Ex-LNER Mk4 sets for Grand Central (Blackpool - Euston)

samuelmorris · 20 Feb 2020

Whistler40145 said:
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.

RailUK Forums

TT-ONR-NRN · 20 Feb 2020

samuelmorris said:
Seems a bit unnecessary? The LNER Mk4 sets always seemed in pretty good shape since the Virgin refurb.

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.

Entertexthere · 20 Feb 2020

samuelmorris said:
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.

aiden_g1 · 20 Feb 2020

samuelmorris said:
Seems a bit unnecessary? The LNER Mk4 sets always seemed in pretty good shape since the Virgin refurb.

It will most likely be a refresh rather than a refurb. More along the lines of new carpet and seating moquette to suit the GC branding. Plus a deep clean to everywhere else.

43096 · 21 Feb 2020

Whistler40145 said:
AFAIK the Class 91s aren’t in good condition, hence the use of Class 90s

Is that a fact, or just hearsay/rumour?

CTS1990 · 21 Feb 2020

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?

LNW-GW Joint · 21 Feb 2020

CTS1990 said:
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?

The trains will use 110mph paths, being overtaken by Avanti services in places (eg Milton Keynes Central).

hexagon789 · 21 Feb 2020

CTS1990 said:
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?

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.

hexagon789 · 21 Feb 2020

Entertexthere said:
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.

I agree, TfW can get away with it, but GC are competing for custom so I think they need to make their mark a bit more strongly.

Jurg · 21 Feb 2020

Coach layout attached from the GC website.

Railperf · 21 Feb 2020

hexagon789 said:
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.

hexagon789 · 21 Feb 2020

Railperf said:
The acceleration is barely any better..and atrocious in wet weather.

I thought 90s were quicker off the mark and more sure-footed but you see all sorts of claims about things from various sources

hexagon789 · 21 Feb 2020

Jurg said:
Coach layout attached from the GC website.

No Coach D and only 5 coaches?

IamTrainsYT · 22 Feb 2020

_toommm_ · 22 Feb 2020

IamTrainsYT said:
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

All cancelled now unfortunately.

Murray J · 22 Feb 2020

The first 4 have been cancelled but the other 4 may have a chance.

IamTrainsYT · 22 Feb 2020

Interesting it was listed as a “Great northern railway project” service rather than “grand central” or “DB cargo”

Railperf · 22 Feb 2020

hexagon789 said:
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!

hexagon789 · 22 Feb 2020

Railperf said:
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!

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?

27016 · 23 Feb 2020

hexagon789 said:
No Coach D and only 5 coaches?

As and when business increases the sets will become 6 coaches plus DVT.

Class455 · 23 Feb 2020

Jurg said:
Coach layout attached from the GC website.

There seems to be a lot of space for the luggage rack!

hexagon789 · 23 Feb 2020

27016 said:
As and when business increases the sets will become 6 coaches plus DVT.

I erroneously assumed they were using 6+DVT from the outset, but the approach they're taking isn't unreasonable, just so long as they've got those spare coaches ready!

ainsworth74 · 23 Feb 2020

Class455 said:
There seems to be a lot of space for the luggage rack!

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!

Royston Vasey · 23 Feb 2020

hexagon789 said:
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?

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.

samuelmorris · 23 Feb 2020

hexagon789 said:
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.

Class455 · 23 Feb 2020

ainsworth74 said:
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!

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 rack

hexagon789 · 23 Feb 2020

Royston Vasey said:
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.

I never suggested they should use 91s though, indeed I've been trying to point out why it was better that they weren't.

hexagon789 · 23 Feb 2020

samuelmorris said:
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.

Again, I never said that they should and I also pointed out the acceleration thing as well.

Railperf · 24 Feb 2020

hexagon789 said:
Again, I never said that they should and I also pointed out the acceleration thing as well.

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.

krus_aragon · 24 Feb 2020

Railperf said:
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.

Avanti are also conspiring to make it worse, with non-tilt (i.e. 110mph?) Voyager replacements arriving in the next few years.

Or perhaps there's something else going on behind the curtain.

Ex-LNER Mk4 sets for Grand Central (Blackpool - Euston)

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Member

On Moderation

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Attachments

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member