Modern Railways WCML Articles

[SkinnyDave]

Really good articles about WCML franchise discussions including ongoing negotiations on 135mph on some parts of northern route.
No further progress on Baby Pendolinos but Scottish Government have expressed interest in Voyagers should they become available for INV/Aber to Glas/Edin

 

[YorkshireBear]

Really good articles about WCML franchise discussions including ongoing negotiations on 135mph on some parts of northern route.
No further progress on Baby Pendolinos but Scottish Government have expressed interest in Voyagers should they become available for INV/Aber to Glas/Edin

It was a very interesting series of WCML articles.
(the whole magazine is interesting I recommend it to anyone wanting a new rail magazine)

Disagree very much with the Voyagers to Scotland. They should go to XC, nowhere else in my opinion should be able to have them. If XC are being cheap and don't get them then then I wouldn't want Arriva running any more franchises.

 

[Muzer]

I switched from Modern Railways because they seemed to miss quite a few stories, they were too infrequent, and most importantly, they're not sold in Sainsbury's Portswood whereas RAIL are

 

[tbtc]

Scottish Government have expressed interest in Voyagers should they become available for INV/Aber to Glas/Edin

Disagree very much with the Voyagers to Scotland

I don't think Voyagers would suit the Scottish routes very well - no tilting, no 125mph, a capacity reduction on the current doubled up 158/170s, no scope for doubled up Voyagers to Glasgow (given the platform constraints at Queen Street)...

 

[bnsf734]

Pardon my question, but by "Modern Rail" do you mean Modern Railways magazine, or is there another magazine or website that I don't know about?

Thanks.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Pardon my question, but by "Modern Rail" do you mean Modern Railways magazine, or is there another magazine or website that I don't know about?

Thanks.

I presumed he meant modern railways as i read all the info he posted in the August issue this morning
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think Voyagers would suit the Scottish routes very well - no tilting, no 125mph, a capacity reduction on the current doubled up 158/170s, no scope for doubled up Voyagers to Glasgow (given the platform constraints at Queen Street)...

That too....

I think they would be better electrifying the two routes and using 6 car EMUs that can do 110mph where needed without crumple zones.

 

[SkinnyDave]

Yeh meant Modern Railway mag

I can't seem to edit title

 

[YorkshireBear]

Yeh meant Modern Railway mag

I can't seem to edit title

Click advanced and you can.

 

[The Ham]

It was a very interesting series of WCML articles.
(the whole magazine is interesting I recommend it to anyone wanting a new rail magazine)

Disagree very much with the Voyagers to Scotland. They should go to XC, nowhere else in my opinion should be able to have them. If XC are being cheap and don't get them then then I wouldn't want Arriva running any more franchises.

Depends on when the new trains arrive and when Manchester - South Coast is fully wired up.

It maybe possible for XC to get the 221's from Virgin and then palm a number (but probably less than the up to 20 sets they receive) of 220's off on Scotrail. Which would result in them having more capacity (at the very least running more 5 coach sets rather than 4 coach sets) even before passing a few more sets over when they get IC EMU's for the wired up route.

How many sets would Scotrail need?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Disagree very much with the Voyagers to Scotland. They should go to XC, nowhere else in my opinion should be able to have them. If XC are being cheap and don't get them then then I wouldn't want Arriva running any more franchises.

The new contract for Scotrail comes before that for XC, in 2015.
The SG are getting their ITT ready and it's their prerogative (if they have the subsidy money) to upgrade the Aberdeen/Inverness services if they want.
The bidders will then try and find the best solution.

I'd be surprised if XC has any scope to take on 21 more trains prior to a renegotiation of the franchise.
Actually Modern Railways also says DfT is "indifferent" to the VT proposal to replace its Voyagers with Pendolinos, so they may not be available for anybody.
The maintenance arrangements for Voyagers at Central Rivers don't help a Scottish operation, though.

 

[WatcherZero]

Well we know the Scottish Government has been rebuffed in several attempts at nationalising, what if they 'nationalised' the Scottish Railcare depot to protect the 100 jobs there and had it take over maintance of the Voyagers as a steady work stream for the depot.

Silly but plausible scenario

 

[RobShipway]

Would it not be better for ScotRail to take any Class 170's or Class 185's that become available with TPE using 350/4's?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Would it not be better for ScotRail to take any Class 170's or Class 185's that become available with TPE using 350/4's?

185's seem logical for Glasgow/Edinburgh to Aberdeen/Inverness given their superior ability at hill climbing. Could they be run doubled up in the peaks?

 

[WatcherZero]

They can run doubled up but have no corridor connections. Moot anyway as TPE is keeping the 185's for strengthening and additional services.

 

[The Ham]

Actually Modern Railways also says DfT is "indifferent" to the VT proposal to replace its Voyagers with Pendolinos, so they may not be available for anybody.

With Virgin calling for 135mph running on some sections of the WCML:
http://www.globalrailnews.com/2013/08/01/virgin-calls-for-135-mph-running-on-west-coast-main-line/

Virgin’s chief operating officer Chris Gibb has said that 135mph running on some sections of the West Coast Mainline is vital if rail is to challenge competition from the airlines and make best use of capacity.

Although Pendolinos are capable of operating at 140mph – and this capability is being maintained by Alstom – to travel at this speed would require signalling alterations, whereas 135mph would present no such issues as drivers would still be able to see two sections ahead, which deals with any sighting problems.

Mr Gibb said: ” We are pleased that Network Rail agrees with us in this instance and is working positively with us to deliver this change.”

It would make a lot of sense for all the IC stock to be able to run that fast otherwise the 390's will be catching up with the 221's, meaning that pathing becomes more of an issue than if all the IC trains can run at the higher speed.

 

[wilsontown]

I did see the stuff about the proposed 135 mph running, and my impression was that they were dreaming in technicolor. If the issue with 140 mph running was signal sighting at the higher speeds, I can't see how 135 mph is going to be allowed, at least until the signalling is replaced with ETCS which isn't going to happen in the immediate future.

 

[dk1]

I did see the stuff about the proposed 135 mph running, and my impression was that they were dreaming in technicolor. If the issue with 140 mph running was signal sighting at the higher speeds, I can't see how 135 mph is going to be allowed, at least until the signalling is replaced with ETCS which isn't going to happen in the immediate future.

It was on the straight sections in the Lockerbie area. One reason put forward by Chris Gibb of Virgin Trains was that drivers could always see two signals ahead. How this works in fog i would be interested to know.

 

[wilsontown]

Indeed, but I don't see why you need to see two signals ahead, you just need to see the signal you're about to pass (unless someone out there knows better?).

In fog I presume you would just run to slightly lower speed limits, I think that's already done...or is that just in falling snow?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

With Virgin calling for 135mph running on some sections of the WCML:
http://www.globalrailnews.com/2013/08/01/virgin-calls-for-135-mph-running-on-west-coast-main-line/

It would make a lot of sense for all the IC stock to be able to run that fast otherwise the 390's will be catching up with the 221's, meaning that pathing becomes more of an issue than if all the IC trains can run at the higher speed.

It won't happen unless (a) Network Rail agrees, and (b) the DfT say they want it, and write it into the franchise agreement.
Virgin can't just "will" it into existence.
It's probably another thing the DfT is "indifferent" about.

I think DfT simply wants the maximum premium out of Virgin for the next 4 years (to help pay for franchise improvements elsewhere), and are not interested in expensive sideshows like this (and in all probability the Blackpool/Salop services too).

 

[gordonthemoron]

will TPE's 350/4s be able to do 110mph?

 

[RobShipway]

will TPE's 350/4s be able to do 110mph?

There are built to be able to do 110mph according to any articles I have read in either Rail or Modern Railways. Plus the fact of the timings that are coming in the December timetable has them down as doing 110mph from the outset.

 

[The Ham]

It won't happen unless (a) Network Rail agrees, and (b) the DfT say they want it, and write it into the franchise agreement.
Virgin can't just "will" it into existence.
It's probably another thing the DfT is "indifferent" about.

I think DfT simply wants the maximum premium out of Virgin for the next 4 years (to help pay for franchise improvements elsewhere), and are not interested in expensive sideshows like this (and in all probability the Blackpool/Salop services too).

http://www.globalrailnews.com/2013/08/01/virgin-calls-for-135-mph-running-on-west-coast-main-line/

Mr Gibb said: ” We are pleased that Network Rail agrees with us in this instance and is working positively with us to deliver this change.”

 

[YorkshireBear]

will TPE's 350/4s be able to do 110mph?

Eventually yes, it awaits LM completing the safety case for multiple unit working. Will not be introduced till after May 2014 anyway when most 185s are stepped down once all EMUs have arrived.

 

[dk1]

Indeed, but I don't see why you need to see two signals ahead, you just need to see the signal you're about to pass (unless someone out there knows better?).

In fog I presume you would just run to slightly lower speed limits, I think that's already done...or is that just in falling snow?

But we don't drive any slower in fog. I think he was getting at not requiring flashing greens for braking distance.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

http://www.globalrailnews.com/2013/08/01/virgin-calls-for-135-mph-running-on-west-coast-main-line/

Let's see what turns up in the franchise agreement...

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I switched from Modern Railways because they seemed to miss quite a few stories, they were too infrequent, and most importantly, they're not sold in Sainsbury's Portswood whereas RAIL are

I did not realise that Sainsbury's stores was such a noted purveyor of the railway magazines that normally attract the more managerially-minded of those interested in rail-related matters. I am more than happy to pay my annual subscription for Modern Railways to Link Publishing and have it delivered to our residence days before it is on sale in retail outlets.

The rumour that our butler used to go to the W H Smith store in Macclesfield to purchase my monthly copy of Modern Railways, in the barouche box, is a scurrilous rumour put around by young and envious rapscallions who do not have a paddock as part of their residences...

 

[anthony263]

I have certainly been enjoying the articles on the GW region in the latest issue. That said the west coast articles have proved a interesting read as well.

Before I struggled to get a copy as my local WHSmith's store in Bridgend is terrible so much so I ended up taking out a subscription to Modern Railways just to make sure I got a copy each month.

 

[Eagle]

They can run doubled up but have no corridor connections. Moot anyway as TPE is keeping the 185's for strengthening and additional services.

For now, at least. There may be a cascade six or seven years down the line when TPE North electrification is finished.

There are built to be able to do 110mph according to any articles I have read in either Rail or Modern Railways. Plus the fact of the timings that are coming in the December timetable has them down as doing 110mph from the outset.

No, in the Dec 2013 timetable they are all timed for 100 mph, because not all the 350s will be in service by then and a lot will still need to be operated by 185s. In the May 2014 timetable it should be fully 350-operated and only then can it be timed for 110.

 

[Qwerty133]

Eventually yes, it awaits LM completing the safety case for multiple unit working. Will not be introduced till after May 2014 anyway when most 185s are stepped down once all EMUs have arrived.

read on Facebook last night, that for 350/1s to run in multiple at 110MPH they will need new pantographs and therefore won't be happening in the short term.

 

[WatcherZero]

I did see the stuff about the proposed 135 mph running, and my impression was that they were dreaming in technicolor. If the issue with 140 mph running was signal sighting at the higher speeds, I can't see how 135 mph is going to be allowed, at least until the signalling is replaced with ETCS which isn't going to happen in the immediate future.

140 is the level where the in cab signalling is required, 135 is mooted if the track conditions allow as its just below the cutoff point without the cost of resignalling.

That said there is a lot of stock in the UK that could potentially do 140 now if track conditions allowed, The Pendolino, the IEP, 395's and Intercity 225's