ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Class 120 Cross Country DMU sets (WR)
Riddled with asbestos unfortunately ..
Riddled with asbestos unfortunately ..
Class 120 Cross Country DMU sets (WR)
Riddled with asbestos unfortunately ..
309s I liked them fast good ride nice seats. smart front end till they fitted flat drivers window
They could have been fitted with door locks as Mk 3 s or the 421s that ran to Lymington
Have you ever seen a 4VEP unload at Waterloo? Don't think you'll see a train empty out faster than that
When were 7-car DMUs ever proposed for the Crosscountry network? If such a thing was ever said at all then it must have been very, very early on in the life of the Crosscountry franchise, when Virgin were outlining their initial intentions.HOw about withdrawal of the XC HST fleet apparently without the originally planned order of 7-car DMUs?
When were 7-car DMUs ever proposed for the Crosscountry network? If such a thing was ever said at all then it must have been very, very early on in the life of the Crosscountry franchise, when Virgin were outlining their initial intentions.
Interesting if this is the case, as by 2000 the proposal had evolved into a fleet of 4-carriage loco hauled push-pull sets and 4-car tilting DMUs. Then of course as everyone knows the loco hauled sets were dropped and replaced by an order for a similar number of non-tilting Voyagers, and the tilting sets gained an extra carriage.Indeed, there were supposedly plans for a mixed fleet of 4/5 car and 7 car DMUs, with the former being used for replacing loco hauled formations and the latter for the HST formations.
As I understand it anyway.
Perhaps it wasn't retained because it was "non standard" against FNW's wider fleet and the inherent operating issues and running costs that retaining would have entailed meant it was not viable to do so?
To this list you can add: an empty Waterloo International, an unused viaduct in Battersea and HS1 connection at Gravesend, Redhill-Tonbridge electrification, Sheepcote Lane Curve, Shortlands diveunder and many other Channel Tunnel-related investments that are now superfluous.
Mr Portillo had a hand in all that (and his successors, including John Prescott).
This is quite a good rant, really.
http://www.alycidon.com/ALYCIDON RA...VE/INF SRCS 2003/Informed Sources 01 2003.htmInteresting if this is the case, as by 2000 the proposal had evolved into a fleet of 4-carriage loco hauled push-pull sets and 4-car tilting DMUs. Then of course as everyone knows the loco hauled sets were dropped and replaced by an order for a similar number of non-tilting Voyagers, and the tilting sets gained an extra carriage.
It seems this plan was not as radical as Operation Princess. Back then the 4 car frequent service was to be a more limited network. Had the 7 car plan gone ahead then frequencies on some routes may not have been as high as they are now.Informed Sources said:Looking back, I note that six years ago this month this column was enthused by Virgin's franchise winning proposal for Cross Country. This would emulate Regional Railways in the 1980s and replace Cross Country's loco-hauled stock with ‘fast and frequent three and four car DMUs connecting to create a “string of pearls” network'. But I was also surprised by the decision to replace the IC125 fleet with 24 seven car DMUs from the May 2004 timetable when they came off lease.
It's amazing what you forget, because that seemed a sensible phased programme, devised by Virgin's consultants Steer Davies Gleave – yes, that Steer. Somewhere along the line it got much more ambitious and by the time Richard Bowker was buying the new train fleet – yes, him too – we'd got into a radical new timetable and total replacement with a mix of standard and tilting Voyager DEMUs, all in service for September 2002.
A significant change was that the seven car IC125-replacement DMUs were now 40 five car DEMUs effectively running at twice the service frequency. The “string of pearls” units were four car.
As we're failing miserably to stick to post privitisation the withdrawl and scrapping of the Blue Pullmans after little over a decade of use- with the complete scrapping being perhaps the biggest part of the crime.
I think the half set at Temple Mills (3308) has never been used. Aside from a few shakedown runs think the move from North Pole to Temple Mills is the only other journey it has made.The NoL class 373 units
Whichever way you look at it the Channel Tunnel rolling stock programme was "shameful".
The NoL class 373 units, the 92s, and the night stock were all bungled (by DfT mainly).
Even the main Eurostar fleet was too large.
Nobody has ever given a cost for all this useless spend (to say nothing of the infrastructure changes made, like the depot at Longsight).
Year after year I used to pass the unused NoL sets parked up at North Pole.
Eventually 3 of them got used on the ECML, but the waste of world-class technology and resources was shocking.
Most of the redundant stock got sold off (to SNCF and CN - I wonder at what price?).
Even now the 92s are very lightly used and the line of rusting electric locos at Crewe (90s as well) is embarrassing.
Is it any wonder that the Treasury frequently doubts rail business plans?
To this list you can add: an empty Waterloo International, an unused viaduct in Battersea and HS1 connection at Gravesend, Redhill-Tonbridge electrification, Sheepcote Lane Curve, Shortlands diveunder and many other Channel Tunnel-related investments that are now superfluous.
Mr Portillo had a hand in all that (and his successors, including John Prescott).
This is quite a good rant, really.
Build the CTRL in time for the opening of the Channel Tunnel like they did in France?Since it took many years to build HS1 to St Pancras, what was the alternative to building Eurostar to Waterloo (with all the infrastructure that is now unused)?
Build the CTRL in time for the opening of the Channel Tunnel like they did in France?
Build the CTRL in time for the opening of the Channel Tunnel like they did in France?
LGV Nord had utility far in excess of that of CTRL, indeed I am not sure that it is worth it even now.
To be fair though, the Tonbridge - Redhill electrification is a useful infill, and the Shortlands diveunder is probably operationally handy (particularly since it's on the South Eastern division which has always had rather too many flat junctions).
I'm all in favour of the Channel Tunnel and its rail links, but we threw a lot of the investment down the drain and damaged other projects as a result.