Loco-hauled for Crosscountry?

[43096]

Getting back on topic, does this story carry any weight?

No, it's rumour and conjecture from a magazine, and a magazine that caters for the enthusiast end of the market rather than the "industry insider" end. Nothing more.

 

[Mag_seven]

No, it's rumour and conjecture from a magazine, and a magazine that caters for the enthusiast end of the market rather than the "industry insider" end. Nothing more.

Thought as much.

 

[Skymonster]

Getting back on topic, does this story carry any weight?

I suspect there will be no changes in traction before the current Cross Country franchise finishes in late 2019 - there is no provision in the agreement to introduce new stock before thens nd it's getting a bit late for Arriva to ask the DFT if it can instigate such a change unilaterally, even if it wants to. Invitations to Tender for the future Cross Country franchise are to be issued next month, and it is likely the bidders will be asked to propose changes they might want to make to the rolling stock. So when the bids are in and the winner is announced, that's the time we're most likely to know for sure.

 

[Fearless]

You cannot get away from the AT300s being overweight EMUs and under-powered DMUs - it is a simple fact.

Like you, I am amazed at this love-in with Hitachi and the AT300 we now see from enthusiasts; the very same people who were telling us how rubbish they would be a couple of years ago! In service terms they are still un-proven really: already we are seeing issues with them in hot weather and anyone claiming they are good for the Dawlish sea wall and the Devon banks is clearly talking nonsense - they haven't been teste dins ervice there yet!

Is it true that when XC brought in the Voyagers, they'd been tested to withstand water incursion but not tested with SALT water? So they go okay in the rain but as soon as there's bad weather/rough seas in Dawlish it's only GWR HSTs that carry on providing a service - XC services terminate at Exeter. Let's hope the Hitachis are tested in the actual conditions they'll have to cope with.

 

[Grannyjoans]

along with the fact you actually get slower trains because of the fact loco-hauled stock is often slower to accelerate and has trouble getting up hills more than multiple units?

This post is too general.
Yes a class 31 with 13 Coaches will have more trouble getting uphill than a 22X with all engines working.
But a class 68 with a short rake of coaches will easily beat a 150.

(Just coming up with the two most extreme examples I can think of! 150's are sluggish as hell)

 

[pt_mad]

I wish people would stop stating this as a fact. It is a matter of opinion. I for one find Mk 4s and MK3's quite uncomfortable.

It is also interesting to see that yet again, folk have disappeared down a rabbit hole on the back of a speculative articles.Some folk are talking as if LHCS was a done deal.

By comfort I think people mean that there's little underfloor vibration, which transfers to ride comfort, rather than the internal fitting of the vehicles. The part that there's less underfloor vibration vs vehicles fitted with engines underneath, is pretty much fact.

It's far from a done deal for sure. Presumably one of the prospective bidders is coming up with something loco hauled for this to be a story.
However it read from the XC franchise info like there won't be any firm requirement for new stock although obviously this is yet to be confirmed for sure.

Presumably the attractiveness of loco hauled is due to the speedy delivery time if using existing locos. The TPE mk5s are apparently ready for testing on the WCML imminently and that's a fast lead time in today's industry.

 

[The Ham]

Basically XC need longer units to provide more capacity.

There's many ways to achieve this, LHCS is just one of many which may or not be being considered by those looking to run XC.

Now one such option could be to do something like TPE and create 7 rakes of 5 coaches which could be built quite quickly to provide some extra capacity whilst they build a new fleet to replace the 22x's.

Once the new fleet is in place these rakes could be reformed to 7 coaches to form 5 rakes to replace the HST's.

 

[Mag_seven]

By comfort I think people mean that there's little underfloor vibration, which transfers to ride comfort, rather than the internal fitting of the vehicles. The part that there's less underfloor vibration vs vehicles fitted with engines underneath, is pretty much fact.

Has any research ever been done into this underfloor vibration / noise issue i.e. do the travelling public ever notice in the same way that enthusiasts do?

 

[Rail Blues]

Has any research ever been done into this underfloor vibration / noise issue i.e. do the travelling public ever notice in the same way that enthusiasts do?

I have never found it intrusive in any way shape or from on a Voyager. The travelling public probably don't give a thought as to where the engines on any given unit are located.

I think you'd have to actively listen for it. Yo my ears at least far less intrusive than the squeek and rattles on your typical Mk3, but then I'm probably actively listening for that.

 

[Rail Blues]

Presumably the attractiveness of loco hauled is due to the speedy delivery time if using existing locos

What existing locos though.

 

[Grannyjoans]

Has any research ever been done into this underfloor vibration / noise issue i.e. do the travelling public ever notice in the same way that enthusiasts do?

I think the underfloor engine noise gets uncomfortable on a longer journey. But not on a short one.

But nowhere near as bad as listening to noisy passengers such as kids.

The general public are mostly concerned about whether the train is more pleasant than the alternative, which is travelling by Car on the Motorway. Underfloor engine noise or not, the answer is infinitely yes.

 

[43096]

I have never found it intrusive in any way shape or from on a Voyager. The travelling public probably don't give a thought as to where the engines on any given unit are located.

I think you'd have to actively listen for it. Yo my ears at least far less intrusive than the squeek and rattles on your typical Mk3, but then I'm probably actively listening for that.

Which somehow only you hear................

 

[DenmarkRail]

I think any new stock in the franchise will be multiple units, rather than loco hauled stock. Potentially looking at 15 units as an addition to Voyagers in my view.

 

[HSTEd]

It often depends on how the interior has been fitted.

For example in the first class on a 180, for some reason the single seat side tables are not secured to the carriage bodyside.
And they hit an unfortunate resonance whilst attempting to run at 125mph which makes them vibrate like crazy.

Additionally the supports for the table manage to obscure the plug socket.
Whoever designed that layout is probably in the wrong business

 

[NSEFAN]

Has any research ever been done into this underfloor vibration / noise issue i.e. do the travelling public ever notice in the same way that enthusiasts do?

The IEPs seem to have pretty low noise, even when running on diesel (at least when compared to Bombardier DMUs, which were seemingly conceived as maracas but were then subject to a bit of feature creep). I think it was a DfT requirement that the designers keep IEP engine noise in the carriage below a certain level, so clearly someone in charge felt it could be a problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So why do you not accept that they have a sensible policy in this area?

SBB are in the process of switching from LHCS to EMUs. There is a significant difference in the economics and practicalities of EMUs vs DMUs - there is near enough no argument whatsoever for LHCS for the former; the Southern worked that one out years ago. Of course SBB is near enough 100% electrified.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It often depends on how the interior has been fitted.

For example in the first class on a 180, for some reason the single seat side tables are not secured to the carriage bodyside.
And they hit an unfortunate resonance whilst attempting to run at 125mph which makes them vibrate like crazy.

None of the seats are secured to the bodyside. The reason why is that the floor "floats" to avoid vibration from the engines. It does however as you say mean the seats move around too much.

 

[mushroomchow]

I must say i find some of these opinions a little odd - Mk. 4s are comfortable, quiet and surprisingly spacious from the few time's I've been able to ride one. Considering they would be replacing Voyagers, it's a pretty major step-up in quality. It's gauging clearances that will kill this plan before it even gets off the ground - as others have said, if they do pursue LHCS a Mk. 5 order will be the way forward.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I must say i find some of these opinions a little odd - Mk. 4s are comfortable, quiet and surprisingly spacious from the few time's I've been able to ride one.

Ride on one more, and you will see that they have no suspension and a quite constrained tilt profile. They really are not very good.

 

[gingertom]

if they do pursue LHCS a Mk. 5 order will be the way forward.

what will haul them at 125mph?

 

[Grannyjoans]

Voyagers are good in first class, 2nd class is not that comfortable I don't think, though still way better than Driving on the Motorway.

 

[Rail Blues]

what will haul them at 125mph?

The fleet of magical non existent locos seemingly.

 

[HSTEd]

Ride on one more, and you will see that they have no suspension and a quite constrained tilt profile. They really are not very good.

They can be a little wild sometimes, but they are not really that bad.

I don't find them substantially worse than the Mark 3s used on the route.

 

[JamesT]

The fleet of magical non existent locos seemingly.

How busy are the Class 67s? Wikipedia (yes, I know) reckons some of them are in storage and they're rated to 125mph.

 

[Rail Blues]

How busy are the Class 67s? Wikipedia (yes, I know) reckons some of them are in storage and they're rated to 125mph.

Far too heavy, would incur speed restrictions and eye watering track access charges and acceleration is woeful.

 

[Agent_Squash]

View attachment 50860
Map of the electrified areas of the uk rail system. Slightly dated but gives a good idea. The only parts of the cross country network electrified are just Glasgow/Edinburgh to York/Doncaster, plus Leeds-Wakefield and Manchester-Birmingham.

That map seems to exclude the GWML wiring, as well as anything done under the NWEP - quite a bit more is electrified now!

Indeed so, hence one of the reasons why TPE and ScotRail have also decided to use Class 68s on their loco hauled services as well. That and the Turbostars have always been fairly notoriously sluggish in the performance side of things.

Also, as you’ve mentioned the Voyagers having a possible limited life left in them. I was wondering this the other day while looking a stabled XC example parked up in Reading Station with all its battle scars visible. The worst part appeared to be the roofline, especially in the area where the brake retarders are - more dents and twists along the roofline than any Mk3 I’ve ever seen.

TPE's 68s are purely for getting capacity quickly. They have worse performance than the (much quicker than Turbostars) 185s.

 

[gg1]

Voyagers are good in first class, 2nd class is not that comfortable I don't think, though still way better than Driving on the Motorway.

That's a matter of opinion. As I mentioned in a previous Voyager thread, I occasionally travel from Brum to Leeds and made the switch from rail to road a couple of years ago. IMO driving up the M42 and M1 is far preferable to travelling on a crush loaded 4 car Voyager.

 

[Minilad]

Virgin leased 221s do 125mph on the WCML as they still have tilt. XC 221s don't due to no tilt equipment. 220s also 125mph capable on ECML and core XC route where permitted speed allows. Max 110mph on WCML.

But the post wasn't about VT 221s It was specifically about XC 221s

 

[Grannyjoans]

It is hard to believe a Class 68 will not keep up with a 185.

If the 68 is hauling 5 coaches that is 780 horsepower per coach.
BTW that would seem insanely good looking back to the old days of loco hauled where you'd often find a Class 47 on load 13!
Occasionally a 31 would stand in!

 

[gsnedders]

It is hard to believe a Class 68 will not keep up with a 185.

If the 68 is hauling 5 coaches that is 780 horsepower per coach.
BTW that would seem insanely good looking back to the old days of loco hauled where you'd often find a Class 47 on load 13!
Occasionally a 31 would stand in!

750 v. 780hp per coach isn't a big difference (and at that point, efficiency of the transmission is going to become significant, as well as draw of auxiliaries), and the 185 has a clear traction advantage through having way more powered axles.