You can't expect a driver to do everything... he's there to drive the train, and that's it.
Suggesting that a driver is 'just there to drive the train' would be gross arrogance for safety. At the end of the day the driver has the final say in whether the train can tilt or not, if available. The safety of himself, his crew and passengers is just as important if not more important than getting from A to B on time. You would rather arrive at your destination late but alive than not at all.
I'm sure 221s can only tilt under TASS.
http://www.traintesting.com/Class_221.htm also says that the Oxford-Banbury section is back at 90mph, despite TASS allowing 110mph. I'm not sure if that's correct, though it could well be - I can't remember there being any EPS boards.
Andrew, Birmingham - Reading is outside my route knowledge so I couldn't comment accurately but all the information suggests that some part of that line is enabled.
Even on the WCML tilt only takes place at very restricted curves: Bushey, Linslade, Weedon, parts of the Trent Valley and North Staffs, and in Cumbria, Southern Scotland.
Not wishing to confuse where tilt is enabled to where it actually takes place, but if I said about the majority of the WCML then I mean that EPS boards are there and enabled over most of the WCML. For example, through North London suburbs, even though there isn't much in the way of tiltage, the trains can still run at a higher speed.
I guess the point is, if HSTs and MK3s were cascaded, subsidy would be a fraction of the cost now or even non existent. It really depends whether passenger numbers would have grown in any case. Take Reading-Birmingham, which is a huge growth route, on account of business development in the Thames Valley. The service frequency was doubled, so that in itself is attractive. It also remains to be seen what could have been achieved through yield management on tickets something BR didnt do on cross country.
That said, there is no doubt that Voyagers are popular with passengers. The first rule of mass transit is it has to be a quality service; else people just wont use it. Minimum services with cheap and nasty stock just dont work. Voyagers, although far too short, are in most passengers eyes an upgrade.
This backs up my reasons behind replacing stock on WC and XC - new trains are an upgrade, refurbished 30 year old trains less so. Improving service frequency and ticketed (value for money) has come with this.
Voyagers are not the worst trains on the Network.... However they are just not suitable for Bournemouth-Edinburgh and the like.
Now with Brum-Edinburgh/Glasgow going to VWC from December will we see sense with 90+DVT sets on these services (as they will be self contained), releasing Voyagers to strengthen XC proper services. Makes sense, and I don't even like skodas!
175s/180s for me deliver a much better travelling environment than Voyagers (just dont mention the reliability
)
Can see the new XC/West Mids/East Mids franchises being a right mess!
TBH I don't think anyone's sure what will happen. I suspect for Brum-Schcotland will either be 390s (if they're available) or 221s, or a mix of both. What about running one of the 3 London - West Mids trains to Scotland?
I can't see WC considering the use of 90/DVT sets on a large basis. But, XC will require less Voyagers if you think about it, because a large portion of the network will be lost but don't forget that if North Wales does eventually become hourly then WC will want more 221s for that.
Otherwise, I can't see the shake up being too bad. Central units will fill in mostly for the Ex-Citylink routes soon too be XC, i.e. Nottingham - Cardiff/Brum - Stansted and Brum - Leicester, with maybe the odd Voyager appearing on Welsh runs.
