Intercity Express Programme going ahead

[Yew]

Does the IEP provide for more services to lincoln? or might EC keep some HST's to run some of these services

 

[Rhydgaled]

Where is the business case for electrifying west of Plymouth though? It's only one train per hour.

How many of them are Intercity, or are you only counting Intercity trains? In my opinion 1tph is enough if the trains are long enough. If there's less than one Intercity train per hour, and the rest are DMUs just going to Plymouth, then just drag an electric train with a diesel loco (with the electric train being formed of conventialy-sized coaches, not 26m ones that won't fit).

Or put it another way, where's the enviromental case for having diesel Intercity trains into 2050, or having electric IC trains carting around tonnes of diesel engines and fuel? Answer to the first (the enviromental case for diesel Intercity trains in 2050) is almost certainly 'there isn't one'.

 

[HSTEd]

There certainly is no case for electrification of the line west of Plymouth with Furrer and Freys 200kph capable equipment.

But since the line could probably be single end fed from the plymouth end thanks to low traffic density you could probably make use of the Furrer and Frey ~60-70mph "Semi Tensioned" Equipment or even that Trampower stuff that is supposed to be insanely cheap.

Whether that massively improves the case or not is beyond me however. But there is not just the 1tph InterCity, isn't there atleast 1tph all Shacks to Plymouth which could also be converted to electric traction?

 

[Zoe]

How many of them are Intercity, or are you only counting Intercity trains?

There are eight direct services from London to Penzance Mondays to Thursdays with an additional service on Fridays. There are also three Cross Country services per day to Penzance.

 

[sprinterguy]

Where is the business case for electrifying west of Plymouth though? It's only one train per hour.

That was enough justification to electrify the ECML between Newcastle and Edinburgh, and then Edinburgh - Carstairs. Actually, perhaps that is an argument against electrifying more "marginal" sections of route, given that with the withdrawal of mail trains (formerly powered by 86s and 90s down the ECML) and with no more class 86s and mark 2s working Crosscountry services down the West Coast from Edinburgh there's probably less trains making use of the wires on both of these sections now than there were when they were wired up!

 

[Zoe]

That was enough justification to electrify the ECML between Newcastle and Edinburgh, and then Edinburgh - Carstairs - Glasgow.

Bi-mode wasn't available back then though and not electrifying would have resulted in a time penalty due to a loco change at Newcastle or running HSTs under the wires from London to Newcastle.

 

[anthony263]

I think you could run an Exeter - Penzance stopping train using an emu if the wires were errected to Penzance.

To make better use of paths perhaps the units could attach to units to/from Paignton at Newton Abbott.

An hourly stopping service would perhaps allow some intercity services to skip some stations perhaps saving a few minutes and if the crosscountry voyagers are equipped with a pantograph car they could also make use fo the wires

 

[Zoe]

I think you could run an Exeter - Penzance stopping train using an emu if the wires were errected to Penzance.

To make better use of paths perhaps the units could attach to units to/from Paignton at Newton Abbott.

An hourly stopping service would perhaps allow some intercity services to skip some stations perhaps saving a few minutes and if the crosscountry voyagers are equipped with a pantograph car they could also make use fo the wires

I don't think removing intercity services from Newton Abbot (with the exception of the Cornish Riviera) and forcing everyone onto a stopper to join intercity trains at Exeter is going to be very popular. It's not the largest of towns but the station is well used and covers a large area.

 

[anthony263]

I don't think removing all intercity services from Newton Abbot and forcing everyone onto a stopper to join intercity trains at Exeter is going to be very popular. It's not the largest of towns but the station is well used and covers a large area.

I said nothing about running the intercity services through Newton Abbott they would continue to call its just some of the smaller stations it think they could skip

 

[Zoe]

I said nothing about running the intercity services through Newton Abbott they would continue to call its just some of the smaller stations it think they could skip

Yes sorry and I note that you also didn't say "all" services so have edited my post to correct that. I thought the fact you were starting the service back at Exeter would result in trains not stopping at Newton Abbot so that journey times to Plymouth/Penzance would be quicker. If you just want to skip some of the smaller Cornish stations then you could start the service from Plymouth. I'm not sure if there would be demand for more than one service per hour between Plymouth and Penzance though. You could call intercity services only at Bodmin Parkway, St Austell, Truro, Redruth and Penzance but the question is if there would be sufficient demand from only calling at these stations. Liskeard, Par and St Erth also have connections to branch lines.

 

[HSTEd]

Perhaps if the resignalling of the CML and attached bits and pieces (that should be coming soon right?) with ERTMS (well it would make sense as its an extension of the GWML?) that would lead to increased capacity would raise the prospect of extending the St Ives branch line trains to Penzance and the Par trains to St Austell and allow you to cut out some of the stops.

BUut until then....

 

[anthony263]

Yes sorry and I note that you also didn't say "all" services so have edited my post to correct that. I thought the fact you were starting the service back at Exeter would result in trains not stopping at Newton Abbot so that journey times to Plymouth/Penzance would be quicker. If you just want to skip some of the smaller Cornish stations then you could start the service from Plymouth. I'm not sure if there would be demand for more than one service per hour between Plymouth and Penzance though. You could call intercity services only at Bodmin Parkway, St Austell, Truro, Redruth and Penzance but the question is if there would be sufficient demand from only calling at these stations. Liskeard, Par and St Erth also have connections to branch lines.

Yes I can see what you mean about some stations such as Par and perhaps yes intercity services should call at these stations.

As for demand yes you may be correct however if there is a better service that could increase patronage on the trains especially during the summer season

 

[HSTEd]

Well if you were going to electrify the Cornish Main Line (and presumably the branches as they would all be single end fed as well and would not draw significant amounts of power) you could extend the Plymouth train to terminate at Newquay and Falmouth alternately.

But that would require quite extensive resignalling and atleast a second platform (atleast at Newquay) on the branches.

 

[philjo]

An update is given in the May edition of Modern Railways which arrived in the post today.

DfT have told the franchise bidders for Thameslink that the choice of roling stock for the Cambridge/Kings Lynn services will be their responsibility, so IEP will not now be used for these services.
Roger Ford mentions that this means the class 365s are likely to be retained as the lowest cost option or alternatively a possible new build 110mph EMU order.

It also mentions that the Great Western IEP fleet order is scheduled for signing in May. IEP bi-modes to replace EC HST is scheduled for signing in 2013.

 

[Zoe]

DfT have told the franchise bidders for Thameslink that the choice of roling stock for the Cambridge/Kings Lynn services will be their responsibility, so IEP will not now be used for these services.

So the bidders will not be allowed to choose the IEP for these services then?

 

[philjo]

The article implied that the bidders will not opt to use them as it would cost them a lot more in leasing costs! DfT is looking for major cost savings in the new franchises.
The editorial says IEP would cost £20,000 per vehicle more per month in leasing costs than using refurbished 365s.

 

[tbtc]

An update is given in the May edition of Modern Railways which arrived in the post today.

DfT have told the franchise bidders for Thameslink that the choice of roling stock for the Cambridge/Kings Lynn services will be their responsibility, so IEP will not now be used for these services.
Roger Ford mentions that this means the class 365s are likely to be retained as the lowest cost option or alternatively a possible new build 110mph EMU order

That's very interesting, especially as some people have already planned for the cascaded 365s elsewhere (e.g. TPE North) when assuming how electrification will be dealt with.

It also confirms that Thameslink will continue to run the Cambridge/Kings Lynn services (since there was talk of them moving to East Coast etc, given that Thameslink will be a much bigger franchise once the "core" services are expanded).

Keeping some/all 365 on the GN (and keeping the faster GN services with Thameslink) does offer some clues as to where the medium term looks.

 

[jopsuk]

Aye- if the slower GN outer suburban services are going to be "Thameslink" stock, then the present fleet of 365s is plenty big enough to run the "Express" services- and even lengthen even more, especially at the peaks.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Aye- if the slower GN outer suburban services are going to be "Thameslink" stock, then the present fleet of 365s is plenty big enough to run the "Express" services- and even lengthen even more, especially at the peaks.

The point is that the choice will be the TOC's.
The IEP objective was to get 125mph for Express services south of Hitchin and particularly over Welwyn Viaduct.
Keeping Class 365s with their 100mph might not be sufficient.

 

[jon0844]

Would the 365s be likely to receive any major overhaul, or just another refresh? Would that be up to the bidders?

I'd love to see them get aircon, and an updated CIS system and the addition of CCTV.

 

[Aictos]

Would the 365s be likely to receive any major overhaul, or just another refresh? Would that be up to the bidders?

I'd love to see them get aircon, and an updated CIS system and the addition of CCTV.

You and me both,

The point is that the choice will be the TOC's.
The IEP objective was to get 125mph for Express services south of Hitchin and particularly over Welwyn Viaduct.
Keeping Class 365s with their 100mph might not be sufficient.

But I'm sure the 365s could be upgraded to 110mph running?

 

[jon0844]

But I'm sure the 365s could be upgraded to 110mph running?

There's a good chance they already can, but if not it can't be that expensive to upgrade in comparison to building a whole train.

 

[Zoe]

Doesn't running faster than 100 mph require a crumple zone?

 

[philjo]

I think 110mph would be sufficient.
I can't remember exactly but I think the limit through Welwyn tunnels is something like 105mph which are close to Stevenage/hitchin where the Cambridge trains would need to slow anyway for the junction & there is a limit on the sharp curves at Hatfield. So only a few stretches for 125mph from KX to Hitchin. more for Peterborough services if they run on the fast line but a lot of these use the slow line anyway north of Htchin.

IEP stock also would have the doors at the end of the carriages so presumably station dwell times would be longer with those trains compared to the 365s (or other new EMUs inc the Thameslink stock) during peak hours.

I suppose they could opt to add-on to the Thameslink order to have a uniform fleet type even if the train lengths are different. (currently 4 cars is normally the limit north of Cambridge due to OHLE limitations)

 

[Zoe]

IEP stock also would have the doors at the end of the carriages so presumably station dwell times would be longer with those trains compared to the 365s (or other new EMUs inc the Thameslink stock) during peak hours.

In another thread it was suggested that Cambridge would have a commuter IEP and this would be different to the other IEP units. Would the doors still be at the end of the coaches?

 

[ainsworth74]

Doesn't running faster than 100 mph require a crumple zone?

I'm sure someone somewhere on the forum posted the the latest specifications for railway vehicles (in terms of crashworthiness requirements) and there was no longer any mention of trains rated for service faster than 100mph needed dedicated crumple zones. This is why the 350s are being cleared for 110mph running without the provision of extra crumple zones in the design. However, I'm happy to be proved wrong.

 

[Rhydgaled]

In another thread it was suggested that Cambridge would have a commuter IEP and this would be different to the other IEP units. Would the doors still be at the end of the coaches?

Why not just order additional 395s for the KGX - Cambridge/Kings Lynn services? The rest of IEP as currently planned could then be abandonded (not quite as unlikely as I thought now that Hitachi might build an assembly plant in Germany not the UK).

 

[HSTEd]

I was under the impression that IEP was a super-395 with extra bits and pieces.

If we could have a super-395 without the bells and whistles it might be good.
Even send them to the Southern Region and cascade the 395s north. (since the super-395 would presumably have a top speed more suitable to HS1). (Or to the GW Commuter trains - like Oxford-London).

Hell a 140mph super-395 might be able to make the one hour mark for Bristol fasts.

 

[jon0844]

If the 365s could operate at 110mph and comply with safety regulations, why not keep them until such time that the ECML has its signalling upgraded, whereby we might see faster running (140mph+) and all-new stock. As stated, on the 'last bit' of the ECML approaching KGX, the line isn't 125mph anyway.

It could be quite some time for that to be done, possibly even after HS2 is completed.

The 365s seem to do a perfectly good job right now. Can they last another 20 odd years?

 

[Failed Unit]

I did read many years ago that the 365s can equal a 91 and mk4 (and beat a HST) between Kings Cross and Knebworth. So 100mph should be fine. I guess if they upgrade the slow lines to 100mph it would do the job just as well. (someone may tell me they aready are between Knebworth and Hitchin. The flyover I am sure is going to speed up the route much more than 125mph trains will.