anamyd
On Moderation
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 3,011
I'm concerned that the TOPS numbers for these CAF units and the Stadler ones (assuming they don't have their own thread) have still not been revealed...
as far as the vast majority of them are concerned, yes. late 2021-2024 overall.
Isn't 90mph the absolute highest line speed in Wales, with most of Wales being a mixture of 70/60 etc...?
The only reason Northern are getting new trains at all is because the Pacers have to go. Of course they're not going to be "nice" new trains.
Isn't most of Wales in the 60-70 range though...?[/QUOTE]There is 75/HST95 for 7 miles Newport-Cardiff and 90/HST100 through Pyle.
An electrified Swansea to Newport plus Crewe to Manchester would account for 38% of the Milford - Manchester journey.
Presently Cardiff - Newport is 12 miles, plus the 30 miles from Crewe to Machester makes it 18% of the journey under wires.
Given these new trains will be owned by TfW (not TfW rail) they will be in constant use for the next 30-35 years, it would make sense to make them bi-modal, especially given the criticism made by the WG of the UK Govt over transport plans.
TfW have signed an order for (I think) 66 new diesel only trains - the biggest current order in the UK and it must be one of the highest in Europe right now - doesn't quite fit with the Climate Emergency WG Ministers voted to declare a few weeks ago does it?
Isn't most of Wales in the 60-70 range though...?
I often wondered what the limit was as it does feel like it picks up a decent speed at times!even the single track Cambrian line has an 80 section.
I'm concerned that the TOPS numbers for these CAF units and the Stadler ones (assuming they don't have their own thread) have still not been revealed...
PaulHarding150, 77 units have been ordered, and I was under the impression that they'll be leased from some Japanese bank.
But there are no plans for Cardiff to Swansea to actually happen at the moment. How much money is it going to cost to provide bi-modes for such a small percentage of the journey? How much extra fuel are you going to use carrying that mostly unused equipment around?
It's similar to the issue you have with the Cambrian. Yes it would be nice to have more units, and yes it would be nice to have bi-modes, but there isn't an infinite pot of money. As I keep pointing out, this is an extremely heavily subsidised franchise!
I admittedly haven't seen a CAF Civity DMU in person so I'm probably not one to talk... And I was aware about the indirect replacement of PacersEh? They are nice new trains. And they are long-bodied 100mph regional express DMUs - which is not what you need to replace Pacers directly. Pacers are being replaced by 150s (and 150s by 156s, and 156s by 158s, and 158s by 170s) via the classic cascade, which is all very well but it leaves unsuitable units (170s) on stopping services. Crikey, a 230 would be better suited to Harrogate line stopping services than a 170 - you'd easily get 5-10 minutes off a run due to the acceleration.
Isn't most of Wales in the 60-70 range though...?
oops, thanks a lot for this where's the 80 section on the Cambrian Line...?Nonsense. North Wales Coast is 75-90 as far as Bangor, and 75 across Anglesey. South Wales mainline is as high as 100 (through Pyle as mentioned above) and even Swansea - Clarbeston Road is predominantly 75. The marches line is 75-90, and even the single track Cambrian line has an 80 section.
not necessarily, but it would be nice to and would give some reassurance that they're a real thingWe are still almost two and a half years away from seeing one. Do we need to know now?
oops, thanks a lot for this where's the 80 section on the Cambrian Line...?
I'll have to whack my speedo app out next time I'm on an Aber-Shrews or Aber-Brum trainMight be more than one, but it definitely has speeds this high.
Well you only have to look at the history of the Class 341 and 342 to know that giving a proposed train a Class number is no guarantee that it will get built. I can't imagine those responsible for procuring and designing the stock are having too many meetings wondering what to classify it, when there must be a million more important things on their minds.not necessarily, but it would be nice to and would give some reassurance that they're a real thing
true, maybe I shouldn't make that assumption...Well you only have to look at the history of the Class 341 and 342 to know that giving a proposed train a Class number is no guarantee that it will get built. I can't imagine those responsible for procuring and designing the stock are having too many meetings wondering what to classify it, when there must be a million more important things on their minds.
true, maybe I shouldn't make that assumption...
no, the FLIRT DEMUs will be 666s you're right, I should Do you know when the first build is due to start though...? sometime in 2020 perhaps...?They could be class 666's for all I care. Most important thing is all the contracts are signed. Just need to be patient now and hope that by the time the tfw ones hit the production line, all the problems which Northern are experiencing now will be long rectified and lessons learned.
I'll have to whack my speedo app out next time I'm on an Aber-Shrews or Aber-Brum train
Not sure anything actually makes 100 through Pyle even in the downhill direction tbh
The South Wales stuff can come laterNot sure anything actually makes 100 through Pyle even in the downhill direction tbh
I agree. I also love people saying they should be this class number or that class number. If they are structurally the same as a WMR 196 then they should be a sub class of that. Why do they need to be a different class? Look how many sub classes of 170 and 377 there are.We are still almost two and a half years away from seeing one. Do we need to know now?
I had my doubts myself so I asked some Cardiff traincrew about it - apparently it is doable.
The South Wales stuff can come later
It's exactly the same stupid mistake as Virgin made on XC 20 years ago and we are still suffering from now. If you double the frequency you are going to attract so much extra custom from a better service, particularly if that better service also includes new rolling stock, that you are going to need a LOT more capacity.
It's utterly idiotic, and because of ERTMS (which has caused nothing but problems and was a stupid move) it means they can't just bring in a few other units when it gets busy.
The signalling on the Cambrian immediately prior to ETCS wasn't what most would think of as 'conventional signalling'; if I recall correctly it was RETB (Radio Electric Token Block).Other than as a pilot scheme, the ERTMS seems to cause more grief than its worth, could they not have retained conventional signalling with the ERTMS superimposed so that non-ERTMS units could operate the service if needed.
If I recall correctly, I once read that the Cambrian RETB had to go because the radio frequencies used were wanted for something else (perhaps 4G mobile phones). I could be wrong though.They should have put it somewhere insignificant like the Conwy Valley or an East Anglia branch line with a couple of units needing to be fitted and no overcrowding issue nor peaky seasonal demand. The Cambrian was an utterly mad choice - I can hardly imagine a worse one other than fitting it to a London commuter line and stuffing that up.
don't think that will be much comfort to users of the Cambrian line! having stood from Birmingham international to newtown myself before now (4 coaches) its not very nice! ive seen people stand as far machynlleth many a time, and this is outside the peak school holiday periods (they've probably continued standing further on the Pwllheli branch but machynlleth is my station)
Last week, I would have entirely agreed with you that 2-car DMUs have no place between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth (ie. most of the Cambrian Mainline). On the other hand, on Friday I took one of the new even-hour services into Aberystwyth (I think it was the 10:30 off Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth) and it was alot less busy than my previous Cambrian journies. I fear the Newtown bypass may be having an impact on traffic on the trains, unless people just haven't really taken up the new even-hour services yet.This (like VTXC) misses the point that it is likely that these improvements will grow custom substantially.
2-car DMUs have no place running alone on the mainline.
Is there a suitable train on the market? The class 800 bi-mode is a 125/140mph product with pointy ends and the FLIRT doesn't appear to come with an option for unit end gangways or for narrow doors at the vehicle ends (both of which in my opinion should be seen as essential features). That leaves the bi-mode Aventra as the only other possible alternative - but even that might only be being offered in 125mph form at the moment.What happens if a Labour government comes in and decides to electrify Cardiff to Swansea? That being so, surely it would make sense for the new CAF trains to be bi-mode being as they would also be under the wires between Crewe & Manchester? All this take about pollution from diesels yet here we are in 2019 with a diesel only type of train on order.
The other option would have been a diesel-electric unit with passive provision for convertion to bi-mode at a later date. That way, the extra weight of the pantograph etc. would be avoided.But there are no plans for Cardiff to Swansea to actually happen at the moment. How much money is it going to cost to provide bi-modes for such a small percentage of the journey? How much extra fuel are you going to use carrying that mostly unused equipment around?
Which is part of the reason why I strongly resent the double-width doors proposed for the new stock, as this increases standing room and almost all the routes concerned should be standee-free.On what is quite a rural line, there's really no excuse for any standing ever.
There's not really much need for that with the Civity units for TfW as they will have unit end gangways, so units can be coupled to create a longer train. In the case of the class 175s (the 2-car units in particular) I think there's a need to consider either moving them to quite backwater lines (like the Heart of Wales) where their 100mph capability would be wasted or converting cab cars to centre cars to create longer formations.I wonder if there is provision to convert cab cars into centre cars if future traffic requires the shorter units to be reshuffled into longer formations?
Eh? 195s nice? As far as I've been able to make out, they only have 1 toilet (the wheelchair-accessible one) on the whole train, no ability for trolley/guard/passengers to move between units if in multiple, 'ironing board' seating and a very small seat pitch (the latter being an assumption based on them having more seats than a 175 but less floor area due to the wide doors). I'd have to go on one to be sure of course, but all-in-all the 195s look like a bargin basement suburban train to me.Eh? They are nice new trains.
The signalling on the Cambrian immediately prior to ETCS wasn't what most would think of as 'conventional signalling'; if I recall correctly it was RETB (Radio Electric Token Block).
The signalling on the Cambrian immediately prior to ETCS wasn't what most would think of as 'conventional signalling'; if I recall correctly it was RETB (Radio Electric Token Block).
If I recall correctly, I once read that the Cambrian RETB had to go because the radio frequencies used were wanted for something else (perhaps 4G mobile phones). I could be wrong though.
I was told that no 175 has ever seen the Cambrian Lines because apparently they don't even have RETB equipment let alone ETCS...? The 158s on the Cambrian Line until 2011, and non-158 units that went on the Cambrian Lines until 2001 (Central Trains' 150/153/156/170) were all RETB-fittedThat's been used since the 1980s, is used on a number of routes and is simpler than ETCS.