Should AT300's be ordered for CrossCountry and East Midlands Trains

[47802]

If AT300s were ordered for XC I would very much expect them to be in 5 car formations. A 5 car AT300 would represent a massive increase in capacity over a 4 car 220, so without any doubling up there would still be benefits over today. When appropriate, a second 5 car set can be coupled up to handle the peak loadings that happen on the network. Even if that did mean there was some excess capacity on some parts of the network this wouldn't be a great issue, since the excess capacity can be used up by yield management.

Well indeed it wouldn't take a massive order to significantly increase capacity if XC got 15 x 5 Car AT300's for instance, AT300's are effective at least 6 car Voyagers seating capacity wise.

So 15 current 5 car Voyager services could become 6 car

10 x 5 car Voyagers are used to replace HST's

5 x 5 car replace 5 x 4 car

5 x 4 car can then become 8 car which in turn allows 5 x 5 car to be replaced by 8 car which in turns allows another 5 x 4 car to be replaced by 5 car.

 

[The Ham]

Well indeed it wouldn't take a massive order to significantly increase capacity if XC got 15 x 5 Car AT300's for instance, AT300's are effective at least 6 car Voyagers seating capacity wise.

So 15 current 5 car Voyager services could become 6 car

10 x 5 car Voyagers are used to replace HST's

5 x 5 car replace 5 x 4 car

5 x 4 car can then become 8 car which in turn allows 5 x 5 car to be replaced by 8 car which in turns allows another 5 x 4 car to be replaced by 5 car.

Although I agree with you (relatively few trains equals lots of services being run by longer sets), I'm not sure that small increases will be enough now.

Although, for instance up to 17 new trains allows all the 220's to be run in pairs all the time (less if some are ready running in pairs and as you still only need one spare where there is spares at present) and for all the 221's to run services currently being run by 220's, the uplift in capacity would be fairly small.

A 220 being replaced with a 221 would gain you 25% more seats, however if it is running at 90% loadforit would only get the loading rate down to 72%. That maybe enough for a 3 year extension (2.5% growth would put the loading value at 78%) but isn't going to be enough for 10 years of growth, as even 2.5% growth puts the loading value at 92% (or worse than at present!).

However, of we see 5% growth for the 3 year extension then the loading rates at the end of it would be 83%.

Personally I think that you need to take half the 220's and use them to make the other half the fleet (17 sets) 6 coaches long. Then use them and the 221's to run the services currently run by the 220's (40 units vs the current 34). Then get at least 30 units with the equivalent of an 8 or 9 coach Voyager unit to replace the 221's and HST's.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

With a suitable engine (if any engine manufacturer offers one at the time), could some new coaches be built that would be compatible with 220s, 221s and 222s?

Apart from engine (emissions) issues do the designs meet all current regs?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

My 4p-worth.
It's not about who deserves to get more of those nice AT300s. It's about £££ and franchise premiums to DfT.
I think the XC direct award later this year will be "stay as you are" until retender in 2019.
The next dominos to fall are the ITTs for ICWC (November this year) and East Midlands (December), for award in 2017.
I think ICWC will replace the 10-ish Voyagers that run wholly under the wires (maybe all 20 of them).
These can then be transferred to XC in 2019 to replace the HSTs and add capacity.
EM will get pure 125mph EMUs for its self-contained electrified system.
XC will then be rebid in 2019 with a more radical development plan.
But for people with a nervous disposition, the XC award in July 2019 is after the next general election...

There's also many a slip that might occur to change the timetable.
If Arriva refuses the XC direct award (like Stagecoach did with SWT) it would change things radically.
All franchise plans north of London after 2019 will also be impacted by the arrival of HS2.

 

[Xavi]

7-car AT300s covering all of the Edinburgh to Plymouth route would provide the most logical solution. 220s could the be doubled up on Newcastle to Southampton and also cover Cardiff - Nottingham. The HSTs would be retired. Concentrate the 221s on Bournemouth to Manchester and reactivate the tilt, with Norton Bridge complete and the tilt section between Oxford and Leamington available as well as WCML, there would be scope for a bidder to offer better journey times.

Retirement for Voyagers would then coincide with Oxford - Coventry and Birmingham to Derby wiring which is probably 12 years away.

There must be a good chance of something like this being proposed, wires from Edinburgh to Derby will be in place in 5 years or so and DfT can't approve enough AT-300s. Probably 5-cars only though and it will be 2020 before there's any capacity for the AT-300 build.

 

[class26]

(LNW - GW Joint Quote) But for people with a nervous disposition, the XC award in July 2019 is after the next general election...

It isn`t, the next election is May 2020, fixed by law as a 5 year term.

 

[jimm]

Ah, so maybe you haven't heard about the Transpennine Express order for 19 AT300 sets announced today? That's most of the options and 2019 deliveries accounted for.

Yes, I have heard about it, thanks.:roll:

What has an option taken out by First Group - not the DfT or anyone else - got to do with any potential Class 800/802 orders for other routes run by other operators?

That's right - nothing.

And the TPE sets will be built in Japan and County Durham, not Italy, where there will be a whole different production line in a whole different country at a plant that needs new orders to justify Hitachi buying Ansaldo Breda, and will have delivered the confirmed GWR sets in time for the December 2018 timetable change. Even if GWR does get nine more five-car AT300 sets and a Hull Trains order is firmed up too, that's still only going to provide work into the first part of 2019 in Italy.

The TPE sets will be introduced "from December 2019", not by December 2019, suggesting that some, but not all, will be in service at the end of that year - the ones from Japan perhaps - and that a number of them are going to follow the East Coast order down the production line at Newton Aycliffe, an order which is due to completed in early 2020.

I can't see any point in ordering a single new train for XC until wiring of its network spreads far enough to justify use of a bi-mode, never mind a straight electric set - for all the running under wires right now, the fact remains that on the XC core area, with half-hourly service frequencies, you need diesel traction, apart from Birmingham-Manchester.

On the other hand, a modest number of bi-modes for MML to replace all their HSTs plus a number of 222s could make sense, with the displaced 222s going to XC to replace their HSTs and give them some more capacity generally as well. Wiring to Corby by the end of 2019 will displace about four 222s for starters.

And I'd agree with LNW-GW Joint about the likely destination of the 221s used under the wires on West Coast being XC, assuming Alstom finally does come up with a UK-gauge version of the new generation Pendolino for the next West Coast franchise.

More 222s could also move to XC as MML wiring moves north and electric trainsets arrive to replace them, which could also displace any MML bi-modes to XC or GWR, which will also clearly have a long-term need for bi-modes generally, given how far down the line any further electrification in the GW area looks right now and GWR may well need an expansion of its fleet at some point in the 2020s if passenger traffic keeps growing at current rates.

Nor is there likely to be much effort on the ground put into adding overhead wires to a single extra mile of XC's network until all the currently committed schemes are out of the way in 2022-23, so I see little point in it getting bi-modes if 222s can move over in batches as MML wiring spreads - and I know they are not electrically compatible with a 220/221, etc, etc, but nor are the HSTs and they somehow cope with operating those.

There must be a good chance of something like this being proposed, wires from Edinburgh to Derby will be in place in 5 years or so and DfT can't approve enough AT-300s. Probably 5-cars only though and it will be 2020 before there's any capacity for the AT-300 build.

Sorry, where do you get this idea from? The Hendy update says MML wiring to Sheffield is not expected to be complete until December 2023 and does not set any dates for infill wiring in Yorkshire from Sheffield to the likes of Doncaster and Wakefield to link to the ECML. And see above about the availability of AT300 production capacity in Italy from late 2018.

Concentrate the 221s on Bournemouth to Manchester and reactivate the tilt, with Norton Bridge complete and the tilt section between Oxford and Leamington available as well as WCML, there would be scope for a bidder to offer better journey times.

The balises to activate tilt between Oxford and Banbury were switched off when XC stopped using tilt. Someone may know if they are still in place. And tilt only cut two or three minutes off the journey time anyway, which you could probably deliver by other means through various capacity enhancement schemes between Birmingham, Oxford and Didcot.

 

[The Planner]

Concentrate the 221s on Bournemouth to Manchester and reactivate the tilt, with Norton Bridge complete and the tilt section between Oxford and Leamington available as well as WCML, there would be scope for a bidder to offer better journey times.

Tilt between Oxford and Banbury (it never went to Leamington) was taken out a while ago, I don't recall it actually allowing higher line speeds either. It could probably get you a minute, minute and a half between Stone and Manchester.

 

[47802]

My 4p-worth.
It's not about who deserves to get more of those nice AT300s. It's about £££ and franchise premiums to DfT.
I think the XC direct award later this year will be "stay as you are" until retender in 2019.
The next dominos to fall are the ITTs for ICWC (November this year) and East Midlands (December), for award in 2017.
I think ICWC will replace the 10-ish Voyagers that run wholly under the wires (maybe all 20 of them).
These can then be transferred to XC in 2019 to replace the HSTs and add capacity.
EM will get pure 125mph EMUs for its self-contained electrified system.
XC will then be rebid in 2019 with a more radical development plan.
But for people with a nervous disposition, the XC award in July 2019 is after the next general election...

There's also many a slip that might occur to change the timetable.
If Arriva refuses the XC direct award (like Stagecoach did with SWT) it would change things radically.
All franchise plans north of London after 2019 will also be impacted by the arrival of HS2.

I think your assumption that some WC voyagers can replace XC HST's is a bit questionable, There no certainty that the winning bidder will want to get rid of any voyagers and indeed the recent closure of WC may focus their minds in that respect, and even if they do the new franchise doesn't start until April 2018 and with a likely 2 year min delivery time for a new train that going to take you into 2020 plus I assume the voyagers are largely 2020 compliant so there will be no desperate need to get rid of them before 2020 as far as the WC franchise is concerned.

 

[Mikey C]

While the government can't insist on it, I can't imagine them wanting to order so many AT300s that they are all made in Italy or Japan as the UK plant is full, especially if there is then a lull in the early 2020s...

 

[jimm]

I think your assumption that some WC voyagers can replace XC HST's is a bit questionable, There no certainty that the winning bidder will want to get rid of any voyagers and indeed the recent closure of WC may focus their minds in that respect, and even if they do the new franchise doesn't start until April 2018 and with a likely 2 year min delivery time for a new train that going to take you into 2020 plus I assume the voyagers are largely 2020 compliant so there will be no desperate need to get rid of them before 2020 as far as the WC franchise is concerned.

Okay, how about a tilting, bi-mode AT300 for West Coast to replace all its 221s? Hitachi can probably rise to the design challenge if asked. The key issue would presumably be what the axle loading would be once you added tilt kit to the train.

 

[Mikey C]

Okay, how about a tilting, bi-mode AT300 for West Coast to replace all its 221s? Hitachi can probably rise to the design challenge if asked. The key issue would presumably be what the axle loading would be once you added tilt kit to the train.

The change in body profile would be pretty expensive for a short production run though

 

[Haydn1971]

When is it predicted that the electrification will reach Sheffield now? I'd never though about having AT300's on the Norwich to Liverpool route. It's probably too slow for them though really. AT200's might be a better option, assuming they could be made in a bi-mode version?

Dec 2019 for Corby/Bedford, but 2023 to Sheffield... There was talk of getting wires on the Hope Valley Line in CP6 (before Mar 2024), but with the work on MML and TP pushed more into CP6, I'd expect the Hope Valley to drop into CP7 (before Mar 2029) - if the EMT 158s aren't replaced till then, they would be 40 years old - so either need replacing or a major overhaul to extend the life to 40 years and will definitely need to be extended from four carriages - six car 185s perhaps - I certainly don't think that bi-modes would be a great investment on the Norwich-Liverpool line at this time, but may be once Nottingham-Sheffield and Liverpool-Hazel Grove is complete in c2023, meaning the EMT 158s would be "just" 34 years and could survive till 2023 on the proviso of the third fast service on provided post 2018 presumably by TPE

 

[Bletchleyite]

The change in body profile would be pretty expensive for a short production run though

Non tilt would be fine if used on the Brum shuttles.

 

[jimm]

The change in body profile would be pretty expensive for a short production run though

Simply thinking aloud. As I have pointed out in the thread about TPE, Hitachi seem quite happy to turn out small orders for customers in other parts of the world.

Any order for new tilt stock for West Coast services, whether franchised or open access, is likely to be fairly modest anyway and Alstom will have to create a new generation UK-gauge Pendolino bodyshell as well if they want to keep a foothold in the UK express train market.

 

[Mikey C]

Non tilt would be fine if used on the Brum shuttles.

Indeed after HS2 opens, the New Street to Euston service will become much more of a stopping service, something with faster acceleration might be useful?

 

[47802]

Okay, how about a tilting, bi-mode AT300 for West Coast to replace all its 221s? Hitachi can probably rise to the design challenge if asked. The key issue would presumably be what the axle loading would be once you added tilt kit to the train.

It doesn't really matter what you order for WC its still likely to take at least a couple of years from when the franchise id re-let, the only way I see to change that is if DFT turn around this year and say yes we will use WC voyagers to replace XC HST's and order new trains before the WC franchise is re-let but I don't think that's very likely, and even then you may still be hit by capacity constraints from the manufacturers. In fact modifying HST's might be the only realistic option for XC and MML as a 2020 fix.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Dec 2019 for Corby/Bedford, but 2023 to Sheffield... There was talk of getting wires on the Hope Valley Line in CP6 (before Mar 2024), but with the work on MML and TP pushed more into CP6, I'd expect the Hope Valley to drop into CP7 (before Mar 2029) - if the EMT 158s aren't replaced till then, they would be 40 years old - so either need replacing or a major overhaul to extend the life to 40 years and will definitely need to be extended from four carriages - six car 185s perhaps - I certainly don't think that bi-modes would be a great investment on the Norwich-Liverpool line at this time, but may be once Nottingham-Sheffield and Liverpool-Hazel Grove is complete in c2023, meaning the EMT 158s would be "just" 34 years and could survive till 2023 on the proviso of the third fast service on provided post 2018 presumably by TPE

Hope Valley might start at the end of CP6, clearance work, resignalling or immunisations & signal alterations, feeding & sectioning equipment and layout modifications can be done long before that though, and I'd very much prefer that was all done before the trackside electrification works begin.

The Class 158 fleet is in it for the long haul - they'll be at least 50 before retirement and some might celebrate 60 years, that's why the various owners are looking at ZF transmissions, and it's part of the reason why the ETCS kit was installed in the Class 158 units for the Cambrian Line - it might well need to be installed on many more members of the class before they're withdrawn.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It isn`t, the next election is May 2020, fixed by law as a 5 year term.

You're right of course, XC is in the clear.
TSGN and Chiltern are the first franchise renewals after the next election (though the competitions kick off in this parliament).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed after HS2 opens, the New Street to Euston service will become much more of a stopping service, something with faster acceleration might be useful?

I don't think anybody quite knows what will happen post-HS2 (and the Pendolinos will be getting on a bit by then) - but while a number of timetables have been proposed, logic to me would be to merge the "VT" and "LM" services into a semifast 4tph service of some kind using Desiro style high acceleration EMUs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Class 158 fleet is in it for the long haul - they'll be at least 50 before retirement and some might celebrate 60 years, that's why the various owners are looking at ZF transmissions, and it's part of the reason why the ETCS kit was installed in the Class 158 units for the Cambrian Line - it might well need to be installed on many more members of the class before they're withdrawn.

It's scary to think they are now 26 years old - while some TOCs (Northern) have let them get in a mess, when taken care of (ATW, EMT, ScotRail in particular) they still look quite modern and are a practical design with good window views.

 

[absolutelymilk]

The Class 158 fleet is in it for the long haul - they'll be at least 50 before retirement and some might celebrate 60 years, that's why the various owners are looking at ZF transmissions, and it's part of the reason why the ETCS kit was installed in the Class 158 units for the Cambrian Line - it might well need to be installed on many more members of the class before they're withdrawn.

What is it about the 158s that make them so reliable? Were they designed with an extraordinarily long service life in mind or have they just proven to be reliable?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What is it about the 158s that make them so reliable? Were they designed with an extraordinarily long service life in mind or have they just proven to be reliable?

Simple, solid, proven technology (other than the hopeless aircon, but that can be replaced) - and aluminium bodies, so no tin-worm?

Other than the body they are as much a Sprinter as the Class 150 - when they were built the Cummins engines and Voith hydraulic drivelines were well proven.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Simple, solid, proven technology (other than the hopeless aircon, but that can be replaced) - and aluminium bodies, so no tin-worm?

Other than the body they are as much a Sprinter as the Class 150 - when they were built the Cummins engines and Voith hydraulic drivelines were well proven.

Yes, absolutely agree with that.

The light weight of the units (a Class 158 is only slightly heavier than a Class 156) and the extra power 65-115hp extra per vehicle makes the whole driveline and transmission very under stressed.

The bogies are a particularly good design too, they ride fantastically well and isolate the body very effectively from vibration (I've lost track of the number of experienced railwaymen who consider them to be the best riding stock we've ever had on the GB network).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What is it about the 158s that make them so reliable? Were they designed with an extraordinarily long service life in mind or have they just proven to be reliable?

Originally they were junk.
BREL even refused to provide them with a warranty (they were delivered during the sale of BREL to ABB).
Another lauded class which was pants at first was the 323.
They sat unused for many months with electrical problems related to icing in the winter.
Both classes have gradually improved reliability and are now among the best, but it was hard-earned.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Originally they were junk.
BREL even refused to provide them with a warranty (they were delivered during the sale of BREL to ABB).
Another lauded class which was pants at first was the 323.
They sat unused for many months with electrical problems related to icing in the winter.
Both classes have gradually improved reliability and are now among the best, but it was hard-earned.

They weren't good initially, but some of the troubles can be thought of as development work in a live environment - issues with braking and track circuit activation were the first problems to appear in their first autumn, that should have been picked up during development but the T4 bogies saw little pre-production testing compared with what we would expect today.

They were still woefully unreliable in the hands of National Express franchises a little over a decade ago. The change at Salisbury from a SWT Class 159 to a Wales and West or Wessex Class 158 was eye opening, assuming the Wales and West/Wessex unit arrived at all.

The warranty issue was more complex, the obligation to provide any sort of warranty for their products was dropped by Government as part of the sweetener provided to ABB to get them to buy BREL. It's also why it was impossible for BR to get BREL to agree a price on the conversion work needed to create the Class 159 fleet, Government didn't want BREL contractually obliged to undertake what might have been loss making work.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

The CrossCountry stock is still relatively new by rolling stock standards so I don't think that CrossCountry will get more stock in the short term.

as Neil Williams Said in his replay, the age of the stock is not the issue with XC Voyagers it;s the growth in travel meaning the quantity of stock in current use is insufficient and with the possible exception of the mk4s displaced from the ECML there's not a lot of intercity stock available before 2020 that doesn;t need extensive mods to be fully compliant with the accessibility stuff .

 

[ryan125hst]

I don't think anybody quite knows what will happen post-HS2 (and the Pendolinos will be getting on a bit by then) - but while a number of timetables have been proposed, logic to me would be to merge the "VT" and "LM" services into a semifast 4tph service of some kind using Desiro style high acceleration EMUs.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It's scary to think they are now 26 years old... they still look quite modern and are a practical design with good window views.

The same can be said for the 225 sets in my opinion which were built only a few years earlier. Having had a refurbishment a decade ago, they still look modern and are comfortable and smooth (although I know some people disagree). I'm sad to see them go when the IEP's arrive (and I feel the same about the HST's) but they do need to be replaced at some point, especially when some cover over 1,000 miles a day now. While i'd guess a large number of HST's will be scrapped, I hope to the 225's are found a home somewhere. They should still have another 10-15 years of life left by the time they are replaced by the IEP's.

Simple, solid, proven technology (other than the hopeless aircon, but that can be replaced) - and aluminium bodies, so no tin-worm?

Yes, absolutely agree with that.

The light weight of the units (a Class 158 is only slightly heavier than a Class 156) and the extra power 65-115hp extra per vehicle makes the whole driveline and transmission very under stressed.

The bogies are a particularly good design too, they ride fantastically well and isolate the body very effectively from vibration (I've lost track of the number of experienced railwaymen who consider them to be the best riding stock we've ever had on the GB network).

Originally they were junk.

I've heard them being referred to as "Garden shed engineering" before. I'm guessing they weren't particularly liked at first but once the issues mentioned were taken care of, people thought of them more favorably?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I've heard them being referred to as "Garden shed engineering" before. I'm guessing they weren't particularly liked at first but once the issues mentioned were taken care of, people thought of them more favorably?

At the time, single 2-car 158s were replacing 4-car loco hauled trains on many routes (eg on Manchester-North Wales/Cardiff).
They were also considered cramped, the seating was very low-slung, and engine noise was a problem.
Today, most trains are like that! The recent refurbs of 158s have greatly improved their image (apart from the feeble aircon).
The thing which made a difference (eventually) was that 90mph became the target for line speeds, instead of 75mph.
Many regional lines were "sprinterised" in the 1990s with differential speed limits, allowing the 90mph for 158s (eg Hope Valley).
That has now gone up to 100mph with newer DMUs, but not many lines have yet got beyond 90.

 

[Haydn1971]

The Class 158 fleet is in it for the long haul - they'll be at least 50 before retirement and some might celebrate 60 years, that's why the various owners are looking at ZF transmissions, and it's part of the reason why the ETCS kit was installed in the Class 158 units for the Cambrian Line - it might well need to be installed on many more members of the class before they're withdrawn.

Interesting to hear, I don't mind the EMT units, but they are in need of improvements to provide power at seats, wifi, passenger information systems, better heating and air conditioning, plus will need to be extended to 5/6 car units to manage passenger growth - I dread to think how much work the Northern 158s need though !

 

[Xavi]

Yes, I have heard about it, thanks.:roll:

What has an option taken out by First Group - not the DfT or anyone else - got to do with any potential Class 800/802 orders for other routes run by other operators?

That's right - nothing.

And the TPE sets will be built in Japan and County Durham, not Italy, where there will be a whole different production line in a whole different country at a plant that needs new orders to justify Hitachi buying Ansaldo Breda, and will have delivered the confirmed GWR sets in time for the December 2018 timetable change. Even if GWR does get nine more five-car AT300 sets and a Hull Trains order is firmed up too, that's still only going to provide work into the first part of 2019 in Italy.

The TPE sets will be introduced "from December 2019", not by December 2019, suggesting that some, but not all, will be in service at the end of that year - the ones from Japan perhaps - and that a number of them are going to follow the East Coast order down the production line at Newton Aycliffe, an order which is due to completed in early 2020.

I can't see any point in ordering a single new train for XC until wiring of its network spreads far enough to justify use of a bi-mode, never mind a straight electric set - for all the running under wires right now, the fact remains that on the XC core area, with half-hourly service frequencies, you need diesel traction, apart from Birmingham-Manchester.

On the other hand, a modest number of bi-modes for MML to replace all their HSTs plus a number of 222s could make sense, with the displaced 222s going to XC to replace their HSTs and give them some more capacity generally as well. Wiring to Corby by the end of 2019 will displace about four 222s for starters.

And I'd agree with LNW-GW Joint about the likely destination of the 221s used under the wires on West Coast being XC, assuming Alstom finally does come up with a UK-gauge version of the new generation Pendolino for the next West Coast franchise.

More 222s could also move to XC as MML wiring moves north and electric trainsets arrive to replace them, which could also displace any MML bi-modes to XC or GWR, which will also clearly have a long-term need for bi-modes generally, given how far down the line any further electrification in the GW area looks right now and GWR may well need an expansion of its fleet at some point in the 2020s if passenger traffic keeps growing at current rates.

Nor is there likely to be much effort on the ground put into adding overhead wires to a single extra mile of XC's network until all the currently committed schemes are out of the way in 2022-23, so I see little point in it getting bi-modes if 222s can move over in batches as MML wiring spreads - and I know they are not electrically compatible with a 220/221, etc, etc, but nor are the HSTs and they somehow cope with operating those.



Sorry, where do you get this idea from? The Hendy update says MML wiring to Sheffield is not expected to be complete until December 2023 and does not set any dates for infill wiring in Yorkshire from Sheffield to the likes of Doncaster and Wakefield to link to the ECML. And see above about the availability of AT300 production capacity in Italy from late 2018.



The balises to activate tilt between Oxford and Banbury were switched off when XC stopped using tilt. Someone may know if they are still in place. And tilt only cut two or three minutes off the journey time anyway, which you could probably deliver by other means through various capacity enhancement schemes between Birmingham, Oxford and Didcot.

As I am sure other readers will agree, jimm is one of the most informative but also amusing contributors on this forum. Always worth a read every day, but just to clarify, when I said 'proposed' I mean a bidder will put forward an option for reduced journey times on the Reading - Manchester axis. Everyone in the industry knows there is scope for improved XC journey times. DfT approving such a proposal or any new XC stock will be another thing, but surely we're allowed to suggest such ideas on this forum?!

As for the exact date that Doncaster to Derby will be wired, who cares?! That's the whole point of bi-mode - use the diesel until the wires are in. Glasgow / Edinburgh to York / Wakefield (with TP wiring) / Doncaster is still a long way under the wires.

As for whether it's Oxford to Banbury or Leamington that previously had the tilt, again who cares? I don't go researching the exact detail. The principal of using tilting stock where it can tilt (it can on WCML) is the important part of the suggestion along with one possible means of providing badly needed increased capacity on XC.