Alternative solutions for the Marston Vale Line

[Energy]

The 755s are needed to restore the Norwich in 90 services without borrowing airport or commuter units. The airport is picking up again, too. Go steal the Welsh flirts or order new, please.

Is Norwich in 90 still happening?

 

[RT4038]

Is Norwich in 90 still happening?

From any Marston Vale station? No.

 

[al green]

I didn't say build on the floodplain. I said extend north but leaving a gap as parkland, as per the Ouse Valley from Willen to Bow Brickhill.

The river that runs between between Willen and Bow Brickhill is the Ouzel, a tributary of the Gt Ouse, not the Gt Ouse. Since it is a smaller river it has a smaller floodplain.

 

[Whistler40145]

With 323s being replaced by 730s at West Midlands Railway, could they take on several 769s to run the service?

 

[Peter Sarf]

On the subject of 230s. There seems to be a step backwards in hopes they might still return to service. Apparently all three of the 230s (003-005) have been moved outside the shed with their engine rafts removed - I assume to protect the engines from frost damage. Although the rafts are supposed to be easy to remove/replace it does mean the immediate use of 230s is less likely - UNLESS (optimistically) it indicates the engines are being protected in anticipation of return to service.

It mght be easy to see the 230s at Bletchley now ?.

With 323s being replaced by 730s at West Midlands Railway, could they take on several 769s to run the service?

Not sure where the 769s would come from as WMR has none of them !. Also the 769s have a diesel capability so straight electric units would never be a substitute for 769s. I can only dream of more electrification allowing cascades. Even then, being four coach units, they are waaaay too long for the Marston vale. Several explanations above (e.g. short platforms, level crossings covered by the rear of the train so SDO would not work). Perhaps free up some Northern 150s but all very tenuous and not a solution any time soon.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you wanted to free up three 150s it might be viable for Northern to take two 769s instead.

I am increasingly starting to think, though, that LNR may have run their last train on the route, and it will be buses until EWR starts up, thence whatever they end up using i.e. 196 or 175.

 

[skyhigh]

Apparently all three of the 230s (003-005) have been moved outside the shed with their engine rafts removed - I assume to protect the engines from frost damage. Although the rafts are supposed to be easy to remove/replace it does mean the immediate use of 230s is less likely - UNLESS (optimistically) it indicates the engines are being protected in anticipation of return to service.

Or were the engines from a leased pool and have been returned to the owners?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or were the engines from a leased pool and have been returned to the owners?

I did wonder who owned the engines. Were they perhaps leased from Vivarail as part of the maintenance contract on a so-called "power by the hour" contract? That does rather explain why they couldn't just crack on with their own maintenance teams.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I did wonder who owned the engines. Were they perhaps leased from Vivarail as part of the maintenance contract on a so-called "power by the hour" contract? That does rather explain why they couldn't just crack on with their own maintenance teams.

I did wonder if the engines and ancillaries out of the 230 rafts are the most re-usable asset from the point of view of the auditors. They are going to be useful as spare parts for innumerable Ford vans.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I did wonder if the engines and ancillaries out of the 230 rafts are the most re-usable asset from the point of view of the auditors. They are going to be useful as spare parts for innumerable Ford vans.

I very much doubt that flogging essentially scrap used engines for couriers to put in their ragged-to-death second hand Transit is going to make more money than flogging them to e.g. WMT to use in the 230s, though. There's no shortage of crashed Transits to take second hand engines out of. They're (according to Top Gear last night) the best selling vehicle of any type in the UK!

 

[Peter Sarf]

I very much doubt that flogging essentially scrap used engines for couriers to put in their ragged-to-death second hand Transit is going to make more money than flogging them to e.g. WMT to use in the 230s, though. There's no shortage of crashed Transits to take second hand engines out of. They're (according to Top Gear last night) the best selling vehicle of any type in the UK!

I hope your right but I fear there is a market not hamstrung by the DfT more likely to jump in quick and acquire them for parts.

 

[zwk500]

I hope your right but I fear there is a market not hamstrung by the DfT more likely to jump in quick and acquire them for parts.

I don't see why modified engines on a railway mounting would be more favourable than buying a used transit and stripping it down. Old models aren't hard to come by.

If the engines are leased (which would make sense as it would allow future upgrades/servicing) then it really does look like unless WMT cuts some services somewhere then the Marston Vale is going to be bussed until EWR can provide the service.

 

[Dai Corner]

I don't see why modified engines on a railway mounting would be more favourable than buying a used transit and stripping it down. Old models aren't hard to come by.

If the engines are leased (which would make sense as it would allow future upgrades/servicing) then it really does look like unless WMT cuts some services somewhere then the Marston Vale is going to be bussed until EWR can provide the service.

The engines would be of value to TfW if they are planning on keeping their 230s, which I have read are owned rather than leased.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The engines would be of value to TfW if they are planning on keeping their 230s, which I have read are owned rather than leased.

In that case the entire raft is of value. But how many do TfW need ?.

 

[Dai Corner]

In that case the entire raft is of value. But how many do TfW need ?.

Yes, I should have said rafts. I imagine they'd take them all if the price is right. We're getting off-topic for this thread though.

 

[Energy]

The engines would be of value to TfW if they are planning on keeping their 230s, which I have read are owned rather than leased.

At some point Vivarail switched to catepillar engines instead of the transit ones, not sure about the Marston Vale units but I'm fairly sure the TfW units are on catepillar engines.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At some point Vivarail switched to catepillar engines instead of the transit ones, not sure about the Marston Vale units but I'm fairly sure the TfW units are on catepillar engines.

The MV units are Transit engines. I suspect it's experience with these that prompted the move to CAT engines.

 

[Greybeard33]

There's no shortage of crashed Transits to take second hand engines out of. They're (according to Top Gear last night) the best selling vehicle of any type in the UK!

As discussed in a previous thread, the 230 engine is not normally fitted to UK models of the Transit, although it is an option in some foreign markets. The Ford Ranger is the only vehicle to use this engine in the UK.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As discussed in a previous thread, the 230 engine is not normally fitted to UK models of the Transit, although it is an option in some foreign markets. The Ford Ranger is the only vehicle to use this engine in the UK.

Then there won't be much UK demand for used examples.

 

[diligentdave]

If you wanted to free up three 150s it might be viable for Northern to take two 769s instead.

I am increasingly starting to think, though, that LNR may have run their last train on the route, and it will be buses until EWR starts up, thence whatever they end up using i.e. 196 or 175.

You're not too far from the truth there. Watch this space.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You're not too far from the truth there. Watch this space.

The May timetable appears to show trains (pathed for 15x, which I think is what it always was) but these of course could be taken back out.

 

[RailWonderer]

So are 150s confirmed or will it be bustitution indefinitely? @Bletchleyite and @DarloRich are both taking it in good stride, if it was my local line I would be livid.

If GWR can day in day out move Turbos from Reading to Greenford (or did for many years before the 230s) surely LNR can use a 2 car 196 on the Marston Vale from Tyseley unless DfT won't sign off on the driver and guard training. A daily move with set swaps might be more hassle than its worth, unless some of Northampton was trained on 196 operation. PS to mods, not speculative, I am not saying any of it will happen in the current situation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So are 150s confirmed or will it be bustitution indefinitely? @Bletchleyite and @DarloRich are both taking it in good stride, if it was my local line I would be livid.

I don't use it that often - I'm missing it but it doesn't muck my daily life up like it does for @DarloRich who used it for his commute.

If GWR can day in day out move Turbos from Reading to Greenford (or did for many years before the 230s) surely LNR can use a 2 car 196 on the Marston Vale from Tyseley unless DfT won't sign off on the driver and guard training. A daily move with set swaps might be more hassle than its worth, unless some of Northampton was trained on 196 operation. PS to mods, not speculative, I am not saying any of it will happen in the current situation.

196s are not yet cleared for Bedford P1A (though no doubt they will be) and there is the short platform issue.

 

[norbitonflyer]

If GWR can day in day out move Turbos from Reading to Greenford (or did for many years before the 230s)

No 230s on the Greenford branch yet. There was a 165 in the bay when I passed through West Ealing on Tuesday.

 

[MK Tom]

How much would it actually cost to do cheapest-option platform extensions at the intermediate stations to accommodate 2x23m? Some of the stations (e.g. Fenny) are long enough already. If that had been done back when the signalling was upgraded in 2006 we'd have 172s on the line now.

 

[Trainfan344]

Im not sure but are there any 156s stored in Ely sidings? Would these be available for transfer to Northern to free up the 150s?

 

[Intercity110]

Im not sure but are there any 156s stored in Ely sidings? Would these be available for transfer to Northern to free up the 150s?

Why can’t they cut out northern and get the 156s

 

[12LDA28C]

Why can’t they cut out northern and get the 156s

I assume because 156s are longer (about 5m per unit) and platform length is a constraint.

 

[MML]

There are plenty of 153s at Ely.
Lock out the toilet, as the journey is so short and rail replacement coaches do not provide a toilet either.
Minor modifications would still be required to meet accessibility regulations, but overall costs should be minimal.
Driver training could commence with sufficient stock to operate an improved half hourly frequency rather than the current hourly interval service, helping to spread loading and offer an improved frequency which will provide better connectivity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are plenty of 153s at Ely.
Lock out the toilet, as the journey is so short and rail replacement coaches do not provide a toilet either.
Minor modifications would still be required to meet accessibility regulations, but overall costs should be minimal.
Driver training could commence with sufficient stock to operate an improved half hourly frequency rather than the current hourly interval service, helping to spread loading and offer an improved frequency which will provide better connectivity.

An interesting question is whether you could do a useful half hourly skip stop type service using three units? That would be quite an upgrade as it would also speed end to end journeys.

I reckon all trains would do Bedford St John's, Woburn Sands and Ridgmont plus one other (I know who'd want it to be Fenny ), but you could alternate the others while maintaining through capacity.