Chiltern Loco Hauled and 165 refresh

[swt_passenger]

The 442s are a good example of what can be done with an EMU. Too many enthusiasts think an EMU has to be a cramped commuter unit, there's no reason why an EMU cannot have the interior ambiance of the sacred Mk3 coach

There's not a lot of difference in layout between a Mk3 open coach and a 444 TSO. People on the GEML definitely shouldn't assume that a 444 is just a longer version of a 360...

 

[Helvellyn]

The 442s are a good example of what can be done with an EMU.

The 442s were a good example of what can be done with an EMU.

I wonder if NSE could have built say 16 5-car a.c. versions to replace the Class 309s? But then I'd imagine they'd have been cascaded to London-Norwich by now if such a unit had been built, operating alongside a few LHCS sets.

 

[Aictos]

If for argument's sake the MML was fully wired up and the DfT decided to cascade the NXEA Class 90s and Mk3s to EMT to use on the MML having replaced them on the GEML with a AC version of the Class 444, what then would happen to the 222s and HSTs?

Secondly, people refer to having a Class 444 type on the GEML between Norwich and Liverpool Street well how about St Pancras to Derby or Sheffield seeing as the idea has been discussed about them being used to replace the 185s on the Manchester to Scotland services which is a lot further then the MML destinations above.

 

[NXEA!]

If for argument's sake the MML was fully wired up and the DfT decided to cascade the NXEA Class 90s and Mk3s to EMT to use on the MML having replaced them on the GEML with a AC version of the Class 444, what then would happen to the 222s and HSTs?

Secondly, people refer to having a Class 444 type on the GEML between Norwich and Liverpool Street well how about St Pancras to Derby or Sheffield seeing as the idea has been discussed about them being used to replace the 185s on the Manchester to Scotland services which is a lot further then the MML destinations above.

I can see your reasoning with regards to the MML, but the line is 110 mph, and I'm pretty sure some sections are being upgraded to 125 mph. A 444 or an AC variant's maximum speed is 100 mph, so it wouldn't be able to take advantage of the higher speed that the MML possesses, which the GEML lacks with the maximum being a hundred which is what a 444 is capable of. If the 90's were moved to the MML, I'd convert the 222's to EMU's and move the HST's to XC or retire them. Also, the Norwich line is more commuter-orientated, something that the 444 is suitable for, but just for longer distances. Manchester-Scotland is timetabled for 100 mph running, which is why this sort of EMU is being sought after. However, in my opinion they should order a small fleet of shorter Pendolino's and timetable the service for 125 mph and while they're at it, order some for Birmingham-Scotland. Anyway, I'm going even further off topic here.

 

[TomJ93]

NXEA only have 15 90s. That would not be sufficent for the MML.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Manchester-Scotland is timetabled for 100 mph running, which is why this sort of EMU is being sought after. However, in my opinion they should order a small fleet of shorter Pendolino's and timetable the service for 125 mph and while they're at it, order some for Birmingham-Scotland.

I agree entirly with that. 6-car Pendos or 7-car ones? or longer? that is the question. In fact, perhaps order even more and extend the wires from Crewe to Chester, allowing Virgin to dispose of all it's Voyagers (Bangor and Holyhead would then be all Pendo drags from Chester).

 

[NXEA!]

NXEA only have 15 90s. That would not be sufficent for the MML.

I know that, but EMT currently has 11 HST sets. 11 NXEA 90's are diagrammed currently. The 90's could come and work the HST services, and I'm sure that if they were given a massive overhaul they'd be able to attain that, with possibly a DBS 90 on standby at Derby to help out if necessary. Anyway, I think only 8(?) HST's are diagrammed daily, so if you diagrammed 11 90's, that's three Meridian diagrams that could be moved to 90 working. With some shuffling of the Meridian diagrams, 3 of the 4 Pioneers could be released daily for some Liverpool-Norwich diagrams. So I would say that 15 is enough, they wouldn't exactly be worked intensively would they.


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree entirly with that. 6-car Pendos or 7-car ones? or longer? that is the question. In fact, perhaps order even more and extend the wires from Crewe to Chester, allowing Virgin to dispose of all it's Voyagers (Bangor and Holyhead would then be all Pendo drags from Chester).

I would go for 7, because you may be able to use them on quieter Birmingham diagrams or other quiet services and use some 9 cars on busy Chester/Wales/ and Brum-Scotland services, and even if you didn't do that, 7 coaches would cater adequately for Chester services and allow growth too. 57's could be stationed at Crewe even if they didn't wire to Chester, I'm sure one drag each way an hour wouldn't be beyond the wit of railway men.

 

[jopsuk]

Would the max speed of an AC version of a 444 really be 100? As I understood it, they're limited to that on third rail as that's pretty much the maximum you can go with 3rd rail pick up without losing contact too much or ripping the shoes off at the "ramps". There's as-aerodynamic loco plus stock do 125mph in France, so the shape isn't an issue.

 

[NXEA!]

Would the max speed of an AC version of a 444 really be 100? As I understood it, they're limited to that on third rail as that's pretty much the maximum you can go with 3rd rail pick up without losing contact too much or ripping the shoes off at the "ramps". There's as-aerodynamic loco plus stock do 125mph in France, so the shape isn't an issue.

I suppose you're right, I didn't really think about that. Would you need more powerful traction motors though? Even if you could make it 125 mph capable, would the acceleration rate be affected?

 

[Rhydgaled]

Would the max speed of an AC version of a 444 really be 100? As I understood it, they're limited to that on third rail as that's pretty much the maximum you can go with 3rd rail pick up without losing contact too much or ripping the shoes off at the "ramps". There's as-aerodynamic loco plus stock do 125mph in France, so the shape isn't an issue.

Is there anything with unit-end corridor connections that can exceed 100mph? I've not seen any.

 

[route:oxford]

Is there anything with unit-end corridor connections that can exceed 100mph? I've not seen any.

Not yet.

Well, not officially. It wouldn't be a surprise if someone at Scotrail hadn't pushed one over 100mph when they were introduced last century.

As I understand it, the planned 125mph capable 380 derivatives for the Glasgow-Edinburgh route will have unit-end corridor connections.

 

[tbtc]

If for argument's sake the MML was fully wired up and the DfT decided to cascade the NXEA Class 90s and Mk3s to EMT to use on the MML having replaced them on the GEML with a AC version of the Class 444, what then would happen to the 222s and HSTs?

HSTs to XC (which isn't getting wired any time soon)

222s to TPE North, reformed into five/six coach trains (the twenty seven 222s should cover all duties on the Manchester - Leeds - York corridor.

However, I'd be against the 90s coming to the MML, because if they are too old for the GEML then why would they be any younger on our line?

Secondly, people refer to having a Class 444 type on the GEML between Norwich and Liverpool Street well how about St Pancras to Derby or Sheffield seeing as the idea has been discussed about them being used to replace the 185s on the Manchester to Scotland services which is a lot further then the MML destinations above.

I've argued a few times for a new build of electric 110+mph stock to run routes like the GEML, MML, London - Oxford, Manchester Airport - Glasgow/Edinburgh, Northampton "fasts" etc. Designed for longer journeys than a 350, but without the tilting frame of a 390 (or need for 125mph).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not yet.

Well, not officially. It wouldn't be a surprise if someone at Scotrail hadn't pushed one over 100mph when they were introduced last century.

As I understand it, the planned 125mph capable 380 derivatives for the Glasgow-Edinburgh route will have unit-end corridor connections.

There's no way that Edinburgh - Glasgow needs 125mph units, this is a vanity project.

You are running on the same line as stoppers serving Edinburgh Park/ Croy/ Lenzie/ Bishopbriggs, no "loops", plenty flat junctions etc... I can't see where you are going to get above 100mph even if you run non-stop and omit Falkirk (unless you run at three in the morning)

 

[NXEA!]

HSTs to XC (which isn't getting wired any time soon)

222s to TPE North, reformed into five/six coach trains (the twenty seven 222s should cover all duties on the Manchester - Leeds - York corridor.

However, I'd be against the 90s coming to the MML, because if they are too old for the GEML then why would they be any younger on our line?



I've argued a few times for a new build of electric 110+mph stock to run routes like the GEML, MML, London - Oxford, Manchester Airport - Glasgow/Edinburgh, Northampton "fasts" etc. Designed for longer journeys than a 350, but without the tilting frame of a 390 (or need for 125mph).

Its not that they're too old as such, although I realise they are over 20 years old, its more so the fact they aren't really as suited to the Norwich line as a 444 derivative. Also NX haven't really given them a thorough refurbishment whereas I think EMT would be inclined to heavily refurbish them as they seem to invest a lot in their fleet. The fact that the MML is 110 mph and the 90's are 110 capable makes them better suited, and the 90's have good acceleration which is needed for Nottingham slow services which is where they'd be in their stride. Again with the 110 mph capability, this can allow them to be put on Sheffield services as well as I would think they'd be able to accelerate as well as 222's. I think with some power doors and a radical 'Mallard' style refurbishment and overhaul, the Mark 3's would be good for the MML.

 

[tbtc]

Its not that they're too old as such, although I realise they are over 20 years old, its more so the fact they aren't really as suited to the Norwich line as a 444 derivative. Also NX haven't really given them a thorough refurbishment whereas I think EMT would be inclined to heavily refurbish them as they seem to invest a lot in their fleet. The fact that the MML is 110 mph and the 90's are 110 capable makes them better suited, and the 90's have good acceleration which is needed for Nottingham slow services which is where they'd be in their stride. Again with the 110 mph capability, this can allow them to be put on Sheffield services as well as I would think they'd be able to accelerate as well as 222's. I think with some power doors and a radical 'Mallard' style refurbishment and overhaul, the Mark 3's would be good for the MML.

That's a good argument.

Sadly the reason why EMT do such significant refurbishments is a lot to do with the standard of stock they inherited, but I'd be interested to see what they'd do with the Mk3s

 

[NXEA!]

That's a good argument.

Sadly the reason why EMT do such significant refurbishments is a lot to do with the standard of stock they inherited, but I'd be interested to see what they'd do with the Mk3s

Thank you. Yeah, they've done a great refurbishment on the 158's and HST's IMO.

 

[Aictos]

That's a good argument.

Sadly the reason why EMT do such significant refurbishments is a lot to do with the standard of stock they inherited, but I'd be interested to see what they'd do with the Mk3s

Probably the same kind of refurb they did on the HSTs.

 

[cj_1985]

Probably the same kind of refurb they did on the HSTs.

which.. while being a a smart HST refresh/refurb... is still pretty weak when compared to the efforts of Cross Country, GNER/NXEC/East Coast and First Great Western...

all the mainline (non Network Rail or Open access) HST operators did what seems to be (atleast to the eyes) a more comprehensive interior refurbishment... bringing the Mk.3 interiors into the 21st century with the "mallard" style . And i say Mallard style as that was the earliest indication of a full on post privatisation heavy refresh/refurb... despite "mallard" only really being the EC Mk.4s which formed the basis of the EC and XC refresh/refurb and fairly similar to the FGW style which has/had different seating and layouts

 

[jopsuk]

Is there anything with unit-end corridor connections that can exceed 100mph? I've not seen any.

The French run these, which aren't any more aerodynamically styled (surely a 444 is more aerodynamic than that!), at 125mph with rakes of hauled coaches with no aero "tail" coach.

 

[merlodlliw]

So Arriva really are planning to run non-Chiltern/WSMR mk3's on Gerald post December? Is this a fact?

Its being closely guarded by ATW, we only know of £3.5M subsidy being given to ATW by WAG for 67s on WAG2 via Wrexham to commence Dec 2011, driver training on 67s was for reasons unknown was postponed by ATW when W/S was closed.

Until a new Minister is installed next week, we will not know the fate of Gerald WAG1 whose £2M plus subsidy contract is only paid to Dec 2011. A new Minister may no doubt have differing views than the previous Minister as to the need for Premier Class rail services, and of course the New Minister will not be from Anglesey, thats for sure.

Bobh

 

[swt_passenger]

which.. while being a a smart HST refresh/refurb... is still pretty weak when compared to the efforts of Cross Country, GNER/NXEC/East Coast and First Great Western...

all the mainline (non Network Rail or Open access) HST operators did what seems to be (atleast to the eyes) a more comprehensive interior refurbishment...

When EMT's HSTs were refreshed wasn't the idea that they would be the first to be retired by the Rosco, so minimal work was done?
(Maybe because the line would be electrified. :roll: )

IIRC one of the rail mags explained that the limited service expected was the main reason that the EMT fleet's windows weren't changed to laminated glass, like FGW's were.

 

[Christopher125]

Would the max speed of an AC version of a 444 really be 100? As I understood it, they're limited to that on third rail as that's pretty much the maximum you can go with 3rd rail pick up without losing contact too much or ripping the shoes off at the "ramps". There's as-aerodynamic loco plus stock do 125mph in France, so the shape isn't an issue.

Over 100mph you cant have passengers travelling in the first vehicle of a train unless you have suitable crush zones - on voyagers etc these typically take up over a third of the leading and trailing carriages. For this reason 444's would still be 100mph, as indeed would any current design of 100mph Desiro or Electrostar.

As I understand it, the planned 125mph capable 380 derivatives for the Glasgow-Edinburgh route will have unit-end corridor connections.

Realistically, 125mph trains with corridor connections are a no-no - the driving position is too compromised. The drivers wouldnt stand for it and neither would the unions.

That said, its irrelevant anyway as the capacity loss, higher track access charges and maintenance costs from running 125mph units between E-G would exceed any benefits from running at the higher speed, even if they were full-length units - which of course wouldnt need corridor connections...

Chris

 

[TDK]

Over 100mph you cant have passengers travelling in the first vehicle of a train unless you have suitable crush zones...

Chris

Are 180's 125 mph units? I remember when they first came out they were designed for this speed with crumple zones however these zones are a lot less that a voyager

 

[swt_passenger]

Are 180's 125 mph units? I remember when they first came out they were designed for this speed with crumple zones however these zones are a lot less that a voyager

I think it is generally considered nowadays that the Voyager designers interpreted the rules far too conservatively, hence their crumple zones are significantly longer than actually needed.

180s are definitely 125 mph units, and as far as I know are run at that speed on the ECML by HT and GC...

 

[junglejames]

There's not a lot of difference in layout between a Mk3 open coach and a 444 TSO. People on the GEML definitely shouldn't assume that a 444 is just a longer version of a 360...

Plus they shouldnt assume that a 444 is as good as a Mk3.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

which.. while being a a smart HST refresh/refurb... is still pretty weak when compared to the efforts of Cross Country, GNER/NXEC/East Coast and First Great Western...

all the mainline (non Network Rail or Open access) HST operators did what seems to be (atleast to the eyes) a more comprehensive interior refurbishment... bringing the Mk.3 interiors into the 21st century with the "mallard" style . And i say Mallard style as that was the earliest indication of a full on post privatisation heavy refresh/refurb... despite "mallard" only really being the EC Mk.4s which formed the basis of the EC and XC refresh/refurb and fairly similar to the FGW style which has/had different seating and layouts

Calling it a weak refurbishment is unfair. Its not as extreme, but that doesnt make it weak. All they are missing are the power points. They may not have changed the seats, but so what? Opinion is pretty much divided over what seats are nicer, so changing them or not, it doesnt matter.
To me, they have refurbished them to a good standard, but without spending unnecessary money. I think GNER spent extra money unnecessarily. EMT have a much warmer environment onboard their HSTs.

 

[MCR247]

To be fair there wasn't any sort of point in doing an EC or GW because at the time the MML was being electrfied :roll:

 

[Aictos]

Calling it a weak refurbishment is unfair. Its not as extreme, but that doesnt make it weak. All they are missing are the power points. They may not have changed the seats, but so what? Opinion is pretty much divided over what seats are nicer, so changing them or not, it doesnt matter.
To me, they have refurbished them to a good standard, but without spending unnecessary money. I think GNER spent extra money unnecessarily. EMT have a much warmer environment onboard their HSTs.

Which is I prefer the East Midlands Trains HSTs on the ECML to the East Coast ones, the only downside is the lack of plugs but otherwise is very comfortable.

 

[tonytrainsfree]

when are the class 67 and the Mk3 come in to use

 

[MCR247]

The refurbs aren't needed 'till 2012 or so

 

[Aictos]

The refurbs aren't needed 'till 2012 or so

As a safe bet, I reckon it will be Dec 2012 when the refurbished Chiltern sets are all in service - There is of course every chance that one set could be ready in time for the May 2012 timetable but I'm sticking with my bet that it's going to be December 2012 before they enter service not counting training on the sets.

On a side note, what are Chiltern going to be using on the Bicester to Oxford shuttle? One of the Bubble Cars would be perfect for it, in fact they probably be perfect for a number of Thames Valley branch lines as well.

 

[TEW]

Calling it a weak refurbishment is unfair. Its not as extreme, but that doesnt make it weak. All they are missing are the power points.

It's a weak refurbishment because it hasn't installed laminated glass. Laminated glass was one safety feature identified that would have saved several lives in the Ufton Nervet crash as it would have prevented passengers being thrown from and dragged under the train.