There has to be a point where throwing extra cash to keep a marginal line open has to stop though?
Its a bit narrow though, and could mean you waste a chunk of a short platform on the pod if the stopping points aren’t flexible. Could you end up with the disabled door in the wrong place??
I think it’s the twistiness rather than the platforms
So its not essential to have the trains?
The ASDO system on the 185s has presented a slight headache for crews due to where the wheelchair spaces are: despite the fact that they do fit, since the ASDO system went live the last set of doors on 185s doesn't release at Huddersfield platform 6. If the composite coach with the wheelchair space is at that end and a wheelchair user wishes to board or alight, the crew have to manually override the system.
It was actually one of my reasons for this thread!
it’s niche problem territory but I was pondering whether you could get a short platform filled by the ‘wrong end’ and the power pack, so the disabled door didn’t reach.
Great sell to the Treasury too - ‘Look, we have been efficient and reduced the number of coaches we need to order!
As has been stated already, there is already 20(ish)m stock available off the shelf, and more/different stock could be developed if that would be better/cheaper/otherwise more desirable.
No obsession, that’s why I was asking whether there is a need for them elsewhere to justify the expense of another stock type.
Thats quite a difference (noting it’s a low v high density comparison). And the 755 is a fixed 80m - which would look a bit silly on the Looe branch in winter!
The obvious solution is a 3-car Flirt but with a higher-density layout for Looe. St. Ives and Falmouth would presumably justify a 4-car, but with a similar high-density layout.
Why is that more obvious than Alstom/CAF/Siemens offering a 20m version of a 23/24m DMU for regional services? A more efficient use of length.
Modern diesel engines are bulkier than those of the 150 because of all the emission control equipment required. Porterbrook managed to squeeze Stage IIIB compliant engines under the 20m driving trailers of a 769, but that unit has the traction motors and ancillaries under the centre two vehicles. Is there any evidence that the there is enough space between the bogies of a 20m vehicle to fit in a Stage V engine, powertrain and other equipment?
That was one of the questions in my starter for this thread?
Would a hybrid solution be easier to fit - smaller engine plus battery packs that can be almost any size/shape?
The 755s are truly a low density set-up, aiming for comfort. 2+2 seats that match SWR first class seats, 2 wheelchair spaces, 2 toilets, and 6 bike spaces. if needed for GWR/northern/whoever else, a much higher density interior could be used
I quoted the numbers from wikipedia, which lists this:
the 124 seats is correctly taken from the source though. Where units swapped between northern/gwr, or the GWR ones refurbished since/during First Great Western days?
ASDO seems to work very well in the 755's (complete with power pod) her in East Anglia.
Apparently the issue is the very short turnaround on the St Ives branch - anyone worked out if the Greenford fast charge is fast enough?
What the Stadlers don’t have going for them is a UK factory. If they got the GWR/Northern/SWR order then that is likely to kill at least one of the UK factories, making it politically brave, if not courageous.
Sorry I meant the 147 for GWR was in fact listed on the first great western websit. It may be right that the higher numbers are in fact for the 3car units, in which case the 755s are competitive for capacity compared to 150s even in the low-density GA layout
Batteries would seem like the best option for the cornish branches. All assessments show battery units as a lot cheaper, and the characteristics of the branches in cornwall aren't of the type to require hydrogen
Indeed it was, but I do not think anyone has yet answered that question.....That was one of the questions in my starter for this thread?
Two small automotive engines under a 230 carriage, which have proved appallingly unreliable on the Marston Vale. It remains to be seen if the TfW hybrid version achieves better reliability, if it ever enters service.
Some GWR 150s have certainly been cascaded to Northern since 2016, including 3-car examples.
It is, from Gunnislake and Calstock themselves, there is a lot of peak commuter and schools traffic heading towards Plymouth which has no reasonable alternative (**** road quality means a much extended journey time if you were to run RRBs).
The best solution is to improve the roads/buses, rather than throw money at a special edition tram train for a rural branch! There can't be "a lot of" traffic on a line that doesn't even have double figures trips a day, in a 150 - between them the two stations don't get 50,000 passengers a year.