• 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!

Siemens' announces the Desiro Verve

Status
Not open for further replies.

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,192
Location
St Albans
Maybe they'd been better off order an AC version of a 444 at the time. What's the stopping pattern like on the line? The stopping pattern might have pushed them towards going for a "commuter" door pattern (1/3 and 2/3 doors)

Yes of course I like the 309s and their ilk for journeys over 1 hour, (the clue is in my user name), nostalgia is a wonderful thing but times have changed. When I used them (early '70s), the bulk of the mainline commuter traffic was handled by 307/308s which provided the core Chelmsford, Witham/Colchester service. The (relative) luxury of the Clactons meant that some travellers crammed on them at Liverpool St but in reality the corridors/gangways quickly clogged up, and their dwell times were tedious. In the peaks, they either took paths that effectively restricted them to the maximum speeds of the outer suburban trains, i.e. 75mph or the way ahead had to be cleared allowing them to reach 90-100mph beyond Shenfield, which was wasteful for a realtively few passengers.
As usual, it's all about the average passenger journey. Even today, the volume of Clacton passengers is low by GE standards so providing low density stock would be unlikely.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Wivenswold

Established Member
Joined
24 Jul 2012
Messages
1,478
Location
Essex
Those pesky 75mph units must have really stuffed the service up when there were delays. It's bad enough when a Norwich Train gets stuck behind a stopper these days.

Lower density units (6 car?) would work well on off-peak services to Ipswich and Clacton and also on peak trains like mine that stop Colchester, Kelvedon & Witham, but less doors and longer internal gangways would cause chaos at Chelmsford between 7.30 and 8.30 am.

I still think it should be considered, many Colchester commuters currently use the Mk3 stock trains simply because there's better legroom, more toilets, air con, somewhere to get a snack, less drafts (a serious problem on the 321s in winter) and the seats are more comfortable. Having more long-distance trains from Colchester would help spread the load and speed up journey times if the slower 321s are restricted to Chelmsford/Southend Vic or even West Anglia services.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,192
Location
St Albans
Those pesky 75mph units must have really stuffed the service up when there were delays. It's bad enough when a Norwich Train gets stuck behind a stopper these days.

Not really because they had better acceleration than the 309s. The Norwich trains really did get in the way as a 47 struggled to drag 10 MKIIs up Brentwood Bank or even out of Chelmsford towards Boreham.

Lower density units (6 car?) would work well on off-peak services to Ipswich and Clacton and also on peak trains like mine that stop Colchester, Kelvedon & Witham, but less doors and longer internal gangways would cause chaos at Chelmsford between 7.30 and 8.30 am.

Yes they would be OK on off-peak services, but for journeys up to 1 hour in ther peak it's all about capacity and will be mpore so in the future.

I still think it should be considered, many Colchester commuters currently use the Mk3 stock trains simply because there's better legroom, more toilets, air con, somewhere to get a snack, less drafts (a serious problem on the 321s in winter) and the seats are more comfortable. Having more long-distance trains from Colchester would help spread the load and speed up journey times if the slower 321s are restricted to Chelmsford/Southend Vic or even West Anglia services.

Passengers will always go for the longer distance trains if given the choice. Expect to see pick-up onlys in the evening at Colchester in the future.
 

superalbs

Established Member
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Messages
2,460
Location
Exeter
Perhaps they could be used on an upgraded WEML, with a 6 car electric unit coupled to a 3 car bi-modal unit, allowing the train to still split at Salisbury. There are talks of electrifying this line, but whether or not it'll be OHLE or 3rd Rail is yet to be known, so if it is OHLE, might as well go for 125mph on the straight sections too!
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,192
Location
St Albans
Perhaps they could be used on an upgraded WEML, with a 6 car electric unit coupled to a 3 car bi-modal unit, allowing the train to still split at Salisbury. There are talks of electrifying this line, but whether or not it'll be OHLE or 3rd Rail is yet to be known, so if it is OHLE, might as well go for 125mph on the straight sections too!

I doubt that any more 3rd rail would be sanctioned on new electrification schemes. There's no case for DC as any SWT train suitable for the journey is dual-voltage capable (or convertible) anyway as would be all new stock. In addition, for such a long low-density route, 3rd rail installation would probably be more expensive than OLE, let alone its higher through-life cost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top