. And then there are those Irish control trailers still lying around waiting to be brought back to the UK, if they have not yet been scrapped. There were around 90 vehicles.

They would need rewiring to make them compatible but any of these options is going to be a lot less expensive than any new build.

 

[The Ham]

The only way any of these ideas about splitting hsts will work is if it is cost effective.

I know that cost is the limiting factor, hence the reason I was thinking of ways in which the HST's could be used post 2020.

But either way, would it not be more simple to order some sort of dmu like the 22x series. Diesel can run under wires, don't see the need for all this bi-mode traction

More simple yes, more cost efective proberbly not. Given that a high number of the IC lines will be electrified post 2019 and the likelyhood that post 2030 (when the current batch of class 22x's are 30 years old) there is unlikely to be much (if any) need for diesel 125mph stock.

How much longer are the class 442s going to last? That will yield some gangwayed driving trailers. And then there are those Irish control trailers still lying around waiting to be brought back to the UK, if they have not yet been scrapped. There were around 90 vehicles.

They would need rewiring to make them compatible but any of these options is going to be a lot less expensive than any new build.

The use of 442 end coaches could be a good way to make the IC125's able to split (and a way of reducing the conversion costs). 17 of the 24 442's are currently in use with the remaining being used for spares, that could meaning that some of the remaining 7 could be used.

 

[jon0844]

Well, quite. DDA legislation is a good thing to aspire to, but I'm skeptical over whether we'll see a fully-DDA railway by the stated deadline. I suspect when it comes to the crunch, we'd see operators and government preferring to put out a Pacer rather than not run a service at all.

I'd seek to impose fines only on operators that haven't at least ordered new stock or made provisions to have stock upgraded/modified.

I could accept turning a blind eye if a new fleet of trains were delayed by the manufacturer or there were other unforeseen circumstances, but not simply leaving it until it's too late or hoping for some kind of get out of jail free card.

 

[plzmindethegap]

The answer is I will buy one and shove on my front lawn so everyone can see a real train!

 

[Surreyman]

The bellweather will be how non-DDA buses are treated after their respective dates:

• 1 January 2015 – all buses and coaches up to 7.5 tonnes GVW
• 1 January 2016 – single-deck buses over 7.5 tonnes GVW
• 1 January 2017 – double-deck buses
• 1 January 2020 – coaches (same as trains)

It was easy to set 2016/2017 as dates a decade ago, when they seemed like a long way away. When we get closer to the dates and find some companies unable to withdraw old buses (lack of money to invest in new ones etc), we may see fudges.

If the bus dates are strictly adhered to then I'd expect no flexibility for TOCs though.

For buses its slightly more complicated than you indicate, the key words are 'Used on Public Services' older vehicles which don't conform to DDA regs can continue to operate post 2016/2017 on services such as contracted School contracts (provided the service is not registered as a public service).
From my own knowledge of the bus industry all the major bus groups are on target to be compliant by the due dates.
I believe the 2020 deadline for the rail industry will be met.