Former Grand Central HSTs now with EMT

[flyingbanana]

Hi everyone,

I read earlier on that GC intends to return its 3 HST sets to its lessor and operate an all Class 180 fleet. (http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...ng-a-uniform-approach-class-180s-replace-hsts)

Does anyone know when exactly the HSTs will be withdrawn?

 

[Mordac]

As soon as they get the 180s from GWR, presumably (plus some time for staff training if needed, although I imagine most of their staff will already sign them).

 

[PHILIPE]

I hope they go to XC and they use them 7 days a week.

 

[sprinterguy]

I don't know, but if they "will be gone by Q4 2017" then December 2017 should be the first full 180 timetable: Displaced by the end of September 2017, perhaps, which is the end of Q3 2017 if my understanding is correct. That tallies roughly with the planned acceptance dates of GWR's IEP sets, due to be accepted at the rate of one per week from 25 May 2017 onwards.

Interesting to note that Grand Central intend to operate 10-car formations on certain services: A useful capacity boost on busy services as a result of operating a homogenous fleet.

 

[swt_passenger]

I hope they go to XC and they use them 7 days a week.

£10 says they won't.

We should bear in mind that the linked article above is from 2014, so dates in there will have been as accurate as was assumed at that time. However the change to a '180 only' fleet has been in the background for a few years, it was explicitly stated in their various recent track access agreements for these routes.

AIUI the lease of the GWR 5 is with GC from the end of this month, and the many questions about GWR stock cascades notwithstanding, one unit should be transferred imminently. Discussions in another forum suggest GWR have already reduced their daily 180 diagrams by one since the timetable change.

 

[AlterEgo]

£10 says they don't.

£20 says they will...

 

[Clarence Yard]

Word on the tracks is that WCML trips to Blackpool might be in the offing, now that the baby Pendo plan seems to be dead.

 

[Mordac]

Word on the tracks is that WCML trips to Blackpool might be in the offing, now that the baby Pendo plan seems to be dead.

I have my doubts about the feasibility of that. The ORR approval of the plan was predicated on them using tilting stock so as not to get in the way of VTWC services. If they did a turnaround on that, it might cost them the paths.

 

[class26]

Word on the tracks is that WCML trips to Blackpool might be in the offing, now that the baby Pendo plan seems to be dead.

But I thought everything on the fast lines of the WCML HAD to have tilt ?

 

[317 forever]

This could be a good opportunity to refurbish all Grand Central class 180 units to their oen spec.

 

[swt_passenger]

But I thought everything on the fast lines of the WCML HAD to have tilt ?

Not so. There's the LM 350s for a start...

 

[61653 HTAFC]

This could be a good opportunity to refurbish all Grand Central class 180 units to their oen spec.

They haven't even refreshed the ones they've had for years, other than in 1st class... :roll:

 

[Clarence Yard]

I have my doubts about the feasibility of that. The ORR approval of the plan was predicated on them using tilting stock so as not to get in the way of VTWC services. If they did a turnaround on that, it might cost them the paths.

So did I until I read their TAA which says they can get contingent rights if they use any other stock type that is cleared in the SA.

And then the clause that says their rights fall away if they don't operate by 1700 on the PCD 2018.

Desperate measures?

 

[Crossover]

But I thought everything on the fast lines of the WCML HAD to have tilt ?

They don't have to have tilt, but without it, a service is limited to non-enhanced (non-EPS) speeds, which means a maximum speed of 110mph vice 125mph, with other lower limits elsewhere

 

[47271]

When it happens that'll be me travelling between London and Sunderland on VTEC. I can't take the terrible vibration at speed on 180s.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

They don't have to have tilt, but without it, a service is limited to non-enhanced (non-EPS) speeds, which means a maximum speed of 110mph vice 125mph, with other lower limits elsewhere

It will cost them 15 minutes Euston-Preston.
If they run in the xx33 path at 110mph it will impact the following xx40 Manchester Pendo (non-stop to Crewe) unless recessed somewhere.

 

[43096]

Hi everyone,



I read earlier on that GC intends to return its 3 HST sets to its lessor and operate an all Class 180 fleet. (http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...ng-a-uniform-approach-class-180s-replace-hsts)



Does anyone know when exactly the HSTs will be withdrawn?

GWR are due to hand back their 180s late next year. However, that assumes IEP is introduced as scheduled in the summer, which there is doubt over currently.

There is also the issue that part of the GW HST fleet is committed to ScotRail, again with hard deadlines.

In short, it's not possible to say currently when GC HSTs finish - the situation is an utter mess at present.

 

[Steve14]

GWR are due to hand back their 180s late next year. However, that assumes IEP is introduced as scheduled in the summer, which there is doubt over currently.

There is also the issue that part of the GW HST fleet is committed to ScotRail, again with hard deadlines.

In short, it's not possible to say currently when GC HSTs finish - the situation is an utter mess at present.

Given the fact that they leave next year, their use is proving to be useful during peak times, perhaps a swap? The GC HSTs don't require any training to be worked on and they could provide that capacity boost.

 

[JN114]

Given the fact that they leave next year, their use is proving to be useful during peak times, perhaps a swap? The GC HSTs don't require any training to be worked on and they could provide that capacity boost.

Actually - a lot of GWR Class 180 work is by London Thames Valley drivers and Guards; many of whom don't sign HSTs. It's the principle reason why Turbos generally cover 180 unavailability, not HSTs.

 

[Steve14]

Actually - a lot of GWR Class 180 work is by London Thames Valley drivers and Guards; many of whom don't sign HSTs. It's the principle reason why Turbos generally cover 180 unavailability, not HSTs.

Understandable, but if they require those GWR 180s to phase out their HSTs, maybe those drivers and guards can be trained on existing GWR HSTs and those GC ones can do the thames valley run, that will then allow all of the drivers and guards to then work on a uniform high speed fleet until the 800s arrive. Easier said then done I know but logically makes sense.

 

[swt_passenger]

Understandable, but if they require those GWR 180s to phase out their HSTs, maybe those drivers and guards can be trained on existing GWR HSTs and those GC ones can do the thames valley run, that will then allow all of the drivers and guards to then work on a uniform high speed fleet until the 800s arrive. Easier said then done I know but logically makes sense.

It would mean the TOC and TU's reorganising from the current 3 parts with 3 separate pay and condition agreements. Not to mention separate compensation deals for passengers Still unlikely anyone will rock the boat that much, twelve years after Thames Trains and ten after FGW Link...

 

[JN114]

Understandable, but if they require those GWR 180s to phase out their HSTs, maybe those drivers and guards can be trained on existing GWR HSTs and those GC ones can do the thames valley run, that will then allow all of the drivers and guards to then work on a uniform high speed fleet until the 800s arrive. Easier said then done I know but logically makes sense.

GC HSTs aren't fitted with ATP, so that would need doing. Given the massive stock training regime going on, what with 387s being introduced and IEPs on the horizon, I can't see the time and money being invested training drivers on stock that will be withdrawn in the next couple of years. Also I don't think GC HSTs are fitted with SDO, which is against GW's station safety case. So that would need doing as well.

Given that both sides seem quite content with GW holding on to the 180s until stock can be released, maybe we should trust in the clever and highly paid people that make these decisions.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Are the GC HSTs coaches LSL or SSL bogies?

 

[yorksrob]

Understandable, but if they require those GWR 180s to phase out their HSTs, maybe those drivers and guards can be trained on existing GWR HSTs and those GC ones can do the thames valley run, that will then allow all of the drivers and guards to then work on a uniform high speed fleet until the 800s arrive. Easier said then done I know but logically makes sense.

Let FGW hang on to their 180's for a bit longer. There's no hurry to replace the GC HST's by end of 2017. Why change everything around before the new trains are in place when you don't need the upheaval.

 

[43096]

Let FGW hang on to their 180's for a bit longer. There's no hurry to replace the GC HST's by end of 2017. Why change everything around before the new trains are in place when you don't need the upheaval.

You don't need the cost either - the railway costs too much to run as it is!

 

[swt_passenger]

Are the GC HSTs coaches LSL or SSL bogies?

Why does it matter? There's practically zero chance of them finding their way onto the SR.

 

[DarloRich]

Not so. There's the LM 350s for a start...

No tilt = max 110 mph = inefficient path usage
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't know, but if they "will be gone by Q4 2017" then December 2017 should be the first full 180 timetable: Displaced by the end of September 2017, perhaps, which is the end of Q3 2017 if my understanding is correct. That tallies roughly with the planned acceptance dates of GWR's IEP sets, due to be accepted at the rate of one per week from 25 May 2017 onwards.

Agreed IEP introduction dates drive the release dates. End Dec 17 seems a good target for the switch over.

 

[swt_passenger]

No tilt = max 110 mph = inefficient path usage

I know that, but my answer was in response to the proposition that all WCML stock must be 125 mph capable.

 

[Chester1]

No tilt = max 110 mph = inefficient path usage

Its odd that Arriva put so much effort into obtaining the paths to then fail to obtain tilting stock, which was always a prerequisite. The only alternative tilting option I can think of is a messy swap between Grand Central and Cross Country, which I doubt NR and DfT would allow. New stock could be bought for Cross Country who could cascade 5-6 Voyagers (pressuming the tilting gear is still in storage and can be reinstalled). The time difference with no stops between Crewe and London between a Voyager and a Pendolino is about 5.5 minutes (was discussed in detail a while back). That would only leave a 90 second window between the xx33 and xx40 paths between London and Crewe but slight alterations to the time table could create a sufficient gap. Grand Central could undertake a long overdue upgrade of tbe Cross Country Voyagers before switching them.

 

[adrock1976]

Are the GC HSTs coaches LSL or SSL bogies?

Could these acronyms please be translated into English?

Furthermore, I have always believed that one of the forum rules documented somewhere mentions not to use acronyms or abbreviations without first saying what they mean. I would like to note that this is not intended as a rant.