Latest on IEP/GWML

[mallard]

I think electrifying the GWML in stages as funding becomes available isn't a bad idea. It's quite similar to how the WCML was done and that took over 10 years to complete!

Also, the WCML required new diesel locos (the Cl50s) and loco swaps before it was complete, which is somewhat analogous to a hybrid train in todays MU-centric railway.

 

[Zoe]

Also, the WCML required new diesel locos (the Cl50s) and loco swaps before it was complete, which is somewhat analogous to a hybrid train in todays MU-centric railway.

Not quite as you are still dragging the underfloor engines for many miles under the wires. You wouldn't have left the class 86 attached the the formation when hauled by a class 60. They could easily have gone for the EMU with diesel locomotive off the wires option which would have been more efficient but they decided not to. I also don't see any reason why they couldn't have included the Plymouth and Penzance route in the order to have a standard fleet. That said maybe the maximum speed when operating in diesel mode will be slower than 110 mph?

 

[Kneedown]

The recent non-existant or irrelevant improvements. All I can think of is platform extensions and supply upgrades at Radlett Jc on TL.

If they mean the work to raise line speed to 125mph, I believe no major work has been done yet.

There has been a bit of re-signalling in the Trent area, but nothing to make any difference to journey times or capacity.
As regards the forthcoming linespeed improvements, you are right. No significant work has commenced as of yet. I think it's due to start later this year or next. Even when it is completed the speeds on the line will still be very up and down, so just as much accelerating and braking will still be the norm. Far more efficient with electric traction than diesel.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

http://www.railpro.co.uk/news/?idArticles=694

The Midland Main Line was said to have at least as strong a business case for electrification as the Great Western, but the latter was more urgent because of the ageing rolling stock.

Are the MML's HST's very much younger than the GW's then? The article also says that HST's will continue for perhaps another decade on the Plymouth/Penzance services, so they can't be THAT in need of urgent replacement.

 

[Zoe]

The HSTs for the Paddington to Bristol route are the oldest, introduced in 1976.

 

[bnm]

If you take an average, then the EMT Inter-City fleet is newer than the FGW IC fleet. FGW don't have any shiny new(ish) Class 222s!

Whilst there may be the need to life extend the FGW HSTs for Plymouth and Penzance runs for an extra 10 years, that will be made easier by the lower HST fleet utilisation. That means cherry picking the best remaining examples of Class 43s and MkIIIs and stripping the best serviceable components from the rest of the fleet for spares.

 

[Zoe]

I would have hoped that some could have been cascaded to XC rather than stripped for spares and sent for scrap.

 

[bnm]

The HSTs for the Paddington to Bristol route are the oldest, introduced in 1976.

The service was introduced in 1976. I don't think that's quite the same as what rolling stock runs between PAD-BRI. The fleet is well and truly mixed up these days. I saw 43002 in Worcester early in the New Year!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would have hoped that some could have been cascaded to XC rather than stripped for spares and sent for scrap.

Well, that as well. Remember IC Cross Country always seemed to have the worst examples of the 47s and MKIIs back in the day. History repeating?

 

[sprinterguy]

Are the MML's HST's very much younger than the GW's then? The article also says that HST's will continue for perhaps another decade on the Plymouth/Penzance services, so they can't be THAT in need of urgent replacement.

I think the more pressing concern is that whilst EMT on the Midland Mainline has largely displaced the majority of their HSTs with new Meridians, FGW rely on the HSTs as the backbone and sole provider of their long distance services. (EDIT: bnm beat me too it!)

 

[Zoe]

The service was introduced in 1976. I don't think that's quite the same as what rolling stock runs between PAD-BRI. The fleet is well and truly mixed up these days. I saw 43002 in Worcester early in the New Year!

My point was that it will be these trains that the Paddington to Bristol electrification will allow to be withdrawn.

I think the more pressing concern is that whilst EMT on the Midland Mainline has largely displaced the majority of their HSTs with new Meridians, FGW rely on the HSTs as the backbone and sole provider of their long distance services.

That was the decision of FGW though, they decide they didn't want the 180s.

 

[sprinterguy]

My point was that it will be these trains that the Paddington to Bristol electrification will allow to be withdrawn.

Yeah that’s true, although it is likely that when HST withdrawals do start happening then it will be those in worst mechanical condition that will be withdrawn first, which won’t necessarily be the oldest examples (Unless the withdrawals were made from a purely accountancy, rather than operational, perspective): 43002 and 43003 were the last two FGW power cars to be refurbished with MTUs, so despite being the oldest power cars they may outlive some of their younger siblings if they are in good nick. The same will probably apply to the mark 3s and withdrawals are likely to be based on the amount of time since their last overhaul.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That was the decision of FGW though, they decide they didn't want the 180s.

Indeed it was, but that doesn’t change the fact that FGW thereby have the oldest Intercity train fleet. Plus, fourteen five carriage Adelante trains was never going to make a huge dent in FGWs extensive Intercity operations.

 

[bnm]

All this talk of renewal, life extending etc....anyone else reminded of Trigger's broom?

 

[sprinterguy]

All this talk of renewal, life extending etc....anyone else reminded of Trigger's broom?

Yup. HSTs at 50 years old anyone? They’re already showing a heck of longevity for a long distance passenger train, especially one that still remains in front line service on exactly the same duties it was originally designed for. I think that goes to show how good a design the HSTs are more than anything else possibly could.

 

[Zoe]

How are they going to meet the 2020 disability discrimination requirments?

 

[sprinterguy]

How are they going to meet the 2020 disability discrimination requirments?

Beats me. Although aren’t the proposed Chiltern loco hauled rakes meant to match up to the 2020 requirements with sliding plug doors and other such disabled friendly paraphernalia?

Using “refurbished 35 year old HSTs for perhaps another decade” suggests that they could still potentially be withdrawn by the end of 2019: By the time we’re into the CP5 period beyond 2015 I suspect there will be a clearer picture of how likely further electrification to Plymouth or Penzance is in the next 5-10 years (Up to the end of CP6), and further action could then be taken in making the necessary modifications to the HSTs to keep them going a bit longer if electrification looks to be forthcoming, or to order brand new diesel trains if it isn’t.

 

[bnm]

How are they going to meet the 2020 disability discrimination requirments?

Isn't RVAR the more pertinent legislation? That has sufficient leeway for rail vehicles brought into service prior to 1st January 1999. Oh, and doesn't the current Coach C in a FGW HST rake already comply with the DDA?

 

[anthony263]

Isn't RVAR the more pertinent legislation? That has sufficient leeway for rail vehicles brought into service prior to 1st January 1999. Oh, and doesn't the current Coach C in a FGW HST rake already comply with the DDA?

I think the main probelsm are the slam doors on the MK3 stock

 

[starrymarkb]

Isn't RVAR the more pertinent legislation? That has sufficient leeway for rail vehicles brought into service prior to 1st January 1999. Oh, and doesn't the current Coach C in a FGW HST rake already comply with the DDA?

It has leyway for older stock, but that expires around 2020, was to allow the exisiting stock to continue for an ~30 year life.

After 2020 full compliance was required

 

[Chafford1]

Beats me. Although aren’t the proposed Chiltern loco hauled rakes meant to match up to the 2020 requirements with sliding plug doors and other such disabled friendly paraphernalia?

Using “refurbished 35 year old HSTs for perhaps another decade” suggests that they could still potentially be withdrawn by the end of 2019: By the time we’re into the CP5 period beyond 2015 I suspect there will be a clearer picture of how likely further electrification to Plymouth or Penzance is in the next 5-10 years (Up to the end of CP6), and further action could then be taken in making the necessary modifications to the HSTs to keep them going a bit longer if electrification looks to be forthcoming, or to order brand new diesel trains if it isn’t.

No problem in meeting the 2020 requirements if Chiltern's prototype Mk3 is adopted for HST sets. Nice to have retention toilets as well.

 

[Zoe]

If a new locomotive could be built to replace the class 43 power cars, would the Mark 3 coaches would it be reasonable to keep the mark 3 coaches in service even longer? I know we will likely never see a new build of loco and stock so just interested to know how long the coaches could remain in service for.

 

[Chafford1]

If a new locomotive could be built to replace the class 43 power cars, would the Mark 3 coaches would it be reasonable to keep the mark 3 coaches in service even longer? I know we will likely never see a new build of loco and stock so just interested to know how long the coaches could remain in service for.

Zoe

Scan back through previous editions of 'Modern Railways' and you'll come across some detailed articles from Roger Ford on exactly the proposal you're suggesting - rebuilt Mk3s and new locomotives (possibly a UK compliant version of Bombardier's 'Traxx') to pull the carriages.

As to how long refurbished Mk 3's would last, that would depend on how much refurbishment they underwent. Roger Ford reckons the Mk 3 design is sound which suggests at least 10 further years of service.

I'm sure Chiltern will be looking to use their rebuilt Mk 3s until the end of their franchise in 2021.

 

[anthony263]

wern't bombardier looking at designing a traxx locomotive that would fit the uk loading gauge?

 

[Zoe]

If the rebuilt Mark 3s would only last 10 years then new locomotives would be a bit pointless. It's just unfortunate the the train builders these days do not offer loco hauled stock or Mark 5 coaches would be a possibility.

 

[Chafford1]

If the rebuilt Mark 3s would only last 10 years then new locomotives would be a bit pointless. It's just unfortunate the the train builders these days do not offer loco hauled stock or Mark 5 coaches would be a possibility.

Yes, but you could build new carriages as and when funding became available.

 

[Daimler]

If the rebuilt Mark 3s would only last 10 years then new locomotives would be a bit pointless. It's just unfortunate the the train builders these days do not offer loco hauled stock or Mark 5 coaches would be a possibility.

But they could - the issue lies in the DFT's obsession with IEP and the laughable bi-mode.

 

[Zoe]

But they could - the issue lies in the DFT's obsession with IEP and the laughable bi-mode.

Not off the shelf though.

 

[Daimler]

Not off the shelf though.

Perhaps not, but the plan for IEP was not for an 'off the shelf' train either (I'm not sure how off the shelf a bi-mode will be, come to that).

 

[Zoe]

Perhaps not, but the plan for IEP was not for an 'off the shelf' train either (I'm not sure how off the shelf a bi-mode will be, come to that).

I get the impression that it will basically be an off the shelf underfloor engine DMU with a pantograph to supply the traction motors when under the wires. If Bombardier had won the contract then more Voyagers could have been built for this.

 

[TomJ93]

Would be great to see rapid electrification of the MML, starting soon and being totally finished December 2012.

A new order of 390s without tilt for the EC, MML and maybe NXEA. VT would also get some more tilty ones.

13 HST power cars from MML, 11 EC HSTs would all be freed. 21 super voyagers would be released from our friends at Virgin Trains along with 27 Meriden sets. XC would surrender their much hated HSTs.

The Holyhead route and the North of Edinburgh routes would be handed to the XC franchise. Some minor electrification would happen alongside improvements to the current electrification on the EC. The GW would not recieve any electrification until the money was there to Electrify the main trunks of the GW and buy new trains.
Though they would receive every single HST freed up (and have ownership of most of the HST fllet apart from GC and NRs iirc) XC would have complete ownership of all 220/221/222 and all would get a Pantograph coach aswell as being lengthened to 8 cars (to match the new length of the longest Meridens).

I would much prefer a proposal to this rather than giving all our money to the Japanese for a product that isn't best suited to our needs and the Daft's proposals don't benefit as many operators.
Asking Bombardier to expand the Voyager family would keep our folk at Derby busy and help British industry.

Hopefully Washwood Heath could be reopened (even better for good!) and then the work could be done here, failing that at least it can come through the Chunnel.

I feel the major choking point on investment in the British network is currently the Gov. pays for everything. If Hammond was to announce tomorrow if the franchise holders agree to buy all these new sets and to improve stations they can have a 30 year contract, with strict performance quotas, which if they fail they will lose the franchise, so they have incentive to invest, and incentive to do well.

I can't see FGW losing their franchise whilst operating HSTs, as they own the things!

 

[ainsworth74]

Would be great to see rapid electrification of the MML, starting soon and being totally finished December 2012.

Even if you placed the orders at the start of business tomorrow I don't think you would be able to wire the entire MML in a little under two years. Certainly not without compromising the quality of the wiring, causing more trouble in the future.

XC would surrender their much hated HSTs.

You do realise that the HSTs on XC are vital (and much liked) due to the fact they provide vastly more capacity than a 4 car voyager?

The Holyhead route and the North of Edinburgh routes would be handed to the XC franchise.

Why these routes seem to work pretty well with VT and EC as it stands, why complicate things further by having a new operator working out of Euston and ending through services to London from Aberdeen and Inverness?

Though they would receive every single HST freed up (and have ownership of most of the HST fllet apart from GC and NRs iirc)

I can't see FGW losing their franchise whilst operating HSTs, as they own the things!

FGW don't (and wouldn't) own most of the HSTs they lease most of their HSTs from ROSCOs. Granted they do own some of their own HST sets but by no means the majority of them.

You're ideas are all nice enough but some of them don't make sense. But the main problem is where the hell is all the money for this going to come from!? You want to wire the MML in two years? That's going to cost billions (if its even possible), lengthening all 22xs to 8 cars whilst laudable is also going to be very expensive. Reopening Washwood Heath, expensive. There is no money for a scheme like this.

 

[TomJ93]

Sorry, I forgot to say at the top in my ideal world!

I was thinking it's not the longest stretch of line in the world, and if they did some solid work they could get it done.

The point about Fgw owning their HSTs is if you take the franchise away they may not lease them out to the new gw franchise just out of spite.