Why do folk always obsess over the number of coaches? It’s completely irrelevant. Modern coaches can be anywhere between 20m to 26m. Surely overall or usable length is much more important metric.
-
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!
What would a dream future cross-country train be like?
- Thread starter ox_chap
- Start date
Why do folk always obsess over the number of coaches? It’s completely irrelevant. Modern coaches can be anywhere between 20m to 26m. Surely overall or usable length is much more important metric.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
GRALISTAIR
Established Member
i grew up with loco hauled travel and loved it with a passion and miss it like crazy. For me every train would be top and tailed with a locomotive. ETS of 100.
Loco hauled trains aren't obsolete. Some European countries are ordering them even today because of the operational flexibility they offer in terms of capacity if not redundancy.
Loco-hauled was ruled out of IET options by DfT’s Stuart Baker wrongly claiming that it took 15 minutes to couple a loco. It was presumed he’d seen the pantomime of a Pendolino drag.
Just imagine if the only thing you needed to do to strengthen a train was add some completely unpowered dumb vehicles without driving cabs. (Sigh.)
Had he never left these fair shores?
Pete_uk
On Moderation
8 or 9 car bi mode would be revolutionary
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,262
There aren't that many.
As far as I know, the vast majority of passenger rolling stock being built these days is multiple units.
And a lot of "loco-hauled" stock being built these days is used in fixed formation push-pull sets that are effectively multiple units in operational terms.
Was that wrong? It certainly took around that time for a loco swap at Crewe when that was how Euston to Holyhead was worked.
Many guards would announce it and suggest people who wanted to have a smoke go on to the platform to do so.
Let’s put it a different way. No under-floor diesel engines.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
If the infrastructure /signalling is set up correctly, it should take no longer than coupling /uncoupling two units. Possibly even less as there are no passengers in the loco to needs doors closing etc. I doubt any alterations were made to signalling / infrastructure at Crewe to facilitate quick attachment. Anywhere there’s a reversal there’s potentially even less time lost.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,262
I would certainly think that would be a nice feature if it is possible, but not that much of XC is really on third rail any more.
I think it's just Basingstoke to Bournemouth, which is ~60 route miles out of 850 on the core CrossCountry network (Bournemouth / Plymouth – Manchester / Edinburgh).
Dual voltage equipment is pretty trivial these days, any kind of electric unit that'll run on DC could (and should) be fitted with shoes etc. Yes, Basingstoke to Bournemouth isn't a huge proportion of the XC network, but it's not an insignificant nothing section either.
The loco needs to go somewhere and come from somewhere.
That isn't possible.
How so? You can't do splitting and joining if it's not possible for one part of a train to wait in a platform for the other part.
And you clearly can do splitting and joining, it happens hundreds of times every day.
It's not a splitting / joining train. The loco has to come from somewhere before the attachment, and it needs to go somewhere after detachment.
Ok yes, we're talking about different things then. That arrival/ departure is not part of the time take to split/ join, and if the timetable permits the loco could just wait in the platform between duties. But it might need to shunt away somewhere too.
In my BR ops days, 10 mins was a standard run-round allowance and 10 or less for a loco swap depending on location. The Met line steam/diesel swaps (well before my time!) were usually quoted as 2-3 minutes. I’m also told by those from that area that the 33/1 attachments/detachments at Bournemouth were pretty fast too.
As for Mr Baker, it took Roger Ford in Modern Railways to call out his belief that he knew more about physics than Isaac Newton and that distributed traction did not bring magical properties.
Even usable length isn't that helpful, as taking an extreme example, if 2/3rds of a train is 1st class vs a train which is all standard class is going to be able to carry a vastly different number of passengers.
As to what it should look like:
- a mix of 9 coach and 5 coach fleet (the latter being the minority)
- ideally able to work with XC & LNER stock
- the 5 coach stock used to run services like Scotland to Cardiff/Plymouth
- 2 engines plus a battery (5 coaches) or 3 engines plus 2 batteries (9 coaches)
- would require extra maintenance deposits, again ideally one in GWR land to aid them (especially if the order allows several of the 5 coach GWR sets to be lengthened to 9 coaches)
- the above is due to the fact that Central Rivers wouldn't be available to the new sets until at least some (if not a significant number and maybe even all) 22x's are withdrawn from passenger duties as the maintenance facilities wouldn't be suitable (the new 5 coach sets would be too long and with 9 coach sets as well, it'll need significant changes to service the new fleet)
- ideally more electrification, could allow the fleet to loose the diesel engines in due course
Yeah but we all know that a 5 coach 80X is a completely differently beast to a 5 coach Voyager due to the appalling inefficient layout of the latter. A 5x26m unit is longer than a 6x20m unit. A 9x26m unit is 54m longer than a 9x20m unit, and almost as much as a 12x20m unit such as a class 745.
Last edited:
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 19,624
10 minute run round? Assume that wasn't for freight too!
Less than 10 to get the loco round. About a week to walk the lamp down, brake test and walk back!
tbtc
Veteran Member
Obviously nobody is going to argue with cost-free statements like "comfortable seats and excellent window alignment"... Sure, nobody is going to argue against those in principle (only when they come up against other costs/benefits).
However i really don't understand why, if you're trying to tackle the capacity problems that XC experience, your starting point would be "I'd like a twenty meter long non-passenger unit at the front of the train, which will act as a single point of failure, plus a further twenty metres of space at the rear taken up by a non-passenger unit
Fifteen minutes to attach/detach a locomotive may sound like it's erring on the side of caution but the realities of performing this procedure at a busy station like New Street wouldn't be fast, especially after BR "simplified" track layouts forty or so years ago). Fine if you have a dedicated platform at a quieter station, like in The Good Old Days, where the detached 33 could just occupy the platform waiting for the next EMU to arrive... But I remember how it worked at places like Carstairs. Great fun for enthusiasts , no doubt, but a long delay for through passengers. Good luck if your plan involves hogging a platform at a busy modern station, with that platform specifically dedicated to XC
If you grasped the nettle and split XC into a "Manchester to Reading/ beyond" corridor and a "ECML to West Country" corridor (to minimise complications/ delays, simplify operations etc) then it might be worth considering some Third Rail capacity for units running the first corridor and some 125mph capacity for units running the second corridor. Both would come at costs, but may be worth justifying on those specific corridors. However, keeping the existing muddle of services and paying to ensure that a "go anywhere" fleet of identical trains would have both Third Rail and 125mph capabilities sounds like a very expensive bit of gold plating, designed to make them sound prohibitively expensive. Keep It Simple, Stupid.
However i really don't understand why, if you're trying to tackle the capacity problems that XC experience, your starting point would be "I'd like a twenty meter long non-passenger unit at the front of the train, which will act as a single point of failure, plus a further twenty metres of space at the rear taken up by a non-passenger unit
Fifteen minutes to attach/detach a locomotive may sound like it's erring on the side of caution but the realities of performing this procedure at a busy station like New Street wouldn't be fast, especially after BR "simplified" track layouts forty or so years ago). Fine if you have a dedicated platform at a quieter station, like in The Good Old Days, where the detached 33 could just occupy the platform waiting for the next EMU to arrive... But I remember how it worked at places like Carstairs. Great fun for enthusiasts , no doubt, but a long delay for through passengers. Good luck if your plan involves hogging a platform at a busy modern station, with that platform specifically dedicated to XC
If you grasped the nettle and split XC into a "Manchester to Reading/ beyond" corridor and a "ECML to West Country" corridor (to minimise complications/ delays, simplify operations etc) then it might be worth considering some Third Rail capacity for units running the first corridor and some 125mph capacity for units running the second corridor. Both would come at costs, but may be worth justifying on those specific corridors. However, keeping the existing muddle of services and paying to ensure that a "go anywhere" fleet of identical trains would have both Third Rail and 125mph capabilities sounds like a very expensive bit of gold plating, designed to make them sound prohibitively expensive. Keep It Simple, Stupid.
pokemonsuper9
Established Member
140mph capable, tri-voltage (battery, 3rd rail, OLE) and some diesel for Devon/Cornwall and Aberdeen services.
Large doors at thirds (think 195s) for better flow (surely over double than what you can get on a Voyager).
Low floor as minimum at entrances, internal ramps if underfloor space is insufficient for batteries and diesel (unless a power pack solution is used).
Probably 9 car at 26 metre if Hitachi, other manufacturers would provide different but similar results in terms of seating.
Seating aligned with windows, and good seats (cue discussion). High amout of tables with suitable legroom
I would say tilting but I think that's getting too fanciful even despite the rest of my post, and might be extra-difficult with low floor.
Large doors at thirds (think 195s) for better flow (surely over double than what you can get on a Voyager).
Low floor as minimum at entrances, internal ramps if underfloor space is insufficient for batteries and diesel (unless a power pack solution is used).
Probably 9 car at 26 metre if Hitachi, other manufacturers would provide different but similar results in terms of seating.
Seating aligned with windows, and good seats (cue discussion). High amout of tables with suitable legroom
I would say tilting but I think that's getting too fanciful even despite the rest of my post, and might be extra-difficult with low floor.
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Very unfair - he did extensive travelling all over , including the Trans-Siberian !
With ‘dream’ in the thread title let’s dream that there will be a time when our former second city won’t need diesels for nine* of its radial routes.
Yep. Electric traction throughout.
* To/via Derby, Leicester, Oxford, Stratford, Bristol, Cardiff, Hereford, Stourbridge, Shrewsbury.
Last edited:
Technologist
Member
- Joined
- 29 May 2018
- Messages
- 467
Dream Cross Country Train:
9 car BEMU derived from off the shelf automotive componentry, transformer replaced by DC-DC converter. Carries 39 tonnes of batteries (6MWh) for a 150 mile range off wire at express speeds. It has 35MW (46,500bhp) from a pair of Lucid Air PM motors (32kg) per axle. It has an eddy current braking system capable of slowing the train at up to 2ms-2 irrespective of the traction conditions.
It accelerates at 1.3ms-2 up to over 125mph, top speed north of 300mph on battery, 200mph+ on OHLE. When not operating on a mixed traffic line the vehicle uses its massive acceleration to allow it to reach much higher speeds than current trains can between geometric restrictions, it also tilts. Net result is that we get high speed train timetables on existing lines, the high acceleration means we can stop at most stations and express trains aren't needed ergo we can have higher capacity.
9 car BEMU derived from off the shelf automotive componentry, transformer replaced by DC-DC converter. Carries 39 tonnes of batteries (6MWh) for a 150 mile range off wire at express speeds. It has 35MW (46,500bhp) from a pair of Lucid Air PM motors (32kg) per axle. It has an eddy current braking system capable of slowing the train at up to 2ms-2 irrespective of the traction conditions.
It accelerates at 1.3ms-2 up to over 125mph, top speed north of 300mph on battery, 200mph+ on OHLE. When not operating on a mixed traffic line the vehicle uses its massive acceleration to allow it to reach much higher speeds than current trains can between geometric restrictions, it also tilts. Net result is that we get high speed train timetables on existing lines, the high acceleration means we can stop at most stations and express trains aren't needed ergo we can have higher capacity.