45mph Heritage Railways?

[35B]

You haven’t been to a gala where once lateness starts it escalates with no way of recovery?

I'd suggest that's more usually due to over-ambitious timetables combined with an inability to accelerate run-rounds and the like. Speed is rarely relevant.

But the wider point is valid - when a timetable goes pop on a heritage line (gala or otherwise), that does matter to people - however they get there.

 

[BerkshireRails]

You are comparing apples and oranges, or to be specific 60 minutes of loco run time compared to 90 minutes of loco run time. The most likely consequence of doing the trip half an hour faster at 45mph is that the diesel would then spend half an hour idling. So taking its consumption up to 1.95 units, compared to the 1.77 units for the 25 mph trip.

In the real world, most power (and therefore fuel) is expended in acceleration. Once you have achieved the desired steady-state speed, maintaining it uses much less fuel.

I did not include the dwell time at the end of the line in the calculations for fuel use, as there are multiple options for what can be done. It would be up to the heritage railway to decide which ones they use, with the time saved from running at up to 45mph. Some of the options are listed below.
1) The Heritage Railway could shut the diesel engine down for 30 minutes, saving fuel, reducing noise emissions and engine hours.
2) They could have the train depart 30 minutes earlier, therefore improving the frequency and/or reducing the number of heritage trains required to keep the same service frequency. This would require fewer volunteers to operate the same service as before.
3) They could keep the engine idling at the terminus after the run-around of the train.

As a result, this could make commuter services on heritage railways more attractive as they become more competitive with road transport.
1) More reliable commuter service due to having increased padding at the interchange between Heritage and mainline services.
2) Better average speed makes it more comparable with the car in terms of journey time.
3) Allows emails to be checked on the commute, therefore possibly making the workers more productive.
4) It is an option to enable diversification of the Heritage sector, making it a stronger sector.

The Worth Valley Joint Transport Committee have funded a feasibility survey, examining the possibility of running a commuter style service along the Keighley and Worth Railway, the line featured heavily in the film ‘The Railway Children.’ The aim of the service would be to help relieve the heavy congestion that local roads currently face.

The report concluded that the proposed service, which could be operated either by the KWVR or a third party, would generate revenue of at least £39,000.

The service could be run with, excluding train crew, 4 members of staff. It also reports that the current bus service is relatively slow and unlikely to offer the step change to encourage motorists out of their cars.

It is envisaged at this stage that there would be 4 services in the morning and evening peak periods, allowing passengers to connect with the national network at Keighley and travel onwards to Leeds, Bradford and Shipley. Although, as many of the costs associated with running a commuter type service are fixed, the possibility of running an all day service has also been examined.

Northern Rail, who operate national rail services at Keighley has said: ” We’re happy to support them with our expertise to work up the operational logistics for running a commuter service.”

The KWVR will report back to the JTC within the next 6 months.

 

[Egg Centric]

I did not include the dwell time at the end of the line in the calculations for fuel use, as there are multiple options for what can be done. It would be up to the heritage railway to decide which ones they use, with the time saved from running at up to 45mph. Some of the options are listed below.
1) The Heritage Railway could shut the diesel engine down for 30 minutes, saving fuel, reducing noise emissions and engine hours.
2) They could have the train depart 30 minutes earlier, therefore improving the frequency and/or reducing the number of heritage trains required to keep the same service frequency. This would require fewer volunteers to operate the same service as before.
3) They could keep the engine idling at the terminus after the run-around of the train.

As a result, this could make commuter services on heritage railways more attractive as they become more competitive with road transport.
1) More reliable commuter service due to having increased padding at the interchange between Heritage and mainline services.
2) Better average speed makes it more comparable with the car in terms of journey time.
3) Allows emails to be checked on the commute, therefore possibly making the workers more productive.
4) It is an option to enable diversification of the Heritage sector, making it a stronger sector.

Ignoring that this is fantasy economics, trying to make commuter services on heritage railways pay - if it were possible which it isn't - would end up with them running pacers.

For high speed running (as with many things railway) the best arguments are cultural/emotional, not rational. Going down the rational route is a very dangerous one.

 

[skyhigh]

3) Allows emails to be checked on the commute, therefore possibly making the workers more productive.

What on earth has this got to do with anything?

People can't check their emails at 25mph but can at 45mph?

 

[zwk500]

As a result, this could make commuter services on heritage railways more attractive as they become more competitive with road transport.

45mph is not what will make commuter services viable on heritage railways. The economics of running a 50-week 5-day service are radically different, and there are few heritage railways with the potential catchment and destinations to even think of doing it, let alone sufficient rolling stock and staff resources.