There was one wacky plan with a Trent Valley to\from London service via Nuneaton and Coventry.
Do they waste as much platform space as a loco and DVT?
It isn't just about battery capacity, it's also about charging time. If part of the route is electrified then trains can recharge their batteries while running on the electrified section, meaning less downtime. But if little or none of the route is electrified then you have to factor in enough time to plug in and recharge at the terminus, which could well mean extended layovers and a much less efficient utilisation of resources – ie, you would need 3 trains to run the same frequency of service that you can currently do with 2.
Battery-electric cars and buses have their own problems – particularly in terms of mining lithium for the batteries. I think as electric vehicles become more common and the demand for lithium continues to grow, we'll start to see more of a pushback against it, and the idea of replacing diesel trains with battery-electric buses will not get a lot of public support.
I'm looking at the sectional appendix.
It looks like it will, but with Watford calls. I think this is ok - Watford has higher rail usage and certainly higher London commuting. But I’d expect it to change, Watford to Rugby nonstop seems unnecessary.
It isn't just the overall length though but also the on useable space the seating capacity of a 4 car Flirt is getting on for 100 seats less than a 4 car 20m 150.
Sure, a 4-car FLIRT is more akin to a 3-car set of anything else ... but I think we're digressing from the original point, which was that although with FLIRTs you need slightly longer platforms to get the same passenger capacity, almost all Chiltern stations are more than long enough to accommodate FLIRT formations that will give at least the same capacity as is offered now, because in many cases Chiltern are running tiny trains that could fit in the platform 2 or 3 times over.
When the alternative is burning oil, people won't mind about mining lithium.
There about 70 seats more in a 168 and 150 in a 165. Flirts are not people movers.
How many new Aventras have 3+2 it doesn't appear operators have realised as you suggest. I much prefer 2+2 it is amazing the difference it makes on a TfW 150/2 compared to the traditional layout
Killer app or party trick? Which DOO railway is using FLIRTSanyway?
Or a very very large dormitory or regional town. Northampton is that. Would you say Nottingham was an economic powerhouse?
Population isn't the only thing, but MK already has substantial offices, tech jobs, the OU, and the council offices alongside being the region's biggest retail destination. It also has the good luck to be a key interchange on the mainline so lots of stops in long-distance trains for good connectivity. MK is already a more significant economic centre than Northampton, and growing in size is only going to increase that.
MK is home to several F1 firms and Cranfield Uni is just down the road, specialising in Aerospace design and has a buzzing car safety section. It's also the home of Marshall amplifiers, who are a global supplier of audio equipment for the entertainment industry. I lived in MK for 5 years. Tech is a massive part of it's economy.
It's boring is what you mean. And yes, by and large it is. There's a nice enough theatre and some bars and restaurants but it's not a traditional city centre. But for people raising a young family that's fine. It's not dead, there's still things to do in the evenings and weekends. I wouldn't choose to live there if I could be 22 again, but it's not a terrible place for people at other stages of their life.
Personally I'd take Chorlton over that, as someone how is now long past being 22! But we have absolutely no plans to start a family, and so we are perhaps the outliers.
Well a current four car FLIRT has four 16L V8 Deutz diesels putting out 2750hp compared to four 13L I6 MTU diesels putting out 1688hp on an equivalent 168 so pulling a couple of extra trailers shouldn't be a problem apart from the tiny fuel tanks.