Irish Mk 3s for sale

[jon0844]

Aren't there any off the shelf loco designs that can be built easily by the big manufacturers?

Surely a tried-and-tested design shouldn't (note the emphasis on the word shouldn't) cost loads, and would be made to work with newer carriages later on to justify funding their construction.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I really don't understand this desire to start building loco's and loco hauled stock again. Why do some people on here have the perpetual need to revert back to the '70's? Hybrids and more Pendys are surely the way forward.

 

[jon0844]

Yes, but if there's a cheaper way to get some Intercity stock up and running fairly quickly then it seems to make sense. It doesn't stop other projects going ahead.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Yes, but if there's a cheaper way to get some Intercity stock up and running fairly quickly then it seems to make sense. It doesn't stop other projects going ahead.

But it wouldn't make economic sense to buy loco's knowing that they will only get 5 to 10 years use before new high speed intercity stock is introduced. This all seems like a throw back to the 1950's modernisation programme with the construction of locos with a ludicrously short life span.

It will be hard enough to get the ROSCO's on board with a Pacer replacement programme let alone the procurement of loco's to haul life expired stock. In my view Hybrids are perfect for this country given that it maybe 50 years (and more) before all the intercity routes are electrified.

 

[Peter Sarf]

But it wouldn't make economic sense to buy loco's knowing that they will only get 5 to 10 years use before new high speed intercity stock is introduced. This all seems like a throw back to the 1950's modernisation programme with the construction of locos with a ludicrously short life span.

It will be hard enough to get the ROSCO's on board with a Pacer replacement programme let alone the procurement of loco's to haul life expired stock. In my view Hybrids are perfect for this country given that it maybe 50 years (and more) before all the intercity routes are electrified.

If you buy electric locos now and stick them in HSTs then WHEN the routes finally get electrified you can remove the diesel power cars and keep the perfectly good Mk3 coaches. Its the advantage of flexibility.

Not all of us are sold on Pendolinos and Voyagers. The Pendolinos are claustrophobic, noisy (airconditioning) and too cold. They must have been chosen by someone who compared them to planes and prefered them. I have probably hit two nails on the head .

The voyagers like most DMUs are tediously noisy with their underfloor diesel engines. WE MUST NOT HAVE ANY MORE INTERCITY TRAINS WITH SO MUCH NOISE AND VIBRATION FROM UNDER THE FLOOR.

For leasure I prefer my car, Mk3s/Mk4s, Sleepers or then the plane. Most people who commute dont have a choice so even pacers will do. I walk to work so now I don't have to put up with any of the bulls??t (Southern/South Eastern or LUL) .

 

[CP165]

WE MUST NOT HAVE ANY MORE INTERCITY TRAINS WITH SO MUCH NOISE AND VIBRATION FROM UNDER THE FLOOR.

Agreed!!!!

Good quality intercity trains from existing stock (Mk3s) makes sense. If new electric locos are built for exisitng stock and then the whole trainset is replaced by an EMU, the electric locos can easily be deployed elsewhere or sold on to foreign countries, like the sale of Class 87s/86s to Bulgaria (I think)

Now i'm no expert, but in my opinion, regarding hybrids (hybrid IEPs in particular), hauling diesel traction and fuel for hundreds of miles under wires is pretty stupid. Diesel locos, specially designed for a quick coupling process, should haul EMUs beyond the wires until the route is eventually electrified and these locos can be deployed elsewhere or sold. Anyway, this is slightly off topic.

These new built locos for intercity operations can also be used for freight and other companies such as DRS for replacing class 47s and 86s (for example) once retired from passenger service.

Now i'm expecting someone to come back with a vicious argument saying that i'm wrong, which I could be, but it's just my opinion

 

[jon0844]

That's the thing. I think we need to accept that, partly due to the way the ROSCOs get to milk every last penny out of the industry, we're going to keep old trains for much longer than just 5-10 years.

I am not in any way against us building brand new fleets of trains. As a passenger, I'd love to see modern trains with all the modern creature comforts, but where possible, I also accept we can get a lot of life out of the existing stock.

I'd like 378s to replace 313s but would be equally happy (well, almost) to see the 313s refurbed to the Southern standard and run for another 10-15 years. They're well built (back when we built trains to last) and pretty damn reliable, especially compared to some of the modern stuff.

So, I am sure new locos would get more than 5-10 years of use, and would go on to be used elsewhere for a lot longer. Then, as mentioned above, they could be sold on - or used for freight operation, possibly after being re-geared.

The DfT should be looking far ahead for things like this.. not just the next term of Government.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Sadly the pressure to resist is the short term approach of saving money now without looking more than one franchise period ahead. I know that if there was true objectivity we would have had a lot more electrification decades ago and so the points to debate now would be completely different.

I repeat myself but electrify and cascde. Anyway I would prefer to see Bombardier get a look in on intercity rather than something arguably less European from a country that does not entertain the idea of an open market.

 

[RichmondCommu]

If you buy electric locos now and stick them in HSTs then WHEN the routes finally get electrified you can remove the diesel power cars and keep the perfectly good Mk3 coaches. Its the advantage of flexibility.

Not all of us are sold on Pendolinos and Voyagers. The Pendolinos are claustrophobic, noisy (airconditioning) and too cold. They must have been chosen by someone who compared them to planes and prefered them. I have probably hit two nails on the head .

The voyagers like most DMUs are tediously noisy with their underfloor diesel engines. WE MUST NOT HAVE ANY MORE INTERCITY TRAINS WITH SO MUCH NOISE AND VIBRATION FROM UNDER THE FLOOR.

For leasure I prefer my car, Mk3s/Mk4s, Sleepers or then the plane. Most people who commute dont have a choice so even pacers will do. I walk to work so now I don't have to put up with any of the bulls??t (Southern/South Eastern or LUL) .

In all fairness the design of the Pendolino is dictated by the need for it to tilt. Like it or not (and obviously you don't) the Pendolino's have transformed rail travel on the WCML and have proved to be very popular. I don't know of anyone else who has issues with the air-con; they are cool in summer and warm in winter. I notice that you have chosen to ignore their top speed, acceleration and reliability. Rose tinted spectacles anyone?

During the football season, around twice a month myself and my children travel up to Derby to watch my beloved Derby County. We have a very modern family car sitting in the garage with all the mod-cons and yet on Saturday mornings we get the train up to Waterloo, take the Northern line to St Pancras and then a Meridian up to the Motherland. Now i'm no mug and if the Meridians were really as bad as you make out we'd take the car which to be honest would be rather more convenient. To suggest that Voyagers and Meridians are no better than DMU'S is an absolute nonsense and for the vast majority of the time you hardly notice the engine vibrations if at all.

In all fairness the mk3's are outdated and need to be replaced in the next five years. They cannot be expected to last forever no matter how many refurbs they have. They have served the railway very well but their time is now up. Importing second hand mk3's from Ireland would be nothing more than a backward step. You need to realise that rail enthusiasts are not the only one's who use the rail network.

 

[jon0844]

I am not an enthusiast but can say that a refurbed HST or EC's Mk4's are just fine interior wise. That's all most people care about isn't it? You could make the interior identical to a 390 if you really wanted. It's essentially the same metal shell as any modern EMU carriage on the inside after all.

It would be great to build new trains, but we're not going to get every train replaced at 10-20 years old, so refurbishment makes perfect sense for as long as is possible. Look how old some tube trains are, yet they look almost new to Joe Public.

When you simply cannot go on any more, as the mechanics have failed, parts are impossible to obtain and so on - THEN you build new rolling stock.

What annoys me more is that we have these old trains going around that have fallen apart inside, giving a horrible customer experience and turning people off rail.

 

[seventh-heaven]

In all fairness the mk3's are outdated and need to be replaced in the next five years. They cannot be expected to last forever no matter how many refurbs they have. They have served the railway very well but their time is now up. Importing second hand mk3's from Ireland would be nothing more than a backward step. You need to realise that rail enthusiasts are not the only one's who use the rail network.

I suggest we need to wait until we see the Chiltern refurbishment. This will bring the coaches up to modern standards in many respects - power doors, internal power doors on the body ends to seal the coach from the weather and noise of the gangway, and modern low volume flush toilets with tanks.

Some would argue that it is a shame that they are not replacing the seats, but sadly whilst the fixed armrests are a pain the seats themselves are more comfortable than any other current standard class seat!

 

[Rhydgaled]

I really don't understand this desire to start building loco's and loco hauled stock again. Why do some people on here have the perpetual need to revert back to the '70's? Hybrids and more Pendys are surely the way forward.

Because, while multiple units are very much better suited to an awful lot of our train services, occasionally there are services that are better provided using LHCS. Generally, LHCS might be suitable for Intercity trains longer than 5 carriges with a linespeed of at least 100mph, prefablly more.

Not all of us are sold on Pendolinos and Voyagers. The Pendolinos are claustrophobic, noisy (airconditioning) and too cold. They must have been chosen by someone who compared them to planes and prefered them. I have probably hit two nails on the head .

The voyagers like most DMUs are tediously noisy with their underfloor diesel engines. WE MUST NOT HAVE ANY MORE INTERCITY TRAINS WITH SO MUCH NOISE AND VIBRATION FROM UNDER THE FLOOR.

My Pendo trip was pleasant enough, the windows are a bit small but I could see out alright so it wasn't bad. My Voyager trip however was not nice, I agree with you there.

Good quality intercity trains from existing stock (Mk3s) makes sense. If new electric locos are built for exisitng stock and then the whole trainset is replaced by an EMU, the electric locos can easily be deployed elsewhere or sold on to foreign countries, like the sale of Class 87s/86s to Bulgaria (I think)

Now i'm no expert, but in my opinion, regarding hybrids (hybrid IEPs in particular), hauling diesel traction and fuel for hundreds of miles under wires is pretty stupid. Diesel locos, specially designed for a quick coupling process, should haul EMUs beyond the wires until the route is eventually electrified and these locos can be deployed elsewhere or sold. Anyway, this is slightly off topic.

These new built locos for intercity operations can also be used for freight and other companies such as DRS for replacing class 47s and 86s (for example) once retired from passenger service.

Not all 86s or 87s (forget which) have been exported I think, perhaps any that are left could haul mark3s to provide cheap extra capacity? Or the droves of 60s and a few 66s could be put back to work to free passenger locos from freight work. A bunch of 47s with new engines and TDM working (57/7 perhaps?) with the extra mark3s would be another option, probably would cost under £1m per loco as opposed to, I think, over £2m each for new locos.

In all fairness the design of the Pendolino is dictated by the need for it to tilt. Like it or not (and obviously you don't) the Pendolino's have transformed rail travel on the WCML and have proved to be very popular. I don't know of anyone else who has issues with the air-con; they are cool in summer and warm in winter. I notice that you have chosen to ignore their top speed, acceleration and reliability. Rose tinted spectacles anyone?

During the football season, around twice a month myself and my children travel up to Derby to watch my beloved Derby County. We have a very modern family car sitting in the garage with all the mod-cons and yet on Saturday mornings we get the train up to Waterloo, take the Northern line to St Pancras and then a Meridian up to the Motherland. Now i'm no mug and if the Meridians were really as bad as you make out we'd take the car which to be honest would be rather more convenient. To suggest that Voyagers and Meridians are no better than DMU'S is an absolute nonsense and for the vast majority of the time you hardly notice the engine vibrations if at all.

I must admit the noise of the Voyager didn't really effect me, but I've read many comments to the country and was only on it for a short time. Underfloor engines are alright on regional services, and for passengers only going a few stops like I was but not long-distance Intercity runs. Regardless, I disliked the Voyager because it was very cramped and felt a bit claustriphobic. Pendos are not the only train designed to tilt, the Intercity 225s were designed so tilt could be retrofitted and the person you quoted likes them.

In all fairness the mk3's are outdated and need to be replaced in the next five years. They cannot be expected to last forever no matter how many refurbs they have. They have served the railway very well but their time is now up. Importing second hand mk3's from Ireland would be nothing more than a backward step. You need to realise that rail enthusiasts are not the only one's who use the rail network.

We have overcrowding. Ireland has spare mark3s. Spare mark3s should be cheaper than new stock, so it is more likely that money can be found to increase capacity that way than through buying new stock. They may be old but they are a good design, give them a good enough refurbishment and power-doors and I'd be supprised if non-enthuisast passengers would realise how old they are.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I am not an enthusiast but can say that a refurbed HST or EC's Mk4's are just fine interior wise. That's all most people care about isn't it? You could make the interior identical to a 390 if you really wanted. It's essentially the same metal shell as any modern EMU carriage on the inside after all.

It would be great to build new trains, but we're not going to get every train replaced at 10-20 years old, so refurbishment makes perfect sense for as long as is possible. Look how old some tube trains are, yet they look almost new to Joe Public.

When you simply cannot go on any more, as the mechanics have failed, parts are impossible to obtain and so on - THEN you build new rolling stock.

What annoys me more is that we have these old trains going around that have fallen apart inside, giving a horrible customer experience and turning people off rail.

Yes but mk3 coaches are not 10 - 20 years old! The oldest vehicles will be around 35 years old and i would guess that even the youngest examples are 27 - 28 years old. They are life expired and need to be replaced!

I agree that some of the older tube stock appears to be in good nick but the stuff operating on the likes of the District is not so good. However, when you travel on new air-con stock you begin to realise how poor the rest is.

I just curious to know which old trains you are refering to? Certainly in the SE the trains are pretty good although up north the Pacers certainly need to go soon. I assume that these come under the category of mechanics have failed, parts are impossible to obtain and so on?

 

[jon0844]

The new Victoria Line trains are a mess and they're brand new. Far too hot, serious door problems and the interior already looks tatty in places (seat covers etc). They have great acceleration though, I'll give them that!

I haven't been on a new S Stock train, but I did go on the mock-up that was at Euston some time ago. They were okay, but will they last the same length of time as the stock they're replacing?

I agree about air con though, but you could have possibly retro fitted aircon to the existing sub-surface trains for all I know. But these trains were at an age where you would have had to consider new stock. That said, the 313's were made in, what, 1976? They're pretty old but have loads of life left in them with a refurbishment. The Piccadilly Line trains are also looking like they'd go on for another 10-15 years, perhaps with another facelift between now and then.

Now when it comes to some stock, which was awful from day one, like the Pacer - it's almost criminal that they haven't been replaced. But, a lot of rolling stock was well built - which is why you can't just give a fixed term for anything. You look at each train in its own right surely?

 

[colchesterken]

A cheap way foward would be to rebogie the Irish mk 3s with ones off sleepers and redundant resturant cars
press into service underused class 67s I understand some are stored
refurb ex virgin DVT s I think there are a few still in store
that would give the train op. co.at least 6 125 mph trains to enhance services

 

[jopsuk]

It wouldn't be that cheap, the 67s are now pretty well used and it won't happen without the DfT's say. Also, the 67s are unlikely to ever be authorised to run in service at 125mph.

 

[40086]

Yes but mk3 coaches are not 10 - 20 years old! The oldest vehicles will be around 35 years old and i would guess that even the youngest examples are 27 - 28 years old. They are life expired and need to be replaced!

I agree that some of the older tube stock appears to be in good nick but the stuff operating on the likes of the District is not so good. However, when you travel on new air-con stock you begin to realise how poor the rest is.

I just curious to know which old trains you are refering to? Certainly in the SE the trains are pretty good although up north the Pacers certainly need to go soon. I assume that these come under the category of mechanics have failed, parts are impossible to obtain and so on?

Sorry but the HSTs will be running for a bit more than 5 - 10 years under the current proposals for GWML electrification, as they will be running most of the Paddington - Penzance services! The whole electrification proposal is flawed, electrify to Swansea & Plymouth with straight EMUs with diesel locos (DRS are acquiring some Eurolights apparently so a 2nd GW batch could be procurred) to run the services that go through to Penzance.

I note your comments on electrification not taking place for another 50 years on most routes, unfortunately that's not an option given the cost of diesel and that we are almost at peak oil production! If in 50 years a railway is not electrified it will be closed unless battery technology rapidly improves!

That is where the problem arises with Voyagers etc, they are very thirsty and significantly over powered for the majority of the routes they operate. A comparison done by Chiltern suggests that a 67 + 6 Mk3s is cheaper to run than a 168 equivalent. Load six seems to be a cut off point where head power (ie a fixed formation train with a locomotive) becomes cheaper to run than something like a Voyager. Particularly if you are talking a modern locomotive!

Chiltern for example have a number of Mk3s being refurbished at Doncaster with power operated plug doors. You may think a Meridian is good, these will be significantly better!

Finally I believe the aircon issue on the Pendolinos is to do with the venting of the toilet 'aroma' from the toilets around the carriage, a problem with everyone I've been on! I live in Scotland (although I too am an exiled Derby fan), and Pendos are avoided by almost everyone I know, I use ECML & sleeper, most of my friends and colleagues use the plane!

 

[CP165]

The whole electrification proposal is flawed, electrify to Swansea & Plymouth with straight EMUs with diesel locos (DRS are acquiring some Eurolights apparently so a 2nd GW batch could be procurred) to run the services that go through to Penzance.

I agree, the railways shouldn't start messing about with bi-modes

 

[electra27000]

I agree about air con though, but you could have possibly retro fitted aircon to the existing sub-surface trains for all I know.

C stock car, 6513, was trial fitted with air conditioning at the time it was refurbished. The trial appears to have been a flop.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Sorry but the HSTs will be running for a bit more than 5 - 10 years under the current proposals for GWML electrification, as they will be running most of the Paddington - Penzance services! The whole electrification proposal is flawed, electrify to Swansea & Plymouth with straight EMUs with diesel locos (DRS are acquiring some Eurolights apparently so a 2nd GW batch could be procurred) to run the services that go through to Penzance.

I note your comments on electrification not taking place for another 50 years on most routes, unfortunately that's not an option given the cost of diesel and that we are almost at peak oil production! If in 50 years a railway is not electrified it will be closed unless battery technology rapidly improves!

I believe some say we have already passed peak oil. My opinion is the IC125s should not run most PAD - Penzance services, they should run all Paddington services beyond Taunton. That should save several million pounds worth of guage clearance work for 26m coaches to pay for Swansea and Cheltenham Spa electrification. If it doesn't save enough, then don't guage clear Swindon - Cheltenham or Cardiff - Swansea for IEP either and put the IEPs destined for those routes on East Coast instead and transfer IC225s to Swansea Landore (and save their jobs, IEP only mentions new sidings at Swansea, no depot) to work those services. To get rid of Pacers without buying loads of DMUs we are probablly going to need the ValleyLines wired, that plus Cardiff-Swansea and the Severn Tunnel Diversionary Route eats up most of the years to 2020, but then electrifing the remaining core IC routes (Crewe - Chester, MML to Corby, Nottingham and Doncaster, Broomsgrove - Bristol and GWML to Plymouth(maybe Penzance too) by both routes and maybe Chester - Holyhead/Llandudno) should be possible by the time 22xs are life-expired (30 years takes them to 2040ish I think).

I agree, the railways shouldn't start messing about with bi-modes

If you are refering to IEP, I agree. However:

That is where the problem arises with Voyagers etc, they are very thirsty and significantly over powered for the majority of the routes they operate.

Since 22xs are thirsty and their diesel engines are already tied to a 2040ish life-expiry date (IEP would leave you with diesel engines beyond the 2050 carbon reduction targets), I would support convertion (by adding pantograph cars) of 22xs to bi-mode despite objecting to new Intercity bi-modes. I'd put extra Pendos on ICWC or more IC125s on XC to displace 5-car bi-mode Voyagers (220s with a panto car) to run the Cotswolds line.

Away from Intercity, I don't think we can get electrification fast enough though. Therefore, a very lightweight (if the 23m coaches are heavier than a 23m Sprinter coach of the lightest varient don't buy it) bi-mode regional unit might be worth looking at (also don't buy it unless the fuel economy on diesel power is better than any comparable DMU) if Sprinters can't be life-extended for long enough or provide sufficent capacity.

 

[CP165]

If you are refering to IEP, I agree.

I was , sorry I should have clarified that

I would support convertion (by adding pantograph cars) of 22xs to bi-mode despite objecting to new Intercity bi-modes.

So would I

I'd put extra Pendos on ICWC or more IC125s on XC to displace 5-car bi-mode Voyagers (220s with a panto car) to run the Cotswolds line.

That's a good idea, I never thought of that. I was just thinking bi-mode voyagers (with 3rd rail compatibility aswell as overhead line) to work cross-country routes.

I accept that there may not be a valid business case for electrifying Cardiff-Swansea, but in the long run it will be beneficial, eradicating the need for existing diesel traction (ATW DMUs) and new diesel traction (Bi-mode IEPs). It will have to be done eventually so why not do it now to coincide with Valley Lines electrifycation and avoid ordering new diesels which will cost more to run

 

[Rhydgaled]

I accept that there may not be a valid business case for electrifying Cardiff-Swansea, but in the long run it will be beneficial, eradicating the need for existing diesel traction (ATW DMUs) and new diesel traction (Bi-mode IEPs). It will have to be done eventually so why not do it now to coincide with Valley Lines electrifycation and avoid ordering new diesels which will cost more to run

I can't see how there can be a business case for wiring Bristol Parkway to Cardiff but not to Swansea myself, since there's only 1 train per hour (none in the peaks) which would become fully electric over that section. Adding Swansea - Cardiff to the wiring project for 1 train per hour might not seem to make a good case to them, but have they counted the improvment it would make to the case for electrifying the rest of the route to Paddington, adding another full-electric train per hour over the whole route?

The real win comes if you electrify the ValleyLines (inc. Severn Tunnel Junction - Cheltenham Spa) as well. Then Canton would be able to handle EMUs for the following services without having a micro-fleet:

• 1tph Maesteg - Ebbw Vale Parkway Stopper
• 1tph SWANLINE Swansea - Cheltenham Spa all stations
• 1tph Swansea - Bristol Temple Meads (apparently there are plans for the Swansea trains to go fast from Newport to Reading, this service would link Swansea back to Bristol and take over the Cardiff - Bristol section of the Cardiff - Taunton)

That's 4 electric trains per hour (plus freight) over the Cardiff - Bridgend section, as opposed to only 1 passenger train per hour without ValleyLines electrification. The thing is, Swansea - Cardiff electrification (and therefore the ValleyLines if you want more than 1 passenger train per hour without a micro-fleet) needs to be anounced this year, otherwise £52.5m will be signed away for the 210 diesel engines needed for the 70 5-car bi-modes I belive are planned. Supporters of IEP bi-mode claim that bi-mode supports pregresive electrification as the engines can be removed. It's technically feesible yes, but after spending £52.5m on diesel engines would anyone want to spend more money errecting wires so they can throw the diesel engines in the bin? Much better to scrap bi-mode IEP and spend £1m on 10 class 47s to life-extend them and fit them with TDM. These new 57s would take electrics from Bristol to Weston-Super-Mare and from Swansea to Carmarthen/Pembroke Dock (that's what the TDM is for, loco-swapping the 91 off an IC225 set at Swansea, the only practical way I can see of continuing the Pembroke Coast Express). That saves £42.5m and avoids bringing the weight of the diesel engines with you under the wires. It also avoids underfloor diesel engines, which will make some passengers happier.

 

[a good off]

Yes but mk3 coaches are not 10 - 20 years old! The oldest vehicles will be around 35 years old and i would guess that even the youngest examples are 27 - 28 years old. They are life expired and need to be replaced![/B]?

I don't understand why just because something is 'old' it is automatically deemed broken? Any long term assets such as railway carriages IMO should be viewed as life expired when they become unreliable, dangerous or no longer fit for purpose. MkIII coaches are a proven and popular design and are definitely not life expired after being put through overhaul and refurbishment. It doesn't matter how old they are.

 

[CP165]

Adding Swansea - Cardiff to the wiring project for 1 train per hour might not seem to make a good case to them, but have they counted the improvment it would make to the case for electrifying the rest of the route to Paddington, adding another full-electric train per hour over the whole route?

The real win comes if you electrify the ValleyLines (inc. Severn Tunnel Junction - Cheltenham Spa) as well. Then Canton would be able to handle EMUs for the following services without having a micro-fleet:

• 1tph Maesteg - Ebbw Vale Parkway Stopper
• 1tph SWANLINE Swansea - Cheltenham Spa all stations
• 1tph Swansea - Bristol Temple Meads (apparently there are plans for the Swansea trains to go fast from Newport to Reading, this service would link Swansea back to Bristol and take over the Cardiff - Bristol section of the Cardiff - Taunton)

Electrification obviously creates potential and opportunities, and from what you have said electrification makes sense, but the DfT don't seem to be looking into the future in the way that you are I would comment further but I know South Wales routes and services to a relatively small extent.

210 diesel engines needed for the 70 5-car bi-modes I belive are planned.

This is something I do not understand. Why are 5-car sets being ordered instead of 9 or 10-car sets? I take two 5-car sets will be coupled together for Bristol/South Wales services and single 5-car sets will be used on Cotswolds services?

but after spending £52.5m on diesel engines would anyone want to spend more money errecting wires so they can throw the diesel engines in the bin?

Exactly. It will be, and will be seen as, a waste of money. Plus fuel will be costly and surely maintainence costs will increase with the use of diesel engines? And as you've said, underfloor diesels have the potential to upset passengers

 

[Rhydgaled]

This is something I do not understand. Why are 5-car sets being ordered instead of 9 or 10-car sets? I take two 5-car sets will be coupled together for Bristol/South Wales services and single 5-car sets will be used on Cotswolds services?

I would hope their plans are for all Bristol terminators to be formed of only 'electric' IEP sets. While the bi-modes planned are 5-car, mix of train lengths among the others sets is still under discussion I think.

GW is due to receive 308 IEP cars in total, 35x 5-car bi-modes and 133 electric IEP vehicles for trains of indeterminate length (p29, April issue). Mr Hopwood reports that DfT and the operators are looking at the make-up of the electric fleet carefully, considering a combination of five-, eight- and nine-car units. 'We don't want to fall into the Class 180 trap, of having a fleet of trains not long enough for the job, but equally, five cars can be useful for lightly-loaded services late in the evening and for secondary routes.

Interestingly, considering the discussions further back in this thread, the article goes on to say that a small part of the HST fleet (I assume that refers to Intercity 125s, why do so many use the term HST, which is very broad, to refer to IC125s in particular?) will be retained for:

services to Devon and Cornwall. Introducing Meridians cascaded from Midland main line electrification onto the West of England service was looked at, but 'stakeholders did not find this acceptable, as they did not like the underfloor diesel engines and cramped interiors of those trains' says Mr Hopwood.

So, given that underfloor diesel engines have offically been branded unacceptable for the route, why go to the expence of an IEP maintenance facility at Plymouth depot and gauge clearance at least that far, rather than barring IEP from the route altogether and wiring to Swansea and Cheltenham?

 

[junglejames]

I really don't understand this desire to start building loco's and loco hauled stock again. Why do some people on here have the perpetual need to revert back to the '70's? Hybrids and more Pendys are surely the way forward.

Yes of course its the way forward, if you want to go forward with annoying uncomfortable trains.
Pendys are tilting trains remember? How many of our lines need tilting trains? Just the West Coast. So why put a cramped train onto a line which doesnt require it? As for Hybrids. Well Hitachi have already proved what a disastrous idea they are for intercity trains.
LHCS is the correct way to go for Intercity trains, as it provides more room and comfort (remember comfort covers many things and not just seats), on trains that need them most. Unfortunately we wont go down the correct route.

Just because you love Pendys. That is fine, but to go on abouyt putting them on every line going. What next? Pendys with shoe gear on the Sheerness branch?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In all fairness the design of the Pendolino is dictated by the need for it to tilt. Like it or not (and obviously you don't) the Pendolino's have transformed rail travel on the WCML and have proved to be very popular. I don't know of anyone else who has issues with the air-con; they are cool in summer and warm in winter. I notice that you have chosen to ignore their top speed, acceleration and reliability. Rose tinted spectacles anyone?

During the football season, around twice a month myself and my children travel up to Derby to watch my beloved Derby County. We have a very modern family car sitting in the garage with all the mod-cons and yet on Saturday mornings we get the train up to Waterloo, take the Northern line to St Pancras and then a Meridian up to the Motherland. Now i'm no mug and if the Meridians were really as bad as you make out we'd take the car which to be honest would be rather more convenient. To suggest that Voyagers and Meridians are no better than DMU'S is an absolute nonsense and for the vast majority of the time you hardly notice the engine vibrations if at all.

In all fairness the mk3's are outdated and need to be replaced in the next five years. They cannot be expected to last forever no matter how many refurbs they have. They have served the railway very well but their time is now up. Importing second hand mk3's from Ireland would be nothing more than a backward step. You need to realise that rail enthusiasts are not the only one's who use the rail network.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
That was funny. Thankyou for a good laugh. Reliability? Yep, worse than 90s. Voyagers not noisy? Did you remember to take your ear plugs out? Vibrations? Very bad, partly because of the high speed of the engines.
Oh and please, Pendys revolutionising the WCML. It was the speed that did it. Just so happened it was the pendys that were the trains brought in to give the speed. As has already been shown (but quietly forgotten by you), Mk3s are prefered by the travelling public. They like the speed, but not the pendys.
Now a loco hauled tilting train on the WCML would have given more space and comfort.
The pendys themselves could be good trains, but have been designed on the cheap. Hardly thought about at all.

 

[Drimnagh Road]

The Irish Rail mk3s are in poor condition and would need a lot of work done to them after years of storage.

http://www.drimnagh-road.com/130311heustonmk3s.htm

 

[route:oxford]

The Irish Rail mk3s are in poor condition and would need a lot of work done to them after years of storage.

http://www.drimnagh-road.com/130311heustonmk3s.htm

More superficial really.

 

[tbtc]

Just because you love Pendys. That is fine, but to go on abouyt putting them on every line going. What next? Pendys with shoe gear on the Sheerness branch?

Kids love Pendolini:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebustocrookes/5941292530/

 

[boing_uk]

The Irish Rail mk3s are in poor condition and would need a lot of work done to them after years of storage.

http://www.drimnagh-road.com/130311heustonmk3s.htm

Couldnt the same have been said for many of the Mk3's that ended up in store that are now back in traffic?

I seem to recall a Cl43 power car looking in much worse visual condition in store somewhere or other. They're all now back in use are they not?