Anyone able to shed any more light on this? It's hardly an unreliable source. But unless the twisty bits of the route get a tilt upgrade, what would be the point? Seems a lot of work to put one return service in- all the EPS equipment, signage, clearence work, driving route/stock training, having to have suitable thunderbird locos in place etc? Also, what stock- didn't the "extra" Pendolinos had been completed yet?
-
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!
East Coast rumours?
- Thread starter jopsuk
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Geezertronic
Established Member
I can only see the title (no twitter account). If there is more underneath, please can someone quote it on here?
TheBigD
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 2,043
Bizarre post.
All I can see is:
"Breaking story that DfT is planning to add a Glasgow-Kings Cross Pendolino return service to the Eureka timetable."
but I don't think there's any more info than that.
I assume the source is Roger Ford, although I cannot see any proof of that being the case.
There is no mention of tilt upgrades, etc, there is no 'need' for that to happen. If the OP believes that it makes no sense, then given that it's the DfT we're talking about, then that's hardly surprising
If there aren't enough 91 + Mk4 sets around, then the only realistic choices are 90s + Mk3s, or HSTs, or Pendolinos. If there are no HSTs, and they don't want 110mph trains on the ECML, then that doesn't leave a lot of choice.
All I can see is:
"Breaking story that DfT is planning to add a Glasgow-Kings Cross Pendolino return service to the Eureka timetable."
but I don't think there's any more info than that.
I assume the source is Roger Ford, although I cannot see any proof of that being the case.
There is no mention of tilt upgrades, etc, there is no 'need' for that to happen. If the OP believes that it makes no sense, then given that it's the DfT we're talking about, then that's hardly surprising
If there aren't enough 91 + Mk4 sets around, then the only realistic choices are 90s + Mk3s, or HSTs, or Pendolinos. If there are no HSTs, and they don't want 110mph trains on the ECML, then that doesn't leave a lot of choice.
rail-britain
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2007
- Messages
- 4,102
Basically, this is a proposal to use the new Class 390 units on one diagram so that they acquire some mileage before they are introduced on the West Coast franchise
What would be the point, why not just put them into regular use!
Equally, Project Eureka was all about removing East Coast services between Glasgow Central and Edinburgh
What would be the point, why not just put them into regular use!
Equally, Project Eureka was all about removing East Coast services between Glasgow Central and Edinburgh
Looks like a purely political move with reasons given in the blog.
There won't be a tilt upgrade, far too expensive.
And 140mph would require cab signalling (ERTMS level 2) which isn't scheduled until the 2020s, and will be first introduced on the GWML in any case.
Signalling on the ECML is actually designed for Deltics for the most part, it was the increased braking power of HSTs that allowed them to run at 125mph in conventional signalling braking distances. But you won't get much more out of it than that for now.
There won't be a tilt upgrade, far too expensive.
And 140mph would require cab signalling (ERTMS level 2) which isn't scheduled until the 2020s, and will be first introduced on the GWML in any case.
Signalling on the ECML is actually designed for Deltics for the most part, it was the increased braking power of HSTs that allowed them to run at 125mph in conventional signalling braking distances. But you won't get much more out of it than that for now.
Geezertronic
Established Member
I don't see any mention of driver training or route learning so the 390s can actually be driven down the ECML?
tbtc
Veteran Member
Seems a waste of time to me. Is it worth training the staff etc? Where is the spare path? Would Virgin/ Stagecoach be happy with "their"* train being used on a competing service?
(* - yeah, I know there's an argument about whether it's "theirs" or not)
(* - yeah, I know there's an argument about whether it's "theirs" or not)
Crossforth
Established Member
If these are the new 11 car Pendolinos that are going to be used, will there not need to be some infrastructure changes to in-cooperate them at King's Cross due to platform length?
As I've gathered. Pendo carriages are longer than MK4s so would there be room or would it be a tight squeeze?
As I've gathered. Pendo carriages are longer than MK4s so would there be room or would it be a tight squeeze?
Ploughman
Established Member
Is this linked to the recent announcement that East Coast are pulling out of Glasgow?
Thus opening up the opportunity for someone else to step in.
Thus opening up the opportunity for someone else to step in.
This sounds like a civil servant's suggestion. When someone actually sits down and costs it, I think that might just be the end of it.
To resource even one service per day, would require quite a significant number of drivers to be traction trained. There's also the costs that would be incurred covering their rostered work, whilst this training took place. (at least a two week course, probably more - can anyone comment from experience of the type?).
Then there's the issue of arranging train handling; not easy on the ECML, with a type of traction that is not operating scheduled services. It's hard to get the paths, and again, there's a considerable cost involved.
Presumably there would be ECS moves at the Glasgow end for maintenance? Again, that would need to be resourced, and would not represent a particularly productive use of at least one (expensive) driver per day.
With the Lincoln services and Class 180's being axed to save money, I don't think this proposal will come to anything.
To resource even one service per day, would require quite a significant number of drivers to be traction trained. There's also the costs that would be incurred covering their rostered work, whilst this training took place. (at least a two week course, probably more - can anyone comment from experience of the type?).
Then there's the issue of arranging train handling; not easy on the ECML, with a type of traction that is not operating scheduled services. It's hard to get the paths, and again, there's a considerable cost involved.
Presumably there would be ECS moves at the Glasgow end for maintenance? Again, that would need to be resourced, and would not represent a particularly productive use of at least one (expensive) driver per day.
With the Lincoln services and Class 180's being axed to save money, I don't think this proposal will come to anything.
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
With regards to drivers, surely they would be better off using Virgin West Coast drivers but with the East Coast Drivers acting as route conductors between London and Edinburgh?
Bastiaan
Member
I don't understand why these new sets can't just directly come in service on the West Coast, where they are needed badly. Meanwhile Virgin is still running Voyagers on the completely wired Birmingham to Scotland route ...
I doubt that Virgin would have the spare manpower to cover this. It would be difficult to cover the necessary mid - journey crew change (ie Virgin don't have a depot mid - way up the ECML!), without having drivers traveling passenger everywhere. That's without the obvious doubling of manpower costs.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 34,237
Er... because it is as contracted by the Labour Government, who correctly refused to give in to Branson's ill judged demands for extra money to bring them into service.
So they aren't part of the current franchise which was supposed to end in March 2012...
EWS 58038
Member
Well, there is your IEP.
Intercity Eastcoast Pendolino.
Intercity Eastcoast Pendolino.
Bastiaan
Member
So, because they aren't part of the current West Coast franchise, they just can't go directly to Virgin? But apparently they can go to East Coast? They aren't part of the East Coast franchise either, are they? So I still don't get it ...
Oh, wait. The new Pendos and the current East Coast franchise are both owned by the government, right? Then I get it.
EWS 58038
Member
Okay... received this one a minute ago via Twitter: http://railwayeye.blogspot.com/2010/08/more-on-barbie-lino.html
Bastiaan
Member
A Barbie-bird?Railway Eye said:
Geezertronic
Established Member
Good as it sounds, one train hardly seems worth worrying about making a big fuss over (although, to be fair, EC hasn't said anything to the public yet so we don't know how much of a big deal they were going to make).
I suppose it makes economic sense though. The train can be tested ahead of official use, and generate revenue, which I suppose shows a degree of common sense. But, why not put all of the sets into use on the same basis?
I suppose it makes economic sense though. The train can be tested ahead of official use, and generate revenue, which I suppose shows a degree of common sense. But, why not put all of the sets into use on the same basis?
EWS 58038
Member
Hmm.... a 6 car Pendolino for Great Northern, 8 car version for great Western (if OHLE will ever be installed, which I doubt) and you have your IEP.
For Inverness and Aberdeen we just drag it along like Beardy rail West coast does.
Lincoln and Hull can be done by the 180's, If hey haven't fallen apart by then.
For Inverness and Aberdeen we just drag it along like Beardy rail West coast does.
Lincoln and Hull can be done by the 180's, If hey haven't fallen apart by then.
I've been wondering (off topic) about Pendolino dreags- presumably it wouldn't be beyond the wit of man to turn "drags" into "push-pull" operation? Or would the current coupler not be up to the job, having been designed primarily for rescue purposes?
Geezertronic
Established Member
Royston Vasey
Established Member
This is what IEP should always have been... an effectively off the shelf tried and tested train, specified in appropriate lengths and quantities. Why duplicate all the design and specification effort? You don't need to be stuck with a Pendolino as is, there are any number of quality IC trains from Europe and elsewhere which could evolve into a UK HST2 - a Javelin or TGV evolution perhaps.
A promise of a big enough order would justify their construction, or at least their assembly, in the UK a la Hitachi, should that be a political priority.
It is a shame that the world has moved on since a few mavericks at Crewe and Derby were able to cobble together truly revolutionary trains such as APT and HST. But so many private companies are producing high speed trains that we don't need to do that any more.
The HST's ongoing success (some of which only being realised in the last couple of years) was down not just to its good design, but also its flexibility and universality, so that even if certain routes or operators decided to dispense with them, they are completely useable on other routes.
Thus in future, you'd have a fairly universal Intercity fleet, cheaper to operate, easier to maintain, more flexible and easy to redeploy.
Of course you'd have to spend some of the money saved on electrification to fully exploit such benefits. For non-electrified sections, use Voyagers/Meridians/Adelantes on secondary routes and new off-the-shelf diesel units (Meridian or Turbostar based?) for primary non-electrified 125 mph routes.
As for this particular situation, it is a shame that political dogma may have blocked the simpler, cheaper, more passenger-beneficial route of commissioning these on the WCML, where they are needed not in 2012, but right now.
Perhaps part of this is evaluating the operational possibility and passenger reaction to a Pendolino derivative as a lower-cost 225 replacement. So it is maybe not as crazy as it first seems.
A promise of a big enough order would justify their construction, or at least their assembly, in the UK a la Hitachi, should that be a political priority.
It is a shame that the world has moved on since a few mavericks at Crewe and Derby were able to cobble together truly revolutionary trains such as APT and HST. But so many private companies are producing high speed trains that we don't need to do that any more.
The HST's ongoing success (some of which only being realised in the last couple of years) was down not just to its good design, but also its flexibility and universality, so that even if certain routes or operators decided to dispense with them, they are completely useable on other routes.
Thus in future, you'd have a fairly universal Intercity fleet, cheaper to operate, easier to maintain, more flexible and easy to redeploy.
Of course you'd have to spend some of the money saved on electrification to fully exploit such benefits. For non-electrified sections, use Voyagers/Meridians/Adelantes on secondary routes and new off-the-shelf diesel units (Meridian or Turbostar based?) for primary non-electrified 125 mph routes.
As for this particular situation, it is a shame that political dogma may have blocked the simpler, cheaper, more passenger-beneficial route of commissioning these on the WCML, where they are needed not in 2012, but right now.
Perhaps part of this is evaluating the operational possibility and passenger reaction to a Pendolino derivative as a lower-cost 225 replacement. So it is maybe not as crazy as it first seems.
Geezertronic
Established Member
For all the bad points about the 390s, they have actually gone a very good job on the WCML and I'd be interested to see what the not so obvious changes are on the new 390s since...
I would also be interested to see if there is any timing differences between the 225's, HST and the new 390s (non tilt) on an Edinburgh-Kings Cross run.
Like already mentioned, why reinvent the wheel if an improved 390 or equivalent could do the job?
From EastCoast Press Release said:
I would also be interested to see if there is any timing differences between the 225's, HST and the new 390s (non tilt) on an Edinburgh-Kings Cross run.
Like already mentioned, why reinvent the wheel if an improved 390 or equivalent could do the job?
- Status