Which they could reverse engineer into a.....442!
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
If you designed your own DMU, what would it be like?
- Thread starter 222ben
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
The argument goes both ways; an MU should be able to (at least) keep to loco hauled trains timings and have at least the same number of seats as the same length of loco hauled trains.
Not wanting to drag this into another Voyager bashing thread, but they were a product of their time which with the way the passenger numbers have changed (i.e. doubled in the last 20 year) are now no longer suitable for the routes that they serve.
This has been exacerbated by the ICWC franchise process failing which could have seen (at least some of) their Voyagers move to XC and the delays in electrification meaning that there will not be many (if any) 222's available to strengthen XC services for some time to come. Even if Project Thor had been better value that would have helped significantly.
In short there are many organisations with whom you can lay blame for the Voyagers being now unsuitable for the services that they run, however that does not mean that all Intercity MU's are bad and all Intercity loco hauled services are good.
For instance if you compare a 9+2 HST with a 10 coach class 800 (formed of two units), then the HST's would be much slower with lower capacity than the class 800 over a similar length of train, which makes it clear cut as to which to use.
However change the HST to 8+2 with a 10 coach 221 (formed of 2 units) and the HST would still be a little slower but have a some extra seats (535 vs 500) for a similar length, but with the flexibility to be able to split the train on route to serve two more minor end destinations, so the comparison becomes more difficult to make the judgment as to which would be better to use.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Yet, oddly, the HST is a much nicer environment for the passenger on a long distance service. Odd that....................
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
They weren't suitable for the routes they serve when they were new either. The concept of shorter trains more frequently was flawed, and it's not like Crosscountry's seven carriage trains of the time were only carrying around fresh air beforehand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I've mentioned it before, but in the realms of fantasy I would have liked to have seen a late-eighties modernisation of the Crosscountry network with 110mph capable class 442 based DEMUs, in five and seven carriage formations.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Nurse! The screens!
HMS Ark Royal
Established Member
442s in tandem with 142/143/144s... Oh, and throw in a couple of Class 101s for good measure
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
They did have "Class 442 based DEMUs", initially in 7 (or was it 8?) car formation, and later in 5 car formation. They even had 125mph capability, never mind 110. They are called HSTs.
HMS Ark Royal
Established Member
They did have "Class 442 based DEMUs", initially in 7 (or was it 8?) car formation, and later in 5 car formation. They are called HSTs.
HSTs... What are these HSTs of which thou speaketh of?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
What, on XC? They had a few until Virgin got rid.
Yet, if XC still had them then it would be another TOC which would be short of stock and so would have either offered more than XC are paying (net result XC where it is now anyway - see what has happened with the 170's) or the other TOC would have got more trains, probably something like the 180's (i.e. short MU's and we'd be no better off anyway, just with a different mix of short MU's).
sprinterguy
Veteran Member
Good point, that.They did have "Class 442 based DEMUs", initially in 7 (or was it 8?) car formation, and later in 5 car formation. They even had 125mph capability, never mind 110. They are called HSTs.
The Crosscountry sets were 7 car, only the East Coast ones were built as 8.
Last edited:
We have plenty of short DMUs, the need is for more longer trains to cater for ever growing passenger numbers.
So I would go for a 6 car battery/diesel hybrid with two relatively powerful engines of sufficient HP to just reach 100MPH on the level. Additional power for acceleration and to ascend inclines would come from the battery.
Automatic controls would shutdown one engine when possible.
6 cars would be a considerable improvement over the many 3,4, and 5 car DMUs in use at present. Two units could run in multiple to give a 12 car train, up to four units should be capable of multiple operation for ECS moves and rescue purposes, and perhaps exceptionally in passenger use, but not regularly due to platform length limitations.
On a 12 car train, one engine only should be able to provide hotel power for the whole train when stopped at a terminus.
Reliable air conditioning, with windows that can be opened in case of AC failure but are normally locked.
Large windows that align with seats.
Non stinking, reliable toilets with ample water tank and retention tank capacity.
Most seats to face across tables, a minority of unidirectional seats. 2+1 in first, 2+2 in steerage.
Properly sprung or upholstered seats.
A buffet AND a trolley.
Luggage space in overhead racks and between the seats, with careful design the unidirectional seats AND the table seats would line up with windows, the space saved by the unidirectional seating being used for luggage.
And finally two unique features that would cost almost nothing and greatly improve customer satisfaction.
Firstly design the heating and air conditioning such that one side of each coach is warmer than the other.
For winter use install heaters at low level along one side only of the coach, the heat will of course spread out, but one side of the coach will be noticeably warmer than the other.
For summer use supply cold air from ceiling outlets along one side only of the coach (or centrally located air outlets that direct the cool air to one side) The cooling effect will of course spread out, but one side of the coach would be noticeably cooler.
To make it clear how this works, I would make the seats different colours in the warmer and cooler sides of the coach and supply explanatory notices.
"dear customer, in order to best cater for differing preferences, we have designed these trains such that one side of each carriage will normally be warmer than the other. The warmer area has orange seats, the cooler area has green seats" Regular travellers would of course know which they preferred in advance.
Secondly, I would make the lighting level much higher along one side of the coach, customers could choose the dim or bright side according to choice. Far fewer complaints about it being too dim to read by, or too bright to relax under should result.
Asymmetric lighting should cost nothing, and "one sided" heating and cooling should actually be cheaper than the present arrangement.
.
So I would go for a 6 car battery/diesel hybrid with two relatively powerful engines of sufficient HP to just reach 100MPH on the level. Additional power for acceleration and to ascend inclines would come from the battery.
Automatic controls would shutdown one engine when possible.
6 cars would be a considerable improvement over the many 3,4, and 5 car DMUs in use at present. Two units could run in multiple to give a 12 car train, up to four units should be capable of multiple operation for ECS moves and rescue purposes, and perhaps exceptionally in passenger use, but not regularly due to platform length limitations.
On a 12 car train, one engine only should be able to provide hotel power for the whole train when stopped at a terminus.
Reliable air conditioning, with windows that can be opened in case of AC failure but are normally locked.
Large windows that align with seats.
Non stinking, reliable toilets with ample water tank and retention tank capacity.
Most seats to face across tables, a minority of unidirectional seats. 2+1 in first, 2+2 in steerage.
Properly sprung or upholstered seats.
A buffet AND a trolley.
Luggage space in overhead racks and between the seats, with careful design the unidirectional seats AND the table seats would line up with windows, the space saved by the unidirectional seating being used for luggage.
And finally two unique features that would cost almost nothing and greatly improve customer satisfaction.
Firstly design the heating and air conditioning such that one side of each coach is warmer than the other.
For winter use install heaters at low level along one side only of the coach, the heat will of course spread out, but one side of the coach will be noticeably warmer than the other.
For summer use supply cold air from ceiling outlets along one side only of the coach (or centrally located air outlets that direct the cool air to one side) The cooling effect will of course spread out, but one side of the coach would be noticeably cooler.
To make it clear how this works, I would make the seats different colours in the warmer and cooler sides of the coach and supply explanatory notices.
"dear customer, in order to best cater for differing preferences, we have designed these trains such that one side of each carriage will normally be warmer than the other. The warmer area has orange seats, the cooler area has green seats" Regular travellers would of course know which they preferred in advance.
Secondly, I would make the lighting level much higher along one side of the coach, customers could choose the dim or bright side according to choice. Far fewer complaints about it being too dim to read by, or too bright to relax under should result.
Asymmetric lighting should cost nothing, and "one sided" heating and cooling should actually be cheaper than the present arrangement.
.
Last edited:
HMS Ark Royal
Established Member
3rd Rail pacer, anyone?
GatwickDepress
Established Member
The squealing between London Road and Brighton would deafen the entire population of Preston Park!
HMS Ark Royal
Established Member
Good... About time them namby pamby Southerners learned the meaning of pain *insert evil laugh here*
What about a pantograph version of a pacer?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
With regard to HVAC, I would like to see a proper blown-air climate control system, and a move away from the big radiators at floor level which tend to just cook your ankles while your head is frozen from above.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It'd bounce enough to bring the wires down at every set of points.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It'd bounce enough to bring the wires down at every set of points.
The chief concept of the Multiple Unit is that the units can be connected in multiple, to provide full flexibility of train length. The down side, is that, the shorter the unit, the more space is taken up with redundant cabs when they are joined. The "modern" approach of having longer units reduces this redundancy, but at the cost of inflexibility.
A traditional train had a locomotive carrying the controls and the power, hauling dumb coaches. Would there be any mileage in sets of powered coaches, with unpowered, smaller "cab" units that could be coupled at each end? Give them a corridor connection, and you could have flexibility both in number of coaches between cabs, and the potential to split trains.
HMS Ark Royal
Established Member
We have 144's in the Southwest, so yes we do know the meaning of pain
No, you do not
AnonymousUser1
Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2013
- Messages
- 1,010
is it ? i've done HST and 222 on the MML and didn't find a great deal of difference
unfortunately MU vs hauled on IC is something where the average travelling person or even a none basher / gracer / ' for teh thrash + clag' interested person is rather less interested than if it runs to time, if the bogs work and if the buffet + trolley aren;t run by 'wounded rhino catering' ...
Last edited:
RichmondCommu
Established Member
This all sounds a bit too slow to me. I'd rather have more trains with diesel engines slung under the carriages.
Minilad
Established Member
GatwickDepress
Established Member
Oh, us southerners knew the meaning of pain before you northerners were old enough for long trousers! Behold, the LB&SCR railmotor!
RichmondCommu
Established Member
Oh God no. Sprinters are much better.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Maybe I'm just built for comfort and not for speed
Have you ever been on the back of a motor bike
Minilad
Established Member
Oh God no. Sprinters are much better.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Have you ever been on the back of a motor bike
God no! I would rather travel by Pendolino than motorbike. And I'm sure you know my views on Pendolinos!
RichmondCommu
Established Member
Eh? I'm afraid I've left my RailUK Forums phrase book at work and now I'm home for the weekend.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oh yes
Mind you if I said the Villa will stay up if you agreed to an hour on the back of a bike you might be tempted Minilad
Established Member
Eh? I'm afraid I've left my RailUK Forums phrase book at work and now I'm home for the weekend.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oh yes
At the risk of going massively off topic. No actually I am resigned to us going down now. Not even an hour on the back of a bike can save us
RichmondCommu
Established Member
At the risk of going massively off topic. No actually I am resigned to us going down now. Not even an hour on the back of a bike can save us
Oh well at least you can travel on a Voyager to Derby for the away fixture at Pride Park
You have a good record at our place!Minilad
Established Member
Oh well at least you can travel on a Voyager to Derby for the away fixture at Pride Park
Or a 170. I seem to remember a 0-6 not so long ago!
RichmondCommu
Established Member
Yes the Class 170's are pretty good units
I've managed to pretty much block that season from my memory!In all honesty I'd say the service between the East and West Midlands is as good as it's ever been. Yes the Voyagers need to and should have been longer but the service is at least very frequent.
- Status