If you were DfT - the future of Voyagers

[AndyLandy]

A Swiss company has produced external combustion locomotives have been produced that satisfy emission regulations without difficulty, but so far only for demonstration purposes

Locomotives? I guess that's good to know, but I'm wondering more about DMU engines in this context, whether it would be possible to do a new-build Voyager-esque train, or carriages for the existing sets.

 

[starrymarkb]

Is it really impossible to produce a more modern suitable engine that's compliant with current emissions regulations? I guess the issue just comes down to $$$

Cummins have done. But it is substantially different to the existing engines so you loose commonality.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Are they capable of 125mph? If so does their acceleration match that of a 22x or at least existing 125mph capable locomotives?

3500 hp is possible but acceleration is going to depend on how many vehicles are hung behind them. Like a lot of trains they are probably designed for a top speed of not more than 159 kph so no, they will not match a Voyager. So what that means for timetables is something that needs to be worked out.

 

[Voyagergirl]

I would use the additional HSTs aquired from the proposed replacement of the on the XC services and have the Voyagers replace the Turbostars on the Cardiff-Nottingham/Stansted services, they would be so well suited to that route. BTW, to offer someone a seat which isn't window aligned is like offering someone the chance to spend an hour in a prison cell? Who else agrees?

 

[RAGNARØKR]

I would use the additional HSTs aquired from the proposed replacement of the on the XC services and have the Voyagers replace the Turbostars on the Cardiff-Nottingham/Stansted services, they would be so well suited to that route. BTW, to offer someone a seat which isn't window aligned is like offering someone the chance to spend an hour in a prison cell? Who else agrees?

I think that is an exaggeration. I do not like those seats myself, but then I don't like travelling in vehicles where the windows cannot be opened. Some people spend the entire journey looking at a computer screen, or asleep, so they are not really interested in what is going on outside the train, especially at night or on a journey they make several times a week.

However, these seats ought to be identified in the reservation system so that people who do not want to sit in one are not forced to.

This is the result of a power failure on a train with windows that could not be opened. Stuck in a forest for five hours, more than half the time trying to couple the shunting locomotive to the train.

 

[LE Greys]

I would use the additional HSTs aquired from the proposed replacement of the on the XC services and have the Voyagers replace the Turbostars on the Cardiff-Nottingham/Stansted services, they would be so well suited to that route. BTW, to offer someone a seat which isn't window aligned is like offering someone the chance to spend an hour in a prison cell? Who else agrees?

I agree with the latter, to a certain extent. However, the former is difficult because Voyagers can't venture into East Anglia. Well, they can, but they can't run at full linespeed because of trackforce issues. 185s have the same problem. It's unfortunate, but there isn't much that anyone can do about it because of costs.

 

[AndyLandy]

However, the former is difficult because Voyagers can't venture into East Anglia. Well, they can, but they can't run at full linespeed because of trackforce issues.

Do we have any evidence of this? I've seen it stated a few times that Voyagers cannot use Sprinter differentials, but I've also been told that it's untrue and that they can keep to Sprinter timings along that stretch of line.

That all said, I'm no longer convinced that that's the sort of route you'd want to re-deploy Voyagers to. I suspect the Turbostars are actually ideal stock on that route. I'm not sure how much effort went into researching Project Thor, but I'd be rattling cages at Bombardier and asking "Are you really sure there's nothing that can be done?"

 

[ainsworth74]

Do we have any evidence of this? I've seen it stated a few times that Voyagers cannot use Sprinter differentials, but I've also been told that it's untrue and that they can keep to Sprinter timings along that stretch of line.

Keeping to time and using Sprinter differentials are different things. 185s can emphatically not use SP differentials but they're more than capable of keeping to 170 timings on the way to Hull. This being due to the superior acceleration of a 185 vs a 170. Obviously if a whole route is covered with SP differentials then it doesn't matter how fast you accelerate you'll lose time, but it is something to keep in mind.

 

[Chris125]

I'm not sure how much effort went into researching Project Thor, but I'd be rattling cages at Bombardier and asking "Are you really sure there's nothing that can be done?"

From what's been said that's precisely the problem - when they actually looked in more detail at the work involved the cost estimates ballooned. Project Thor is dead.

Chris

 

[tbtc]

From what's been said that's precisely the problem - when they actually looked in more detail at the work involved the cost estimates ballooned. Project Thor is dead.

Chris

I hope that next time some local politician/ journalist/ Union-mouthpiece starts spouting off about how we should protect jobs in Derby etc that the Government/ DfT remind them of the problems they've had in trying to give Bombardier a guaranteed slice of work like this!

 

[Goatboy]

Having used both units today I've decided what we really need to do is replace all the Voyagers with 8 coach 158's. What a brilliant DMU the 158/159 is. Quiet (for a DMU) and comfortable. I'd happily travel on a journey of any length on a 158 or 159.

I am of course not seriously suggesting this - I doubt its even possible - but they are a much under-rated class of unit which demonstrate you can do DMU's without ending up with something like a Voyager.

 

[HSTEd]

Or we could pay £18bn and be like Switzerland.

EMUs everywhere

 

[Goatboy]

Ugly catenary and enormous upfront capital costs?

 

[HSTEd]

Ugly catenary and enormous upfront capital costs?

£18bn is hardly enormous, and its not really ugly compared to the post industrial wasteland that is the railway network's backdrop.

As for vistas on single track lines like West Highland, you could just put the cantilevers on the less "scenic" side.

 

[Waverley125]

obviously electrify the gaps that would make large-scale DMU workings necessary, those being:

Crewe-Holyhead
Wolverhampton-Shrewsbury
Sheffield-Doncaster
Sheffield-Leeds
Derby-Birmingham
Birmingham-Bristol
Birmingham-Cardiff

then use the remaining 22Xs to run services on:

Inverness/Aberdeen-Glasgow/Edinburgh
Liverpool-Norwich
Stansted Airport-Birmingham
Waterloo-Exeter Central
Bristol-Penzance

 

[Blindtraveler]

Couldnt agree more!
Rebuild them internally first with half current FC Seating and only 1 or 2 disabled loos

 

[Rhydgaled]

What a brilliant DMU the 158/159 is. Quiet (for a DMU) and comfortable. I'd happily travel on a journey of any length on a 158 or 159.

I agree, 158s and 159s are great, we need more trains like them, although it depends who's refurbished them as to how long I'd like to be on one (I seem to remember FirstGW's having insufficent legroom in airline seating when I went from Cosham to Cardiff on one, nice soft seats though compared to the 175 I then boarded in Cardiff (the 175 had enough legroom though)).

£18bn is hardly enormous

That's cheaper than HS2 isn't it, isn't HS2 something like £22bn?

 

[tbtc]

That's cheaper than HS2 isn't it, isn't HS2 something like £22bn?

I think that HS2 includes the "full life" costs of looking after the vehicles too (something that certain people forget when comparing other costs)

 

[ainsworth74]

although it depends who's refurbished them as to how long I'd like to be on one (I seem to remember FirstGW's having insufficent legroom in airline seating when I went from Cosham to Cardiff on one, nice soft seats though compared to the 175 I then boarded in Cardiff (the 175 had enough legroom though)).

Actually I believe that interior is the same one that BR fitted originally (though they have new seat covers) and can be found on a few operators 158s. I agree very comfy but no where near enough legroom, take out a set of airline seats on each side and redistribute the space amongst the remaining seats.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Actually I believe that interior is the same one that BR fitted originally (though they have new seat covers) and can be found on a few operators 158s. I agree very comfy but no where near enough legroom, take out a set of airline seats on each side and redistribute the space amongst the remaining seats.

The seats may be the BR ones, but I'm pretty sure there's more airline seating (as opposed to bays of 4 at a table) in the FirstGW sets than ATW 158s had prior to the recent refurbishment.

 

[Goatboy]

Ok so when i waxed lyrical about 158s I has not realised that some of the FGW ones had been refurbished with new seats. Had one this afternoon, certainly not as comfortable as the recovered original seats on most of the fleet. Shame.

 

[aylesbury]

Perhaps the interiors could use the seats suggested for the mark four coaches plus a more restful colour scheme.The loos definitely need to be sorted and quickly,plus the buffet must be changed to offer a better ambiance than at present.The buffet at the moment looks like a badly stocked booth on a street corner. Class 158,s are not the answer ,to build new or carry out an extensive refurb is not feasable.In an ideal world new units would be in the pipeline but this wont happen in the forseable future.Do not expect the DFT to come up with any ideas ,they are not in the business of actualy doing anything only micro managing the railway.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

In an ideal world new units would be in the pipeline but this wont happen in the forseable future.Do not expect the DFT to come up with any ideas ,they are not in the business of actualy doing anything only micro managing the railway.

In an ideal world the railways would be ordering a large fleet of go-anywhere vehicles for loco-haulage in push-pull mode, compatible with the mark 3 fleet, and a fleet of electric and diesel locomotives to power them. In due course the Voyagers would be converted to be compatible with this fleet, as would the loco-hauled and HST mark 3 stock, plus what is left of the Irish fleet, plus the 442 units if and when they are no longer needed as EMUs.

It is called standardisation. It is the exact opposite of the present strategy and what has been going on in the past 30 years.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think that HS2 includes the "full life" costs of looking after the vehicles too (something that certain people forget when comparing other costs)

It will earn precisely nothing until 2026 as it cannot be opened in stages, thus it will represent sunk capital with no yield. In the meantime, interest charges start to stack up.

It would have made more sense to build the line southwards from Edinburgh/Glasgow and Tyneside to the Midlands, where building could have proceeded relatively quickly, there are few intermediate places, and the benefits could have been banked.

 

[The Ham]

In an ideal world the railways would be ordering a large fleet of go-anywhere vehicles for loco-haulage in push-pull mode, compatible with the mark 3 fleet, and a fleet of electric and diesel locomotives to power them. In due course the Voyagers would be converted to be compatible with this fleet, as would the loco-hauled and HST mark 3 stock, plus what is left of the Irish fleet, plus the 442 units if and when they are no longer needed as EMUs.

The problem is that the UK network is made up of a lot of lines and services which see up to 4 coach long trains (which I seem to recall you have said in the past is too short for loco hauling), of the rest quite a lot of services need to run with the maximum number of coaches or are South East EMU services. That only leaves relatively few services where loco hauled trains would be useful and even those are often better run as DMU's (with running speeds of up to 100 mph) as they can split and run as short formations to a couple of destinations (again 4 or less coaches).

Also the track access charges for the cheapest loco is nearly 3 times that of the most expensive DMU coach and most DMU's (including the class 158's and 159's) are cheaper than a mark 3 coach, meaning that the lease costs of the Loco and coaches would have to be quite a lot lower than a DMU for loco hauling to be a viable option.

It will earn precisely nothing until 2026 as it cannot be opened in stages, thus it will represent sunk capital with no yield. In the meantime, interest charges start to stack up.

It would have made more sense to build the line southwards from Edinburgh/Glasgow and Tyneside to the Midlands, where building could have proceeded relatively quickly, there are few intermediate places, and the benefits could have been banked.

If everything was equal that would make sense, however there are a few flaws in that suggestion:

- Firstly HS2 isn't currently planned to run to Scotland, so that is extra money that would need to be spent

- Secondly the numbers of passengers between Tyneside and the Midlands is probably a fraction of that of the numbers of passengers between London and all the places services by HS2. As basicly HS2 works because it is running into London, all the people that will be able to travel between the other stations are an added bonus. Which means although you would be receiving an income earlier it may not cover the costs of running the trains, let alone off setting some of the interest costs.

- Thirdly, even if the passenger numbers were enough to pay for running the trains and covering some of the interest costs that is likely to be at the expense of most of the existing services, potentially resulting in a reduction of services for many towns along the line. Conversely, even though the Birmingham - London section of HS2 may take a few more years more to be built than your suggestion, once it is running it could bring much more relief to the existing lines enabling more services to places between the two.

 

[Photohunter71]

So as a big fan of loco haulage I'd be feeling hopeful for that type of haulage surviving on UK rails,if Chiltern are going to be placing some orders for locos (will more than likely be class 68's) And DB is theirs and Cross Country's parent company,I don't see why they can't place orders for 68's for XC haulage? Voyagers? can't they be cascaded to work Scotrail Borders run as well as Edinburgh to Glasgow and suchlike?

 

[dosxuk]

In an ideal world the railways would be ordering a large fleet of go-anywhere vehicles for loco-haulage in push-pull mode, compatible with the mark 3 fleet, and a fleet of electric and diesel locomotives to power them. In due course the Voyagers would be converted to be compatible with this fleet, as would the loco-hauled and HST mark 3 stock, plus what is left of the Irish fleet, plus the 442 units if and when they are no longer needed as EMUs.

It is called standardisation. It is the exact opposite of the present strategy and what has been going on in the past 30 years.

Why?

Standardisation doesn't mean that every item of rolling stock is identical.

If you think that the irregular services on the Norwich - Sheringham branch line need exactly the same stock as the Norwich - London intercity services, or the Shenfield Metro's, then it's obvious you know even less about UK rail services than I feared.

MUs offer significant benefits over LHCS, this is inescapabale. They also don't cost as much as you've been making out, with your claims of over £2m / car - the recent 377 order works out at around £800k £1.2m / car.

So your logistics don't work out, your operating costs don't work out, and your purchasing costs don't work out. Other than a sense of nostalgia, what exactly do your demands have going for them? Next you'll be suggesting we bring back kettles...

 

[The Ham]

Next you'll be suggesting we bring back kettles...

they already have elsewhere, I can't find where at the moment though.

 

[HSTEd]

MUs offer significant benefits over LHCS, this is inescapabale. They also don't cost as much as you've been making out, with your claims of over £2m / car - the recent 377 order works out at less than £800k / car.

Really?

I really need to correct my 'Economics of Total Electrification' calculations as I assumed £1.5m, although that was for 23m vehicles.

And electric IEP does come out at £2.4m but those are overspecced to the max.

 

[dosxuk]

Really?

I really need to correct my 'Economics of Total Electrification' calculations as I assumed £1.5m, although that was for 23m vehicles.

Now I've looked for it, I can't find the source... Although it's more than likely I got numbers mixed up with the number and working out of orders Southern are making... Figures I've now found today point to around £1.1m-£1.4m, depending on the scale of order. Still, it's far less than the amount RAGNARØKR has quoted for a new DMU carriage.

And electric IEP does come out at £2.4m but those are overspecced to the max.

But RAGNARØKR seems to think we'll be buying IEP spec vehicles for replacement of the Stourbridge Town line stock.

 

[LE Greys]

But RAGNARØKR seems to think we'll be buying IEP spec vehicles for replacement of the Stourbridge Town line stock.

The way stock procurement is going at the moment, we'll see them on the line sometime around 2090 after Northern have received the rest to replace the 185s they got in 2050 to take over from Pacers. :roll:

Facetiousness aside, BR did a fairly good, if basic, job of stock replacement. They standardised very effectively, following on from what Churchward, Stanier and (I'll grudgingly admit) Thompson did for their respective companies. All of these realised what they needed was a small number of classes, many of which shared basic components, that could fit into multiple roles wherever they were on the system. BR messed up badly with the Modernisation Plan regarding local stock, loads of different DMU classes when about four would have done the job just as well, but they got their act together in time to produce the Sprinters, maybe even the Pacers. The chances are, some spinoff from the Turbo/Networker 'family' would have replaced them, but privatisation stepped in and every company went its own way. Naturally, they concentrated their best stock on their best routes, hence the bulk ordering of semi-fast/regional express DMUs, meaning that more regional express/semi-fast DMUs end up on local services. London Midland and Chiltern have had the sense to order some 172s to fill the gap, but what of Northern and FGW? Horse-trading of old BR classes can only go so far. Will we see 158s going to Severn Beach in 2030? What about 185s on the Harrogate Circle? A good standard local DMU should go a long way to preventing that.