Possibility for SWR to use Bi-Mode/Battery EMUs in the London Waterloo-Exeter/Bristol Route

[JonathanH]

Not been on Waterloo-Exeter for a while but when I have been on that route, 3 car trains become very full after Axminster. 10 coaches up from 3 however, would be overkill.

I think the concern is more the reduction in coaches from 6 to 5 on the busiest services and the fact that if you have 5 car units you can only run 5 or 10 car trains.

The Weymouth line sees crowding on Summer Saturday services which run with five car trains and lots of space on ten car trains - more flexibility might be good.

 

[Meerkat]

I think the concern is more the reduction in coaches from 6 to 5 on the busiest services and the fact that if you have 5 car units you can only run 5 or 10 car trains.

The Weymouth line sees crowding on Summer Saturday services which run with five car trains and lots of space on ten car trains - more flexibility might be good.

444 was just an example. Could stick with 3-cars or move to 4-car.
What are the platform issues - could Waterloo, Clapham, Woking, Basingstoke, and Salisbury cope with 3x4x23m? That would shift some people!

 

[swt_passenger]

444 was just an example. Could stick with 3-cars or move to 4-car.
What are the platform issues - could Waterloo, Clapham, Woking, Basingstoke, and Salisbury cope with 3x4x23m? That would shift some people!

No, Waterloo would immediately prevent that, it’s mostly designed around 240m max, basically 12x20m or 10x23/24m, with a few 200m platforms.

 

[TheWalrus]

I think the concern is more the reduction in coaches from 6 to 5 on the busiest services and the fact that if you have 5 car units you can only run 5 or 10 car trains.

The Weymouth line sees crowding on Summer Saturday services which run with five car trains and lots of space on ten car trains - more flexibility might be good.

I think maybe we would need a new order similar to what is operating now. Maybe a mix of 3 and 4 carriage bi-mode units to give the right combination in peak times.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think people might be able to adapt to 5 car sets reaching Exeter if every train was 5 car, AND the GWR Devon Metro service was in place to provide additional local capacity as far as Honiton or Axminster.

 

[The Ham]

I think people might be able to adapt to 5 car sets reaching Exeter if every train was 5 car, AND the GWR Devon Metro service was in place to provide additional local capacity as far as Honiton or Axminster.

By my maths you'd need 8 units to run a single 5 coach unit every hour to Exeter.

To run 10 coach trains inwards of Yeovil (both an hourly service to Yeovil and extending the Exeter to 10 coaches East of Yeovil) you'd need an extra 18 units.

Therefore 8+18 would be 26, if you then allow 3 spares that's 29 units.

Therefore to run 1/4 of services to Exeter as 10 coaches you'd just 2 more units, bringing the total to to 31. Hardly a significant number of extra units.

 

[swt_passenger]

By my maths you'd need 8 units to run a single 5 coach unit every hour to Exeter.

To run 10 coach trains inwards of Yeovil (both an hourly service to Yeovil and extending the Exeter to 10 coaches East of Yeovil) you'd need an extra 18 units.

Therefore 8+18 would be 26, if you then allow 3 spares that's 29 units.

Therefore to run 1/4 of services to Exeter as 10 coaches you'd just 2 more units, bringing the total to to 31. Hardly a significant number of extra units.

I was in any case only really thinking of 5 car trains AT Exeter, (as opposed to a variety of 3s or 6s), not that any would necessarily run from Waterloo as 5 car.

 

[The Ham]

I was in any case only really thinking of 5 car trains AT Exeter, (as opposed to a variety of 3s or 6s), not that any would necessarily run from Waterloo as 5 car.

I know, I had allowed for the trains being 10 coaches from Waterloo and the splitting to be a 5 coach train over the Western section.

Actually reviewing my maths is assumed those 2 units from Waterloo when they would only need to run from Yeovil, which would mean that they could run more than 1/4 of the services.

 

[MarkyT]

Not been on Waterloo-Exeter for a while but when I have been on that route, 3 car trains become very full after Axminster. 10 coaches up from 3 however, would be overkill.

Agreed better to continue with 3 and 6 car formations from Exeter (or something new with similar capacity), strengthened by another set coupled at Salisbury as required on certain busy trains. No point in all that fresh air going to Devon and back every hour.

 

[Dan15812]

Can the 350/2 be converted to be bi-mode? To run on diesel like a 185 and then to switch to 3rd rail from basingstoke. If so than this would be a great replacement on the West of Engalnd

 

[D365]

Can the 350/2 be converted to be bi-mode? To run on diesel like a 185 and then to switch to 3rd rail from basingstoke. If so than this would be a great replacement on the West of Engalnd

Anything "can" happen if you throw enough money at it! Depends how much space is available under the carriages.

 

[Energy]

Looks like quite a bit of space underneath, wonder if you could fit the MTU raft which porterbrook are trialling on a 168 and 170?

 

[Domh245]

You could install any raft with a generator attached - the PB/MTU raft is designed to mate to the existing mechanical transmission but this would be more like the 769 solution, you just need something that can generate 750v DC

 

[TheWalrus]

No, Waterloo would immediately prevent that, it’s mostly designed around 240m max, basically 12x20m or 10x23/24m, with a few 200m platforms.

So we could operate 3x319/769 out of Waterloo, at around 239m??

 

[swt_passenger]

So we could operate 3x319/769 out of Waterloo, at around 239m??

Of course, 3x4 car is already normal at Waterloo, and on the majority of platforms.

 

[TheWalrus]

Of course, 3x4 car is already normal at Waterloo, and on the majority of platforms.

Ah that’s great! Wasn’t aware of this!

I’m now thinking (assuming they are successful) 769s on Waterloo-Salisbury/Gillingham/Yeovil? This would enable 12-car workings out of Waterloo in the peaks and could also trigger an internal cascade of 158/159s which could then strengthen the Exeter services, making them up to 12 cars.
Is this idea a reasonable possibility?

 

[Domh245]

In terms of passenger environment, 769s would be a non-starter I'd suggest. Operationally probably not too good either, 319s weren't renowned for sprightly performance on 3rd rail (which is pretty important on the congested SWML) and they're only capable of matching 150 performance when on Diesel, although I don't know how big of an issue that'd be west of Basingstoke

 

[TheWalrus]

In terms of passenger environment, 769s would be a non-starter I'd suggest. Operationally probably not too good either, 319s weren't renowned for sprightly performance on 3rd rail (which is pretty important on the congested SWML) and they're only capable of matching 150 performance when on Diesel, although I don't know how big of an issue that'd be west of Basingstoke

I thought I read 769s are capable of 87mph on diesel, only 3 less than 158/159s?
Interior could be refreshed and 2+3 seating reconfigured to 2+2? I would agree nearly any unit would be a downgrade in terms of passenger environment vs a 159.

 

[Meerkat]

I thought I read 769s are capable of 87mph on diesel, only 3 less than 158/159s?
Interior could be refreshed and 2+3 seating reconfigured to 2+2? I would agree nearly any unit would be a downgrade in terms of passenger environment vs a 159.

There would be outrage if all the subsidy soaks up north were getting new trains and the SWR commuters paying vast amounts and premia got wheezing old heaps!!
We need new bi-modes

 

[swt_passenger]

Ah that’s great! Wasn’t aware of this!

I’m now thinking (assuming they are successful) 769s on Waterloo-Salisbury/Gillingham/Yeovil? This would enable 12-car workings out of Waterloo in the peaks and could also trigger an internal cascade of 158/159s which could then strengthen the Exeter services, making them up to 12 cars.
Is this idea a reasonable possibility?

It gives little or no advantage over a 10 car formation of 159/158, which could run today, (noting that 10 x 23m formations already run in the up direction). We‘re into solutions without a problem again here...

 

[Domh245]

I thought I read 769s are capable of 87mph on diesel, only 3 less than 158/159s?
Interior could be refreshed and 2+3 seating reconfigured to 2+2? I would agree nearly any unit would be a downgrade in terms of passenger environment vs a 159.

Even with new seating (or just using the ex-Brighton Flyer 319s with the 2+2) you're still left with what is fundamentally a suburban EMU without Aircon, and that's going to be a tough sell compared to the 158s and 159s that they're used to.

As for the speed, 87mph is the balancing speed on level track, ie given long enough that's the speed they'll top out at but it'll take them a long time to reach it, and it'll only decrease as soon as gradients are involved. It's telling that they only ever reference class 150s, not 158s

the required performance on diesel was likely to be as good as, if not better than the Class 150

 

[TheWalrus]

Even with new seating (or just using the ex-Brighton Flyer 319s with the 2+2) you're still left with what is fundamentally a suburban EMU without Aircon, and that's going to be a tough sell compared to the 158s and 159s that they're used to.

As for the speed, 87mph is the balancing speed on level track, ie given long enough that's the speed they'll top out at but it'll take them a long time to reach it, and it'll only decrease as soon as gradients are involved. It's telling that they only ever reference class 150s, not 158s

So probably not a good idea.
Does a 10-car 159/158 provide enough capacity? Also in a few years time 50 158s will be released from TfW and EMR so probably a better shout for strengthening.

 

[swt_passenger]

So probably not a good idea.
Does a 10-car 159/158 provide enough capacity? Also in a few years time 50 158s will be released from TfW and EMR so probably a better shout for strengthening.

A ten car 159/158 formation has been compared to a number of theoretical alternatives in earlier threads (even including stuff such as HSTs and Voyagers), and IIRC nothing came close in terms of seats...

 

[TheWalrus]

A ten car 159/158 formation has been compared to a number of theoretical alternatives in earlier threads (even including stuff such as HSTs and Voyagers), and IIRC nothing came close in terms of seats...

I’ve seen many suggestions on here for different solutions in the past and as you say, all lack capacity compared to the fantastic and comfortable 159s.
I’m now think a bi-mode 3rd rail/diesel unit order for Waterloo-Exeter and London Bridge-Uckfield?

 

[Energy]

I’ve seen many suggestions on here for different solutions in the past and as you say, all lack capacity compared to the fantastic and comfortable 159s.
I’m now think a bi-mode 3rd rail/diesel unit order for Waterloo-Exeter and London Bridge-Uckfield?

The best would be a bimode 444 although Siemens no longer make the Desiro UK.

 

[TheWalrus]

The best would be a bimode 444 although Siemens no longer make the Desiro UK.

Not really any good unless you can convert them. Then that leaves Weymouths and any other services they operate with no other suitable stock. Let’s not go down the 442 route again!

 

[Energy]

Not really any good unless you can convert them. Then that leaves Weymouths and any other services they operate with no other suitable stock. Let’s not go down the 442 route again!

I mean new build bimode 444s, there aren't enough 444s already which is why the 442s were brought in!

 

[Meerkat]

I’ve seen many suggestions on here for different solutions in the past and as you say, all lack capacity compared to the fantastic and comfortable 159s.
I’m now think a bi-mode 3rd rail/diesel unit order for Waterloo-Exeter and London Bridge-Uckfield?

Are end doors suitable for Uckfield?

 

[TheWalrus]

Are end doors suitable for Uckfield?

I don’t see any reason why 1/3 & 2/3 doors are not suitable for Exeter if the comfort is there? Ie 170s I think are fine for XC?

 

[TheWalrus]

I mean new build bimode 444s, there aren't enough 444s already which is why the 442s were brought in!

I understand what you mean. Realistically we’re looking at a completely new design.