• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Alliance Rail - East Coast Luxury Proposals

Status
Not open for further replies.

Haydn1971

Established Member
Joined
11 Dec 2012
Messages
2,099
Location
Sheffield
Question - would a new tilting train be required ? Could a new open access operator simply bid for an existing tilt train operated by Virgin or XC once the lease period ends ? Yeah sure it could play havoc with the timetables in places, but what's to stop this happening ?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

dgl

Established Member
Joined
5 Oct 2014
Messages
2,390
Surely for the ECML could they convert MK4's when they come off lease when the IEP's are introduced. Would have huge cost savings compared to new stock even if they required new loco's.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I too can see the potential for a single carriage of "luxury" accommodation, but only if the rest of the train is made of up high-capacity economy airline seating with a strict limit of one piece of cabin baggage per person.

So to meet with requirements to provide accommodation for the full spectrum of walk-up fares with standard luggage. On an 11-car Pendolino train

Leading coach - Super Luxury
Second Coach - Composite 10 First Class Plus 1 First Disabled, remaining standard plus standard disabled.
Remaining 9 coaches - Super-economy.

Arguably super economy would be the same as standard now but perhaps with fewer table seats.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,691
Location
Scotland
Question - would a new tilting train be required ? Could a new open access operator simply bid for an existing tilt train operated by Virgin or XC once the lease period ends ? Yeah sure it could play havoc with the timetables in places, but what's to stop this happening ?
For the ECML tilt is largely overkill as it doesn't really get twisty until north of Newcastle. Even then it's not nearly as sinuous as the WCML.
 

Jonny

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,562
For the ECML tilt is largely overkill as it doesn't really get twisty until north of Newcastle. Even then it's not nearly as sinuous as the WCML.

Agreed in principle - but the area around Retford is pretty bendy by ECML standards - and Durham Station is on a relatively tight bend (75mph over the Viaduct IIRC). TASS could be a benefit, but only at a few bits and would most likely be more trouble than it's worth, especially since IEP won't tilt. It would also play havoc with the pathing.
 

glbotu

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2012
Messages
644
Location
Oxford
The thing is, even with tilt, what are these trains going to do North of Darlington, mess up the paths?

I mean, given IEP is non-tilt, I assume it will be limited to 75 mph over the Durham viaduct and the various sub-125mph speed limits North of there, along with whatever stock runs there. Surely introducing a 125 - 140 mph tilt train would screw up all the paths in the area (although I guess the frequent Morpeth Pacers do this already)? Maybe North of Morpeth there aren't enough trains to cause a problem (up to 2tph EC, 1tph XC?).

I also assume that 75mph over the Durham viaduct is a structural issue with the viaduct, as opposed to a bend issue and everything will be limited to 75mph over that, tilt or no tilt.

I assume the use of Pendo stock is to make a large stock order with some WCML Open Access, with balises already installed. Running an OAO is expensive as is (didn't Grand Central lose money for its first 7 years of operation?), paying for TASS balises for 1tph seems like a rather disproportionate outlay.
 

Haydn1971

Established Member
Joined
11 Dec 2012
Messages
2,099
Location
Sheffield
Question - would a new tilting train be required ? Could a new open access operator simply bid for an existing tilt train operated by Virgin or XC once the lease period ends ? Yeah sure it could play havoc with the timetables in places, but what's to stop this happening ?


Perhaps my question was unclear, I'm not asking "if" tilt is required, I'm asking if existing "tilt" stock could be acquired under the noses of Virgin/XC if the leasing company was offered a better deal than Virgin/XC at the end of the current leases.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,836
People are assuming a timetable would written around them, it wouldnt, therefore they would slot in working with all the other paths for the best use of capacity, which could well mean they dont get to utilise any tilt benefits.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Perhaps my question was unclear, I'm not asking "if" tilt is required, I'm asking if existing "tilt" stock could be acquired under the noses of Virgin/XC if the leasing company was offered a better deal than Virgin/XC at the end of the current leases.

The current lease/maintenance deal for Pendolinos to the West Coast operator lasts until 2022, signed by the DfT before the franchise shenanigans in 2012.
This was largely prompted by the 106-vehicle order for 4 new 11-car 390s and 31x2-car extensions to existing 390s, then being delivered.
Virgin's Class 221 Voyager fleet has a lease/maintenance deal with Bombardier until 2019.
So tilting 390s/221s are not available to others until at least those dates, even though they are beyond the current Virgin franchise end date in 2017.
 
Last edited:

DownSouth

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2011
Messages
1,545
The current lease/maintenance deal for Pendolinos to the West Coast operator lasts until 2022, signed by the DfT before the franchise shenanigans in 2012.
This was largely prompted by the 106-vehicle order for 4 new 11-car 390s and 31x2-car extensions to existing 390s, then being delivered.
Virgin's Class 221 Voyager fleet has a lease/maintenance deal with Bombardier until 2019.
So tilting 390s/221s are not available to others until at least those dates, even though they are beyond the current Virgin franchise end date in 2017.
This is business though, contracts aren't an issue if the price is right.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The thing is, even with tilt, what are these trains going to do North of Darlington, mess up the paths?

I mean, given IEP is non-tilt, I assume it will be limited to 75 mph over the Durham viaduct and the various sub-125mph speed limits North of there, along with whatever stock runs there. Surely introducing a 125 - 140 mph tilt train would screw up all the paths in the area (although I guess the frequent Morpeth Pacers do this already)? Maybe North of Morpeth there aren't enough trains to cause a problem (up to 2tph EC, 1tph XC?).

I also assume that 75mph over the Durham viaduct is a structural issue with the viaduct, as opposed to a bend issue and everything will be limited to 75mph over that, tilt or no tilt.

I assume the use of Pendo stock is to make a large stock order with some WCML Open Access, with balises already installed. Running an OAO is expensive as is (didn't Grand Central lose money for its first 7 years of operation?), paying for TASS balises for 1tph seems like a rather disproportionate outlay.
All that trouble and money just to save a few seconds here and there.

Tilt and higher maximum speeds should only be considered once all the more significant improvements have been wrung out of the line - the first step to going faster is to spend less time going slowly.
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
I just don't see how they can get a path that will get into London at a reasonable time in the morning and out of it again without being too late in the evening - no matter how they arrange the seating.
 

Stats

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2009
Messages
943
I'm confused as to why we are talking about this as its a new proposal. We've known about this since December 2013 (http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=93853).

The thing is, even with tilt, what are these trains going to do North of Darlington, mess up the paths?

I mean, given IEP is non-tilt, I assume it will be limited to 75 mph over the Durham viaduct and the various sub-125mph speed limits North of there, along with whatever stock runs there. Surely introducing a 125 - 140 mph tilt train would screw up all the paths in the area (although I guess the frequent Morpeth Pacers do this already)? Maybe North of Morpeth there aren't enough trains to cause a problem (up to 2tph EC, 1tph XC?).

Network Rail have done the modelling for the ORR, albeit based on the Intercity East Coast ITT TSR rather than VTEC's proposed timetable.
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf...20-capacity-timetable-assessment-dec-2014.pdf

In summary, NR say that by 2020 there will be capacity for 8 LDHS tph on the southern end of the ECML. The main capacity constraints are between Northallerton and Edinburgh. Between Northallerton and Newcastle NR say there is capacity for 3 London LDHS tph, 3 non-London LDHS/inter-urban tph and freight.

North of Newcastle NR say there is capacity for 2 London LDHS tph, 1 non-London LDHS/inter-urban tph, current local services and 1 freight tph. Network Rail's modelling suggests long dwell times for some services to allow overtaking to take place. The document also suggests that tilt will be 10 minutes quicker between Newcastle and Edinburgh than Class 80x services. NR suggest that a 2 hourly calling pattern may be the optimum solution for north of Newcastle to fit in with the 2 hourly Edinburgh to Berwick service and calls for a review of services north of Newcastle

A review of service levels and calling patterns is therefore recommended, including local services around Edinburgh and Newcastle (such as the Newcastle – Morpeth stopping services).

ORR wrote to stakeholders in February saying they would make a decision on the ECML applications by this month(http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/16763/ecml-access-letter.pdf), but that was before FirstGroup submitted their proposals.
 
Last edited:

Martin222002

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2011
Messages
254
Location
Chesterfield, Derbyshire
I'm confused as to why we are talking about this as its a new proposal. We've known about this since December 2013 (http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=93853).

What makes things more confusing is that according to the ORRs webiste Alliance has actually closed the application they originally made for their Edinburgh services (see link).

http://orr.gov.uk/consultations/access-consultations/current-track-access-applications/new-contracts-section-17-and-18
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
What makes things more confusing is that according to the ORRs webiste Alliance has actually closed the application they originally made for their Edinburgh services (see link).

http://orr.gov.uk/consultations/access-consultations/current-track-access-applications/new-contracts-section-17-and-18

Isn't it just the consultation that has closed? ORR judgment to come.

It's worth reading the DfT response to the application in the consultation.
It basically says the GNER proposals would undermine the IEP programme and result in a drop in its BCR rating from 8.79 to 1.13 (actual money amounts redacted).
Services to intermediate stations (eg York) would also worsen to allow fast paths for GNER trains, and ECML performance would suffer.
While the DfT "welcomes the benefits that open access can provide", I can't see ORR allowing access at that level of financial impact on the ICEC franchise.
Probably much the same attitude to the First proposals too.
 
Last edited:

JaJaWa

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2013
Messages
1,704
Location
Do Alliance keep making such extreme proposals so that they can submit a slightly more realistic one and have it approved?
 

trainplan1

Member
Joined
6 Dec 2010
Messages
115
People are assuming a timetable would written around them, it wouldnt, therefore they would slot in working with all the other paths for the best use of capacity, which could well mean they dont get to utilise any tilt benefits.

Certain open access operators can often think otherwise...
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
Do Alliance keep making such extreme proposals so that they can submit a slightly more realistic one and have it approved?

Like a reverse Ryanair?

I'm failing to see really what they are offering with their proposal, just an upgraded first class on a less stopping train on the same route as VTEC. At least GC and HT offer different destinations.

Purely from observation, first class these days seems less busy and we see lots of business people in standard on the intercity routes, so where do they think the high paying passengers will come from?

I don't quite get the necessity for 'transatlantic' comfort either on a four hour route - fly first class on a four hour flight and all you get are the same seats as standard with the middle seat blocked off. First class on existing Mk4 sets is suitably comfortable and quiet with more leg room than a plane.

Offering food at the seats - VTEC already have a buffet trolley which is underused (again, purely observation here), do they really think that people will pay more for a microwaved hot meal? A number of European trains offer at seat service like this and again its use is limited.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,265
While the DfT "welcomes the benefits that open access can provide", I can't see ORR allowing access at that level of financial impact on the ICEC franchise.
Probably much the same attitude to the First proposals too.

It makes you wonder why the hourly open access path was explained in the ECML franchise spec? Perhaps DfT really want it to provide and develop services where none currently exist?
 
Joined
9 Jul 2011
Messages
777
....I don't quite get the necessity for 'transatlantic' comfort either on a four hour route - fly first class on a four hour flight and all you get are the same seats as standard with the middle seat blocked off.

If you are referring to long haul first class, then your "same seats as standard with the middle seat blocked off' is way off the mark.

This is a first class cabin and seats on transatlantic long haul flights.....

American Airlines

AMERICAN-AIRLINES-BOEING-777-300ER-INAUGURAL-FIRST-CLASS-2013-1.jpg



British Airways B777

original_British_Airways_New_First_Class_777_Review-Seat_3K.jpg


British Airways B747-400

3842378_orig.jpg
 
Last edited:

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
No, his point referred to 4-hour flights which are much more likely to be operated using a short-haul type aircraft e.g. a B737 or A320 which tend not to have different seats in business class.
 
Joined
9 Jul 2011
Messages
777
No, his point referred to 4-hour flights which are much more likely to be operated using a short-haul type aircraft e.g. a B737 or A320 which tend not to have different seats in business class.

Ah but the Alliance Rail proposal, touts (quote) "TRANSATLANTIC airline-quality comfort", does it not?
 

andrewkeith5

Member
Joined
2 Jun 2013
Messages
681
Location
West Sussex
Ah but the Alliance Rail proposal, touts (quote) "TRANSATLANTIC airline-quality comfort", does it not?

Not wrong - but again you've misinterpreted. The comparison being made was why do you need transatlantic comfort when you're only going to be on the train for less than 4 hours?

The closest we have on the rail network at the moment is probably the Heathrow Express 'business class' with it's 1+1 seating...
 
Joined
9 Jul 2011
Messages
777
A couple of gratuitous photos of First Class rail seats...

Japan

f56a3695d01.jpg



China

bullet-train02.jpg

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---







i wonder if their proposal is based off the way in which the current BA001- BA004 operates - the Extended range all Business class A319s

british-airways-business-class-club-world-london-city-to-new-york-jfk-airbus-a318-via-shannon-23.jpg


british-airways-business-class-club-world-london-city-to-new-york-jfk-airbus-a318-via-shannon-04.jpg
 
Last edited:

JaJaWa

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2013
Messages
1,704
Location
There are photos of the proposed interior on their website

www.gner.scot/gallery


Interesting that they are now using a navy blue and red colour scheme like the traditional GNER - they were using green before. Also interesting to see that the train is a Pendolino on the outside but on the inside, the windows are bigger than an Electrostar's!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,539
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top