4 Track Chiltern Mainline.

[The Planner]

Oh, it is also worth noting that at Whitlocks end, the areas where the 3rd and 4th tracks used to be is now a car park, like with Acocks Green. Removal of car park would mean it would have to be relocated, maybe underground or in a building above the station. However, both would be expensive, and the latter may become an eyesore for locals.

Back with electrification, I do wonder what rolling stock WMR/Chiltern would use if Chiltern mainline was quadrupled and electrified?

Don't you mean Widney Manor? Whitlocks End is on the Stratford line.

 

[quailking14]

Don't you mean Widney Manor? Whitlocks End is on the Stratford line.

Yes. Made A typo, and I have edited the previous post so other users don't get confused.

 

[BogiePicker]

Don't you mean Widney Manor? Whitlocks End is on the Stratford line.

Re: rolling stock, a wider-bodied Aventra would probably be ideal. The 165/166s are 2.8 by 23m vehicles. It would be nice to see how far they can push the gauge on the more generous historic GWR network.

 

[Energy]

Re: rolling stock, a wider-bodied Aventra would probably be ideal. The 165/166s are 2.8 by 23m vehicles. It would be nice to see how far they can push the gauge on the more generous historic GWR network.

Aventras normally are a one common bodyshell width.

 

[quailking14]

Re: rolling stock, a wider-bodied Aventra would probably be ideal. The 165/166s are 2.8 by 23m vehicles. It would be nice to see how far they can push the gauge on the more generous historic GWR network.

This might sound unlikely, but I was thinking of instead using bombardier talents adapted to UK loading gauge. Also, I think the class 93 and mk5 coaches should replace the class 68/mk3.

 

[JonathanH]

Also, I think the class 93 and mk5 coaches should replace the class 68/mk3.

It would be better to see the Mark 5s rebuilt as units without the need for the dead space of a locomotive.

 

[quailking14]

It would be better to see the Mark 5s rebuilt as units without the need for the dead space of a locomotive.

Understandable, but I do feel the world still needs some loco-hauled passenger trains left as they are declining worldwide. I like loco hauled trains since you don't feel motorized bogie vibrations in the carriage.

 

[BogiePicker]

Understandable, but I do feel the world still needs some loco-hauled passenger trains left as they are declining worldwide. I like loco hauled trains since you don't feel motorized bogie vibrations in the carriage.

It may be said that they still are used extensively in the continent. DB uses them in their regional services.

Not all EMU carriages are motored; 745 has only 4 motorised bogies in a 12 car train, effectively a top & tailed loco hauled set (well, half a loco at each end, sandwiching a loco right in the middle).

I don't mind too much either way, but can see loco-hauled stock used for demand-responsive services. Where the platform length is in no danger of being exceeded, I see no harm in having a loco.

Returning to topic, I much prefer the Mk3s. I think they are also slightly longer than the Mk5as, and have been proven to be much less problematic to operate. I do think that to the extent that Chiltern is not competing on speed, a locomotive-hauled & comfortable offering may be a more appropriate package. It may well be more cost-effective as well: the IC225 was much cheaper per seat than the TGV and ICE, and with actual 26m carriages (Mk6), this could be accentuated further. Have a simple loco with tried and tested technology.