How do you free up 800/802 bi-modes?

[Meerkat]

Triggered by comment about XC getting Hitachi bi-modes (it’s almost inevitable isn’t it - slow electrification, the anti diesel deadline, factory to keep open.....)
It seems silly to buy bi-modes then later take the engines off the existing ones leaving compromised electric trains; better to buy new pure electrics for the premier lines and move the bi-modes to XC.
So questions for those in the know...
How many of the GWR/LNER bi-modes would XC need for full Voyager/HST replacement and what is the quickest electrification to enable that?
Does the IET contract make it too difficult without really bending Hitachi’s arm (need a feasible alternative supplier I guess)?
Are the extensions to Camarthen essential for peak loadings/profitable or could electrification to Swansea (poss a DfT deal to fund in return for dropping the Camarthen trains) enable a large scale move to pure electrics?
I am assuming that operationally GWR wouldn’t want Bristol via Parkway to go full electric without the Bath route also finished, not sure about the extensions to W-S-M and Taunton. What about Bedwyn and Oxford?
Looking at LNER it would be just Harrogate and Lincoln unless someone is feeling ballsy enough to cut the Scottish extensions!!

 

[JonathanH]

Does the IET contract make it too difficult without really bending Hitachi’s arm (need a feasible alternative supplier I guess)?

The contracts (initial versions at the link below) have multiple pages summarising where the units need to be at night and the servicing arrangements. It would appear that you can't just move the GWR / LNER units to Cross Country without writing a new contract. Clearly that could be done, and there already have been changes, but it would involve renegotiation, rather than 'bending Hitachi's arm'.

[Withdrawn] Intercity Express Programme technical specification and contracts

Technical specification and contractual documentation relating to the Intercity Express Programme.

www.gov.uk

 

[Domh245]

Does the IET contract make it too difficult without really bending Hitachi’s arm (need a feasible alternative supplier I guess)?

Very much so. Agility trains have been contracted to provide a certain number of trains per day for GWR and LNER under IEP, the units used to provide those (800 and 801) can't just be 'released' onto other routes, not without stupidly large amounts of money

It seems silly to buy bi-modes then later take the engines off the existing ones leaving compromised electric trains; better to buy new pure electrics for the premier lines and move the bi-modes to XC.

In what way are they compromised? The high floor is the only thing that comes to mind, but that's hardly a compromise, as even without them they won't be level boarding

I'm very much of the view that it is better to build a train that suits it's route and move the powerpacks around than it is to build new trains and cascade otherwise suitable trains because they happened to be delivered with an engine fitted. For example, the GW units all have ATP which would have to be removed/isolated when they move to XC and reinstalled on their replacements. The interiors on the LNER units are lower density with a buffet and (soon) with luggage racks in place of the windowless seats. Similarly the mix of 5 and 9 cars wouldn't necessarily suit XC's operations - a uniform fleet somewhere in between may well be better suited.

 

[swt_passenger]

I don’t think XC getting Hitachi bi-modes is anything more than forum wishful thinking. It certainly isn’t what you’d call inevitable.

They’ll get 221 ex WCML or 222 ex MML, or a mixture.

How many times has this discussion come up in 2020 now?

 

[Meerkat]

Very much so. Agility trains have been contracted to provide a certain number of trains per day for GWR and LNER under IEP, the units used to provide those (800 and 801) can't just be 'released' onto other routes, not without stupidly large amounts of money

Agility trains would get new, latest spec, pure electric units. There would be some gain for them

In what way are they compromised?

Fair comment, but the whole design has been heavily criticised - GWR and LNER could get brand new trains to a better internal spec.

I don’t think XC getting Hitachi bi-modes is anything more than forum wishful thinking. It certainly isn’t what you’d call inevitable.

They’ll get 221 ex WCML or 222 ex MML, or a mixture.

How many times has this discussion come up in 2020 now?

The pure diesels have to be gone by 2040 at the latest, assuming the embarrassment of Voyagers chugging away in New Street doesn’t get banned earlier.
When the factories run out of work the government will be looking at vote retaining/winning by buying shiny new trains

 

[PeterC]

I'm very much of the view that it is better to build a train that suits it's route and move the powerpacks around than it is to build new trains and cascade otherwise suitable trains because they happened to be delivered with an engine fitted. For example, the GW units all have ATP which would have to be removed/isolated when they move to XC and reinstalled on their replacements. The interiors on the LNER units are lower density with a buffet and (soon) with luggage racks in place of the windowless seats. Similarly the mix of 5 and 9 cars wouldn't necessarily suit XC's operations - a uniform fleet somewhere in between may well be better suited.

That is starting to look dangerously like an arguement in favour of loco haulage.

 

[Neptune]

How many times has this discussion come up in 2020 now?

Far too many to say as it’s all pure speculation and wishful thinking but it doesn’t stop the regular posts droning on about how ‘XC will definately get Hitachi’s and will probably number them in the 80x range.’

It all gets rather grating.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Aug 2020 ==

That is starting to look dangerously like an arguement in favour of loco haulage.

Ah yes. No doubt someone will suggest using class 88’s despite the obvious lack of power on diesel which is pointed out every time.

 

[swt_passenger]

The pure diesels have to be gone by 2040 at the latest, assuming the embarrassment of Voyagers chugging away in New Street doesn’t get banned earlier.
When the factories run out of work the government will be looking at vote retaining/winning by buying shiny new trains

Sure, but that‘s a decision needed in over ten years time, when I firmly expect they’ll still be using 220/221/222. If only some of these speculation threads opened with a sensible timeframe...

 

[Meerkat]

Sure, but that‘s a decision needed in over ten years time, when I firmly spect they’ll still be using 220/221/222. If only some of these speculation threads opened with a sensible timeframe...

My suggestion requires Network Rail to electrify stuff - how soon do you think that would be complete!!

 

[swt_passenger]

My suggestion requires Network Rail to electrify stuff - how soon do you think that would be complete!!

I could guess but...

The main point for me is that your proposal isn’t even new, and has probably been raised 5 or 6 times this year already. What did you hope to achieve by another discussion?

 

[Meerkat]

I could guess but...

The main point for me is that your proposal isn’t even new, and has probably been raised 5 or 6 times this year already. What did you hope to achieve by another discussion?

Has the question of how to free up bi-modes been asked 5 or 6 times, or have you morphed this into purely about the XC angle? My title was specific, and even if you discount the XC angle the question stands as bare minimum is how do we enable the 800/802s to stop needing to lug all those heavy diesels about.

 

[swt_passenger]

Has the question of how to free up bi-modes been asked 5 or 6 times, or have you morphed this into purely about the XC angle? My title was specific, and even if you discount the XC angle the question stands as bare minimum is how do we enable the 800/802s to stop needing to lug all those heavy diesels about.

I’ll accept concentrating on the XC angle, which is the most regularly repeated topic.

I’d have to search again, but I‘m sure proposals for eventually removing engines from 800 following wiring extension has been done, probably in one of the original (but closed) GWR 800 threads...

Swansea, Penzance, Hereford, Cheltenham, Westbury, Middlesbrough, Aberdeen, Inverness, West Yorkshire...

 

[Domh245]

Agility trains would get new, latest spec, pure electric units. There would be some gain for them

Agility's main gain will be in a new contract where they hold all the strings! They'd have to find the finance to build all those new electric trains, which granted could be partially offset by the sale of all those 800s to a conventional ROSCO. Or I suppose they could ammend the IEP contract to include XC services using the 800s originally intended for ICEC/ICGW but the end result is the same: Agility gain at the expense of the railway user/taxpayer

Fair comment, but the whole design has been heavily criticised - GWR and LNER could get brand new trains to a better internal spec.

The interior design has been heavily criticised but is a simple enough fix for anyone willing to stump up the cash/argue their case with the DfT. The mechanical design of the train is sound, and any issues that do exist with it (for example the ride) will be carried over into the new Hitachi EMUs that you propose!

That is starting to look dangerously like an arguement in favour of loco haulage.

I don't see how it does? Loco haulage has a whole suite of issues, and given that there are trains that are power-source agnostic and relatively flexible (FLIRTs and AT300s) I don't see why it'd be considered without other factors such as build time coming into play (remind me how that worked out for TPE!)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why free them up? Just build more.

The interior issue can be solved, take the seats out and put nicer ones in. In fact, to be honest, there's nothing wrong with the frames, it's just the base cushions that need changing.

 

[Meerkat]

Why free them up? Just build more.

The interior issue can be solved, take the seats out and put nicer ones in. In fact, to be honest, there's nothing wrong with the frames, it's just the base cushions that need changing.

Isn’t it more efficient to build electrics and transfer bi-modes than build bi-modes and then create a big pile of spare engines?
Also commercially better to have sparkly new trains on the profitable premier lines and cascade the older ones to the secondary services - it’s what BR did and we are always told they did it better!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn’t it more efficient to build electrics and transfer bi-modes than build bi-modes and then create a big pile of spare engines?

If there was more electrification yes, but as things stand GWR still really needs a full bi-mode fleet. There's little point in having a tiny fleet of EMUs for Cardiff services only.

(I still think it's nuts they haven't taken the wires to Temple Meads)

Also commercially better to have sparkly new trains on the profitable premier lines and cascade the older ones to the secondary services - it’s what BR did and we are always told they did it better!

They're hardly old!

 

[HSTEd]

Also commercially better to have sparkly new trains on the profitable premier lines and cascade the older ones to the secondary services - it’s what BR did and we are always told they did it better!

Didn't XC end up with the youngest HSTs?

 

[Meerkat]

If there was more electrification yes, but as things stand GWR still really needs a full bi-mode fleet

As it stands, hence asking the best way to change that - which I guess is a question about the order things are electrified and whether it could help the business case. Would Swansea and Filton be enough for releasing a batch of bi-modes/dropping the engines?

 

[221129]

Would Swansea and Filton be enough for releasing a batch of bi-modes/dropping the engines?

Nowhere close. You would need via Bath as well as a couple of other routes.

 

[Domh245]

Isn’t it more efficient to build electrics and transfer bi-modes than build bi-modes and then create a big pile of spare engines?

Or flip that on it's head - electrify, de-engine the current bi-modes and put those engines into the new fleet! That said, the MTU 12V1600 can be put to use in other applications beyond rail, and I expect that if/when they are removed, many of them will be reconditioned and pressed into service on static generators or wherever else MTU can sell them.

Just running the maths for interest, there's 729 gensets across the entire AT300 family across all confirmed orders, not including any spares. If you were able to convert all the 800s to 801s, 228 gensets would be released. Assuming that there was a need to match 22x timing and taking the 810s as a basis for that (4 engines/5 car train) you'd be able to get 57x 5 cars, about enough for a like-for-like replacement of XC's current fleet with the added advantage of extra capacity through over half the trains having an additional vehicle, as well as better use of internal space

 

[Meerkat]

Or flip that on it's head - electrify, de-engine the current bi-modes and put those engines into the new fleet! That said, the MTU 12V1600 can be put to use in other applications beyond rail, and I expect that if/when they are removed, many of them will be reconditioned and pressed into service on static generators or wherever else MTU can sell them.

Just running the maths for interest, there's 729 gensets across the entire AT300 family across all confirmed orders, not including any spares. If you were able to convert all the 800s to 801s, 228 gensets would be released. Assuming that there was a need to match 22x timing and taking the 810s as a basis for that (4 engines/5 car train) you'd be able to get 57x 5 cars, about enough for a like-for-like replacement of XC's current fleet with the added advantage of extra capacity through over half the trains having an additional vehicle, as well as better use of internal space

So basically there aren’t enough to replace the Voyagers, even if all were freed up. That pretty much answers my question thanks. Voyagers it is and Brummies to cough on fumes for decades!

 

[BayPaul]

Didn't XC end up with the youngest HSTs?

It certainly had a brand new fleet of Voyagers when GWR had mid-life HSTs

 

[Philip Phlopp]

So basically there aren’t enough to replace the Voyagers, even if all were freed up. That pretty much answers my question thanks. Voyagers it is and Brummies to cough on fumes for decades!

Just remember that as far as XC is concerned, Birmingham isn't electrified, when planning your fantasy train fleets.

 

[Meerkat]

Just remember that as far as XC is concerned, Birmingham isn't electrified, when planning your fantasy train fleets.

Not sure what you mean. The station is electric and hopefully the lines around the city will be fairly high priority.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Not sure what you mean. The station is electric and hopefully the lines around the city will be fairly high priority.

There's not sufficient electrification on the routes XC used around Birmingham for them to use bi-mode stock around New Street. The majority of their services would be arriving and departing New Street on diesel power, basically, based on where the APCO would need to be located to allow services to turn back in the event diesel power isn't available.

 

[Meerkat]

There's not sufficient electrification on the routes XC used around Birmingham for them to use bi-mode stock around New Street. The majority of their services would be arriving and departing New Street on diesel power, basically, based on where the APCO would need to be located to allow services to turn back in the event diesel power isn't available.

Could you expand a bit please - how much extension would be needed?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Could you expand a bit please - how much extension would be needed?

Bromsgrove to Birmingham New Street would need to be re-wired, that provides just under 15 miles of electrification, and the same sort of distance on the other side of Birmingham, so maybe Water Orton or Tamworth possibly. It's hard to know, it's a trade off between engine wear from repeated shutdown and startup routines versus eliminating emissions across a large section of route through Birmingham.

 

[Meerkat]

Bromsgrove to Birmingham New Street would need to be re-wired, that provides just under 15 miles of electrification, and the same sort of distance on the other side of Birmingham, so maybe Water Orton or Tamworth possibly. It's hard to know, it's a trade off between engine wear from repeated shutdown and startup routines versus eliminating emissions across a large section of route through Birmingham.

Thanks - why would Bromsgrove need rewiring?

 

[tbtc]

I can sympathise with the OP's point, but even if we found the funds to electrify to Harrogate/ Swansea/ Oxford/ Hereford/ Bristol and even Penzance, would GWR/LNER want to get rid of all of their bi-mode trains, given all of the diversionary routes/ irregular extensions/ power supply issues?

I mean, I like a process which has the end result of "XC gets longer, greener trains" but you'd either have to wire up Inverness and various other places that only see one 80x a day, or you'd have to make significant cuts to the places which currently get direct London trains before this was ever a viable option IMHO.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Thanks - why would Bromsgrove need rewiring?

We only wired the platform facing lines and associated crossovers, turnbacks etc (the bare minimum needed for the Class 323 service) on the Cross-City line out to Barnt Green, and because of the way it's wired almost all of the existing electrification between Barnt Green Junction and Kings Norton Station Junction will need to be replaced to enable the electrification of the remaining lines.

Headspans in particular are an unfortunate problem as they are very difficult to modify in-situ, whilst there's a lot of single track cantilever structures on those sections where 2 of the 4 tracks are electrified which would need to be replaced by pairs of twin track cantilevers and portals. There's also some slightly specialised extended cantilever structures which ideally will go.

The easiest option is to install TTCs and portals over several nightly possessions, and then take a Christmas or Easter blockade and swap over all the catenary onto the new structures whilst simultaneously wiring the remaining lines (I keep wanting to say the fast lines, but past Longbridge it swaps over and it's the slow line and the goods line which aren't wired). That would keep Cross-City disruption to an absolute minimum.