Disposal Of IC225s

[D365]

Out of interest, which accelerates faster (from 0 to 125mph) - a 91 + Mk4 rake or Intercity 125?

Definitely a 225. Wouldn't that have made ECML electrification a bit of a backward step otherwise?

 

[DenmarkRail]

It would be far simpler if we had 1 or maybe 2/3 operators, who all use the same types of trains....

Guess who ruined that....

 

[ainsworth74]

Guess who ruined that....

BR? Or the Big Four before them? Or the Pre-Grouping companies before that?

 

[43096]

But why 41 365's?

Because BR had been given a certain amount of funding and that was the number of trains that matched the available finance.

 

[TheKnightWho]

It would be far simpler if we had 1 or maybe 2/3 operators, who all use the same types of trains....

Guess who ruined that....

TPE of course - they'll have 2 microfleets for reasons I've still yet to work out!

 

[CosherB]

Export the whole lot - Mk4s, 91s and Mk4 DVTs. One less problem to deal with!

 

[Rail Blues]

Export the whole lot - Mk4s, 91s and Mk4 DVTs. One less problem to deal with!

Who'd want them? I can't see LHCS built to British loading gauge being that popular with open access operators in mainland Europe.

The 91s will by 30 odd years old by the time they're withdrawn, aren't readily cascadable and may well be due a one way trip to Booths.

 

[class26]

Who'd want them? I can't see LHCS built to British loading gauge being that popular with open access operators in mainland Europe.

The 91s will by 30 odd years old by the time they're withdrawn, aren't readily cascadable and may well be due a one way trip to Booths.

Bulgaria maybe ?

 

[AnonymousUser1]

I agree that the TPE Mk5 LHCS will operate at 100mph due to Class 68 haulage, but aren't the carriages designed for 125mph?

and potentially running at 125 subsequently with future electric or bimode haulage depending o nthe progress of electrification ...

 

[Jonny]

TPE of course - they'll have 2 microfleets for reasons I've still yet to work out!

Different trains for different routes - the Diesel Loco on the new-build LHCS may be replaced later with an Electric one or an Electro-Diesel with a higher power output. After all, who expected the Class 68 or its equivalent (3800hp prime mover, RA7 on Bo-Bo bogies) to become available until it did?

 

[Nickrailtours]

Would be nice to have Preserved Class 91 by AC Locomotive Group (ACLG) to buy this Class 91 No. 91001 in the future?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Different trains for different routes - the Diesel Loco on the new-build LHCS may be replaced later with an Electric one or an Electro-Diesel with a higher power output. After all, who expected the Class 68 or its equivalent (3800hp prime mover, RA7 on Bo-Bo bogies) to become available until it did?

Not really - IEPs would perform the job equally as well or better than either of them. I would've understood a microfleet for the WCML if they tilted, but a fleet of 12 separate but functionally equal trains limited to 110mph on their route is completely absurd. It's the class 180 issue all over again. As for the loco hauled stock, I'm baffled as to why the order for IEPs couldn't just be increased to 32. It's not as though other TOCs are clamouring for the 185s. It's particularly ridiculous that they're using this on the ECML route given they can't even manage 125mph. They won't even have an acceleration advantage either.

So we have 1 fleet that won't be able to reach their top speed, 2 fleets that won't be able to reach linespeed, and a TOC with 3 classes where 1 (or possibly 2 if 1 had tilt) would do, 2 of which are microfleets.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Not really - IEPs would perform the job equally as well or better than either of them. I would've understood a microfleet for the WCML if they tilted, but a fleet of 12 separate but functionally equal trains limited to 110mph on their route is completely absurd. It's the class 180 issue all over again. As for the loco hauled stock, I'm baffled as to why the order for IEPs couldn't just be increased to 32. It's not as though other TOCs are clamouring for the 185s. It's particularly ridiculous that they're using this on the ECML route given they can't even manage 125mph. They won't even have an acceleration advantage either.

So we have 1 fleet that won't be able to reach their top speed, 2 fleets that won't be able to reach linespeed, and a TOC with 3 classes where 1 (or possibly 2 if 1 had tilt) would do, 2 of which are microfleets.

My understanding is that there is a combination of two factors at play here.

Firstly, FirstGroup needed all the trains in service faster than Hitachi were practically able to deliver them. As nice as a consistent fleet would be, their fleet plans relied upon new trains being delivered that quickly.

Secondly, CAF are supposedly determined to win orders to keep their factory going. As far as I understand it, both their TPE trains are based off existing but unimplemented designs. National Express had planned new InterCity LHCS for their ScotRail bid, presumably with a driving carriage and four intermediate carriages. FirstGroup had planned to use the electric 125mph InterCity design to replace the Voyagers in their ICWC bid. Since both products had already been designed, churning out a few would be a reasonable way to keep the factory going for another few years. It seems likely that there will be commonalities between the InterCity sets and the regional sets built for Northern, so it's not like they'll be totally unique on the network.

 

[TheKnightWho]

My understanding is that there is a combination of two factors at play here.

Firstly, FirstGroup needed all the trains in service faster than Hitachi were practically able to deliver them. As nice as a consistent fleet would be, their fleet plans relied upon new trains being delivered that quickly.

Secondly, CAF are supposedly determined to win orders to keep their factory going. As far as I understand it, both their TPE trains are based off existing but unimplemented designs. National Express had planned new InterCity LHCS for their ScotRail bid, presumably with a driving carriage and four intermediate carriages. FirstGroup had planned to use the electric 125mph InterCity design to replace the Voyagers in their ICWC bid. Since both products had already been designed, churning out a few would be a reasonable way to keep the factory going for another few years. It seems likely that there will be commonalities between the InterCity sets and the regional sets built for Northern, so it's not like they'll be totally unique on the network.

Sure, there are reasons for it, but it's short-sighted thinking, and whilst the 397s aren't the end of the world the LHCS on the ECML remains absurd for the gain of replacing trains that aren't any slower a little bit more quickly, when waiting a little bit longer would net them a uniform fleet of trains that would allow near-even journey times across that part of the network (and would allow them to interweave with other ECML services more easily, too).

 

[Jonny]

Sure, there are reasons for it, but it's short-sighted thinking, and whilst the 397s aren't the end of the world the LHCS on the ECML remains absurd for the gain of replacing trains that aren't any slower a little bit more quickly, when waiting a little bit longer would net them a uniform fleet of trains that would allow near-even journey times across that part of the network (and would allow them to interweave with other ECML services more easily, too).

For where the LHCS services will eventually go, there isn't much call for 100mph+ in the short/medium term, but a loco with a higher top speed can be easily substituted in the longer term. After all, the Class 68 is a step up in terms of combined top speed, power from a diesel prime mover and sitting atop two axle bogies at route availability 7 (a level below/lighter/putting less strain on the track than a Class 67). Who knows what will replace the Class 68?

 

[TheKnightWho]

For where the LHCS services will eventually go, there isn't much call for 100mph+ in the short/medium term, but a loco with a higher top speed can be easily substituted in the longer term. After all, the Class 68 is a step up in terms of combined top speed, power from a diesel prime mover and sitting atop two axle bogies at route availability 7 (a level below/lighter/putting less strain on the track than a Class 67). Who knows what will replace the Class 68?

If they go on the South Transpennine route and more IEPs are ordered for the ECML route then that is definitely more understandable.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Would be nice to have Preserved Class 91 by AC Locomotive Group (ACLG) to buy this Class 91 No. 91001 in the future?

BOB and For The Fallen have been claimed by the national colection already.

FTF particuarly as it holds the UK speed record pre eurostar

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they go on the South Transpennine route and more IEPs are ordered for the ECML route then that is definitely more understandable.

There are many options - if, for instance, higher capacity is required on the WCML services they could be reformed, hauled by an electric locomotive and used there. It's generally easier to reform LHCS than EMUs, not that the latter is impossible of course.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Initial LHCS will be introduced on LIV-NCL (the 2 pretendolino rakes) enabling some MIA-NCL.services to be reintroduced. When the mk5 come on stream their use on LIV-NCL and LIV-SCA free up 185s for refurb which will then concentrate on south route, MAN-HUL and MIA-MBR. as IEP come on stream these will replace the LHCS on LIV-EDB and concentrate on LIV-SCA and MIA-MBR. Meanwhile the CAF reolace the 350 and the 185 wil replace 14x and 15x on LDS-MAN semi fast stoppers

 

[Mollman]

Initial LHCS will be introduced on LIV-NCL (the 2 pretendolino rakes) enabling some MIA-NCL.services to be reintroduced. When the mk5 come on stream their use on LIV-NCL and LIV-SCA free up 185s for refurb which will then concentrate on south route, MAN-HUL and MIA-MBR. as IEP come on stream these will replace the LHCS on LIV-EDB and concentrate on LIV-SCA and MIA-MBR. Meanwhile the CAF reolace the 350 and the 185 wil replace 14x and 15x on LDS-MAN semi fast stoppers

I thought there was only one Pretendolio rake, or is it being split and having an extra DVT added in.

 

[sprinterguy]

I thought there was only one Pretendolio rake, or is it being split and having an extra DVT added in.

Two short rakes formed by splitting the one Pretendolino set.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

BOB and For The Fallen have been claimed by the national colection already.

As far as I am aware it's 91111 and 91131 that are designated for the National Collection, the latter for being the last high speed locomotive built for BR and the last loco to be built at Crewe; it also held the UK domestic passenger carrying speed record, albeit not the overall record of 162mph achieved by 91010/91110.

 

[43096]

I thought there was only one Pretendolio rake, or is it being split and having an extra DVT added in.

Set being split to form 2x5-car and no DVTs.

 

[alexl92]

Two short rakes formed by splitting the one Pretendolino set.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As far as I am aware it's 91111 and 91131 that are designated for the National Collection, the latter for being the last high speed locomotive built for BR and the last loco to be built at Crewe; it also held the UK domestic passenger carrying speed record, albeit not the overall record of 162mph achieved by 91010/91110.

You mean nobody is saving 'cursed' 91132 (91023)?!

 

[dk1]

Set being split to form 2x5-car and no DVTs.

What are they planning to use as a brake vehicle in each set if no DVT?

 

[jopsuk]

What are they planning to use as a brake vehicle in each set if no DVT?

we're a bit off topic here, but a loco on either end- rear loco, not powering, acts as brake vehicle. For the time they'll be using this set up (ie until the first new sets arrive) it's easier than converting the DVTs to work with the locos (I'm guessing 68s?)

 

[Hairy Bear]

we're a bit off topic here, but a loco on either end- rear loco, not powering, acts as brake vehicle. For the time they'll be using this set up (ie until the first new sets arrive) it's easier than converting the DVTs to work with the locos (I'm guessing 68s?)

Well that's alright then. Put any bikes on the roof and the Train manager can sit on the floor next to Jeremy .....

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Errr..... no thanks!!!! XD

Although the two DRS mk3 DVTs are currently in Barrow Hill receiving activation work so there may be a possibility yet. After all, we are supposed to be running 4 additional NCL-MIA services from december yet there has been no word as to what times, with which trains and who will crew them.....

 

[Eng274]

Porterbrook had a mark 3 DVT for sale for years, did anybody buy that? Don't know what number it was.

 

[route:oxford]

Errr..... no thanks!!!! XD

Although the two DRS mk3 DVTs are currently in Barrow Hill receiving activation work so there may be a possibility yet. After all, we are supposed to be running 4 additional NCL-MIA services from december yet there has been no word as to what times, with which trains and who will crew them.....

Is that the:-

NCL-MIA

10:51 - New for December
12:51 - New for December
19:10 - Existing Service
21:55 - New for December

MIA-NCL

04:22 - Existing Service
08:06 - New for December
10:06 - New for December
12:06 - New for December
17:03 - New for December

 

[yorksrob]

Is that the:-

NCL-MIA

10:51 - New for December
12:51 - New for December
19:10 - Existing Service
21:55 - New for December

MIA-NCL

04:22 - Existing Service
08:06 - New for December
10:06 - New for December
12:06 - New for December
17:03 - New for December

Needless to say, they're at the wrong times for me.