WCML New Rolling Stock Discussion

[Nick Ashwell]

This is the WCML, the 804s are for EMR where the 222s are which is why they are being built to match 222 timings...

But their performance is relevant if we want 22x family speeds as that will be the way to go. They're likely more relevant when we consider that if Hitachi get the contract as seems likely then they can make units that match 22x speeds in all ways other than the increase in speed tilting units gives us.

My point was not that it will be 804s but rather the speed difference between 802s and 221s is going to be larger than that of 804s and 221s. A hypothetical "805" unit for the WCML can be built with more gensets to bring its speed up

 

[Bletchleyite]

But their performance is relevant if we want 22x family speeds as that will be the way to go. They're likely more relevant when we consider that if Hitachi get the contract as seems likely then they can make units that match 22x speeds in all ways other than the increase in speed tilting units gives us.

But 22x performance on diesel is not needed. The only use for diesel on the WCML is the North Wales Coast and Shrewsbury, everything else is wired and the electric performance of 80x is already excellent. It would be fine with even 100mph top speed.

 

[krus_aragon]

But 22x performance on diesel is not needed. The only use for diesel on the WCML is the North Wales Coast and Shrewsbury, everything else is wired and the electric performance of 80x is already excellent. It would be fine with even 100mph top speed.

Which would be closer to the initial specification for the original 80x fleet: 125mph on electric, slightly less performance on diesel, as under the original plan all the high-speed portions of the GWML were due to be wired.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which would be closer to the initial specification for the original 80x fleet: 125mph on electric, slightly less performance on diesel, as under the original plan all the high-speed portions of the GWML were due to be wired.

Indeed. And on the WCML those stretches are of course already electrified and have been since the 1960s, with diversionary and "extension" routes all being lower-speed.

It is the perfect case for a bi-mode - all high speed mainlines should be electrified anyway, but it allows through running onto lower-speed quieter lines which can't be justified for the time being. My oft-mentioned example of Manchester Airport to Barrow is another example of this - 110mph from Manchester to Carnforth, but after that 75 would be fine.

 

[Prestige15]

There is a possibility some stretch of tracks could be upgraded to 125 mph for non tilting units (Unless Hitachi or other company designed a tilting train but i have doubts) along the WCML, these are the section i can think of so far which are pretty much straight.
North of Berkhampsted - South of Wolverton (apart from Leighton Buzzerd/Linslade area)
North of Rugby - South of Atherstone
Crewe - South of Warrington
Wigan - South of Lancaster (apart from preston area)

 

[a_c_skinner]

I know this is me being repetetive (apologies) but the simple physics of going round corners says there are few places on the WCML where tilt makes a big difference to passenger safety or comfort. Lateral forces are proportional to the speed squared and the differential speed for usual and enhanced just isn't big enough to make a huge difference in the coaches. People tolerate much higher lateral forces in motor cars or coaches and in aeroplanes all sorts of forces (though not, of course, lateral forces!). Tilt wouldn't have been specified for a 125mph railway, IIRC the speed was reduced after the trains were ordered.

Moderator note: Please see Avanti West Coast New Stock - Hitachi chosen