Uses for ex-Grand Central Mk4s?

[Ianno87]

You can't have trains depart Piccadilly at minimum headway and then both call in P2 at Stockport.

Nor would a 10 minute turnround at New Streer be particularly wise.

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

Would it not make more sense to use them on the York to Edinburgh/Glasgow part of XC with 91s? No work with clearance etc. Although perhaps there isn’t enough power north of Morpeth

 

[The Planner]

they could reverse at International (perhaps another diagram).

Nope

 

[agbrs_Jack]

Having trawled through my stock of used fag-packet calculators, I'd suggest the way to use 90s + Mk 4 stock on Manchester - Birmingham would indeed be to split the Manchester - West of England service in two.
Something like:

Manchester Piccadilly depart 08:58 (minimum headway behind xx:55 Euston)
New Street arrive 09:28
New Street depart 09:38
Manchester Piccadilly arrive 11:10

connecting at New Street into / out of

Ex West of England arrive 09:25
To West of England depart 09:42
(West of England to / from New Street timings unaltered)

Some tweaking of the Manchester Stoke all-stations local would be needed to get the xx:58 Picc - New Street through Stoke without delay.
I haven't attempted to prove these paths in detail - I'm sure somebody with access to the necessary train planning software will be along shortly to point out where I've gone wrong!
On the surface though, this looks doable.
Incidentally I don't agree with the narrative that class 90s are especially sluggish. Given the size of train we're discussing here, I suspect they would be quite sprightly. They would lose time on the Stafford - Wolverhampton section which is 125 mph, but only maybe a minute.

Could said service not use the path from the old XC MAN-Bristol service (xx05 from MAN) + (xx31 from BHM).
Timings may be slightly out though given it's different rolling stock. (Assuming the Bristol one isn't coming back anytime soon)

 

[The Planner]

You can't have trains depart Piccadilly at minimum headway and then both call in P2 at Stockport.

Nor would a 10 minute turnround at New Streer be particularly wise.

Standard value for Loco Hauled/HST is 15,

 

[Ianno87]

Could said service not use the path from the old XC MAN-Bristol service (xx05 from MAN) + (xx31 from BHM).
Timings may be slightly out though given it's different rolling stock. (Assuming the Bristol one isn't coming back anytime soon)

Current timings would end up with an exceptionally short or exceptionally long turnround at Piccadilly.

To do this you'd be looking at recasting the current XC service patterns wholesale.

 

[agbrs_Jack]

Current timings would end up with an exceptionally short or exceptionally long turnround at Piccadilly.

To do this you'd be looking at recasting the current XC service patterns wholesale.

Thought that may be the case.
I miss the Bristol services as my morning connection time at Stoke is now 30 minutes instead of 5!

 

[craigybagel]

You can't have trains depart Piccadilly at minimum headway and then both call in P2 at Stockport.

Until a year or two ago the XC Bournemouth departed Piccadilly at XX:27 and the TfW South Wales at XX:30, both then calling at Stockport Platform 2. The TfW has since been pushed back by 1 minute to XX:31 most hours.

 

[Ianno87]

Until a year or two ago the XC Bournemouth departed Piccadilly at XX:27 and the TfW South Wales at XX:30, both then calling at Stockport Platform 2. The TfW has since been pushed back by 1 minute to XX:31 most hours.

Need to be separated by a 2.5 minute platform reoccupation at Stockport, so indeed a 4 minute headway when there's a 90 second dwell time.

Presume when it was xx30 departure, there was 1 minute of pathing time before Stockport somewhere.

 

[craigybagel]

Need to be separated by a 2.5 minute platform reoccupation at Stockport, so indeed a 4 minute headway when there's a 90 second dwell time.

Presume when it was xx30 departure, there was 1 minute of pathing time before Stockport somewhere.

Quite possible. It was rare to get a clear run into Stockport back then - now it happens more often then not.

 

[CW2]

Couldn't they use different platform faces at Stockport, rather than relying on minimum reoccupation of a single platform?

As for NewStreet, how about making it a Manchester to Manchester circular (one way via Soho) with an intermediate dwell at New Street?

 

[Ianno87]

Couldn't they use different platform faces at Stockport, rather than relying on minimum reoccupation of a single platform?

As for NewStreet, how about making it a Manchester to Manchester circular (one way via Soho) with an intermediate dwell at New Street?

P0 inevitably involves a conflict with the Up Slow Line. P1 I think requires approach control from red on approach, which will cost 30-60 seconds or so just by itself.

Looping via Soho could be done....but with a journey time cost.

 

[ABB125]

P0 inevitably involves a conflict with the Up Slow Line. P1 I think requires approach control from red on approach, which will cost 30-60 seconds or so just by itself.

Looping via Soho could be done....but with a journey time cost.

What about going via Bescot instead from Wolverhampton?
Although I don't see the point in going in a loop if you're going to have a long dwell at New Street anyway.

 

[The Planner]

P0 inevitably involves a conflict with the Up Slow Line. P1 I think requires approach control from red on approach, which will cost 30-60 seconds or so just by itself.

Yep, {1} minute for an Up Fast into P1. Platform reoccupation is 2½.

 

[CW2]

Yep, {1} minute for an Up Fast into P1. Platform reoccupation is 2½.

So it's half a minute quicker to go into P1 than to wait for platform reoccupation into P2.

 

[Ianno87]

So it's half a minute quicker to go into P1 than to wait for platform reoccupation into P2.

If two trains depart Piccadilly 3 minutes apart it's either...

-1 minute of pathing time for the second train to wait for the platform (to give 4 minutes separation equating to 1.5 minutes dwell time for the first train then a 2.5 minute platform reoccupation), or

-1 minute adjustment for approach control into P1.

So using P1 gains nothing above just waiting for P2 to become free

 

[CW2]

If two trains depart Piccadilly 3 minutes apart it's either...

-1 minute of pathing time for the second train to wait for the platform (to give 4 minutes separation equating to 1.5 minutes dwell time for the first train then a 2.5 minute platform reoccupation), or

-1 minute adjustment for approach control into P1.

So using P1 gains nothing above just waiting for P2 to become free

Ah yes, I see where I went wrong. I assumed a 2 minute dwell for the Euston service, but it's only 1.5 minutes at Stockport. So no gain from using P1 compared to reoccupying P2.

It will be interesting to see if anything comes of these rumours.

 

[swt_passenger]

Having trawled through my stock of used fag-packet calculators, I'd suggest the way to use 90s + Mk 4 stock on Manchester - Birmingham would indeed be to split the Manchester - West of England service in two.
Something like:

Manchester Piccadilly depart 08:58 (minimum headway behind xx:55 Euston)
New Street arrive 09:28
New Street depart 09:38
Manchester Piccadilly arrive 11:10

I guess you‘ve accidentally missed an hour out of those (highly optimistic) up timings?

 

[CW2]

I guess you‘ve accidentally missed an hour out of those (highly optimistic) up timings?

Oops! Edited.

 

[Dinoman]

I've just seen an image of two ROG 57's hauling a rake of Ex-GC MK4's with a DVT, this was on 5Q85 Wembley IC Depot to Eastleigh. Is it going for warm storage, or possible use with XC?

 

[JonathanH]

I've just seen an image of two ROG 57's hauling a rake of Ex-GC MK4's with a DVT, this was on 5Q85 Wembley IC Depot to Eastleigh. Is it going for warm storage, or possible use with XC?

...or scrap by Raxstar?

 

[Dinoman]

...or scrap by Raxstar?

I've seen some rumours of XC showing interest in the sets, I would doubt scrap from all the work given to them. Would be better to give them some use, as they had all the work done to them for nothing.

 

[swt_passenger]

I've just seen an image of two ROG 57's hauling a rake of Ex-GC MK4's with a DVT, this was on 5Q85 Wembley IC Depot to Eastleigh. Is it going for warm storage, or possible use with XC?

It’s heading to Eastleigh TRSMD, same destination as the earlier sets for TfW.

 

[JonathanH]

I've seen some rumours of XC showing interest in the sets, I would doubt scrap from all the work given to them. Would be better to give them some use, as they had all the work done to them for nothing.

Storage costs money regardless of work undertaken. Indeed, depending on who paid for the work and the way in which the arrangements were terminated, the costs may have been written off already.

Just because work has been carried out does not prevent surplus assets being disposed of if there is no demand for them.

 

[Energy]

Presumably Eversholt (the ROSCO) has been compensated by GC for ending the lease early.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Transport for Wales has also shown an interest if XC doesn't want them. I think this was reported in this month's Modern Railways though I've now recycled it so can't check.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I know for a fact that XC’s supposed interest is not real

 

[DB]

Transport for Wales has also shown an interest if XC doesn't want them. I think this was reported in this month's Modern Railways though I've now recycled it so can't check.

What would they use them for?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What would they use them for?

That wasn't stated, but I'd imagine they would be used on more Cardiff-North Wales services.

 

[HST43257]

That wasn't stated, but I'd imagine they would be used on more Cardiff-North Wales services.

Would be good if they could take all North Wales limited stop stuff