Bi-mode pathing rules and EM consultation

[james-martin]

Hi everyone,

I am currently looking at East Midlands (EM) Franchise consultation and noted talk of Bi-mode trains and some potential partial electrification. This haas raised some interesting questions for me about the stated goal of faster intercity journey times for Sheffield and Nottingham services but only electrifying Bedford to Corby.

Does anyone know how bi-mode is planned to operate on the GWR routes? My assumption was that whenever trains swap to a different supply they do it at a stand whether at a station or possibly at another location (do some cross London services do this). If this is correct I am intrigued how only running wires to Kettering on the mainline would work in conjunction with saving 20 minutes by not stopping south of Leicester for Intercity services. The alternative would be running on diesel all the way to/from London, at which point what’s the point of calling it a bi-mode!

To get to the more technical question, when pathing services are there any time/resilience rules for changing train power source (similar to the ~5mins for changing ends)? If so what is this, or what do you think it potentially should be?

Looking forward to hearing any knowledge, or speculation on this! Please be kind if I have a gapping knowledge gap

James.

 

[Roast Veg]

GWML bi-modes will change mode at speed, as would any potential MML stock.

 

[class26]

Hi everyone,

I am currently looking at East Midlands (EM) Franchise consultation and noted talk of Bi-mode trains and some potential partial electrification. This haas raised some interesting questions for me about the stated goal of faster intercity journey times for Sheffield and Nottingham services but only electrifying Bedford to Corby.

Does anyone know how bi-mode is planned to operate on the GWR routes? My assumption was that whenever trains swap to a different supply they do it at a stand whether at a station or possibly at another location (do some cross London services do this). If this is correct I am intrigued how only running wires to Kettering on the mainline would work in conjunction with saving 20 minutes by not stopping south of Leicester for Intercity services. The alternative would be running on diesel all the way to/from London, at which point what’s the point of calling it a bi-mode!

To get to the more technical question, when pathing services are there any time/resilience rules for changing train power source (similar to the ~5mins for changing ends)? If so what is this, or what do you think it potentially should be?

Looking forward to hearing any knowledge, or speculation on this! Please be kind if I have a gapping knowledge gap

James.

The Hitachi 800 series trains can change for electric to diesel (or vise versa) at speed, there is no need to stop.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Just to clarify, 'speed' being up to 125mph.

 

[james-martin]

Thanks everyone. Impressive!

 

[mallard]

Replacing trains on the MML without electrification would, unfortunately, be a complete waste of time and money. It would make much more sense to give XC bi-modes (BHM-MAN is 81 miles under the wires, DON-EDB is 236; STP-KET is only 73) and give the East Midlands some Voyagers to replace the HSTs.

Maybe have some "GTI"-style HSTs on LIV-NRW and give that service a little bit of a speedup and much-needed extra capacity.

If the MML does get new stock, what happens to the 222s? They're too modern to scrap and nobody else has any clear need for them; even giving them to XC would be rather silly given that they have a far better case for bi-modes than the MML.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I predict by the time MML 222s are on the market looking for a new home, Scotrail will be looking for a replacement for their HSTs which can only be a temporary stopgap. Meridians would be ideal for Scottish Intercity routes which require a good power-weight ratio but don't require hundreds of seats.

 

[edwin_m]

Replacing trains on the MML without electrification would, unfortunately, be a complete waste of time and money. It would make much more sense to give XC bi-modes (BHM-MAN is 81 miles under the wires, DON-EDB is 236; STP-KET is only 73) and give the East Midlands some Voyagers to replace the HSTs.

Maybe have some "GTI"-style HSTs on LIV-NRW and give that service a little bit of a speedup and much-needed extra capacity.

If the MML does get new stock, what happens to the 222s? They're too modern to scrap and nobody else has any clear need for them; even giving them to XC would be rather silly given that they have a far better case for bi-modes than the MML.

There are some good reasons to get bi-modes for the MML and some good reasons not too, but unfortunately politics trumps both - an unsuccessful attempt to throw a sop to the region for the cancellation of electrification.

 

[Roast Veg]

It makes an awful lot of sense to do away with the HSTs on the MML. It makes no sense to have them run down from Neville Hill, and they have had the lest work done to them out of any on the network. It follows then that an all new fleet would serve to drastically improve the BCR of MML electrification in increments.