• 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!

Latest on IEP/GWML

Status
Not open for further replies.

Daimler

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,197
Location
Hertfordshire
I get the impression that it will basically be an off the shelf underfloor engine DMU with a pantograph to supply the traction motors when under the wires. If Bombardier had won the contract then more Voyagers could have been built for this.

Yes, but that wasn't the original plan, which was the point I wanted to make - the whole thing is basically being completely bungled, with DFT desperate to push through 'their' train, no matter how ill-suited or compromised it is due to practicalities and financial constraints.

But then, we all know that, I guess... :(
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,275
The point about Fgw owning their HSTs is if you take the franchise away they may not lease them out to the new gw franchise just out of spite.

FGW don't own the HSTs, First Group own them. If FGW lost the franchise do you really think First Group would take them out of service, or would they lease them to the new franchisee?

I expect applicants for the next GW franchise will simply have to include an explanation of how they will maintain the size of the GW intercity fleet - of course if IEP is being widely introduced :roll: by then (2015?) First Group could just as easily end up with a few HSTs no one wants...
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
FGW don't own the HSTs, First Group own them. If FGW lost the franchise do you really think First Group would take them out of service, or would they lease them to the new franchisee?
They could transfer them to Hull Trains or East Coast should they win that franchise.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,097
Location
Redcar
They could transfer them to Hull Trains

Hull Trains seem perfectly happy with the 180s, not sure if there is any reason to complicate matters for them by giving them HSTs. (Not that I would complain personally of course, I'm thinking operationally ;))
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
If First were to state though that the HSTs would be transferred should they lose the franchise, it may well sway the dft into giving it to First again. I can't really see anyone other than First running the franchise.
 
Last edited:

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,097
Location
Redcar
I see what you thinking. Seems a bit sneaky to try and back the DfT into a corner like that, but I suppose it's possible. Could backfire though.
 

Daimler

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2009
Messages
1,197
Location
Hertfordshire
I see what you thinking. Seems a bit sneaky to try and back the DfT into a corner like that, but I suppose it's possible. Could backfire though.

Indeed, I've heard senior members of the DfT were livid when they heard what First's ownership of the HSTs effectively meant.
 

ChrisCooper

Established Member
Joined
7 Sep 2005
Messages
1,787
Location
Loughborough
Suppose the potential backfire is that if FGW force the DFT into giving them GW by using their HSTs are bargaining chips, they could find themselves out of the running for any other franchises, and then in trouble again when it comes to the next renewal (which the DFT may decide to make conincide with HST replacement).
 

brel york

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2011
Messages
653
Location
the plant
here we go again,new factory for trains no doubt our money been used ,once they have nothing to build just put a padlock on the gate fellas ,weve been here before ,thrall at york works, the digger factory near knaresboro ,im sure theres others .
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,667
Suppose the potential backfire is that if FGW force the DFT into giving them GW by using their HSTs are bargaining chips, they could find themselves out of the running for any other franchises, and then in trouble again when it comes to the next renewal (which the DFT may decide to make conincide with HST replacement).

Exactly, if i was first i would really really really not try and use it to back them into a corner... Because as you say that could royally backfire and i believe it would. They could say in the bidding process that if they are not succesful they will lease them at standard rate so as not to make DFT think they are being sneaky and to allow them to bid fairly.
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Exactly, if i was first i would really really really not try and use it to back them into a corner... Because as you say that could royally backfire and i believe it would. They could say in the bidding process that if they are not succesful they will lease them at standard rate so as not to make DFT think they are being sneaky and to allow them to bid fairly.
The thing is though, the Greater Western franchise is the last one to be awarded in this next round in 2016. Before then there are several big franchises that are to be awarded. These franchises are to be awarded for at least 15 years. If First were successful in winning one of them, for example East Coast then they'd have nothing to lose by forciing the dft into giving them Greater Western. They would have 2 important franchises for at least 15 years so wouldn't have to worry about consequences for a long time.
 

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
9,667
The thing is though, the Greater Western franchise is the last one to be awarded in this next round in 2016. Before then there are several big franchises that are to be awarded. These franchises are to be awarded for at least 15 years. If First were successful in winning one of them, for example East Coast then they'd have nothing to lose by forciing the dft into giving them Greater Western. They would have 2 important franchises for at least 15 years so wouldn't have to worry about consequences for a long time.

Thats a point... they would alos have 20 years to get rid of the consequences by performing well and making things better...
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,057
Location
Reston City Centre
I think the more pressing concern is that whilst EMT on the Midland Mainline has largely displaced the majority of their HSTs with new Meridians

To be pedantic, Midland Mainline/EMT only ran an hourly London service with HSTs to Sheffield/Nottingham (e.g. half hourly London - Leicester). The Meridians displaced the 170s which were introduced for the "stoppers" (plus additional 222s for the Corby service). The HSTs still provide the bulk of a half hourly London - Nottingham service (with trips through to Sheffield/Leeds, for stabling).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the MML 222s were additional to the HSTs and not a "new for old" (unlike XC swapping HSTs for Voyagers)

As I've said before, MML is self contained, whilst the GWML has a dozen different branches with direct London trains. A decision would need to be taken whether to electrify *all* lines in south west England/ south Wales, or to abolish some direct trains (Newquay/ Fishguard/ Weston/ Hereford/ Cheltenham), or to run diesels under the wire a long distance to serve the (short) patches beyond the electrification.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
FGW don't own the HSTs, First Group own them. If FGW lost the franchise do you really think First Group would take them out of service, or would they lease them to the new franchisee?

Well, HSTs work well between Edinburgh and Aberdeen/Inverness. I could see Scotrail getting them :lol:
 

RichW1

Member
Joined
9 Aug 2010
Messages
400
Location
Harrogate
What a mess. These really will be 'special needs' trains. What a complete and utter crap set of rolling stock this half measure is going to be. Leave the HST's alone until you fund a proper replacement not some half-baked, middle of the road pathetic compromise. Oh this is going make the rolling stock situation on Great Western look worse not better. At least it has uniformity at the moment. Now we'll have 2 sets of powers sources, slower trains....just what a complete mess. I want to scream. Electrify or don't but please not this crappy half baked pile of complete s**t.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
To be pedantic, Midland Mainline/EMT only ran an hourly London service with HSTs to Sheffield/Nottingham (e.g. half hourly London - Leicester). The Meridians displaced the 170s which were introduced for the "stoppers" (plus additional 222s for the Corby service). The HSTs still provide the bulk of a half hourly London - Nottingham service (with trips through to Sheffield/Leeds, for stabling).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the MML 222s were additional to the HSTs and not a "new for old" (unlike XC swapping HSTs for Voyagers)

As I've said before, MML is self contained, whilst the GWML has a dozen different branches with direct London trains. A decision would need to be taken whether to electrify *all* lines in south west England/ south Wales, or to abolish some direct trains (Newquay/ Fishguard/ Weston/ Hereford/ Cheltenham), or to run diesels under the wire a long distance to serve the (short) patches beyond the electrification.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Well, HSTs work well between Edinburgh and Aberdeen/Inverness. I could see Scotrail getting them :lol:



FGW have not been to fishguard for a good few years now, a for trains west of swansea there are only 1 or 2 per day to carmarthen and i have been told that the new stock will be out of gauge for the pembroke dock line
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,057
Location
Reston City Centre
FGW have not been to fishguard for a good few years now, a for trains west of swansea there are only 1 or 2 per day to carmarthen and i have been told that the new stock will be out of gauge for the pembroke dock line

Apologies for my mistake.

However, if the wires only go to Bristol, people in Wales will complain that all the money gets spend in England. If the wires only go do Cardiff people in Swansea will complain that Cardiff gets all the money spent on it. If the wires only go to Swansea then you'll get criticism from western Wales that the money only gets spent on the cities, and they are losing their direct links to London.... whatever happens, you'll get complaints from Wrexham and the likes that the money is only spent in South Wales!

However, the MML is a self contained line, for electrification purposes - only the token Summer weekend trips to Skegness would be "wireless" (since Lincoln is getting a direct KX service, I'm ignoring it's token London service).

Wire the MML to Wakefield, and (as well as freeing up some Northern DMUs) you free up 27x222s, which would be perfect for the "North" Transpennine route (releasing 185s onto other routes)
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
FGW have not been to fishguard for a good few years now, a for trains west of swansea there are only 1 or 2 per day to carmarthen and i have been told that the new stock will be out of gauge for the pembroke dock line

Are they persisting with 26m stock?
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
26m stock may not be bad thing though. Seeing as it is basically going to be an underfloor engine DMU with a pantograph you'd be losing part of a coach due to the crumple zones and so longer coaches will help compensate for that. If the units are only going to be 5 coaches long then any extra length is welcome.
 

NXEA!

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2009
Messages
486
26m stock may not be bad thing though. Seeing as it is basically going to be an underfloor engine DMU with a pantograph you'd be losing part of a coach due to the crumple zones and so longer coaches will help compensate for that. If the units are only going to be 5 coaches long then any extra length is welcome.
That's a good point. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but am I correct in thinking that 26m stock could cause more clearance issues? Because the ends will swing out further on curves and the middle part of the carriage will be further in, for instance at a platform it could mean a rather big gap at a curved platform for passengers alighting/boarding. But then as its express stock it'll most likely have doors at the end. However large double doors in the middle(ish) for commuters would be an idea for some IEP sets (such as sets for Oxford runs).

 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
I think most of the stations along the great western mainline should be ok.

Neath may be a bit of an issue with the eastbound platform although that could be easily sorted out, the only platforms that may be a bit difficult i think will be platforms 3 & 4 at swansea which do have a bit of a curve and would the stock manage to get along the curve on the platforms at Bristol TM under the overall roof
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,275
That's a good point. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but am I correct in thinking that 26m stock could cause more clearance issues?

The IEP project is not just rolling stock, it includes the necessary route clearance work and power supply improvements. So these aspects are not show stoppers.
 

Woody

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2006
Messages
277
What a mess. These really will be 'special needs' trains. What a complete and utter crap set of rolling stock this half measure is going to be. Leave the HST's alone until you fund a proper replacement not some half-baked, middle of the road pathetic compromise. Oh this is going make the rolling stock situation on Great Western look worse not better. At least it has uniformity at the moment. Now we'll have 2 sets of powers sources, slower trains....just what a complete mess. I want to scream. Electrify or don't but please not this crappy half baked pile of complete s**t.
Totally agree what a dogs dinner,a half baked and half hearted collection of half measures.If only the government had the same appetite for the here and now as it does for HS2.Great Westerns misfortune is that renewel has come during the worst economic and financial crisis facing the country since the 1929 wall street crash with the result inevitably being the Dafts latest compromise solution of half measures on Great Western.aka botch up.
 

sprinterguy

Veteran Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
11,573
Location
Macclesfield
26m stock may not be bad thing though. Seeing as it is basically going to be an underfloor engine DMU with a pantograph you'd be losing part of a coach due to the crumple zones and so longer coaches will help compensate for that. If the units are only going to be 5 coaches long then any extra length is welcome.

They’re still going with the five carriage idea? Oh no, I hoped that at least the DfT were past that bit of madness and that this proposal would specify ten carriage trains. Looking at the Super Express CAD renderings, then 26 metre long carriages really will be needed, as most of one carriage will be taken up by the diesel power unit (Unless the design has been changed to a straight up under-floor engine DMU).
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Looking at the Super Express CAD renderings, then 26 metre long carriages really will be needed, as most of one carriage will be taken up by the diesel power unit (Unless the design has been changed to a straight up under-floor engine DMU).
I believe that is the case, it will be an underfloor engine DMU with a pantograph. My guess is that the engines will only be have the powerr 90/100 mph. That would explain why the Devon and Cornwall services have not been included in the order.
 

43021HST

Established Member
Joined
11 Sep 2008
Messages
1,565
Location
Taunton
What a mess. These really will be 'special needs' trains. What a complete and utter crap set of rolling stock this half measure is going to be. Leave the HST's alone until you fund a proper replacement not some half-baked, middle of the road pathetic compromise. Oh this is going make the rolling stock situation on Great Western look worse not better. At least it has uniformity at the moment. Now we'll have 2 sets of powers sources, slower trains....just what a complete mess. I want to scream. Electrify or don't but please not this crappy half baked pile of complete s**t.

Thats what happens when you let the tories do the main bulk of planning the electrification of the GWML. (I'm well aware that labour came up with the basic scheme)
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
Thats what happens when you let the tories do the main bulk of planning the electrification of the GWML. (I'm well aware that labour came up with the basic scheme)

I think the current lot are going much further then tories of the past in quite a few areas. At least under Thatcher the ECML, Cambridge, Kings Lynn, Skipton all were wired
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top