GWR Class 800

[TheKnightWho]

...and of course all those container train paths - which as we know from the local RUS already prevent the second XC service being extended to Southampton.

Well exactly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There would be no logic in 'firing up the MTUs' when 25kV AC OHLE is available. However, third rail is much more problematic due to the power supply issues present across much of the network. It seems that every major new rolling stock procurement exercise in the former NSE area requires yet more power supply upgrades, since the third rail power supply network constantly runs at capacity. If it were possible that the trains didn't need any form of diesel power at all, such as in the case of future Manchester-South Coast via Birmingham or East-West services, then there's a clear case to be made for fitting third rail shoes despite the power supply issues. If, however, you would be using a fleet of trains otherwise still equipped with enough diesel power to run happily along the relatively short extent of their routes fitted with third rail then it's not going to be that clear.

The chance of Voyagers or Meridians replacing the HSTs once they're done with ScotRail duties is tiny. The HSTs will last until the line to Aberdeen is electrified at the very least, and it wouldn't be long after that Inverness would be done as well. With that, there's no need for diesel traction whatsoever on these routes. The only remaining sticking point is Aberdeen-Inverness but with the increased passenger numbers due to the HSTs, and a need to electrify whatever suburban routes there would be around Aberdeen, I don't think it unlikely that the long term solution there would be wires as well. The Voyagers and Meridians will face the scrapheap well before stock of a similar age, simply because they are no longer fit for purpose.

I'm inclined to agree with you on the power supply issue, but remember that the DfT and NR will be looking at their fixed costs as well as their variable costs.

Power supply upgrades are a fixed cost. Once they're done they're done. Therefore of course it's a big capital outlay at the beginning, but then requires only maintenance to keep it going. That brings us onto...

Variable costs. The distance from Basingstoke to Bournemouth is around 60 miles, which is not particularly insignificant. The costs of running diesel engines down that route would obviously have a larger cost/mile (read: larger variable cost) than the cost of running the trains on a 3rd rail for that distance. NR would have to make the call as to whether the fixed cost of new power supplies plus maintenance would, over a long period, be outweighed by the cost of using engines over 3rd rail for that period.

Obviously there other costs here and there I'm not taking into account, but you see my ultimate point: which is cheaper entirely depends on how long NR expect them to be making use of that route without OHLE.

Regarding the HSTs over the 22xs: remember that the Scottish Parliament selected HSTs because they were the only trains being released that were viable. Assuming Scotland doesn't opt for entirely new trains (which would no doubt be IEPs or a derivative like the Devon/Cornwall services will get), they're more likely to opt for Voyagers/Meridians if they're up for grabs, which they may well be from XC and EMT. Better performance and cheaper to run: what's not to like? Enthusiasts not liking underfloor engines is irrelevant, really.

 

[jimm]

Well exactly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I'm inclined to agree with you on the power supply issue, but remember that the DfT and NR will be looking at their fixed costs as well as their variable costs.

Power supply upgrades are a fixed cost. Once they're done they're done. Therefore of course it's a big capital outlay at the beginning, but then requires only maintenance to keep it going. That brings us onto...

Variable costs. The distance from Basingstoke to Bournemouth is around 60 miles, which is not particularly insignificant. The costs of running diesel engines down that route would obviously have a larger cost/mile (read: larger variable cost) than the cost of running the trains on a 3rd rail for that distance. NR would have to make the call as to whether the fixed cost of new power supplies plus maintenance would, over a long period, be outweighed by the cost of using engines over 3rd rail for that period.

Obviously there other costs here and there I'm not taking into account, but you see my ultimate point: which is cheaper entirely depends on how long NR expect them to be making use of that route without OHLE.

Regarding the HSTs over the 22xs: remember that the Scottish Parliament selected HSTs because they were the only trains being released that were viable. Assuming Scotland doesn't opt for entirely new trains (which would no doubt be IEPs or a derivative like the Devon/Cornwall services will get), they're more likely to opt for Voyagers/Meridians if they're up for grabs, which they may well be from XC and EMT. Better performance and cheaper to run: what's not to like? Enthusiasts not liking underfloor engines is irrelevant, really.

It's quite clear from the electric spine proposal that if there is going to be any question of spending lots of money on SWML power supplies then that money will most likely be invested in 25kv overhead, in order that you can get electric-powered freight to and from Southampton docks.

Just because it is technically feasible to build a tri-mode - the French have some regional units that can run on diesel, 25kv or 1,500v DC overhead - does not mean that you should do it.

If 25kv wires spread as expected over the next decade, I would be surprised if future XC rolling stock is all built as a pretty similar go-anywhere fleet like the 220s/221s, given that the bulk of the network and its busiest sections will be wired. The bulk of a new fleet would presumably be 25kv only, with bi-modes only potentially coming into play once all possible life has been wrung out of 22x type trains on the services that extend beyond the wires - unless someone in power does suddenly decide to go in for a 'Voyagers into razor blades' scrapping frenzy... though that might upset the leasing companies.

 

[HSTEd]

Fairly sure the 25kV electric spine stuff is dead as the dodo.
Especially since Network Rails cost estimates for overhead wiring have been shown to be absolute junk.

 

[jimm]

Fairly sure the 25kV electric spine stuff is dead as the dodo.
Especially since Network Rails cost estimates for overhead wiring have been shown to be absolute junk.

Given that much of the electric spine actually involves connecting up bits of the network that are currently wired, are being wired, or will be wired, thus making those schemes more useful and cost-effective by spreading the benefits further, it's probably going to happen sooner rather than later.

Network Rail might even be better at doing its sums by then, after actually having some experience of carrying out major electrification schemes, as opposed to it, Railtrack or BR not having done any such thing since the early 1990s.

In the case of the SWML, the reason for the inclusion of Basingstok-Southampton in the spine concept was supposed to be that irrespective of the more recent upgrades for the 44s and 450s, a lot of the kit installed in the 1960s for the Bournemouth electrification will need renewing sooner rather than later. Unless someone knows different, I assume that is still the case.

And if it doesn't happen, then there will need to be yet another generation of freight diesels running around for many miles under the wires, due to assorted gaps in electrified routes, once the 66s are worn out, which doesn't strike me as being a great idea.

 

[Class 170101]

Is it not possible to run IEP on both systems are the same time?

3rd Rail power upto the limit the power infrastructure will take and diesel power to top up?

Secondly I thought 3rd Rail was able to take regenerative braking power back into the rails now surely this must help with power consumption.

Thirdly. Diesel is subject to the whims of the oil markets and we have seen how volatile these have been in recent years so being able to reduce diesel consumption on the railway must be a good thing.

Finally why couldn't the IEP be built to use the 1500 DC wires of the Tyne and Wear (rather than just pass under them) for Sunderland services and diversions thus reducing diesel consumption also - again diesel top up if power consumption is limited.

 

[TheKnightWho]

It's quite clear from the electric spine proposal that if there is going to be any question of spending lots of money on SWML power supplies then that money will most likely be invested in 25kv overhead, in order that you can get electric-powered freight to and from Southampton docks.

Just because it is technically feasible to build a tri-mode - the French have some regional units that can run on diesel, 25kv or 1,500v DC overhead - does not mean that you should do it.

If 25kv wires spread as expected over the next decade, I would be surprised if future XC rolling stock is all built as a pretty similar go-anywhere fleet like the 220s/221s, given that the bulk of the network and its busiest sections will be wired. The bulk of a new fleet would presumably be 25kv only, with bi-modes only potentially coming into play once all possible life has been wrung out of 22x type trains on the services that extend beyond the wires - unless someone in power does suddenly decide to go in for a 'Voyagers into razor blades' scrapping frenzy... though that might upset the leasing companies.

You have literally just gone "it is clearly more expensive - it's obviously stupid". There's no substance to what you've said, and yet you're condescending, derisive and factually lacking. It's getting a bit tiring. I remember you being similarly pessimistic about the bimodes in the first place. It seems you just don't like traction having more than power source, as far as I can tell.

Bimodes are the way forward in the interim, and have of course been fitted out so that the diesel engines can be removed at a later date, just as the Eurostars were designed so their shoes could be removed. As bimode technology with electric and diesel has now been proven possible and deemed viable, the small expense for including a 3rd rail shoe would not be too difficult. As has been raised, it's the power supply issues that seem the most problematic.

OHLE will come on the SWML, but I wouldn't expect to see it anytime soon. Don't presume that it's just around the corner, and that's still aside from the fact that it's only Basingstoke to Southampton anyway. That completely ignores services to Bournemouth and Guildford, and any potential extra services.

 

[kkong]

Better performance and cheaper to run: what's not to like? Enthusiasts not liking underfloor engines is irrelevant, really.

Voyagers would not meet the ScotRail ITT requirements for Inter-City stock (e.g. passenger facilities) in their current configuration.

 

[jimm]

You have literally just gone "it is clearly more expensive - it's obviously stupid". There's no substance to what you've said, and yet you're condescending, derisive and factually lacking. It's getting a bit tiring. I remember you being similarly pessimistic about the bimodes in the first place. It seems you just don't like traction having more than power source, as far as I can tell.

Bimodes are the way forward in the interim, and have of course been fitted out so that the diesel engines can be removed at a later date, just as the Eurostars were designed so their shoes could be removed. As bimode technology with electric and diesel has now been proven possible and deemed viable, the small expense for including a 3rd rail shoe would not be too difficult. As has been raised, it's the power supply issues that seem the most problematic.

OHLE will come on the SWML, but I wouldn't expect to see it anytime soon. Don't presume that it's just around the corner, and that's still aside from the fact that it's only Basingstoke to Southampton anyway. That completely ignores services to Bournemouth and Guildford, and any potential extra services.

Think you must be confusing me with someone else - I have never been pessimistic about bimodes, just realistic - in that there are lines off the core GWML and ECML routes that are not going to be wired in a hurry but with busy through services to and from London, so the bimodes are the best way to maintain those through services until such time as electrification can spread.

What I have been clear about is that I am no fan of the 'they should just electrify everything now so you don't need bimodes' attitude, as that's cloud-cuckoo land stuff, nor of building a micro-fleet of bespoke express diesel locos to drag electric units around off the wires.

I said nothing about how expensive anything might be, because I have no idea what the various possibilities might cost - do you? How do you know fitting third rail shoes would be a 'small expense'? They and the associated additional electrical kit would also need to be maintained, which all adds to long-term costs.

Did I say I presumed 25kv on the South West Main Line was 'just around the corner'?

On the contrary, I said I expected Voyagers to be around on XC for a good while yet, which would include services to and from the South Coast - which might bring us to a point in time where both they and the third-rail kit are life-expired, thus bringing about a happy - and cost-effective - coincidence where a change of both rolling stock and power supply can happen together and benefit all those Freightliners to and from the docks at the same time - and potentially allow speeds above 100mph for 25kv-fitted SWT trains as well, so cutting London-Southampton journey times too, which can never happen so long as the route is stuck with third rail.

This scenario would then avoid any need to buy bi-mode or tri-mode trains for a short section of third rail operation - and however condescending you might find it, the fact remains that in the context of journeys all the way to and from Manchester and Yorkshire, the leg south of Reading is a short one.

Just because the only section of the SWML talked about for 25kv so far, in the context of the electric spine, is Basingstoke-Southampton, does not mean you could not carry it further east or west - the kit from Southampton to Bournemouth is of the same vintage as Basingstoke-Southampton.

The current XC service to and from Guildford is a token gesture, so frankly not relevant, and while XC diversions go that way on occasion, no one is going to go to the expense of fitting complex and expensive express trains to work on 750v just for diversions. Whereas a 25kv/diesel bi-mode could be diverted that way, just the same as it could work on diesel south of Basingstoke, day in, day out.

But my preference would simply be to reach the point where XC could make the switch from Voyagers straight to 25kv trains wherever possible, rather than needing many bi-modes at all, except perhaps for the West Country, depending on the progress of future wiring plans there.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Think you must be confusing me with someone else - I have never been pessimistic about bimodes, just realistic - in that there are lines off the core GWML and ECML routes that are not going to be wired in a hurry but with busy through services to and from London, so the bimodes are the best way to maintain those through services until such time as electrification can spread.

What I have been clear about is that I am no fan of the 'they should just electrify everything now so you don't need bimodes' attitude, as that's cloud-cuckoo land stuff, nor of building a micro-fleet of bespoke express diesel locos to drag electric units around off the wires.

I said nothing about how expensive anything might be, because I have no idea what the various possibilities might cost - do you? How do you know fitting third rail shoes would be a 'small expense'? They and the associated additional electrical kit would also need to be maintained, which all adds to long-term costs.

Did I say I presumed 25kv on the South West Main Line was 'just around the corner'?

On the contrary, I said I expected Voyagers to be around on XC for a good while yet, which would include services to and from the South Coast - which might bring us to a point in time where both they and the third-rail kit are life-expired, thus bringing about a happy - and cost-effective - coincidence where a change of both rolling stock and power supply can happen together and benefit all those Freightliners to and from the docks at the same time - and potentially allow speeds above 100mph for 25kv-fitted SWT trains as well, so cutting London-Southampton journey times too, which can never happen so long as the route is stuck with third rail.

This scenario would then avoid any need to buy bi-mode or tri-mode trains for a short section of third rail operation - and however condescending you might find it, the fact remains that in the context of journeys all the way to and from Manchester and Yorkshire, the leg south of Reading is a short one.

Just because the only section of the SWML talked about for 25kv so far, in the context of the electric spine, is Basingstoke-Southampton, does not mean you could not carry it further east or west - the kit from Southampton to Bournemouth is of the same vintage as Basingstoke-Southampton.

The current XC service to and from Guildford is a token gesture, so frankly not relevant, and while XC diversions go that way on occasion, no one is going to go to the expense of fitting complex and expensive express trains to work on 750v just for diversions. Whereas a 25kv/diesel bi-mode could be diverted that way, just the same as it could work on diesel south of Basingstoke, day in, day out.

But my preference would simply be to reach the point where XC could make the switch from Voyagers straight to 25kv trains wherever possible, rather than needing many bi-modes at all, except perhaps for the West Country, depending on the progress of future wiring plans there.

But your entire argument is based on XC using Voyagers for their entire design life, which is certainly not a given. Frontline service intercity trains are rarely posted for more than 20-25 years or so on primary services before being moved to secondary routes. This has certainly been the case on the ECML and WCML, and with XC services becoming more popular (certainly on the Newcastle-Reading/Bristol and Manchester-Southampton core corridors), I would expect to see new stock relatively soon. Whilst I doubt that Voyagers would be scrapped before they're at least 30 years old, I find it unlikely that they'll be on anything other than secondary routes by that point, possibly with a powerpack switched off or so.

This is especially true when we have a new class of train which can run on diesel and electric power, that's "built" in Britain and is being ordered in bulk. It would be important to remember that. I wouldn't be expecting any new stock if it weren't for the possibility of getting something off the shelf (now the uprated Devon/Cornwall versions have been developed), or with some modifications. The fact that the class 395 exists shows the AT300 can run with 3rd rail shoes, so it's not completely out of this world to suggest that an IEP might be able to. Of course, it might conflict with the diesel engines, but it's not as though I'm envisioning a Pendolino running on 3rd rail, or some other class that was never designed with that in mind at any stage in development.

On a side point, I think 125mph on the SWML is a fantasy even after OHLE, unless all commuter trains were replaced with 125mph stock. Even if they were, you'd have fewer paths due to the necessary resignalling until in-cab moving block signalling came along. Not saying that it will never happen, but certainly not in even the medium-term!

 

[jopsuk]

you'd need to add tracks to regain capacity.

 

[jimm]

But your entire argument is based on XC using Voyagers for their entire design life, which is certainly not a given. Frontline service intercity trains are rarely posted for more than 20-25 years or so on primary services before being moved to secondary routes. This has certainly been the case on the ECML and WCML, and with XC services becoming more popular (certainly on the Newcastle-Reading/Bristol and Manchester-Southampton core corridors), I would expect to see new stock relatively soon. Whilst I doubt that Voyagers would be scrapped before they're at least 30 years old, I find it unlikely that they'll be on anything other than secondary routes by that point, possibly with a powerpack switched off or so.

This is especially true when we have a new class of train which can run on diesel and electric power, that's "built" in Britain and is being ordered in bulk. It would be important to remember that. I wouldn't be expecting any new stock if it weren't for the possibility of getting something off the shelf (now the uprated Devon/Cornwall versions have been developed), or with some modifications. The fact that the class 395 exists shows the AT300 can run with 3rd rail shoes, so it's not completely out of this world to suggest that an IEP might be able to. Of course, it might conflict with the diesel engines, but it's not as though I'm envisioning a Pendolino running on 3rd rail, or some other class that was never designed with that in mind at any stage in development.

On a side point, I think 125mph on the SWML is a fantasy even after OHLE, unless all commuter trains were replaced with 125mph stock. Even if they were, you'd have fewer paths due to the necessary resignalling until in-cab moving block signalling came along. Not saying that it will never happen, but certainly not in even the medium-term!

Agreed, XC could do with some more stock, but it is not going to get any right now and the current franchise agreement runs until November 2019, so nothing will happen on the rolling stock front there until then with all that is going on elsewhere in the meantime.

And which routes are currently scheduled to go electric just a month after that? London-Derby/Nottingham, which will release a whole lot of Meridians with lots of life left in them for other uses.

There is still no commitment to electrification from Birmingham towards Derby, Leicester, Bristol and Cardiff and until there is, whoever is running XC will probably not want to commit to acquiring any sort of 25kv-capable rolling stock while such key legs of the network still need diesel power for at least a few years into the 2020s.

My entire argument is not based on using Voyagers for their entire design life - never mind that I could point out that FGW and EC's HSTs are already a country mile beyond theirs, the 225s will have done 30 years when they are displaced, and many HSTs will carry on even longer in Scotland - it is that I see no need whatever to fit 750v DC kit to any new XC trains.

Such equipment would be no use at all anywhere else that such trains will need an alternative to 25kv power, most likely Devon and Cornwall, where it will have to be diesel engines, which can perfectly well also be used south of Basingstoke if third rail remains in place - just the same as the Voyagers do now and every type of XC train has since the 1960s. I would argue that the cost of fitting and maintaining DC equipment for what is, as I keep pointing out, a small fragment of the overall mileage covered by XC, would be a waste of money when any new trains, should they be built, would already have a suitable means of propulsion off 25kv.

On the SWML, I wouldn't envisage 125mph east of Basingstoke for a very long time, if that's what you're worried about, as taking 25kv towards London is a whole different matter from converting Basingstoke-Southampton, where the line is laid out for fast running as far as Eastleigh.

Never mind that when people in Southampton and Bournemouth see the improvements in services to other key centres across the country over the next few years, they will probably start asking why the fastest journey times on their route to London are still the same as they were in 1967, when the REPs and TCs entered service, at the 70-minute mark. And that can never change so long as third-rail power is being used.

 

[The Ham]

Although there would be a cost implication for having 3rd rail caperbility would be quite high if fitted to the whole of the XC fleet, it would be possible to have a dedicated fleet which was allocated to run south coast services. Yes it would need to be bigger than a fleet run by a TOC which only ran those services, but not the whole XC fleet by any stretch.

The prefrance would be send out on services non 3rd rail units which weren't going near 3rd rail areas. However such an issue is a fair way off just yet as most XC services would still need to run away from wires or 3rd railways for some time yet.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Although there would be a cost implication for having 3rd rail caperbility would be quite high if fitted to the whole of the XC fleet, it would be possible to have a dedicated fleet which was allocated to run south coast services. Yes it would need to be bigger than a fleet run by a TOC which only ran those services, but not the whole XC fleet by any stretch.

The prefrance would be send out on services non 3rd rail units which weren't going near 3rd rail areas. However such an issue is a fair way off just yet as most XC services would still need to run away from wires or 3rd railways for some time yet.

This.

I'm obviously not suggesting the entire XC fleet gets kitted out with 3rd rail shoes. I also don't understand why you are assuming it'll be really expensive and that they should just run on diesel, when obviously costs and benefits should be compared. Otherwise saying "just run on diesel" is an argument you could use against all electrification full-stop.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Agreed, XC could do with some more stock, but it is not going to get any right now and the current franchise agreement runs until November 2019, so nothing will happen on the rolling stock front there until then with all that is going on elsewhere in the meantime.

And which routes are currently scheduled to go electric just a month after that? London-Derby/Nottingham, which will release a whole lot of Meridians with lots of life left in them for other uses.

There is still no commitment to electrification from Birmingham towards Derby, Leicester, Bristol and Cardiff and until there is, whoever is running XC will probably not want to commit to acquiring any sort of 25kv-capable rolling stock while such key legs of the network still need diesel power for at least a few years into the 2020s.

My entire argument is not based on using Voyagers for their entire design life - never mind that I could point out that FGW and EC's HSTs are already a country mile beyond theirs, the 225s will have done 30 years when they are displaced, and many HSTs will carry on even longer in Scotland - it is that I see no need whatever to fit 750v DC kit to any new XC trains.

Such equipment would be no use at all anywhere else that such trains will need an alternative to 25kv power, most likely Devon and Cornwall, where it will have to be diesel engines, which can perfectly well also be used south of Basingstoke if third rail remains in place - just the same as the Voyagers do now and every type of XC train has since the 1960s. I would argue that the cost of fitting and maintaining DC equipment for what is, as I keep pointing out, a small fragment of the overall mileage covered by XC, would be a waste of money when any new trains, should they be built, would already have a suitable means of propulsion off 25kv.

On the SWML, I wouldn't envisage 125mph east of Basingstoke for a very long time, if that's what you're worried about, as taking 25kv towards London is a whole different matter from converting Basingstoke-Southampton, where the line is laid out for fast running as far as Eastleigh.

Never mind that when people in Southampton and Bournemouth see the improvements in services to other key centres across the country over the next few years, they will probably start asking why the fastest journey times on their route to London are still the same as they were in 1967, when the REPs and TCs entered service, at the 70-minute mark. And that can never change so long as third-rail power is being used.

Most of this post is an argument that could well be used against bimodes on XC, to be honest, when out of all TOCs they could do with them the most. I'm really not sure what else to say to you, as it doesn't look like you're ever going to be convinced on this point. Literally arguing that they wouldn't want any OHLE capable stock because key parts of the journey are diesel operated seems to utterly miss the point: bimodes aren't just for those last-mile extensions. If a XC IEP (or whatever) could run Newcastle-Derby on the wires with most of the rest of the journey on diesel that's a damn sight better than running it all on diesel. Obviously. Even if it could run less than that, that's still a big improvement over all-diesel operation.

The reason that I forsee IEPs replacing diesel-only stock is exactly because of the savings that bimodes provide, which they will want to have as soon as possible. You've also totally ignored the point about Voyagers (and yes, Meridians) being able to be run on secondary services such as Manchester-Holyhead etc. with an engine switched off. Those trains don't have to go to waste if they're replaced by IEPs.

(You also totally missed my point about frontline service. The class 90s managed 20 years, the 91s just about 30, the ECML HSTs haven't been on frontline service for a long time etc.)

 

[47802]

Agreed, XC could do with some more stock, but it is not going to get any right now and the current franchise agreement runs until November 2019, so nothing will happen on the rolling stock front there until then with all that is going on elsewhere in the meantime.

And which routes are currently scheduled to go electric just a month after that? London-Derby/Nottingham, which will release a whole lot of Meridians with lots of life left in them for other uses.

There is still no commitment to electrification from Birmingham towards Derby, Leicester, Bristol and Cardiff and until there is, whoever is running XC will probably not want to commit to acquiring any sort of 25kv-capable rolling stock while such key legs of the network still need diesel power for at least a few years into the 2020s.

My entire argument is not based on using Voyagers for their entire design life - never mind that I could point out that FGW and EC's HSTs are already a country mile beyond theirs, the 225s will have done 30 years when they are displaced, and many HSTs will carry on even longer in Scotland - it is that I see no need whatever to fit 750v DC kit to any new XC trains.

Such equipment would be no use at all anywhere else that such trains will need an alternative to 25kv power, most likely Devon and Cornwall, where it will have to be diesel engines, which can perfectly well also be used south of Basingstoke if third rail remains in place - just the same as the Voyagers do now and every type of XC train has since the 1960s. I would argue that the cost of fitting and maintaining DC equipment for what is, as I keep pointing out, a small fragment of the overall mileage covered by XC, would be a waste of money when any new trains, should they be built, would already have a suitable means of propulsion off 25kv.

On the SWML, I wouldn't envisage 125mph east of Basingstoke for a very long time, if that's what you're worried about, as taking 25kv towards London is a whole different matter from converting Basingstoke-Southampton, where the line is laid out for fast running as far as Eastleigh.

Never mind that when people in Southampton and Bournemouth see the improvements in services to other key centres across the country over the next few years, they will probably start asking why the fastest journey times on their route to London are still the same as they were in 1967, when the REPs and TCs entered service, at the 70-minute mark. And that can never change so long as third-rail power is being used.

Well clearly something will have to be done regarding XC HST's and 2020 compliance and either they are made compliant or replaced before the new franchise. Your assertion that there will loads of 222's available at the end of 2019 is questionable clearly the priority will be to eliminate MML HST's once the electrics get to Nottingham, while I expect a substancial number of 222's are retained until the electrics get to Sheffield.

If XC were to get some AT300's Diesel/Electrics then I agree there is probably little point in having third rail as well, on the other hand if and when we can get from the North West to the South Coast with Dual Voltage emu then that might make sense.

 

[po8crg]

The 395s run either on HS1 which has huge clearances or on third-rail, so they have no clearance issues with the shoes.

An XC 800 with shoes would run over a lot of track which would need clearing for third-rail shoes, which would add to the cost of IEP gauge clearance,

 

[The Ham]

This.

I'm obviously not suggesting the entire XC fleet gets kitted out with 3rd rail shoes. I also don't understand why you are assuming it'll be really expensive and that they should just run on diesel, when obviously costs and benefits should be compared. Otherwise saying "just run on diesel" is an argument you could use against all electrification full-stop.

I agree with you, my post was in response to those who were saying that it would be too costly to have 3rd rail kit on all the XC trains.

 

[HSTEd]

An XC 800 with shoes would run over a lot of track which would need clearing for third-rail shoes, which would add to the cost of IEP gauge clearance,

Or they could just do what all modern dual voltage units do, and retract the shoes

 

[TheKnightWho]

I agree with you, my post was in response to those who were saying that it would be too costly to have 3rd rail kit on all the XC trains.

Sorry - should have made it clearer: I was holding your post up as an example, with the rest of that bit being aimed at jimm. Wasn't disagreeing with you!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Or they could just do what all modern dual voltage units do, and retract the shoes

Not sure if retractable shoes are possible on an AT300. Quite possibly they are, but the question in all of this is whether shoes and underfloor diesels are viable on the same train. Retracting them would be one step harder again, as it would require even more underfloor space.

 

[Domh245]

The 395s certainly look to have retractable shoes, and from casual observation, it seems that the shoes retract into the shoebeam assembly, which is what would complicate the gauge clearance, but again, from glancing at it, the shoebeam does sit underneath the yaw damper, and might well be within the clearance of the bogie as a solid cuboid. Of course, this all hinges on whether or not the 800s use the same bogie design as the 395s.

As for the the viability of a tri-modal unit, it should be simple enough to do (they've managed to do 3-voltage trains in europe) but it would depend on what voltage they use for the bus line to power everything. Even if it isn't a 750V bus, you could alter the voltage with an inverter/transformer/rectifier setup, but that would be quite inefficient.

 

[swt_passenger]

Retracting them would be one step harder again, as it would require even more underfloor space.

The retractable shoe mechanism is all fitted on the underside of the bogie, between the wheels, as the shoe gear must be unsprung.

It should have absolutely no bearing on underfloor space generally.

 

[TheKnightWho]

The retractable shoe mechanism is all fitted on the underside of the bogie, between the wheels, as the shoe gear must be unsprung.

It should have absolutely no bearing on underfloor space generally.

Then, frankly, this shouldn't be too much of an effort to install.

Considering the relatively low number of XC services per hour on 3rd rail territory, I'm unconvinced that it would need much (if any) power supply upgrades either, but I'm happy to be corrected on that one.

 

[jimm]

Well clearly something will have to be done regarding XC HST's and 2020 compliance and either they are made compliant or replaced before the new franchise. Your assertion that there will loads of 222's available at the end of 2019 is questionable clearly the priority will be to eliminate MML HST's once the electrics get to Nottingham, while I expect a substancial number of 222's are retained until the electrics get to Sheffield.

If XC were to get some AT300's Diesel/Electrics then I agree there is probably little point in having third rail as well, on the other hand if and when we can get from the North West to the South Coast with Dual Voltage emu then that might make sense.

The electrics are due to get to Sheffield by December 2020, and there are all of eight daily diagrams for the EMT HSTs at the moment which will need to be covered by 222s for that year, so I think it's fair to assume a good number of 222s will become available to other operators as of December 2019, with rest on offer just 12 months later. Replacement of XCs HSTs being an obvious way to use some of them, as I can't see any sign of a rush to make those 2020-compliant.

This.

I'm obviously not suggesting the entire XC fleet gets kitted out with 3rd rail shoes. I also don't understand why you are assuming it'll be really expensive and that they should just run on diesel, when obviously costs and benefits should be compared. Otherwise saying "just run on diesel" is an argument you could use against all electrification full-stop.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Most of this post is an argument that could well be used against bimodes on XC, to be honest, when out of all TOCs they could do with them the most. I'm really not sure what else to say to you, as it doesn't look like you're ever going to be convinced on this point. Literally arguing that they wouldn't want any OHLE capable stock because key parts of the journey are diesel operated seems to utterly miss the point: bimodes aren't just for those last-mile extensions. If a XC IEP (or whatever) could run Newcastle-Derby on the wires with most of the rest of the journey on diesel that's a damn sight better than running it all on diesel. Obviously. Even if it could run less than that, that's still a big improvement over all-diesel operation.

The reason that I forsee IEPs replacing diesel-only stock is exactly because of the savings that bimodes provide, which they will want to have as soon as possible. You've also totally ignored the point about Voyagers (and yes, Meridians) being able to be run on secondary services such as Manchester-Holyhead etc. with an engine switched off. Those trains don't have to go to waste if they're replaced by IEPs.

(You also totally missed my point about frontline service. The class 90s managed 20 years, the 91s just about 30, the ECML HSTs haven't been on frontline service for a long time etc.)

Taking the first point last, since when have ECML HSTs not been in frontline service? They are a quarter of the train fleet available to Virgin, so taking them out of frontline service would leave that company with a bit of a problem. The 91s will do 30 years in frontline service, which is basically their expected lifespan. Last time I looked, Liverpool-Norwich was still considered an intercity route and the Class 90s working there are hardly gently easing into retirement.

What I am saying is not an argument against bimodes on XC or XC having 25kv stock at all - what gives you that idea? What I am against is fitting 750v DC kit for use on a very short section of the XC network.

I am sure that it is technically feasible to do so but that is not a justification for actually doing it.

And buying a shedload of shiny new bimodes could be held up as a very good reason not to carry out any more electrification on XC routes for another 20 or 30 years.

Whereas what I want to see is XC moving, wherever possible, straight from diesel, in the shape of Voyagers, to 25kv-only operation.

That there is likely to be a long-term need for diesel operation to the West Country means that some bi-modes will probably be needed by XC at some point but when the oldest 220 has yet to hit its 15th birthday and the last-built 222s are just 10 years old, why on earth should there be a rush to buy bimodes?

If wiring continues in the way it seems reasonable to expect it will, then in 10 years we could well be looking at a situation where there is 25kv available on the whole core XC network except for beyond Bristol or Exeter and south of Reading - where 25kv conversion of the latter section is already a declared policy aim of the Government.

Given that prospect and the relative youth of the 22xs, it seems to me that the best thing to do is wait until we see the future direction of electrification - which should be apparent by the time the XC franchise renewal happens - so we can make informed decisions on what the next generation of stock for XC looks like - I would expect a mixed straight-electric and bimode fleet, just like those on order for GW and EC services.

What I wouldn't expect is faffing around fitting third-rail kit to some of these trains if there is a high probability that you will be able to do the entire run to Southampton or even Bournemouth on 25kv in a matter of years from their introduction, when you already have a diesel engines under the floor of some of your trains, be they IEP derivatives or 22xs, that can do the job anyway for that interim period.

If, on the other hand, converting the SWML to 25kv ends up in the 'too difficult' box then I could see some 25kv/750v dual-voltage emus being ordered. But that would mean the notion of switching Southampton docks freights to electricity - the rationale behind 25kv conversion being suggested in the first place, not XC's needs - being binned, unless you carry out an expensive boosting of the 750v DC supplies to accommodate a Class 92 or something similar.

But as soon as you get into the realms of expensive upgrades of 750v power kit, you are inevitably then going to compare that with the costs of using 25kv instead, bringing us back to the prospect of 25kv all the way to the South Coast...

 

[RobShipway]

The electrics are due to get to Sheffield by December 2020, and there are all of eight daily diagrams for the EMT HSTs at the moment which will need to be covered by 222s for that year, so I think it's fair to assume a good number of 222s will become available to other operators as of December 2019, with rest on offer just 12 months later. Replacement of XCs HSTs being an obvious way to use some of them, as I can't see any sign of a rush to make those 2020-compliant.



Taking the first point last, since when have ECML HSTs not been in frontline service? They are a quarter of the train fleet available to Virgin, so taking them out of frontline service would leave that company with a bit of a problem. The 91s will do 30 years in frontline service, which is basically their expected lifespan. Last time I looked, Liverpool-Norwich was still considered an intercity route and the Class 90s working there are hardly gently easing into retirement.

What I am saying is not an argument against bimodes on XC or XC having 25kv stock at all - what gives you that idea? What I am against is fitting 750v DC kit for use on a very short section of the XC network.

I am sure that it is technically feasible to do so but that is not a justification for actually doing it.

And buying a shedload of shiny new bimodes could be held up as a very good reason not to carry out any more electrification on XC routes for another 20 or 30 years.

Whereas what I want to see is XC moving, wherever possible, straight from diesel, in the shape of Voyagers, to 25kv-only operation.

That there is likely to be a long-term need for diesel operation to the West Country means that some bi-modes will probably be needed by XC at some point but when the oldest 220 has yet to hit its 15th birthday and the last-built 222s are just 10 years old, why on earth should there be a rush to buy bimodes?

If wiring continues in the way it seems reasonable to expect it will, then in 10 years we could well be looking at a situation where there is 25kv available on the whole core XC network except for beyond Bristol or Exeter and south of Reading - where 25kv conversion of the latter section is already a declared policy aim of the Government.

Given that prospect and the relative youth of the 22xs, it seems to me that the best thing to do is wait until we see the future direction of electrification - which should be apparent by the time the XC franchise renewal happens - so we can make informed decisions on what the next generation of stock for XC looks like - I would expect a mixed straight-electric and bimode fleet, just like those on order for GW and EC services.

What I wouldn't expect is faffing around fitting third-rail kit to some of these trains if there is a high probability that you will be able to do the entire run to Southampton or even Bournemouth on 25kv in a matter of years from their introduction, when you already have a diesel engines under the floor of some of your trains, be they IEP derivatives or 22xs, that can do the job anyway for that interim period.

If, on the other hand, converting the SWML to 25kv ends up in the 'too difficult' box then I could see some 25kv/750v dual-voltage emus being ordered. But that would mean the notion of switching Southampton docks freights to electricity - the rationale behind 25kv conversion being suggested in the first place, not XC's needs - being binned, unless you carry out an expensive boosting of the 750v DC supplies to accommodate a Class 92 or something similar.

But as soon as you get into the realms of expensive upgrades of 750v power kit, you are inevitably then going to compare that with the costs of using 25kv instead, bringing us back to the prospect of 25kv all the way to the South Coast...

I thought that there was already plans to put in 25kv between Southampton and Reading, would this not be across all the lines?

If the above is correct then you will need either hybrid power or use diesel between Southampton and Bournemouth/Poole only.

 

[The Ham]

With the likely electrification of Southampton to Basingstoke via Salisbury in the 2020's it would make a lot of sense (assuming that would be OHLE) for both Basingstoke and Southampton to be wired up too (probably also Eastleigh so that the Salisbury 6 service can go to EMU). Given that is the 3 most complex junctions for the SWML route between Basingstoke and Southampton, the cost to convert the missing sections comes down compared to doing it as a stand alone project.

The other cost saving which then comes into play, is the existing line feed equipment can then be reused elsewhere to lengthen the life of other parts of the 3rd rail network and/or provide cheap power upgrades to parts of the 3rd rail network (much as some of the newer equipment did when the upgrades for the 444's & 450's came along, IIRC they went to Merseyside).

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought that there was already plans to put in 25kv between Southampton and Reading, would this not be across all the lines?

It has now been altered into two separate projects, split at Basingstoke. The Reading (actually Southcote Jn) to Basingstoke leg has been transferred into the Thames Valley branches project, and is therefore planned and funded.

Basingstoke to Southampton is still discussed in the CP5 enhancements plan under 'Electric Spine' and is still only a proposal and no start date has yet been confirmed.

(This has been explained numerous times already...)

 

[HSTEd]

The analysis that the Electric Spine is built on - that replacing the electrification with 25kV was cheaper than as-is renewal, was based on previous estimates of the cost of new electrification using the High Output Plant Machinery and the new OLE designs.

These estimates have been shown to be not worth the paper they are written on.
This throws the whole conversion into question.

 

[TheKnightWho]

The analysis that the Electric Spine is built on - that replacing the electrification with 25kV was cheaper than as-is renewal, was based on previous estimates of the cost of new electrification using the High Output Plant Machinery and the new OLE designs.

These estimates have been shown to be not worth the paper they are written on.
This throws the whole conversion into question.

I would be wary of saying that: there are always teething problems with these sorts of things, and the cost per mile will likely approach the initial estimates as these are ironed out.

jimm - I'll get back to you in a bit. Currently quite busy!

 

[47802]

The electrics are due to get to Sheffield by December 2020, and there are all of eight daily diagrams for the EMT HSTs at the moment which will need to be covered by 222s for that year, so I think it's fair to assume a good number of 222s will become available to other operators as of December 2019, with rest on offer just 12 months later. Replacement of XCs HSTs being an obvious way to use some of them, as I can't see any sign of a rush to make those 2020-compliant.

..

I don't think you can assume that at all at this and likely have to wait for the ITT for the new franchise at least to get some idea as to when and numbers of 222 that will be available, it may be that the Dft has specific plans for them and/or that the winning bidder retains some 222's for off wires London services and/or other EMT services.

 

[monsento]

will the demonstrator be going to York?

 

[jimm]

I don't think you can assume that at all at this and likely have to wait for the ITT for the new franchise at least to get some idea as to when and numbers of 222 that will be available, it may be that the Dft has specific plans for them and/or that the winning bidder retains some 222's for off wires London services and/or other EMT services.

Why can't I assume it? The number of off-wire EMT services will be minimal from December 2019, effectively just the Sheffield service for the following 12 months, which is not going to require all the 222s freed by wiring to Nottingham and Derby (and off Corby duties in 2017 or 2018). The EMT Lincoln service will be history should the more frequent East Coast service from Kings Cross finally get off the ground and the Sheffield-Leeds runs are to get HSTs to and from Neville Hill, not because of huge passenger demand at the times of day they run.

I'm sure DFT will have plans for the 222s but would be astonished if such plans did not involve providing some sort of relief to XC's chronic overcrowding using trains similar to those they have now, even if it is for the short term until a new XC franchise can get new stock to benefit from the spread of 25kv wires.