Snow Hill electrification and 172 cascade?

[Metrailway]

Thats a good question.

If the 165/166s can't easily fit onto lines around Bristol (or elsewhere) then what do we do with them? They ought to have a longer life expectancy than a Pacer, yet it may not be economical to make significant infrastructure improvements to lines where they'd only be one train an hour (or so) - could put more on Chiltern to release the 168s (which are "normal size")? Dunno...

Some modifications will still have to be carried out to the 'Thames Turbos' for them to operate on the Chiltern lines. These include fitting of tripcocks, fitting of ATP, and regearing to match the acceleration of Chiltern 165s.

 

[JEPB]

I believe that 165/166's could be used pretty much anywhere on what I still think of as the Western Region. There might just be a few issues with station platforms here and there but I don't think it would be a hugely expensive investment to clear a route. I have heard suggestions they might get used on semi-fast services on the Worcester-Gloucester-Bristol-Taunton corridor and beyond. I think they would be good on the Cardiff-Portsmouth route but anticipate more issues with guage clearance (153's cannot go beyond Southampton for instance).

165/166's run in current service to Kidderminster from Snow Hill, and in FGW service Worcester-Hereford. I am sure there would be no issues Kidderminster-Worcester but I don't think a cacsde to displae new 172's would go down well with LM or their customers!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Some modifications will still have to be carried out to the 'Thames Turbos' for them to operate on the Chiltern lines. These include fitting of tripcocks, fitting of ATP, and regearing to match the acceleration of Chiltern 165s.

What regearing would be needed? Is the acceleration significantly different? When the Bicester-Banbury line was redoubled, Chiltern 165s ran in multiple with (then) Thames Turbos between Paddington and Oxford, and there was no issue that I recall. Of course Chilterns have aircon (and it works) whihc is one of the main differences I am aware of!

 

[Class172]

165/166's run in current service to Kidderminster from Snow Hill, and in FGW service Worcester-Hereford. I am sure there would be no issues Kidderminster-Worcester but I don't think a cacsde to displae new 172's would go down well with LM or their customers!

Nor do I. Maybe if the 172s hadn't been ordered then the situation would be different...

 

[SSL1990]

It seems electrification of the snow hill lines and the chiltern line is planned eventually by both Chiltern Railways and Network Rail:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...rexham, shropshire and marylebone railway.pdf

 

[The Planner]

That's only an aspiration in a RUS, far from conclusive proof anything will be done in my experience.