New TPE Train Discussion

[43074]

On this press release, it says "220 brand new carriages will be introduced by 2020, providing an additional 13m seats a year. These state of the art trains, all with capabilities of going 125 mph"

That bit about all the new stock being 125mph capable is not going to be true is it, if the LHCS stock is Class 68 hauled? They only do 100mph dont they?

Rail Magazine posted this quote from TPE on their facebook page:

"From initial introduction in the spring of 2018, locomotive hauled trains will initially operate between Liverpool Lime Street and Newcastle. Later that year, some of the trains will begin running to and from Scarborough. However, once our new AT300 bi-mode fleet arrives in December 2019, the intercity carriages will then be transferred onto the routes from Liverpool and Manchester Airport to Middlesbrough and Scarborough services. The carriages are capable of running at 125mph, but the Class 68 locomotives are limited to 100mph and hence these services will operate at 100mph, the maximum linespeed on the routes served in 2019. However, in the future as routes are electrified they will have the capability of running up to speeds of 125mph."

which suggests the 68s are only an interim solution, and will be replaced by 125mph electric locos in due course.

 

[The Ham]

With the likelihood of fewer and fewer "proper trains" on our network, what's the betting that First are hoping for some extra passengers in the form or loco and coach enthusiasts on their services?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Rail Magazine posted this quote from TPE on their facebook page:


which suggests the 68s are only an interim solution, and will be replaced by 125mph electric locos in due course.

Which could lead to speculation as to what 125 mph capable electric locos that could be heading to TPE...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

which suggests the 68s are only an interim solution, and will be replaced by 125mph electric locos in due course.

There aren't any (bar 30-year-old class 91s).
And 13 125mph new electric locos is not an economic build.

 

[Domh245]

which suggests the 68s are only an interim solution, and will be replaced by 125mph electric locos in due course.

So that is near enough a firm guarantee that the LHCS will be 125mph capable. If only they would release some actual pictures of what they will be!

Also, do I spot a market for some unemployed class 91s?

With the likelihood of fewer and fewer "proper trains" on our network, what's the betting that First are hoping for some extra passengers in the form or loco and coach enthusiasts on their services?

I would hope that it is quite low! Enthusiasts can't fund a railway (no matter how expensive rangers are) and besides, these will be air conditioned, plug door stock. How is one supposed to wibble about the thrash and the clag whilst leaning out of the window with stock like that!?

 

[Roose]

El Correo images (at digital Derby?!) show generic First Group livery and the caption suggests this is the designs proposed for the TransPennine project but may simply be an artist's rendering rather than a final design (though one would hope such a design is not too far away).

The article confirms both electric and loco-hauled units will be based upon the Civity platform, like Northern's units.

 

[43074]

There aren't any (bar 30-year-old class 91s).
And 13 125mph new electric locos is not an economic build.

Also, do I spot a market for some unemployed class 91s?

15 68s was enough for DRS to start their 68 fleet, likewise Colas ordered 10 70s to begin with... it isn't unknown to order relatively small fleets of locos. I could imagine a 91 with 5 coaches being relatively ''sprightly'' even if new locos weren't ordered though. Clearly TPE have the longer term in mind.

 

[47802]

Rail Magazine posted this quote from TPE on their facebook page:


which suggests the 68s are only an interim solution, and will be replaced by 125mph electric locos in due course.

Or Replaced by EMU's hopefully

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or Replaced by EMU's hopefully

Why? What's wrong with an electric-hauled LHCS set that will be internally exactly the same as one of the EMUs except for having a locomotive on one end?

 

[47802]

Why? What's wrong with an electric-hauled LHCS set that will be internally exactly the same as one of the EMUs except for having a locomotive on one end?

Well the fact that UK railways have become unit based there are clearly a number of reasons for doing that otherwise it wouldn't have happened, but I will let the Loco Hauled enthusiasts hold on to their limited swansong victory.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well the fact that UK railways have become unit based there are clearly a number of reasons for doing that otherwise it wouldn't have happened, but I will let the Loco Hauled enthusiasts hold on to their limited swansong victory.

Equally First haven't ordered LHCS for a laugh. There must have been a solid business reason for doing so, e.g. early availability.

 

[47802]

Equally First haven't ordered LHCS for a laugh. There must have been a solid business reason for doing so, e.g. early availability.

There clearly a particular set of circumstances with regard to this LHCS order which doubt will be repeated in the future.

When we get to the next franchise and hopefully TPE core is Electrified there may be benefits in moving these trains to another mainly diesel routes anyway as it will allow some DMU's or maybe even HST's to be cascaded or replaced.

 

[RobShipway]

Even though the carriages will be LHCS, they will be no different than the Mk4 coaches with a class 91 at either end with being InterCity 225 units.

Failing that, either Siemens or CAF could always build the long defunct class 93 from the old InterCity 250 project.

 

[WatcherZero]

There aren't any (bar 30-year-old class 91s).
And 13 125mph new electric locos is not an economic build.

Probably is an economical order as simple to build using existing designs. If you tied the order to a 15 year lease (with Dft approval) then quite easy to do after the end of the 68's lease.

The reason they are going with 68's and coaching stock is because the locos are available now and the simple coaching stock could be built in under two years. If they had the ability to wait longer for delivery they would almost certainly have gone with something more complex. Even at this accelerated rate of introduction they wont arrive until a month after the new service starts.

 

[87015]

I would hope that it is quite low! Enthusiasts can't fund a railway (no matter how expensive rangers are) and besides, these will be air conditioned, plug door stock. How is one supposed to wibble about the thrash and the clag whilst leaning out of the window with stock like that!?

Because most haulage men don't wibble about hanging out the window and just quietly build up mileage. Not many of my seven miles are on PVs, but still enjoyed it. Can hear plenty on Chiltern and if the stock puts off idiot children it's a good thing. Still, don't miss an easy dig eh?

Ps wasn't there a thread when this was first announced that there was no chance of new LHCS because the right people didn't agree with it...

Giggles just for the outrage.

 

[jimm]

Or these coaches might just spend most of the time running on 100mph-maximum scheduled services or track that is limited to 100mph or less - such as on the Scarborough line or on Teesside - never mind that Network Rail would probably have kittens about the idea of a 125mph loco, unless it is a bespoke creation like the Class 91, which was purpose-built to keep down the axle loading.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Probably is an economical order as simple to build using existing designs. If you tied the order to a 15 year lease (with Dft approval) then quite easy to do after the end of the 68's lease.

It will indeed be interesting if the DfT has given the ROSCO a Section 54 undertaking beyond the end of the current franchise, to guarantee a longer return.
But UK-gauge 125mph electric locos don't grow on trees...
If (say) XC went LHCS in the interim, that would make a difference.
Unlike the 100mph class 68/88, the freight TOCs won't be interested.

 

[159220]

I understand 68026 upwards are for the TPE contract. The initial 7 (68026-032) currently on order and to be delivered in TPE livery shall be for the December 2016 timetable introduction of at least two TnT sets with Mk3 coaches from the ex-pretedolino and possibly a third formed with DRS mk3 stock. (Requires 7 68s). As DRS/Beacon Rail were under EU regs allowed to order in total 41 x 68s, this means another 9 can be delivered. This would take the TPE fleet in 2018 to 16 TPE 68s with 68032-041 to cover 13 loco-hauled CAF stock.
DRS need 68016-025 for their own operations.
DRS Press Release expected soon shall prove is my source correct. (or not!)

Also, the UKLight design can be for speeds of 75-125mph - it is a software adjustment, thus the 68s/88s can run 125, put as other posts point - No one sees NR allowing this!

 

[DT611]

There clearly a particular set of circumstances with regard to this LHCS order which doubt will be repeated in the future.

Yes, quicker availability then units or bi-modes as suggested by others (which makes sense) . Whether a situation like it will or won't arise in the future i couldn't say.

Failing that, either Siemens or CAF could always build the long defunct class 93 from the old InterCity 250 project.

I'm not sure they would be able to build that design now, it's long out of date surely?

 

[RobShipway]

Yes, quicker availability then units or bi-modes as suggested by others (which makes sense) . Whether a situation like it will or won't arise in the future i couldn't say.



I'm not sure they would be able to build that design now, it's long out of date surely?

Probably is out of date by now.

 

[Mordac]

Or these coaches might just spend most of the time running on 100mph-maximum scheduled services or track that is limited to 100mph or less - such as on the Scarborough line or on Teesside - never mind that Network Rail would probably have kittens about the idea of a 125mph loco, unless it is a bespoke creation like the Class 91, which was purpose-built to keep down the axle loading.

Aren't Class 67s 125mph? (I know they're diesel)

 

[Lemmy99uk]

Well the fact that UK railways have become unit based there are clearly a number of reasons for doing that otherwise it wouldn't have happened, but I will let the Loco Hauled enthusiasts hold on to their limited swansong victory.

The benefit of multiple unit working is that it here is no necessity to provide infrastructure and staff for run round or shunting moves.

Using locos and driving trailers has the same result but, assuming the locomotives have sufficient power, makes it a lot easier to provide additional vehicles in the rake should traffic increase sufficiently.

 

[WatcherZero]

But UK-gauge 125mph electric locos don't grow on trees...

I believe you could easily fit 125mph gubbins within a 66/88 bodyshell with a new aerodynamic nose. Its already larger than a class 91 which fits them in and an 88 is 90% as capable as a class 92 despite being only 2/3rds the weight.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

It will indeed be interesting if the DfT has given the ROSCO a Section 54 undertaking beyond the end of the current franchise, to guarantee a longer return.
But UK-gauge 125mph electric locos don't grow on trees...
If (say) XC went LHCS in the interim, that would make a difference.
Unlike the 100mph class 68/88, the freight TOCs won't be interested.

The fact that the LHCS is being financed by Beacon rail and not one of the three main ROSCO's is very interesting, perhaps they thought the risk was to great was too great with lots of Mk3's and Mk4's being spare in a couple of years.

 

[RobShipway]

Aren't Class 67s 125mph? (I know they're diesel)

Yes, Class 67s are 125mph capable, but I do not believe that Network Rail has passed them to be used with LHCS stock at that speed on all routes where they would potentially be used.

Besides, I have a feeling that in the future that class 88's maybe used with the TPE LHCS fleet but will be using similar class 68's in the meantime.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Aren't Class 67s 125mph? (I know they're diesel)

Nominally yes, but if they were any good they would have been used for this project. There are plenty of them spare.
Reliability and performance seems to be poor.
The NR site showing route clearance says that Class 67 is limited to 110mph on the ECML (100mph north of Doncaster).

 

[CosherB]

I believe you could easily fit 125mph gubbins within a 66/88 bodyshell with a new aerodynamic nose. Its already larger than a class 91 which fits them in and an 88 is 90% as capable as a class 92 despite being only 2/3rds the weight.

Oh really? :roll:

 

[AnonymousUser1]

So proper trains are back!

The EMUs look very nice, as well. Good choice by TPE I think.

primarily becasue of the likelihood of it moving to all under the wires at a unspecificed medium term date and the inability of hitachi to commit to even more 80x stock before 2020 ...

 

[gimmea50anyday]

A 67 pulling a 225 can't attain 125....

 

[Bungle965]

A 67 pulling a 225 can't attain 125....

70/80mph at the very most, even then it will be razzing its head off. Using enough fuel to have a member of Green Peace meet the driver at the next stopping point.
Sam

 

[pjm0512]

That shot in the background reminds me of the 331 (CAF Northern EMU) renders

I think it is infact a render of the same body (at least the cab ends anyway).