I think that requirement was dropped before any major infrastructure work was undertaken. But I could be wrong on that, it's just that the tilt part of the IC225 was dropped pretty early on.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Pendolino testing - ECML
- Thread starter DarloRich
- Start date
- Status
I think that requirement was dropped before any major infrastructure work was undertaken. But I could be wrong on that, it's just that the tilt part of the IC225 was dropped pretty early on.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Peter Sarf
Established Member
Having read backwards through the last ten pages I wanted to say the following. Apologies if I have overlooked it already being said.
In my heart I would like to see all intercity services loco hauled or like an HST but thats principally because of the ambience of the coach.
Now a Pendolino class 390 as used on the West Coast Main Line is a good off the shelf option. I do think its a bit claustrophobic because its designed to tilt. That can be improved upon a bit by working on the decor and fittings I would hope. But if you want tilt then there is a price to pay but they will be more use than an iep. Having travelled on Pendolinos I have a problem with the airconditioning - its a bit too cold (waste of energy) and is noisy. It is a real relief when it occaisionally stops. I am sure that could be improved anyway. Alstoms Pendolino product is not restricted to just the 390 so a differing non-tilt body would still be a Pendolino. Of course the UK loading guage currently means that only the 390 version of Pendolino suits. Also remember that Alstom and the railways did not have problems with the introduction of the 390s so can I say they are reliable from the start ?..
I think a great strength of the Pendolino idea is that GNER could have say ten of them to strenghten the existing service. Then later on they could get cascaded to the West Coast as and when they are needed. This would reassure the owning ROSCO and leave options open for complete fleet change later on the GNER. That is when the HSTs are really near life expiry and/or when a newer better train is available. Then again the MK4s could probably be found a use elsewhere leading to a follow on order of Pendolinos soon after the first.
I whole heartedly despair at the prospect of electric trains with heavy and noisy weights under the coaches. That is the beauty of loco hauled coaches or Electric Multiple Units. The coach can, by and large, just be a coach and given that passengers cannot be carried in the leading end of the end vehicles that seems to be the place to put all the technology. Only disadvantage is that that makes running two units together a bit inconvenient (no walk through). Anyway newer faster trains have aerodynamic fronts anyway and the 380 is so far the nearest to aerodynamic with a gangway connection so far. I have not really noticed Virgins product suffering from 9-car trains that cannot be split although a load of 6-car ones would be useful for Birmingham northwards. So do we need half length intercity units ?.
So good luck to the Pendolino and lets hope the passenger cabin is improved on as it should be possible. If enough are ordered will they get made here ?
.
In my heart I would like to see all intercity services loco hauled or like an HST but thats principally because of the ambience of the coach.
Now a Pendolino class 390 as used on the West Coast Main Line is a good off the shelf option. I do think its a bit claustrophobic because its designed to tilt. That can be improved upon a bit by working on the decor and fittings I would hope. But if you want tilt then there is a price to pay but they will be more use than an iep. Having travelled on Pendolinos I have a problem with the airconditioning - its a bit too cold (waste of energy) and is noisy. It is a real relief when it occaisionally stops. I am sure that could be improved anyway. Alstoms Pendolino product is not restricted to just the 390 so a differing non-tilt body would still be a Pendolino. Of course the UK loading guage currently means that only the 390 version of Pendolino suits. Also remember that Alstom and the railways did not have problems with the introduction of the 390s so can I say they are reliable from the start ?..
I think a great strength of the Pendolino idea is that GNER could have say ten of them to strenghten the existing service. Then later on they could get cascaded to the West Coast as and when they are needed. This would reassure the owning ROSCO and leave options open for complete fleet change later on the GNER. That is when the HSTs are really near life expiry and/or when a newer better train is available. Then again the MK4s could probably be found a use elsewhere leading to a follow on order of Pendolinos soon after the first.
I whole heartedly despair at the prospect of electric trains with heavy and noisy weights under the coaches. That is the beauty of loco hauled coaches or Electric Multiple Units. The coach can, by and large, just be a coach and given that passengers cannot be carried in the leading end of the end vehicles that seems to be the place to put all the technology. Only disadvantage is that that makes running two units together a bit inconvenient (no walk through). Anyway newer faster trains have aerodynamic fronts anyway and the 380 is so far the nearest to aerodynamic with a gangway connection so far. I have not really noticed Virgins product suffering from 9-car trains that cannot be split although a load of 6-car ones would be useful for Birmingham northwards. So do we need half length intercity units ?.
So good luck to the Pendolino and lets hope the passenger cabin is improved on as it should be possible. If enough are ordered will they get made here ?
.
Last edited:
Attachments
Great shots! What time did it come through?
Thanks! I was disappointed it was platform 9, really wanted a picture in the main trainshed but there were possesions.
Booked a 02.10 d 02.15
Actual a 01.44 d 01.49
Eagle
Established Member
As it should; the imaginary prism that a gauge describes doesn't tilt, it remains upright at all times.
John55
Member
This is incorrect for current operation on the WCML. The TASS system is required to ensure the Pendolinos do not tilt at certain locations where a tilting train would infringe the loading gauge. If the loading gauge was more generous then TASS might not be required at all.
APT, being a lot narrower at the cantrail (MkIVs and Voyagers have a similar profile) was fully within the C3 loading gauge when tilted to nine degrees. So does this mean that Voyagers really don't need TASS, but use it anyway? Maybe safety standards are higher now.
Rational Plan
Member
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2011
- Messages
- 235
I thought Rail magazine made an interesting point that these would cost £20,000 per week less to rent than new IEP's. That's a big difference to the premium profile to a franchise bid.
John55
Member
Pendolinos, Voyagers, APT and Mk 4s are all different sizes and shapes so there is no crossover of acceptability.
Re: Rational Plan's post: unfortunately though that makes no difference at all given that Government seems to be determined that these trains are needed, even though it seems no operator wants them.
Unless they use some multiple of that £20K to pay off the transport minister to see it their way
Unless they use some multiple of that £20K to pay off the transport minister to see it their way
87electric
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 1,024
Can anyone confirm that it is coaches F and G that are not running in the 9 car versions of 054/055?
I think its been suggested that the ROSCOs are unhappy with IEP, maybe they have some leaverage.
F and U.
I was under the impression that everyone is unhappy with IEP apart from Hitachi and one civil servant in the DfT that's trying to force it through.
87electric
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 1,024
On the 11 car version standard coaches are A-G and 1st class are H J K L. So where does U come into it please?
The initial production 9 car sets are lettered differently (Standard A-E / 1st G H J K).
Willing to be corrected on this if wrong.
87electric
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 1,024
But they have been redesignated. G is now a standard. The DMRF is now L.
northwichcat
Veteran Member
The carriage letters are programmed in not painted on the carriages, so the system will have to be reprogrammed to allow for the extra carriages anyway.
Eagle
Established Member
You might be thinking of Voyagers; on Pendolinos the carriage letters are most definitely permanent signs.
A few points about this - paths, money and finally some Pendolinos will probably be moving away from the WCML in 15 years time so I can't see 10 extra heading that way some time in the future.
87electric
Member
- Joined
- 27 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 1,024
I agree with that
David Goddard
Established Member
Can't wait until the wires go up on the Great Western, and we get Pendolinos down here as well...
CrossCountry could probably use a few Pendos by then if all the proposed electrifications continue on-track. Or they could be used for regional / transpennine services
Eagle
Established Member
But none of XC's routes will be entirely electric, so that won't work.
However all of them will be between 35 and 50% OHLE. Far better to convert the Voyagers to bi-mode, like Bombardier keep hinting at.
No, none of their current routes are fully electric - however that doesnt stop them taking on new routes. Various possibilities like Glasgow to Bristol, Edinburgh to Liverpool, etc are options for use of high speed electric stock.
Eagle
Established Member
Via where exactly?
(Anyway, Glasgow already has 1tp2h to Bristol, albeit via an indirect route.)
- Status