Disposal Of IC225s

[Darandio]

The 91s are still relatively modern and have a lot of life left in them

But they aren't and they haven't, for reasons outlined in this thread.

 

[A0]

How about LM taking them to run the longer distance services, such as London to Crewe?

A shortened rake (say loco, 6 coaches and DVT) should be able to keep to the timings of an 110mph EMU given the relatively few stations it will serve, whilst giving a noticeable increase in capacity.

You're joking.

Too slow to accelerate compared to the 350s and crap dwell times due to the door arrangement. They'd never be able to keep to time on the WCML paths.

 

[Harbon 1]

Thinking outside the box (and quite desperately it probably seems) for a reuse in freight, could a pair semi-permanently coupled at the slab end with a bus for power between them be an option for home or overseas markets? Seeing as a reuse could be hindered by the asymmetrical nature of them.

Of course a refurb would be necessary.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Thinking outside the box (and quite desperately it probably seems) for a reuse in freight, could a pair semi-permanently coupled at the slab end with a bus for power between them be an option for home or overseas markets? Seeing as a reuse could be hindered by the asymmetrical nature of them.

Of course a refurb would be necessary.

What exactly is a "bus".

 

[D365]

What exactly is a "bus".

Fixed 25kV (or more commonly 750V) power line.

 

[Harbon 1]

What exactly is a "bus".

To be honest I think I used the wrong term. I was thinking of the same arrangement of that on a pendolino, allowing the train to use only one pantograph to power all motor coaches.

In this case so there aren't two pantographs next to each other on the overhead lines.

 

[t_star2001uk]

You were thinking of a power train line..

 

[The Ham]

You're joking.

Too slow to accelerate compared to the 350s and crap dwell times due to the door arrangement. They'd never be able to keep to time on the WCML paths.

I agree that a 9 coach train (plus loco and DVT) would be too slow, I am not sure that 6 coach train would be too slow.

The HST's can't keep to 22x timing when they are 2+7 but apparently when they are 2+5 they could do, as such using the same logic; shorten the length of the train (but still longer than the 4 coach 350s) and it may work.

I'm also not convinced that dwell times would be impacted that badly unless the train was full and standing, it's not like it is a Metro service with the possibility of hundreds of people at each station.

 

[ainsworth74]

I agree that a 9 coach train (plus loco and DVT) would be too slow, I am not sure that 6 coach train would be too slow.

Or a 9 coach with 91s at each end?

 

[TheEdge]

Thinking outside the box (and quite desperately it probably seems) for a reuse in freight, could a pair semi-permanently coupled at the slab end with a bus for power between them be an option for home or overseas markets? Seeing as a reuse could be hindered by the asymmetrical nature of them.

Of course a refurb would be necessary.

No, as has been said several times they are very specific locomotives. They are not designed for or capable of everything other than high speed non stop passenger work. In order to make them usable on freight or stopping services they would need a significant rebuilt which negates any real use. Especially when with the general downturn in some freight, especially bulk, lots of modern freight locos (66s mainly) are looking for work.

 

[Kendalian]

Or a 9 coach with 91s at each end?

Should be a few HST power cars kicking about post Class 800...so put a power car at the other end.

Just the job for the next time the wires come down.

Back to the future indeed. Tricky Dicky will claim all the credit for such a revolutionary idea :roll:

 

[rebmcr]

Massive DC motors are long past their time on this railway. It's time for the 91's to retire, not to search for a reason not to.

 

[najaB]

Forgive me for asking, but is this actual news or a joke?

Pretty sure it is!

 

[cjmillsnun]

Should be a few HST power cars kicking about post Class 800...so put a power car at the other end.

Just the job for the next time the wires come down.

Back to the future indeed. Tricky Dicky will claim all the credit for such a revolutionary idea :roll:

I'll let convert the electrics in the Mk4s then. HSTs give non standard ETS.

 

[Townsend Hook]

I'll let convert the electrics in the Mk4s then. HSTs give non standard ETS.

Just put one of the Night star Mk3 generator cars in the formation then

 

[Suraggu]

MK.IV's and Class 91's are notoriously unreliable, always have and always will be.

Leaving Mk.IV's in storage without regular train supply will destroy their stat cons and air con and you will also create more maintenance issues with wiring etc. The costs will mount up for the leasing company to get them back into revenue earning service.

There will be no home for the Class 91's bar the few staying with VTEC. Again they are too high geared for anything other than limited stop express services. I also cannot see them being sent to mainland europe because they are useless on freight services and Eastern Europe express services are slowly going over to EMU's or using locomotives with lower gearing and the low top speed of lines, means the class 91's being sent abroad would be useless.

so bar a maximum of 10 Mk.4 sets and between 8 -12 Class 91's staying with VTEC they do have a bleak future.

 

[gsnedders]

About the only stuff left is probably the Mk3s being used on:

• The Night Riviera but its highly unlikely that it would be practical/economic to convert a Mk4 into a SLEP/SLE. Particularly considering that GWR are about to have access to a glut of surplus SLEP/SLE vehicles to cannibalise.
• ATW Premier Service and North Wales Coast but who knows how long the Premier Service is going to last (it's a miracle it's made it this far to be honest) and we should have a glut of DMUs that could replace the North Wales Coast LHCS services.
• Fife Circle services but again lots of DMUs in the offing.
• Cumbrian Coast Mk2s but again lots of DMUs available in the near future.
• MML HSTs are currently without a replacement plan as far as I'm aware beyond EMUs once the wires go up.

That's about it that I can think of off the top of my head.

That makes it seem like MML would be a good home, given I can't see the HSTs being refitted for the likely short time prior to electrification with the cost of doing so. I presume we'd need 67s given you need 125mph stock, but that'll massive increase the running costs… Maybe not so obviously a gain compared with replacing the doors, then…

How plausible would it be to add a rectifier/transformer into the luggage compartment of the HST power cars to supply the Mk4?

 

[TheEdge]

Without getting all down people really need to accept that there is really very little chance the ex-BR stock being withdrawn over the next few years doing anything more than keeping EMR and Booths in work and not much else.

 

[Haydn1971]

Given the franchise is renewed in 2018, that wires won't get to Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield until well into the 2020s, then HS2 Phase 1 starts running by 2026 releasing dozens of 390s from WCML (by then just 22-25 years old), then by 2032 HS2 Phase 2 starts running releasing dozens of 801s from ECML (by then just 15 years old), I really don't see the economics of buying a new fleet of EMUs for MML when there's a fleet of off lease 91s and Mk4s sat idle and very competitive on rental... Will an extra 10 minutes to really London matter if you've increased passenger capacity ? You could still run a few under the wires 222s delivering 2hr services between Sheffield and London, fill the rest with bigger slightly slower units until the magical day that HS2 reaches Sheffield.

 

[RichmondCommu]

That makes it seem like MML would be a good home, given I can't see the HSTs being refitted for the likely short time prior to electrification with the cost of doing so.

Given that they were not deemed suitable for the Norwich route I can't see why they would be a good fit for the MML. Their acceleration is not good enough for the number of stations on the route which are in close proximity to each other or the numerous permanent speed restrictions.

 

[gsnedders]

Given that they were not deemed suitable for the Norwich route I can't see why they would be a good fit for the MML. Their acceleration is not good enough for the number of stations on the route which are in close proximity to each other or the numerous permanent speed restrictions.

The HSTs are similarly not suitable, though, and they are the status quo, which makes it a very different situation. In general, the HSTs are only booked on the non-stop services, hence acceleration isn't an issue.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Given the franchise is renewed in 2018, that wires won't get to Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield until well into the 2020s, then HS2 Phase 1 starts running by 2026 releasing dozens of 390s from WCML (by then just 22-25 years old), then by 2032 HS2 Phase 2 starts running releasing dozens of 801s from ECML (by then just 15 years old), I really don't see the economics of buying a new fleet of EMUs for MML when there's a fleet of off lease 91s and Mk4s sat idle and very competitive on rental... Will an extra 10 minutes to really London matter if you've increased passenger capacity ? You could still run a few under the wires 222s delivering 2hr services between Sheffield and London, fill the rest with bigger slightly slower units until the magical day that HS2 reaches Sheffield.

Would a TOC want to take trains that have a history of reliability problems that will surely only get worse and are not quick enough off the mark given the number of station stops / speed restrictions? Not only are you in danger of losing business to the M1 with longer journey times but where does the improved passenger capacity come from over an EMU, especially given that you get rid of the loco and the DVT? How do the track access charges compare to EMU's?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The HSTs are similarly not suitable, though, and they are the status quo, which makes it a very different situation. In general, the HSTs are only booked on the non-stop services, hence acceleration isn't an issue.

The only reason the HST's are still on the MML is because there are not enough Meridians. If there were the HST's would have been long gone. I concur that they don't operate stopping services but they are still sluggish powering away from the numerous speed restrictions.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

But they aren't and they haven't, for reasons outlined in this thread.

exactly, they have been heaviliy utilised in a set of diagrams which sweats them fairly hard - hence the need for the hired in 90 to cover for them havign work done on them ...

 

[RichmondCommu]

I'm also not convinced that dwell times would be impacted that badly unless the train was full and standing, it's not like it is a Metro service with the possibility of hundreds of people at each station.

The problem is in my experience many of those LM services are indeed full and standing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Should be a few HST power cars kicking about post Class 800...so put a power car at the other end.

Just the job for the next time the wires come down.

Tricky Dicky will claim all the credit for such a revolutionary idea :roll:

Who's Tricky Dicky?

 

[gsnedders]

The only reason the HST's are still on the MML is because there are not enough Meridians. If there were the HST's would have been long gone. I concur that they don't operate stopping services but they are still sluggish powering away from the numerous speed restrictions.

I'm not claiming they're ideally suited to the MML; I'm claiming that they may well be the best stock available for the job.

We aren't getting more Meridians, the DMU stock coming off-lease isn't 125mph, and the HSTs aren't compliant beyond 2019. It likely doesn't make sense to order new 125mph stock for the short period between 2020 and electrification, which leaves you with two options: make the HSTs compliant at great cost for a short period (this is, after all, unquestionably a shorter period than the ScotRail ones), or use the Mk4 stock, presumably with 67s.

 

[Gerald Fiennes]

So, the obvious solution is to retain about 15 of the 225s (ideally with the 91s converted to AC traction) and cancel the last 14 or so of the EC C800 order as a lower capacity sub-fleet. Some cost savings from this, perhaps?

 

[transmanche]

Should be a few HST power cars kicking about post Class 800...so put a power car at the other end. Just the job for the next time the wires come down. Back to the future indeed. Tricky Dicky will claim all the credit for such a revolutionary idea :roll:

Who's Tricky Dicky?

Presumably Richard Branson.

 

[Firesprite]

The problem is in my experience many of those LM services are indeed full and standing.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Who's Tricky Dicky?

Ex US President Richard Nixon, Best known for Watergate.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I'm not claiming they're ideally suited to the MML; I'm claiming that they may well be the best stock available for the job.

We aren't getting more Meridians, the DMU stock coming off-lease isn't 125mph, and the HSTs aren't compliant beyond 2019. It likely doesn't make sense to order new 125mph stock for the short period between 2020 and electrification, which leaves you with two options: make the HSTs compliant at great cost for a short period (this is, after all, unquestionably a shorter period than the ScotRail ones), or use the Mk4 stock, presumably with 67s.

From what I understand a class 67 would struggle to haul a rake of Mk4 stock at 125 mph for any significant period of time and I very much doubt that it would be able to keep to HST timings let alone anything else.

Do the HST's definitely have to be gone from the MML by 2019?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ex US President Richard Nixon, Best known for Watergate.

However he's dead so I'm not really sure why this is relevant?

 

[gsnedders]

From what I understand a class 67 would struggle to haul a rake of Mk4 stock at 125 mph for any significant period of time and I very much doubt that it would be able to keep to HST timings let alone anything else.

For 125mph running, top-and-tail is likely the easiest way to achieve it with whatever locomotives you choose. I don't think there's much concern about two 67s?

Do the HST's definitely have to be gone from the MML by 2019?

It's from 1 Jan 2020. But unless they get a derogation, they must either be amended to be compliant (and the EMT ones are the furtherest from compliant currently; need the doors to be sorted, call-for-aid buttons by the wheelchair spaces, universally accessible toilets, saloon doors wide enough for a wheelchair, and a PIS) or replaced.