New TPE Train Discussion

[jonesy3001]

Just weld 2 pacers together whack a pantograph on top, sort out the bogies and there you go, problem sorted.

 

[sprinterguy]

...I do not believe that enough diesel power would be left for the AT300's to power themselves down from Reading to Southampton/Bournemouth and then back again having previously been used on some parts of the route prior to get to Reading from the North.

If as DAB_Move says you are referring to fuel capacity, then the IEP trains have been specified to be able to complete a daily diagram on one tank of fuel that includes the following sections running on diesel power:

Leeds - York, Newcastle - Aberdeen, Aberdeen - Edinburgh, Newcastle - Northallerton (via Sunderland) and Doncaster - Peterbrough (via the Joint line)

OR

Hereford - Oxford, Newbury - Exeter, Exeter - Newbury and Oxford - Hereford.

I'm not sure how either of those works out mileage wise, but if someone wants to calculate it (Is it around 386 miles on diesel for the Great Western diagram?) that should give an idea of how well suited the trains are to managing a trip down to Southampton/Bournemouth in conjunction with a typical Crosscountry diagram.

 

[Clarence Yard]

They (the original small tank version) can do 700 miles on diesel before they need refuelling.

 

[northwichcat]

Just weld 2 pacers together whack a pantograph on top, sort out the bogies and there you go, problem sorted.

Be easier to melt down the Pacers and to start again from the molten metal.

 

[D365]

Be easier to melt down the Pacers and to start again from the molten metal.

Don't be a spoilsport, that's no fun

 

[Roose]

Don't be a spoilsport, that's no fun

Oh, I'm not so sure.

I think a number of forum members would fight to be the first to strike a match under a furnace containing Pacers...

 

[The Ham]

Oh, I'm not so sure.

I think a number of forum members would fight to be the first to strike a match under a furnace containing Pacers...

Why not go for a wider appeal and offer "experiences" where people could, depending on how much they paid, take part in different activities which destroyed Pacers (burn. blow up, cut up, etc.).

Thinking about it, maybe that is how Arriver are funding the new units!

 

[northwichcat]

Thinking about it, maybe that is how Arriver are funding the new units!

So you've also heard that Angel have sold some 142s to Amazon Prime for Jeremy Clarkson and his team to find ways of destroying?

 

[coppercapped]

They have different bogies, no word from Hitachi as to whether they have third rail shoe gear attachment points and suitable wire runs underbody to cope with 750V DC live cables.

I don't have my notes to hand, but a couple of months ago I attended a talk on the approvals process for the IEP given by Hitachi to a group of the Railway Division of the IMechE and I seem to remember being told there was a 1,500v dc busbar running the length of the train. This was fed by the alternator sets or transformers as appropriate and in turn fed the inverter packs for the motors.

Feeding this busbar at 750v dc would affect the train's performance considerably...

 

[swt_passenger]

Also, do not forget that the HST trains that had previous worked on the Cross country routes had to have smaller bogies if I recall so that they could be used on third rail tracks. I believe that you will find if the 26 metre carriages can fit, that the bogies for the Class 800/801 to be able to work on 3rd rail tracks would have to be using smaller bogies than they would be using on the GWML or ECML.

You've been completely misinformed, or misunderstood the issues I'm afraid. It is only a particular component on the Mk 3 bogie (BT10), namely the swing links, that has to be shorter to avoid a physical clash with the third rail. Hence the term 'short swing link (SSL) bogies being regularly mentioned in the forums in connection with HSTs running on the 'Southern'.

The overall bogie size, wheel diameter and wheelbase is exactly the same as on any other BT10 bogie.

Class800/801 use a completely different design of bogie, which is unsurprising given the 40 years that have passed since the BT10 first appeared.

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

I don't have my notes to hand, but a couple of months ago I attended a talk on the approvals process for the IEP given by Hitachi to a group of the Railway Division of the IMechE and I seem to remember being told there was a 1,500v dc busbar running the length of the train. This was fed by the alternator sets or transformers as appropriate and in turn fed the inverter packs for the motors.

Feeding this busbar at 750v dc would affect the train's performance considerably...

Or they'd increase the current. It is what they do on most current dual voltage stock according to previous posters.

 

[coppercapped]

Or they'd increase the current. It is what they do on most current dual voltage stock according to previous posters.

The cable cross-section is fixed. To avoid exceeding its thermal rating it is highly unlikely that any higher current can or will be passed through it.

I sometimes wonder whether people actually understand Ohm's Law...:cry:

 

[swt_passenger]

The cable cross-section is fixed. To avoid exceeding its thermal rating it is highly unlikely that any higher current can or will be passed through it.

I sometimes wonder whether people actually understand Ohm's Law...:cry:

Depends if you design it for both in the first place doesn't it? I do understand ohms law thanks.

 

[D365]

Does it matter anyway? Outside of metro applications, 750V DC is obsolete.

 

[NotATrainspott]

All in all it does suggest that it would be better to run in self-powered mode over any third rail sections. Given the power supply constraints on most third rail routes it's also doubtful that it would be at all advisable to draw power from it as well.

 

[coppercapped]

Depends if you design it for both in the first place doesn't it? I do understand ohms law thanks.

Robbie's original post, No. 51, where he raised the suggestion included the words

Well, since the Class 800/801 are based on parts that are from the class 395's surely all that would need to be added is DC shoe gear I believe such that they could be made to be able to work on 3rd rail.

This implied a modification to the units as built - not that it would be in an original design, which is why I wrote what I wrote!

It's never going to happen anyway, so it's not worth getting het up about. Incidentally, you wrote that you understand Ohm's Law - I did not want to imply you didn't, but your post included the words

Or they'd increase the current. It is what they do on most current dual voltage stock according to previous posters.

I thought it would be clear, obviously erroneously, that I was referring to the 'previous posters'.

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought it would be clear, obviously erroneously, that I was referring to the 'previous posters'.

Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. As you say it is all a bit too hypothetical really.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Big majagement confrence held today in manchester. Everyone wad there from top brass to line managers. Hopefully news and info will start flowing down and outwards now...

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Big majagement confrence held today in manchester. Everyone wad there from top brass to line managers. Hopefully news and info will start flowing down and outwards now...

Some snippets include confirmation that new rolling stock WILL be introduced in service from December 2017 timetable change onwards. Apparently they are bound by confidentiality and currently cannot confirm what the stock will be or where it will come from. But that is a very short lead time, and to allow for training they would need to be here in Summer 2017, so only about 18 months away really.

Also confirmed is that ALL TPE services will convey a second safety critical member of staff (i.e. someone other than the driver) at all times when in passenger service throughout the life of the franchise.

29 Class 185s to be retained and fully refurbished and dedicated to the Manchester to Leeds, Hull and Cleethorpes services.

New catering offering to be introduced in both Standard and First Class when new trains introduced.

Oh, and new ties from day 1. New uniform and full re-branding not until new trains start to arrive.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

You have heared more then me then mate, company is being bery secretive with info. Mind, they arent exactly forthcoming with information under normal circumstances anyway....

Not to mention my blackberry is broke!...

 

[northwichcat]

Some snippets include confirmation that new rolling stock WILL be introduced in service from December 2017 timetable change onwards. Apparently they are bound by confidentiality and currently cannot confirm what the stock will be or where it will come from. But that is a very short lead time, and to allow for training they would need to be here in Summer 2017, so only about 18 months away really.

Also confirmed is that ALL TPE services will convey a second safety critical member of staff (i.e. someone other than the driver) at all times when in passenger service throughout the life of the franchise.

29 Class 185s to be retained and fully refurbished and dedicated to the Manchester to Leeds, Hull and Cleethorpes services.

New catering offering to be introduced in both Standard and First Class when new trains introduced.

Oh, and new ties from day 1. New uniform and full re-branding not until new trains start to arrive.

So I take it nothing on temporary replacements for the 170s?

 

[Solent&Wessex]

You have heared more then me then mate, company is being bery secretive with info. Mind, they arent exactly forthcoming with information under normal circumstances anyway....

Not to mention my blackberry is broke!...

Info from one of the managers who attended.

I was expecting a communique or something from the company on the phone, but nothing, apart from a newsletter saying that the Executive team of Directors will all keep their current positions in the new franchise, although the senior management team is still being decided. It then went on to say that there was no other news they were able to share at the moment and that they were planning some roadshows around the depots to take place later in February and March when more information would be available, but these dates weren't confirmed.

So I take it nothing on temporary replacements for the 170s?

Not that has been reported to me. Last news I heard (last week) was that the plan was that fewer 185s would be subleased to Northern on the North West side than originally intended which would allow more 185 diagrams on the south route. No news on dates though.

EDIT : I am told 11th July or thereabouts is when they go. A farewell tour is planned for 3rd July. Shuffle rounds at Northern including some Hazel Grove services being operated by 319s frees up some units apparently, which means they need less 185s, thus more 185s stay at TPE. Believe only 3 (possibly 4) 185s to be subleased to Northern.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

About time electrics returned to Hazel Grove. Pointless having elecrified route and not using appropriate stock methinks.

Anyhow, the stock shortage will be resolved once and for all when the 442's are introduced. Latest I heared the spare darth vaders were being rebuilt as DVT's to work pish poor....

*ducks for cover*

 

[northwichcat]

I am told 11th July or thereabouts is when they go. A farewell tour is planned for 3rd July. Shuffle rounds at Northern including some Hazel Grove services being operated by 319s frees up some units apparently, which means they need less 185s, thus more 185s stay at TPE. Believe only 3 (possibly 4) 185s to be subleased to Northern.

About time electrics returned to Hazel Grove. Pointless having elecrified route and not using appropriate stock methinks.

So how exactly will a DMU be freed up?

The evening peak services serving Hazel Grove are:
16:58 Piccadilly-Hazel Grove
15:56 Blackpool North-Buxton (departing Piccadilly at 17:21)
17:23 Piccadilly-Chinley via Hazel Grove
17:49 Piccadilly-Buxton
16:50 Blackpool-Buxton (departing Piccadilly at 18:21)

The 16:58 Piccadilly-Hazel Grove looks like a possibly until you consider the same train is needed for the 17:58 Stockport-Chester so it's only freed up for a short amount of time by putting an EMU on.

The others can't switch due to a lack of wires.

Maybe getting rid of the Chinley working in favour of extending a service via Marple to Chinley would allow it to be cut back to Hazel Grove?

A Piccadilly-Hazel shuttle at off-peak times instead of Preston services running there should only require 1 x EMU unless there's long layovers, so I'm not sure how it's supposed to free up multiple DMUs, unless their working on the basis it'll be 2 x 2 car 150s when not all Blackpool/Preston-Hazel Grove services are 4 cars.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

So how exactly will a DMU be freed up?

The evening peak services serving Hazel Grove are:
16:58 Piccadilly-Hazel Grove
15:56 Blackpool North-Buxton (departing Piccadilly at 17:21)
17:23 Piccadilly-Chinley via Hazel Grove
17:49 Piccadilly-Buxton
16:50 Blackpool-Buxton (departing Piccadilly at 18:21)

The 16:58 Piccadilly-Hazel Grove looks like a possibly until you consider the same train is needed for the 17:58 Stockport-Chester so it's only freed up for a short amount of time by putting an EMU on.

The others can't switch due to a lack of wires.

Maybe getting rid of the Chinley working in favour of extending a service via Marple to Chinley would allow it to be cut back to Hazel Grove?

A Piccadilly-Hazel shuttle at off-peak times instead of Preston services running there should only require 1 x EMU unless there's long layovers, so I'm not sure how it's supposed to free up multiple DMUs, unless their working on the basis it'll be 2 x 2 car 150s when not all Blackpool/Preston-Hazel Grove services are 4 cars.

I know not, only going what I have been told by a manager.

 

[Greybeard33]

So how exactly will a DMU be freed up?

The evening peak services serving Hazel Grove are:
16:58 Piccadilly-Hazel Grove
15:56 Blackpool North-Buxton (departing Piccadilly at 17:21)
17:23 Piccadilly-Chinley via Hazel Grove
17:49 Piccadilly-Buxton
16:50 Blackpool-Buxton (departing Piccadilly at 18:21)

The 16:58 Piccadilly-Hazel Grove looks like a possibly until you consider the same train is needed for the 17:58 Stockport-Chester so it's only freed up for a short amount of time by putting an EMU on.

The others can't switch due to a lack of wires.

Maybe getting rid of the Chinley working in favour of extending a service via Marple to Chinley would allow it to be cut back to Hazel Grove?

A Piccadilly-Hazel shuttle at off-peak times instead of Preston services running there should only require 1 x EMU unless there's long layovers, so I'm not sure how it's supposed to free up multiple DMUs, unless their working on the basis it'll be 2 x 2 car 150s when not all Blackpool/Preston-Hazel Grove services are 4 cars.

I imagine that, off-peak at least, the Blackpool-Hazel Grove services will be extended to Buxton, requiring one extra diagram (maybe 1 or 2 x 150s?) to give an approx. 40mn layover at Buxton, similar to the present Piccadilly-Buxton diagrams. The Piccadilly-Hazel Grove shuttle will take the Piccadilly-Stockport paths currently used by the Buxton services. Two 319 diagrams will be required, with generous layovers at both ends.

This swap will then free up the DMUs currently used on the three Buxton-Piccadilly diagrams, less those still required for the extra Blackpool-Buxton diagram. Not sure how many of the Buxtons are normally doubled at the moment, but maybe a net gain of 2 or 3 DMUs?

I cannot predict how it will work in the peaks, since the diagrams are so complex and units are stabled at Buxton overnight and off-peak - as you say the changes will probably have to involve the Chester and Chinley services as well, plus the peak-only one way services from Buxton to Kirkby, Wigan, Clitheroe and Bolton.

One side-effect would be that 142s could not be used on the Buxton-Blackpools, which would no doubt please Bolton passengers, but not people on the other services that would get Pacers instead of Sprinters!

If Northern gets only 3 x 185s for the ex-TPE Airport-Blackpool/Cumbria services, I think at least 4 more 156s will be needed to replace the other two 185 diagrams. More timetable changes will be needed on these services, since the 185 diagrams are very complex currently, with portion working and rotation of units on the Windermere shuttle.

 

[87015]

So how exactly will a DMU be freed up?

What would the murmured Southport club train with some red and grey Mk3s free up, any six cars along there?

 

[northwichcat]

Not sure how many of the Buxtons are normally doubled at the moment, but maybe a net gain of 2 or 3 DMUs?

I think in the morning peak most/all Manchester bound services from Buxton are 4 car and in the evening peak most/all Buxton departures from Manchester are 4 car.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What would the murmured Southport club train with some red and grey Mk3s free up, any six cars along there?

Longest formation on Southport line is 150+156. I think most Southport-Airport services are booked as 2 x 142s. Of course they have to actually introduce a loco-hauled working not just look at the possibly of one to free up DMUs.

 

[Greybeard33]

I think in the morning peak most/all Manchester bound services from Buxton are 4 car and in the evening peak most/all Buxton departures from Manchester are 4 car.

Agreed, but I meant the inter-peak services not the peak ones.

The evening peak will be especially challenging for diagramming a Piccadilly-Hazel Grove EMU shuttle. In addition to the southbound issues you highlighted in your previous post, northbound the 1529 and 1629 from Buxton (1603 and 1703 from Hazel Grove) currently continue to Barrow and Blackpool respectively (providing peak extras to Bolton/Preston) instead of terminating at Piccadilly. Possibly, with some adjustments to timings, the 1459 and 1559 from Chester could be extended to Barrow/Blackpool instead , to enable EMUs to take over the HAZ to MAN paths and release some DMUs.

I think we are likely to see wide-ranging changes to Northern's DMU diagrams in the May 2016 timetable change.

 

[northwichcat]

the 1459 and 1559 from Chester could be extended to Barrow/Blackpool instead , to enable EMUs to take over the HAZ to MAN paths and release some DMUs.

Agreed. However, the 14:59 from Chester to Manchester is booked as a 4 car 150 due to the school loadings and the next working for those units is the 16:51 Piccadilly to Buxton, while I think the Buxton to Barrow service is booked as a 2 car 156, so unless you split/join units at Oxford Rd it might leave a service short formed.

 

[Greybeard33]

Agreed. However, the 14:59 from Chester to Manchester is booked as a 4 car 150 due to the school loadings and the next working for those units is the 16:51 Piccadilly to Buxton, while I think the Buxton to Barrow service is booked as a 2 car 156, so unless you split/join units at Oxford Rd it might leave a service short formed.

I think the 4-car 150 in place of the 2-car 156 would be welcome strengthening for the 1627 Picc to Bolton/Preston. It could then be split at Preston with one unit continuing to Barrow.

With my suggested recast, the 1649 Picc to Buxton would become the 1649 Picc to Hazel Grove EMU. The 1658 Picc to Hazel Grove DMU would be extended to Buxton instead - which would mean that the DMU to form the 1758 Stockport to Chester would probably have to come ECS from Newton Heath, Vic or Picc instead of Hazel Grove.