Ex-VTEC 91's for Blackpool - London Euston

[rebmcr]

There were quite a few pages about the potential use of Queens Park as a terminus somewhere as well...

I wonder if they could get paths onward from Queens Park but not to Euston.

Stratford via Primrose Hill would potentially be very marketable to ExCeL attendees, those with meetings at Canary Wharf, and those with flights from London City Airport...

 

[The Planner]

They could get to Euston.

 

[ash39]

Quite possibly so. I think there is a fairly high chance of the 91+Mk4 sets being scrapped once the 80x arrive...so "higher than scrap value" is a bonus, even if only a few quid per set higher.

I agree about the 91's, but the mk4s will live on I reckon. Chiltern and ATW to replace their loco-hauled mk3's is an obvious choice, and possibly others.

Other than sticking diesel lumps under old EMU's, which is still an unproven concept in mainline service, there's not a lot of options out there for extra diesel trains. I'd put money on most of the mk4's finding homes.

 

[STKKK46]

They can definitely do Euston. I doubt an option like Stratford will even have crossed anyone’s mind.

 

[swt_passenger]

They can definitely do Euston. I doubt an option like Stratford will even have crossed anyone’s mind.

Yes, but in the long gestation of this service there was a significant period when NR were saying they couldn't allow firm rights into Euston. Much discussion ensued here about the Queens Park option.

All I was trying to illustrate is that the plan and its knock on effects has been discussed in numerous threads over quite a long period of time.

 

[Tim R-T-C]

I agree about the 91's, but the mk4s will live on I reckon. Chiltern and ATW to replace their loco-hauled mk3's is an obvious choice, and possibly others.

Given the amount they have invested in power doors and new interiors, I can't see why Chiltern would want to get slightly newer coaches, with far more dated interiors.

Ditto ATW.

Aside from them, Northern and Anglia are only using loco hauled as stop gaps, possibly Scotrail then, but are the Fife Circle LHCS trains also due to end when new units come onstream?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Chiltern haven't invested anything in new interiors, WSMR did that before Arriva closed them down so Chiltern could have the rolling stock. All they've invested in is a load of cheap poor quality LED bulbs and some decals and silver paint, as well as the doors.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Chiltern haven't invested anything in new interiors, WSMR did that before Arriva closed them down so Chiltern could have the rolling stock. All they've invested in is a load of cheap poor quality LED bulbs and some decals and silver paint, as well as the doors.

ATW refitted their Mk3 interiors, but the two LHCS sets still have dump toilets and manual doors.
They will not last long in that mode. Toilets might need upgrading by 2020.
I think Chiltern has one set like that too.

 

[43096]

ATW refitted their Mk3 interiors, but the two LHCS sets still have dump toilets and manual doors.
They will not last long in that mode. Toilets might need upgrading by 2020.
I think Chiltern has one set like that too.

They have to be modified or replaced by 01/01/2020 as they are not PRM compliant.

 

[ash39]

I must admit I forgot the Chiltern sets had power doors. I still expect them to find homes though, hauled by 67's or 68's. They've recently had a multi-million pound refurbishment, they're fully compliant post-2020 and they would be a huge upgrade in comfort over almost any DMU.

Going a bit off topic here, but I suspect DB will be keen to find work for the 67's. Once the ECML thunderbird contract is finished, they won't have any booked duties other than the 2x ATW sets (which may also be going by then if the mk3's aren't upgraded/replaced).

Slightly more on topic, a handful of mk4 sets of 4-5 coaches + DVT would be a much more realistic/affordable way of entering the open access market than a brand new fleet of Pendolinos. Likewise, a 67-hauled version would be a good option for a route off the wires. I wouldn't be surprised to see this, but I wouldn't expect anyone to agree. Nobody seemed to be with me a couple of years back when I suggested new build LHCS as a follow-on to the Caledonian Sleeper order...

 

[Mikey C]

Yes, but in the long gestation of this service there was a significant period when NR were saying they couldn't allow firm rights into Euston. Much discussion ensued here about the Queens Park option.

All I was trying to illustrate is that the plan and its knock on effects has been discussed in numerous threads over quite a long period of time.

Will the rebuilding of Euston for HS2 have an impact on the number of paths into Euston or the number of platforms available? I imagine by 2020, when the 91/mk4s become available, construction work will be well under way.

 

[driver_m]

How on earth are these trains expected to travel without holding VT up? The WCML is susceptible to delays on the Fasts with the 110mph LM paths. Adding another is going to finish off any resilience and recovery that the WC has now.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

How on earth are these trains expected to travel without holding VT up? The WCML is susceptible to delays on the Fasts with the 110mph LM paths. Adding another is going to finish off any resilience and recovery that the WC has now.

The WCML is at capacity too! It’s jam packed as it is!

Source: Channel 5 Documentary

 

[Halish Railway]

Post-HS2, could there be a reduction in the amount of services on the WCML, freeing up paths for more Alliance services?

 

[D365]

Why would there be a reduction in WCML services?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The trouble is though, I don’t really believe that any of Alliance Rail’s plans will go ahead, much as I want them to.

 

[Halish Railway]

Well the Birmingham market will be served by a more frequent and faster train on HS2

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why would there be a reduction in WCML services?

Because some move to HS2?

 

[D365]

And the current services won't be recast?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Because some move to HS2?

It does make sense for some to move. Otherwise you’ve got all of these services going from London to Birmingham:

2tph semi fast from London Marylebone
(Chiltern Railways)

3tph fast from London Euston
(Virgin Trains*)

3tph stopping from London Euston
(West Midlands Trains)

HS2 services from London Euston (goodness knows how many)

Plus there were rumours of a potential GWR service from London Paddington.

*We do not know if VT will still be operating this service at time of HS2

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

How on earth are these trains expected to travel without holding VT up? The WCML is susceptible to delays on the Fasts with the 110mph LM paths. Adding another is going to finish off any resilience and recovery that the WC has now.

Alliance are only getting off-peak paths, and will have limited stops.
Overall paths into Euston will come down during the HS2 rebuild, with the loss of platforms on the west side.

 

[STKKK46]

Plus there were rumours of a potential GWR service from London Paddington.

Not happening, don’t worry.

How on earth are these trains expected to travel without holding VT up? The WCML is susceptible to delays on the Fasts with the 110mph LM paths. Adding another is going to finish off any resilience and recovery that the WC has now.

Whilst it does not do any favours to the resilience and recovery, from what I understand, the paths have been proven to work.

The trouble is though, I don’t really believe that any of Alliance Rail’s plans will go ahead, much as I want them to.

Don’t usually agree with you, however despite everything potentially being in place, I can’t help but feel you might be right.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Don’t usually agree with you, however despite everything potentially being in place, I can’t help but feel you might be right.

Ah, but you may agree with me more now because I’m not trying to be controversial any more it’s just pathetic.

 

[The Planner]

They'll get overtaken at MK on the down so a big dwell will occur there.

 

[swt_passenger]

Will the rebuilding of Euston for HS2 have an impact on the number of paths into Euston or the number of platforms available? I imagine by 2020, when the 91/mk4s become available, construction work will be well under way.

That was part of the problem for NR, IIRC in the early responses to Alliance the availability of Euston/HS2 platforms were yet to be confirmed. What is known now hadn't been decided 3 or 4 years ago.

 

[a_c_skinner]

A little tangentially: 91/Mk4 is 125mph stock. I know the WCML is not the straight racecourse the ECML is but I assume the 91/Mk4 stock would travel safely at 125mph on the WCML with the main effect being somewhat increased lateral forces on the passengers. Is this too great to tolerate? Or do 390/220/221 have markedly different running gear to allow 125 on more curved track. I know this isn't a practical suggestion, I am intrigued as to the reason.

Edit: Yes I know about tilt, despite including the 220s by mistake.

 

[Domh245]

Is this too great to tolerate? Or do 390/220/221 have markedly different running gear to allow 125 on more curved track

Evidently too great, hence why the WCML's stretches of 125mph are only for "Enhanced Passenger Stock". 390s and 221s have got markedly different running gear in that they tilt, in effect reducing the forces on the passengers...

 

[Bletchleyite]

I haven't encountered lateral forces as a passenger in the UK anywhere near what they accept in Germany (despite our allowed cant deficiency technically being larger). I reckon in Germany they'd run 125 without tilt on the WCML.

 

[The Planner]

Evidently too great, hence why the WCML's stretches of 125mph are only for "Enhanced Passenger Stock". 390s and 221s have got markedly different running gear in that they tilt, in effect reducing the forces on the passengers...

Enhanced Permissible Speed.

 

[a_c_skinner]

Just to clarify something so obvious I didn't say (and added the 220s by mistake): Yes I know about tilt.

So is it that we simply have a conservative limit on lateral forces or did we never think about 125 without tilt on the WCML as it has never been an issue as there was only a small proportion of the stock that was 125mph with no tilt? Would we have bothered with tilt at all if we'd not been hoping for 140mph?