Cascade from ECML to MML?

[phil281]

I'm sure no-one considered that once in the years of planning...

I'm getting a bit sick of people just assuming those in management are just a bit thick and they clearly have the solution, when it's much more likely they don't know the full picture and the people with the money, resources and skills do.

They're not thick, just politicaly motivated. The ECML is the jewel in the crown of the railways in this country, so to be able to build shiny new trains in england (even though all the profit will go overseas) for the ECML looks good for those in power. It's not as glamourus as the MML. All about vote winning, not actually what is best for the country and best use of resources. You see it in every other aspect of the way this country is run.

 

[cjmillsnun]

They're not thick, just politicaly motivated. The ECML is the jewel in the crown of the railways in this country, so to be able to build shiny new trains in england (even though all the profit will go overseas) for the ECML looks good for those in power. It's not as glamourus as the MML. All about vote winning, not actually what is best for the country and best use of resources. You see it in every other aspect of the way this country is run.

Hmmmm. I'm sure many would argue that the WCML or the GWML is the Jewel in the crown.

However it is one of the big three and new shiny trains on that line will always be a prestige thing.

 

[talltim]

I wondered about that too.

My alternative, if you decided you needed 2 pantograph cars in the longer units, you'd need to order a further 7 pantograph cars and you'd could configure them as:

20 x 5 car sets = 100 cars
3 x 9 car sets = 27 cars
4 x 10 car set = 40 cars

Total 167 cars

Therefore you'd need a total of 34 pantograph cars. spread over 27 units.

Why would you need two panto cars?

 

[Kettledrum]

Why would you need two panto cars?

I understand that last time it was looked at by Bombardier they concluded that 1 pantograph car would only be able to power 4 other cars In the old project Thor thread, the user Pumbaa said:

"It essentially boiled down to being much harder and expensive than originally thought. The loads of a 5 car alone meant you'd need 2 panto-transformer cars to handle, and then the economics didn't work unless you took it up to ~ 8 cars. That killed 221/222 conversion if it hadn't already been killed. Then Derby put in a higher price than envisaged, and said they'd be sending the work abroad.

Net result, they decided it was better to quietly drop the whole thing. The increase in expense on what was originally conceived was a factor of 4. Was not going to happen."