• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Wrexham & Shropshire query

Status
Not open for further replies.

jones_bangor

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
856
It was VT who pulled the plug on Shrewsbury, no one else.

Under intense political pressure. Probably along the lines "if you go ahead with this, it won't reflect well on your WC franchise application......"

Weren't you involved in organising an anti VT petition?

Anyway, I really think Shrewsbury could have been the next Chester for Virgin. Real shame.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
Under intense political pressure. Probably along the lines "if you go ahead with this, it won't reflect well on your WC franchise application......"

Weren't you involved in organising an anti VT petition?

Anyway, I really think Shrewsbury could have been the next Chester for Virgin. Real shame.

What, in the same way that WSMR could have been the next success story had VT and ATW not put every possible barrier in the way?

You really think WSMR had anything to do with virgin not running to Shrewsbury? Everybody knows franchised operators always get preferential treatment (its in the governments best interests to increase the size of the franchised operator and reduce the size of the Open Access operator), so to suggest Virgin were leant on by politicians/ civil servants because WSMR said so, is frankly quite hilarious.

Anyway, lets assume you are right shall we. Government doing what WSMR told them. Well WSMR are no longer around, so I have to admit, its really good seeing these regular virgin trains speeding between Shrewsbury and London......... Oh wait... Where are these trains?

Now to me this looks like a case of virgin only wanting to run the service to kill off WSMR. As soon as WSMR pulled the plug, VT dont seem to want this service.
 

merlodlliw

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2009
Messages
5,852
Location
Wrexham/ Denbighshire /Flintshire triangle
Under intense political pressure. Probably along the lines "if you go ahead with this, it won't reflect well on your WC franchise application......"

pure speculation as your words imply.

Weren't you involved in organising an anti VT petition?

I was involved from day one to support W/S to combat the intense opposition from both VT & its bed partner ATW, these two throw every obstacle in the way of W/S to kill it off at birth.

Anyway, I really think Shrewsbury could have been the next Chester for Virgin. Real shame.

An hourly VT service from Shrewsbury to London, dream on, six months since W/S finished, not a peep out of VT, nothing stopping them now,but as expected with W/S gone, VT have lost interest.

Bob
 

Squaddie

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2009
Messages
1,072
Location
London
What, in the same way that WSMR could have been the next success story had VT and ATW not put every possible barrier in the way?
I don't think you can reasonably put the blame for the failure of WSMR at the door of the other TOCs.

WSMR suffered from poor timetabling and excruciatingly long journey times (not entirely their fault, of course), which undoubtedly deterred a lot of travellers. Towards the end of their life they were often not publishing a weekend timetable or making tickets available until the last minute, which lost them even more business as potential customers snapped up Virgin Advance tickets. (I know I did, for my monthly trips to visit family in Wrexham). The best onboard service in the country simply could not overcome these obstacles.
 

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,164
Location
Crewe
Makes no difference, if there are paths, there are paths, that's a spurious argument. Chiltern run 75mph 165s down there, so why does a 158 make it collapse ?

Because EG3 is not live at the moment - why do you think Chiltern are aquiring 172's? Not for the fun of it of course. The peak at Marylebone runs on a 3 minute headway on some services, all you need is a poor accellerating slower train in front and it screws the timings with the knock on effect lasting for over an hour. It is of course history planner as the ORR refused their bid anyway, correct me if I am wrong but is it against a Franchise agreement to operate an open access money using the governments funds? If so, what is the WAG express all about?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Under intense political pressure. Probably along the lines "if you go ahead with this, it won't reflect well on your WC franchise application......"

Weren't you involved in organising an anti VT petition?

Anyway, I really think Shrewsbury could have been the next Chester for Virgin. Real shame.

You would have had no chance of that as the journey time is longer than from Chetser as VT had proposed a different route, in fact they actually proposed a routing over a freight line that do not allow class 1,2 services to operate over IIRC. The word probably in your post indicates this is your own opinion, I doubt if the politicians in London even knew what the implications were, VT pulled out because they knew the ORR would refuse the bid due to poor planning of bothe the route and lack of rolling stock for the service.
 
Last edited:

merlodlliw

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2009
Messages
5,852
Location
Wrexham/ Denbighshire /Flintshire triangle
Because EG3 is not live at the moment - why do you think Chiltern are aquiring 172's? Not for the fun of it of course. The peak at Marylebone runs on a 3 minute headway on some services, all you need is a poor accellerating slower train in front and it screws the timings with the knock on effect lasting for over an hour. It is of course history planner as the ORR refused their bid anyway, correct me if I am wrong but is it against a Franchise agreement to operate an open access money using the governments funds? If so, what is the WAG express all about?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As far as the two OA services ATW run, the 175 is Wales & Borders franchise stock , which ATW have hired in from itself to run the WAG2
I do not believe ATW have even thought of getting permission from the ORR
to do this, and no one yet as complained about it, the 0750 WAG2 175 was taken off the 0805 HDD to CDF & replaced with a selection of 158 & 150s.


You would have had no chance of that as the journey time is longer than from Chetser as VT had proposed a different route, in fact they actually proposed a routing over a freight line that do not allow class 1,2 services to operate over IIRC. The word probably in your post indicates this is your own opinion, I doubt if the politicians in London even knew what the implications were, VT pulled out because they knew the ORR would refuse the bid due to poor planning of bothe the route and lack of rolling stock for the service.

You are correct VT pulled the plug on itself, ATW I was informed was offering to divert a HHD BRM Int via Crewe to Shrewsbury to give VT a path,but the VT would have to call at Ruabon/Chirk & Gobowen just like WAG2 as it would be replacing a franchise service to Shrewsbury. Pure spoiler tactics,
as for the routing you mention, you are a driver & know the area very well.

Bob
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,661
Because EG3 is not live at the moment - why do you think Chiltern are aquiring 172's? Not for the fun of it of course. The peak at Marylebone runs on a 3 minute headway on some services, all you need is a poor accellerating slower train in front and it screws the timings with the knock on effect lasting for over an hour.
Still makes no difference, if the service had got off the ground the paths would be there and EG3 would have had to work around it or move them. The EG3 timetable is still being tweaked as it is.

As for the 3 minute headway issue, again that is the designated headway along there and there are instances of several trains doing that. The timetable would take it into account so the 158 being slower off the blocks again makes no difference. It will only take a 168 being slightly off kilter to knacker it all too.

You would have had no chance of that as the journey time is longer than from Chetser as VT had proposed a different route, in fact they actually proposed a routing over a freight line at do not allow class 1,2 services to operate over IIRC.

Nothing to stop a passenger train being routed that way that I know of. The Sutton Park line isnt shown as freight only.
 

jones_bangor

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
856
What, in the same way that WSMR could have been the next success story had VT and ATW not put every possible barrier in the way?

You really think WSMR had anything to do with virgin not running to Shrewsbury? Everybody knows franchised operators always get preferential treatment (its in the governments best interests to increase the size of the franchised operator and reduce the size of the Open Access operator), so to suggest Virgin were leant on by politicians/ civil servants because WSMR said so, is frankly quite hilarious.

Anyway, lets assume you are right shall we. Government doing what WSMR told them. Well WSMR are no longer around, so I have to admit, its really good seeing these regular virgin trains speeding between Shrewsbury and London......... Oh wait... Where are these trains?

Now to me this looks like a case of virgin only wanting to run the service to kill off WSMR. As soon as WSMR pulled the plug, VT dont seem to want this service.

I suppose the PR consequences of VT "dancing on the grave of WSMR" has put them off!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You mean somewhere to terminate trains at (and get passengers to transfer to an ATW DMU)?

(if the stories about the next franchise are true ;))

Are we doing fantasy stories now are we?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
An hourly VT service from Shrewsbury to London, dream on, six months since W/S finished, not a peep out of VT, nothing stopping them now,but as expected with W/S gone, VT have lost interest.

Small beginnings can lead to great things
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
I suppose the PR consequences of VT "dancing on the grave of WSMR" has put them off!

Ha ha. I will give you one thing. You are funny!
You obviously dont know the way Virgin look at PR do you?
This idea of yours is not how Virgin would have looked at it.

If Virgin wanted the service they would have gone ahead with it (after WSMR went belly up of course, because remember WSMR made the government pressure virgin into not running the service before), and claimed they were doing it to help out those that had been affected by WSMRs demise. They would claim to be carrying on WSMRs good work. That is how Virgin look at things.
Virgin are not scared of supposedly 'dancing on the grave'.

To give you an example. At the time British Airways were going through all their troubles, and rumours started flying about BA going under, what did Richard Branson say? Did he say 1- I really want to start up an Inter European operation if BA go belly up, but I dare not because I would be dancing on their grave? or did he in fact say 2- If BA go belly up I will start up a European operation to cover for the loss of BA? It was of course the latter. So its a good bet that if VT really did want to run to Shrewsbury then they would have done, and would have claimed to be helping out WSMRs passengers.

Before coming out with some hilarious versions of what VT were thinking, its always best to think about how Virgin view PR first.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Small beginnings can lead to great things

I dont think you understand his point. VT never really wanted the service.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,052
Location
Reston City Centre
Ha ha. I will give you one thing. You are funny!
You obviously dont know the way Virgin look at PR do you?
This idea of yours is not how Virgin would have looked at it.

If Virgin wanted the service they would have gone ahead with it (after WSMR went belly up of course, because remember WSMR made the government pressure virgin into not running the service before), and claimed they were doing it to help out those that had been affected by WSMRs demise. They would claim to be carrying on WSMRs good work. That is how Virgin look at things.
Virgin are not scared of supposedly 'dancing on the grave'.

To give you an example. At the time British Airways were going through all their troubles, and rumours started flying about BA going under, what did Richard Branson say? Did he say 1- I really want to start up an Inter European operation if BA go belly up, but I dare not because I would be dancing on their grave? or did he in fact say 2- If BA go belly up I will start up a European operation to cover for the loss of BA? It was of course the latter. So its a good bet that if VT really did want to run to Shrewsbury then they would have done, and would have claimed to be helping out WSMRs passengers.

Before coming out with some hilarious versions of what VT were thinking, its always best to think about how Virgin view PR first.

Virgin did make good PR out of promising WSMR passengers that their tickets would be valid to Wrexham on Virgin services instead, you are right about how they "milk" it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Are we doing fantasy stories now are we?

Don't tell me that you think Virgin would pay for extension of electrification to Chester as part of their franchise bid and then continue running as many DMUs to Holyhead? :lol:
 

jones_bangor

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
856
Don't tell me that you think Virgin would pay for extension of electrification to Chester as part of their franchise bid and then continue running as many DMUs to Holyhead? :lol:

lol as if VT would pay for the electrification......now that's fantasy!

VT have no problems with running lots of Voyagers north of Birmingham entirely under the wires all the way to Glasgow & Edinburgh. I see no risk whatsoever in Chester's electrification, if it ever happens, affecting North Wales services. As I've said previously, it will probably mean a peak Pendolino service again for North Wales.
 

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,164
Location
Crewe
Still makes no difference, if the service had got off the ground the paths would be there and EG3 would have had to work around it or move them. The EG3 timetable is still being tweaked as it is.

As for the 3 minute headway issue, again that is the designated headway along there and there are instances of several trains doing that. The timetable would take it into account so the 158 being slower off the blocks again makes no difference. It will only take a 168 being slightly off kilter to knacker it all too.



Nothing to stop a passenger train being routed that way that I know of. The Sutton Park line isnt shown as freight only.

The Sutton Park Line is not equipped with AWS so no passenger services permitted.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,052
Location
Reston City Centre
lol as if VT would pay for the electrification......now that's fantasy!

As I said, as part of the tender bid, it looks like there'll be an option for the cost of electrification of Crewe - Chester to be factored in to the premium/subsidy agreed with the winning bidder.

VT have no problems with running lots of Voyagers north of Birmingham entirely under the wires all the way to Glasgow & Edinburgh. I see no risk whatsoever in Chester's electrification, if it ever happens, affecting North Wales services. As I've said previously, it will probably mean a peak Pendolino service again for North Wales.

They do run Voyagers from Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh. Voyagers are badly needed on XC (and elsewhere, given reliability problems with 180s). However, if the line from Crewe to Chester were to be wired then Virgin could get rid of all their Voyagers, apart from a token daily service to Holyhead.

As I've argued on another thread, the logical way to do this would be to run London - Wolverhampton - Shrewsbury - Wrexham - Chester - Holyhead, thus giving these towns *a* London service (whilst additional Pendolini are ordered for Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh and for the hourly London - Chester service)
 

jones_bangor

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
856
As I said, as part of the tender bid, it looks like there'll be an option for the cost of electrification of Crewe - Chester to be factored in to the premium/subsidy agreed with the winning bidder.

So the Government pays, and they pay more "rent". Hardly stumping up the cash up front is it?


They do run Voyagers from Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh. Voyagers are badly needed on XC (and elsewhere, given reliability problems with 180s). However, if the line from Crewe to Chester were to be wired then Virgin could get rid of all their Voyagers, apart from a token daily service to Holyhead.

As I've argued on another thread, the logical way to do this would be to run London - Wolverhampton - Shrewsbury - Wrexham - Chester - Holyhead, thus giving these towns *a* London service (whilst additional Pendolini are ordered for Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh and for the hourly London - Chester service)

You seem to have a thing about Holyhead only needing a "token daily service". What don't you get about this being an INTERNATIONAL route? Knock, knock....
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,052
Location
Reston City Centre
So the Government pays, and they pay more "rent". Hardly stumping up the cash up front is it?

Its costed for as part of the tender process

You seem to have a thing about Holyhead only needing a "token daily service". What don't you get about this being an INTERNATIONAL route? Knock, knock....

Do Stranraer/ Heysham etc need several daily trains to/from London?

In case you'd not noticed, the market for people travelling to Ireland has mainly been lost to Air ;)
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,052
Location
Reston City Centre
Left to you, the entire market would be lost to air!!

I don't recall seeing any "foot passengers" last time I used a ferry to Dublin, its either cars/ lorries these days. No point in maintaining a service just because demand used to be there twenty years ago (or in case an Icelandic Volcano ever errupts in a few years time), especially when other routes need stock.

Just being realistic.
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
Left to you, the entire market would be lost to air!!

There is no longer a large foot passenger market out of Holyhead. This will probably reduce even more if the HSS is retired anytime soon.
This isnt because of anything either TBTC or I have done. This is just the way it is going. Therefore, a token London to Holyhead service would do. Combined with an hourly Chester service, where passengers can easily connect onto ATW Holyhead services, passengers have a very adequate service.
 

merlodlliw

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2009
Messages
5,852
Location
Wrexham/ Denbighshire /Flintshire triangle
As I've argued on another thread, the logical way to do this would be to run London - Wolverhampton - Shrewsbury - Wrexham - Chester - Holyhead, thus giving these towns *a* London service (whilst additional Pendolini are ordered for Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh and for the hourly London - Chester service)[/QUOTE] TBTC (I must learn to highlight cutaways)
.................................................................................................
Yes you have argued this before, the problem in my opinion is, it takes a Voyager less than two hours Euston to Chester via Crewe, the other route you mention would suit pax to Shrewsbury & Gobowen, but not those further along the line adding over an hour plus to the journey, also having seen the stats few if any board VT UP trains at Holyhead other than those wishing a better ride than a 150 to the East stations on the line.
The only sea/rail train left is the 0630 Summer Sunday ex Chester(ATW) which allows a few hours in Ireland & a return arriving back via the Sundays only 2150? ex Holyhead, this train is the last & latest running departure out of Holyhead in the entire week.
In my opinion we may see a token service to Shrewsbury,but like the 0700 Wrexham VT, its just used by commuters to Chester which replaced an ATW
DMU as is the return down, just used by those on the Seven /Dee line boarding at Chester. OK a very few board at Wrexham for London,but less than an handful due to the
cost of the ticket.

Bob
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
Virgins Chester hrly service has been a success due to the very good journey time to London (2 hrs) routing via Shrewsbury en route to Holyhead chucks this down the pan.

Its a rob peter to pay paul scenario not a solution. Its been argued before and counter argued - where does ATW finds all these DMU's with spare capacity to fill gaps in the North Wales coast tt?
 

merlodlliw

Established Member
Joined
8 Mar 2009
Messages
5,852
Location
Wrexham/ Denbighshire /Flintshire triangle
Virgins Chester hrly service has been a success due to the very good journey time to London (2 hrs) routing via Shrewsbury en route to Holyhead chucks this down the pan.

Its a rob peter to pay paul scenario not a solution. Its been argued before and counter argued - where does ATW finds all these DMU's with spare capacity to fill gaps in the North Wales coast tt?

ATW as no spare capacity,everything is out that can run , If an hourly service came to your line Gareth,where will the stock come from, ATW are also scrapping to find a DMU for Fishguard open access in West Wales.

Bob
 

Gareth Marston

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2010
Messages
6,231
Location
Newtown Montgomeryshire
ATW as no spare capacity,everything is out that can run , If an hourly service came to your line Gareth,where will the stock come from, ATW are also scrapping to find a DMU for Fishguard open access in West Wales.

Bob

ATW sub leased 5 150's to FGW in 2007- they were part of 6 leased by WG. However they all (some are already) should be back in ATW following Class 172 delivery to LM and cascade of 150's to FGW. The 150's can then run the Cheltenham - Maesteg diagrams that currently have 2 158's on them freeing them up.

Also 6 of the trains between Salop and Mach currently run as 4 car (on weekdays 1st 6 UP, last 6 DOWN) with coast & Aber portions joining/splitting at Mach. There could be some scope to terminate some quieter coast trains at Mach so as to cut down on 4 car running with hourly trains in place.
 

jones_bangor

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
856
I don't recall seeing any "foot passengers" last time I used a ferry to Dublin, its either cars/ lorries these days. No point in maintaining a service just because demand used to be there twenty years ago (or in case an Icelandic Volcano ever errupts in a few years time), especially when other routes need stock.

Just being realistic.

Being realistic, flying people from Dublin to London is not sustainable...........the EU have plans to come down HARD on this type of route.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
There is no longer a large foot passenger market out of Holyhead. This will probably reduce even more if the HSS is retired anytime soon.
This isnt because of anything either TBTC or I have done. This is just the way it is going. Therefore, a token London to Holyhead service would do. Combined with an hourly Chester service, where passengers can easily connect onto ATW Holyhead services, passengers have a very adequate service.

See above, plus you're (conveniently) forgetting the populations centres along the North Wales Coast. Exactly the type of route Voyagers were designed for, and will continue to serve in the next franchise.
 
Last edited:

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,052
Location
Reston City Centre
Being realistic, flying people from Dublin to London is not sustainable...........the EU have plans to come down HARD on this type of route

...but then you could argue that people travelling long distance every day isn't sustainable... whilst you wait for the EU to wave their magic wand, the reality is that only a handful of the passengers on the train from London to Chester are using it to board a ferry at Holyhead.

Twenty years ago things were different, but we've not kept the Harwich Boat Train going out of nostalgia, nor the London - Stranraer sleepers...

See above, plus you're (conveniently) forgetting the populations centres along the North Wales Coast. Exactly the type of route Voyagers were designed for, and will continue to serve in the next franchise.

A few small towns? Not exactly in the "big boy" league, are they?
 

The Informer

Member
Joined
2 May 2011
Messages
344
Location
Roy's Rolls Cafe
ATW as no spare capacity,everything is out that can run , If an hourly service came to your line Gareth,where will the stock come from, ATW are also scrapping to find a DMU for Fishguard open access in West Wales.

Bob





I'll tell you where those spare trains are coming from. Last week I came across ATW asking network rails maintenance engineers would they object to them running SEVERAL class 67 locos along with a MK2/3 DVT sets to run at MU speed differentials along the marches route from next may. I seen it all in black and white!!
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,661
So much for December then, knew they couldnt do it.... Im not convinced they will get it for May either, WSMR had a right game getting dispensation for the 67 speeds on the Chilterns.
 

Rhydgaled

Established Member
Joined
25 Nov 2010
Messages
4,857
They do run Voyagers from Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh. Voyagers are badly needed on XC (and elsewhere, given reliability problems with 180s). However, if the line from Crewe to Chester were to be wired then Virgin could get rid of all their Voyagers, apart from a token daily service to Holyhead.

As I've argued on another thread, the logical way to do this would be to run London - Wolverhampton - Shrewsbury - Wrexham - Chester - Holyhead, thus giving these towns *a* London service (whilst additional Pendolini are ordered for Birmingham to Glasgow/ Edinburgh and for the hourly London - Chester service)
If you are ordering Pendolinos anyway, why keep a few Voyagers for a single London service via Wrexham? Order a few more, and you can keep the Holyhead service. There seems to be a surplus of VT 57s, since they spared 4 for ATW who won't be needing them from December if the 67s take over. Just attatch one to the Pendolino and drag, they can do it once a week why not every day. It is a 3hr 20min round trip, from Holyhead to Chester and back. You'd have to add dwell at Holyhead but one loco should therefore manage a service every 4 hours, so for a 2-hourly service 2 locos would surfice. It'd probablly result in a change to the spacing of the services and perhaps an overall reduction in London trains but it would release ALL VT's Voyagers and certainly allow more than a token one direct train per day.

The only sea/rail train left is the 0630 Summer Sunday ex Chester(ATW) which allows a few hours in Ireland & a return arriving back via the Sundays only 2150? ex Holyhead, this train is the last & latest running departure out of Holyhead in the entire week.

Sounds daft to me. Fishguard is a much smaller port, yet the railway has survived solely on Irish traffic for many, many years. I can't see locals using the Fishguard service at the moment, it is hopeless for them, that's what the extra services coming in September will hopefully address. Despite this, when I did the route, the daytime train wasn't too badly loaded. Maybe the lack of rail-sail passengers at Holyhead is due to train times not connecting with ferries? Granted, Fishguard has been cut from an INTERCITY 125 to a Sprinter, but there are still a few rail-sail passengers unless locals have invented a time warp to allow the one daytime train to actually suit them.

Being realistic, flying people from Dublin to London is not sustainable...........the EU have plans to come down HARD on this type of route.
Forget 'this type of route', the whole plane culture and car culture is unsustainable. Forget the EU, our own government need to come down hard on aviation, by introducing massive landing or take-off taxes, applicable to all non-military aircraft including frieght. If it doesn't kill of aviation, at least it would raise some much needed money to pay to de-carbonise or electricity supply with a large number of submerged tidal stream turbines supported by a smaller number of further hydro electric schemes, wind farms and nuclear power plants.

...but then you could argue that people travelling long distance every day isn't sustainable.
I could go into how humanity itself in its current state is unsustainable, but that isn't the topic of this fourm.

I'll tell you where those spare trains are coming from. Last week I came across ATW asking network rails maintenance engineers would they object to them running SEVERAL class 67 locos along with a MK2/3 DVT sets to run at MU speed differentials along the marches route from next may. I seen it all in black and white!!
Mark 2s!! I thought the 67 + DVT sets on the WAG expresses where supposed to consist solely of mark 3 stock. Does this mean the existing stock for WAG1 will be used, with the 57 exhanged for a 67 and a DVT added?

Are the 57s already cleared to run at MU speeds, or is this why WAG2 on the supposedly slower route via Wrexham isn't really slower than WAG1? If the 57s are cleared, perhaps we could see them on WAG 2 from December until May? If not, I hope ATW pay back the money WAG paid for LHCS on WAG2 from December.

This mention of mark 3s and DVTs brings us back closer to the topic of the WSMR stock and my earlier, still unanswered, questions:

I really regret missing out on a ride on WSMR, I was planning to do it this summer but then they stopped running the service. It is a little more difficult to get a ride on the stock now as it no longer runs into Wales. If it looks like these sets will be removed from service for another refurbishment soon (including the power-door fitment) how long have I got before they reduce the number of Moor Street - Marylebone turns using the stock to allow a set to go in for refub?

A little aside, what's going on here? Obviously, there is a Wrexham & Shropshire liveried mark 3 DVT in the foreground but what's that in the background? Looks like the Irish mark 2 DBSO to me. Does somebody out there share my opinion that the 6 remaining DBSOs (ie. the ones that aren't with Network Rail) should be re-activated to get those stored Arriva Trains Wales mark 2s out into service, and has forked out the money to do just that?

Sorry I'm having to ask this a third time, but having missed out on what was possibly the best train service in Britain I'm really keen not to miss out entirly on experiencing at least part of the experience.
 

jones_bangor

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2011
Messages
856
Common sense dictates that WSMR stock will be the Arriva Mk3 stock, despite the deniers. DB aren't stupid enough to refurb carriages twice in a couple of years!....
 

junglejames

Established Member
Joined
8 Dec 2010
Messages
2,069
Common sense dictates that WSMR stock will be the Arriva Mk3 stock, despite the deniers. DB aren't stupid enough to refurb carriages twice in a couple of years!....

No doubt DB would leave these coaches until last until fitting power doors. So it would be slightly more than 2yrs.

Also, how many coaches do Chiltern eventually need? Can they do without the WSMR coaches?
Without knowing how many coaches Chiltern will need, we dont know who will get the WSMR coaches.
Common sense will only get a chance to rear its head if Chiltern can survive without them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top