samuelmorris
Established Member
Sure, but hence changing to using the 90s. The suggestion was it would be the Mk4s being refurbished.AFAIK the Class 91s aren’t in good condition, hence the use of Class 90s
Sure, but hence changing to using the 90s. The suggestion was it would be the Mk4s being refurbished.AFAIK the Class 91s aren’t in good condition, hence the use of Class 90s
But the bright red seats in standard? I mean they don’t exactly match the black orange colour scheme. Having said that neither does purple and Grand Central randomly had purple seats put in their old HSTs in 1st.Seems a bit unnecessary? The LNER Mk4 sets always seemed in pretty good shape since the Virgin refurb.
I mean it's better to have an interior which suits an operator than something which looks completely different. But that's what I believe.Seems a bit unnecessary? The LNER Mk4 sets always seemed in pretty good shape since the Virgin refurb.
Seems a bit unnecessary? The LNER Mk4 sets always seemed in pretty good shape since the Virgin refurb.
Is that a fact, or just hearsay/rumour?AFAIK the Class 91s aren’t in good condition, hence the use of Class 90s
Even if the 91s are worn out, I’m surprised 90s have been chosen owing to their lower top speed of 110mph. Won’t they pose problems for Avanti on the fast lines?
Even if the 91s are worn out, I’m surprised 90s have been chosen owing to their lower top speed of 110mph. Won’t they pose problems for Avanti on the fast lines?
I mean it's better to have an interior which suits an operator than something which looks completely different. But that's what I believe.
The acceleration is barely any better..and atrocious in wet weather.No, as has been mentioned 91+Mk4 would've been limited to 110mph anyway, so may as well go for the 90s for the acceleration.
The acceleration is barely any better..and atrocious in wet weather.
Coach layout attached from the GC website.
training pathed for later today, are these likely to run?
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45819/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45789/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45791/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45804/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45794/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45805/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45796/2020-02-22/detailed
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W45798/2020-02-22/detailed
Slightly quicker on a dry rail - there isn't usually more than 10 to 15 seconds advantage from a standing start accelerating to 5 or 6 miles.I thought 90s were quicker off the mark and more sure-footed but you see all sorts of claims about things from various sources
Slightly quicker on a dry rail - there isn't usually more than 10 to 15 seconds advantage from a standing start accelerating to 5 or 6 miles.
From a Peterboro Northbound start to 8 miles, a 90 can be around 10 to 15 sec quicker than a Class 91 or HST - all being around 110/111mph at that point, but a whopping 56 seconds behind a Class 800 which would be doing 124mph!
As and when business increases the sets will become 6 coaches plus DVT.No Coach D and only 5 coaches?
There seems to be a lot of space for the luggage rack!Coach layout attached from the GC website.
As and when business increases the sets will become 6 coaches plus DVT.
Yes! I think however its just a really bad drawing as looking at seat numbers I don't think they've changed the seating layout at all so I don't think we'll be seeing anything more for luggage space than what is already there!There seems to be a lot of space for the luggage rack!
DBC already maintain a pool of 90s at Crewe. Far better than a micro fleet of unfamiliar and worn out 91s that couldn't do 125 anyway.So really for the operations GC will be using them on, everytime they do a straight 0-110 they are only gaining 10-15 seconds utilising 90s against 91s?
90s aren't being used over 91s, I gather they're in better condition than 91s and since the stock is limited to 110mph on that route, there's no reason 91s need to be used.So really for the operations GC will be using them on, everytime they do a straight 0-110 they are only gaining 10-15 seconds utilising 90s against 91s?
Yeah I noticed that too, seat 63 in Coach C for example, which is where I sat quite a lot when I had an MK4 back to Leeds is right by the vestibule area and there really isn't so much space for the luggage rackYes! I think however its just a really bad drawing as looking at seat numbers I don't think they've changed the seating layout at all so I don't think we'll be seeing anything more for luggage space than what is already there!
DBC already maintain a pool of 90s at Crewe. Far better than a micro fleet of unfamiliar and worn out 91s that couldn't do 125 anyway.
90s aren't being used over 91s, I gather they're in better condition than 91s and since the stock is limited to 110mph on that route, there's no reason 91s need to be used.
Still a step backwards to be introducing more 110mph services on a 125mph route where millions were invested to enable it for higher speeds. And it reduces the ability to insert other paths too.Again, I never said that they should and I also pointed out the acceleration thing as well.
Avanti are also conspiring to make it worse, with non-tilt (i.e. 110mph?) Voyager replacements arriving in the next few years.Still a step backwards to be introducing more 110mph services on a 125mph route where millions were invested to enable it for higher speeds. And it reduces the ability to insert other paths too.