WCML linespeed improvements - LSL objection

[Wilts Wanderer]

I’ve recently heard along the grapevine that certain sections of the West Coast Main Line are due to be upgraded to 125mph for non-tilt stock where route profile and curvature permits. Currently most 125mph sections are classified as EPS limits, i.e. for tilting stock only. (There are some notable exceptions to this such as the route via Penkridge and parts of the North Staffordshire route, and elsewhere.) With a significant fleet of 125mph non-tilt trains being introduced by Avanti, this makes a lot of sense to my mind.

Locomotive Services Ltd have and continue to object to this infrastructure upgrade, to the extent that the commissioning of these improved linespeeds is now deferred into 2024 (was due imminently, with many speed boards already installed.) Does anyone know what the basis of their complaint is?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Doubtless because their loco-hauled passenger trains can't use the new MU speed profile.
Also I guess there might be fewer PS paths available because of the new spread of EPS/MU journey times.
All loco-hauled trains would be affected in the same way, however.

 

[The Planner]

Doubtless because their loco-hauled passenger trains can't use the new MU speed profile.
Also I guess there might be fewer PS paths available because of the new spread of EPS/MU journey times.
All loco-hauled trains would be affected in the same way, however.

Pretty much. Im not sure why Avanti havent taken them to dispute to be honest as proposers of the scheme.

 

[The Chimaera]

Pretty much. Im not sure why Avanti havent taken them to dispute to be honest as proposers of the scheme.

Possibly because Avanti are nowhere near being able to run the new Hitachi trains anyway? There aren’t any plans in place for crew training I believe. The staff they have left are all needed to work trains and can’t be spared for training purposes.

 

[The Planner]

Possibly because Avanti are nowhere near being able to run the new Hitachi trains anyway? There aren’t any plans in place for crew training I believe. The staff they have left are all needed to work trains and can’t be spared for training purposes.

Doesn't matter, the problem still doesnt go away.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Aren't the new Avanti stock replacing services already operated by tilting units though? So if anything they would be slightly slower overall, rather than increasing the number of highest speed services. So this probably actually works in LSL’s favour in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Efini92]

Doesn't matter, the problem still doesnt go away.

The whole project is becoming farcical imo.
Do you think there would be much time lost with the 805/7 running at the current PS speeds?

 

[notadriver]

397s lose time to 390s north of Preston. Doesn’t seem to be lengthy stretches of 110 for them ?

 

[hexagon789]

The whole project is becoming farcical imo.
Do you think there would be much time lost with the 805/7 running at the current PS speeds?

The timetable would need rewritten, because some services are already planned as 80x timings with the new MU profile.

397s lose time to 390s north of Preston. Doesn’t seem to be lengthy stretches of 110 for them ?

Quite a few, Preston to Lancaster is probably the longest single section but there are several others.

 

[Boodiggy]

When LSL first raised the issue last year or the one before I am sure it was to do with the LSL Pullman set

 

[Efini92]

The timetable would need rewritten, because some services are already planned as 80x timings with the new MU profile.


Quite a few, Preston to Lancaster is probably the longest single section but there are several others.

I thought the purpose of the new speed profile was so that the 80x could match the eps timings?

Are the new MU speed profiles going north of Preston?

 

[hexagon789]

I thought the purpose of the new speed profile was so that the 80x could match the eps timings?

No, the 80x will still have slightly slower Sectional Running Times than 390s but not as slow as without it.

 

[Efini92]

No, the 80x will still have slightly slower Sectional Running Times than 390s but not as slow as without it.

Is the long term plan to remove EPS all together?
Surely it would’ve been easier to spec the 80x with a tilt system?

 

[The Planner]

The whole project is becoming farcical imo.
Do you think there would be much time lost with the 805/7 running at the current PS speeds?

@hexagon789 has answered. The timetable is based on 80x SRTs, so it all goes a bit Pete Tong if it doesnt happen.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Dec 2023 ==

I thought the purpose of the new speed profile was so that the 80x could match the eps timings?

Are the new MU speed profiles going north of Preston?

They won't match EPS timings and no, nothing north of Weaver.

 

[cle]

This is also future proofing HS2 stock I assume, to be able to at least do 125 on the straight sections? Cumbria I'm not sure.

I'd hope that Carlisle to Carstairs could be improved though.

 

[The Planner]

When LSL first raised the issue last year or the one before I am sure it was to do with the LSL Pullman set

Pretty sure it is HST related.

 

[Efini92]

They won't match EPS timings and no, nothing north of Weaver.

So really all this effort is going into taking a step backwards?

 

[The Planner]

So really all this effort is going into taking a step backwards?

Not really, they do better with stopping services.

 

[Efini92]

Not really, they do better with stopping services.

Ah ok fair enough. I haven’t seen the MU speeds yet but I assumed they were all over 110.

 

[hexagon789]

Is the long term plan to remove EPS all together?

The 221 EPS profile will be going, but yes ultimately when the 390s are life expired its likely the EPS profile and tilt will go for cost reasons.

This is also future proofing HS2 stock I assume, to be able to at least do 125 on the straight sections? Cumbria I'm not sure.

The present MU profile is only the Southern WCML, the North was vaguely getting one for the 397s but that has been completely shelved I believe.

It may well be revisited for HS2 trains running over the classic line.

As it is, the MU profile is mostly 115/120 where EPS is 125; only a small amount of MU125 from what I've read.

So really all this effort is going into taking a step backwards?

The 80x are going primarily on semi-fast services rather than limited stop where they can make more use of better acceleration than the 390s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Dec 2023 ==

Ah ok fair enough. I haven’t seen the MU speeds yet but I assumed they were all over 110.

As above, mostly MU 115/120 where EPS is 125.

 

[Efini92]

The 221 EPS profile will be going, but yes ultimately when the 390s are life expired its likely the EPS profile and tilt will go for cost reasons.



The present MU profile is only the Southern WCML, the North was vaguely getting one for the 397s but that has been completely shelved I believe.

It may well be revisited for HS2 trains running over the classic line.

As it is, the MU profile is mostly 115/120 where EPS is 125; only a small amount of MU125 from what I've read.


The 80x are going primarily on semi-fast services rather than limited stop where they can make more use of better acceleration than the 390s.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Dec 2023 ==


As above, mostly MU 115/120 where EPS is 125.

Cheers I incorrectly thought @The Planner was referring the the London northwestern services.

 

[chazi898]

Does anyone know if the new MU speed profile overlaps Weaver Junction or stops just before it? I believe its currently 85/100EPS towards Liverpool, but do the pendolinos even tilt over the points? Just seems a bit odd.

 

[Efini92]

Does anyone know if the new MU speed profile overlaps Weaver Junction or stops just before it? I believe its currently 85/100EPS towards Liverpool, but do the pendolinos even tilt over the points? Just seems a bit odd.

The junction is 85 over 95/100EPS.
The 95 voyager EPS will go. Not seen the new speeds yet but I can’t imagine that will change.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I’ve recently heard along the grapevine that certain sections of the West Coast Main Line are due to be upgraded to 125mph for non-tilt stock where route profile and curvature permits. Currently most 125mph sections are classified as EPS limits, i.e. for tilting stock only. (There are some notable exceptions to this such as the route via Penkridge and parts of the North Staffordshire route, and elsewhere.) With a significant fleet of 125mph non-tilt trains being introduced by Avanti, this makes a lot of sense to my mind.

Seems odd they didn't have this speed profile from the outset or have the standards changed on cant deficiency?

 

[Boodiggy]

Seems odd they didn't have this speed profile from the outset or have the standards changed on cant deficiency?

It is possible due to the cl.221 being withdrawn and the removal of the EPS differential profile.
The new MU speeds can be compliantly signed now.

 

[Efini92]

It is possible due to the cl.221 being withdrawn and the removal of the EPS differential profile.
The new MU speeds can be compliantly signed now.

I think it’s been mentioned before that the group standards only allow for 3 different speed profiles.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

It is possible due to the cl.221 being withdrawn and the removal of the EPS differential profile.
The new MU speeds can be compliantly signed now.

Weren't the 221's limited to the EPS profile though?

 

[The Planner]

Weren't the 221's limited to the EPS profile though?

Yes, but a different one to 390s and it is signed as such.

 

[craigybagel]

Am I the only one who finds it odd that LSL, who only run a handful of trains a year are able to hold up an infrastructure project that should be a massive benefit to the regular every day users of the WCML?

Are they suggesting any alternatives that will deliver the benefits of the changed speed profile whilst still allowing their own services to run, or are they just asking for the status quo to be maintained?

 

[Watershed]

Am I the only one who finds it odd that LSL, who only run a handful of trains a year are able to hold up an infrastructure project that should be a massive benefit to the regular every day users of the WCML?

Are they suggesting any alternatives that will deliver the benefits of the changed speed profile whilst still allowing their own services to run, or are they just asking for the status quo to be maintained?

It's normal for adversely affected parties to object; what isn't normal is for this to be able to substantively hold up the process.

The only issue on which I think they may have a point is that they should retain a reasonable shot at getting paths, following the speeding up of Avanti and TPE services. It would be unreasonable for the new timetable to effectively exclude them from using the WCML.