It isn't an idea Zoe has just come up with though, using IEP on a semifast down the B&H is already in the RUS. For all anyone here knows bi-mode use on this service might already be included in the numbers ordered.
I knew the idea of the semi-fast to Exeter had to have come from somewhere 'official', because I've heard it mentioned a number of times. Didn't know it was in the RUS though, thanks. Anyway, I know the service is probablly included in number of bi-modes being ordered, what I was asking specifically was "how many bi-modes would be needed if the
only services operated by IEP bi-mode were the Costswolds ones and the semifast down the B&H" (ie. if Swansea and Cheltenham were electrified, how many fewer bi-modes would be needed and would that quantity be viable, otherwise you might need to use my 180 suggestion).
I presumed that the ECML figures were for the whole of the ECML, not just the East Coast TOC, meaning that the units would be used for London - Hull/ Sunderland etc (currently part of HT/ GC)
Interesting idea. I personally doubt that, I expect the open access operators would probablly have to order some of their own, I doubt the government would subsidise stock for open access.
It does if you're building an HST replacement which means you need enough units to cover 47 services per day. In fact the numbers work out quite nicely, if we have 35 Bi-mode units that means we have essentially 17.5 10-car sets. Assuming a few every day are down for maintenance and a few more are hot standbys, we could assume maybe 30 units are available everyday which would allow 15 10-car sets which is almost identical to the number of HSTs that EC presently have (14) and is actually more seeing as not all of those are probably available at the same time. This means that there is either some more slack being built into the ICEC fleet (which would be a good thing in my opinion) or it gives flexibility to split services north of Edinburgh down to 5-car units.
But, as I said above, why build them 5-car unless you are going to split services down to 5-car, and if you are doing that 5 coaches can be an EMU with the 5 that go on being bi-mode. Plus, as you say, a number of IC125 diagrams are under the wires all the time anyway, so they can be EMU too. 11 9-car trains (including spares) probablly would cover all the off-wires services, and the number of class 67s you'd need to handle East Coast's off-wire services as drags would be pretty small.
It was an 'essential requirement' in the ITT technical specification, so they ought to, or DfT have been ripped off again... :roll:
Doesn't look like they need to do that though, as I'll explain in a sec.
There is one thing I don't quite get with the B&H plan.
If Newbury would only receive one EMU service per hour, what is the economic benefit in electrifying there? Would the longer distance IEPs not need to stop to change to diesel power, and if yes then why couldn't they do so at Reading? Or is there something I'm missing in all of this, e.g. a plan for 2tph starting from Newbury or change of mode being possible at speed?
(An honest question, by the way.)
I thought everyone was saying there's an hourly Paddington/Reading - Newbury stopper already, and there's the Paddington - Exeter/Taunton semi-fast proposal. That's two trains per hour, and I take it the semi-fast, assuming it is a bi-mode as DaFT currently plan, would call at Newbury to change power supply (hence you don't need to change mode at speed).
I really hope that when DfT announced that PAD - Plymouth/Penzance services would remain IC125 operated that they meant
ALL such services. That should save a tidy sum on gauge clearance for IEP's 26m long vehicles to get the wires out to Swansea. Gauge clearance is also one reason why I suggested 180s on the Exeter semi-fast, as that saves guage clearance of the Reading - Westbury - Taunton route too, perhaps raising money for Cheltenham electrification to finish off any need for bi-modes beyond conversions of 22x units.