Stock they should have built more of

[RichmondCommu]

It's not. The train hasn't been cleared for other stretches of route it's not expected to operate on.

Where? The Matlock branch?

Why? It depends on what the industry procedures are for obtaining clearance. I have no idea what they are. Do you?

No I don't. But you would have thought that Alsthom might have had an idea. After all they were the one's trying to sell the train.

 

[transmanche]

No I don't. But you would have thought that Alsthom might have had an idea. After all they were the one's trying to sell the train.

So you're condemning Alsthom for not doing something they may not be able to do anyway, in order to sell a train to operate over a completely different route.

Yeah, that makes sense...

 

[RichmondCommu]

So you're condemning Alsthom for not doing something they may not be able to do anyway, in order to sell a train to operate over a completely different route.

Yeah, that makes sense...

Are you suggesting that Alsthom would be unable to complete paper work in order to sell more trains? Yes that makes perfect sense... How can you compare the cost of admininstration fees over selling more trains?

 

[The Ham]

Are you suggesting that Alsthom would be unable to complete paper work in order to sell more trains? Yes that makes perfect sense... How can you compare the cost of admininstration fees over selling more trains?

Even if it were just a case of doing some paper work then they would only do it as it was needed. Otherwise they could spend a lot of time on paper work on routes which are never going to see that type of train. For instance the 450's and 444's are only cleared to run on the lines which SWT's run them on. Although that doesn't stop people from suggesting that the 444's could be used elsewhere if there was a follow on order. Nor does it stop Siemens from offering other TOC's their trains.

 

[zn1]

The BRB should have also pushed for an extra squadron of intercity 225's for the west coast, Tilt packs could have been quietly installed, speed increased and it would have eliminated the 86/87, mk3s on anglo scots overnight...

 

[sprinterguy]

If it's just a case of signing off some paper work and the administration fee why hasn't this been done? Are you seriously suggesting that Alsthom were right to ignore this? Any project manager with a modicum of sense would have ensured that an Intercity diesel train designed for the British market could run through Birmingham New Street.

As I have mentioned before and as I will undoubtedly mention again when this red herring next comes up, 180s have been cleared to run through New Street. I've seen one, though the sectional appendix says they are not currently cleared.

If there is any sort of physical barrier to 180s operating through New Street it can only be with regard to the Holliday Street and Canal Tunnels on the Cross-City south towards Five Ways.

 

[High Dyke]

159. As they are essensially a 158 with more capacity. could be useful on the Liverpool-Nottingham runs. And they are generally nice regional express units. Although a 100mph version could have been useful..

Having recently been squashed up on an Exeter - Waterloo service using a 159 give me the normal diet of 158's we have on the Norwich - Liverpool services...better legroom.

More 222's would've been nice. I prefer them to the 180 that HT now use. Never really travelled on the 175 to comment. Can we not buy anymore 'tilting' stock though!

 

[Buttsy]

While I would have liked to seen more 156s and 158s in lieu of 142s and 150s, one has to remember the state of the railways and the reluctance of the Government of the time to allow new builds. Hertiage DMUs could only be replaced on a 2 for 3 basis. 2 new cars if 3 old ones were scrapped, so reducing the number of coaches and seats available.

Pacers and 150s we thought up as a cheap and cheerful way of getting Regional Railways (the big loss maker) new trains. It worked and so for longer routes the 156 and 158 were developed, but again, a reduction in the number of coaches was required. A 2-car 156 would replace a 4 coach train (37+TSO+TSO+TSO+BFO [or similar]) on West Highland, Kyle and Far North services.

In the 80s it was hard to justify the longer new trains that we need today. Had growth not been so huge, I could have envisged 142s being on the scrapline now...

 

[sprinterguy]

I'm surprised to see so little support for additional 150s, in place of Pacers. The 150s are a perfect suburban commuter train, the 156s definitely aren't (But they are perfect rural regional trains). The only problem is that some of them retain their original mid-eighties interiors, which are looking understandably unkempt when the trains are used to intensively.

The refurbishment of some of the mark 3 EMU fleets, and also of ATWs' 150s, shows that the unrefurbished 150s could still present a modern appearance to the public if the work was done.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Cracking units they were remember them from my childhood! Quite at least the 303s were the norths units not NSEs cast offs.

So Scottish cast-offs are fine for Northern England, it's just London cast-offs that are a problem then?

 

[transmanche]

Are you suggesting that Alsthom would be unable to complete paper work in order to sell more trains? Yes that makes perfect sense... How can you compare the cost of admininstration fees over selling more trains?

You've made this point already and it has been answered.

There seems little point in discussing this further, as you are just repeating yourself and ignoring all the responses made to you.

 

[cjmillsnun]

They should have built more 442's.

Agree 100%. Enough for the Pompey direct and the Brighton line. Perhaps by using lower power motors but doing the greyhound mods. Could've been 442/5s
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even if it were just a case of doing some paper work then they would only do it as it was needed. Otherwise they could spend a lot of time on paper work on routes which are never going to see that type of train. For instance the 450's and 444's are only cleared to run on the lines which SWT's run them on. Although that doesn't stop people from suggesting that the 444's could be used elsewhere if there was a follow on order. Nor does it stop Siemens from offering other TOC's their trains.

I would've thought 450s, if fitted with Pantos, would automatically be cleared over any route that the 350 and 360 is cleared over, as they are effectively the same train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes I'm aware of that but I also wonder why the ROSCO is now so keen to replace the class 91's. The answer is that the class 91's are very expensive to maintain. The Pendolinos are much quicker and have transformed services on the WCML, something that 225's would have been unable to do. And I speak as a frequent and contented user on the WCML.

Rubbish. The Mk4s were designed to be able to have tilt retrofitted. The 91's were designed to power this, with an extra tap available on the transformer for that purpose. They're also a 140MPH loco (and the Pendo is a 140 MPH EMU).

More 91's would've made them cheaper to maintain (more parts generates economies of scale).

So aside from the acceleration advantage, the 225s had the capability to match what the pendos are now doing on the WCML.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The BRB should have also pushed for an extra squadron of intercity 225's for the west coast, Tilt packs could have been quietly installed, speed increased and it would have eliminated the 86/87, mk3s on anglo scots overnight...

They tried that - a 91 etc ran to Manchester and Liverpool to prove it. NO chance with the DfT of the day (which even then amateurishly tried to diagram the IC fleet and even the 2 main batches of 253 units were hard fought over by BR (wishing a good size fleet) and the penny counters who wished to reduce expenditure , (despite the massive growth experienced by the 253's) ....I knew some of the people who tried this out.

 

[RichmondCommu]

As I have mentioned before and as I will undoubtedly mention again when this red herring next comes up, 180s have been cleared to run through New Street. I've seen one, though the sectional appendix says they are not currently cleared.

If there is any sort of physical barrier to 180s operating through New Street it can only be with regard to the Holliday Street and Canal Tunnels on the Cross-City south towards Five Ways.

I would be interested to know why the clearance has subsequently lapsed. From I understand clearance is determined by either weight or loading gauge. Is it common for clearance to lapse unless either the infrastructure or the rolling stock changes?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Rubbish. The Mk4s were designed to be able to have tilt retrofitted. The 91's were designed to power this, with an extra tap available on the transformer for that purpose. They're also a 140MPH loco (and the Pendo is a 140 MPH EMU).

I'm sorry but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here given that I've never suggested that this isn't the case. All of the above is common knowledge.

More 91's would've made them cheaper to maintain (more parts generates economies of scale).

So aside from the acceleration advantage, the 225s had the capability to match what the pendos are now doing on the WCML.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten the terrible reliability issues that the class 91's suffered from when first introduced. This alone would have had a disastrous impact on the WCML.

You seem to playing down the importance of acceleration to a very busy WCML with its frequent station stops. The 225's could never have matched the Pendolinos in service and if chosen there is no way that the current timetable would exist.

 

[ed1971]

I'm surprised to see so little support for additional 150s, in place of Pacers. The 150s are a perfect suburban commuter train, the 156s definitely aren't (But they are perfect rural regional trains). The only problem is that some of them retain their original mid-eighties interiors, which are looking understandably unkempt when the trains are used to intensively.

I disagree. The 150s have poor ambiance and lineside views, as the seats do not align with the windows. As well as this, the 150/1s have a loud sickening engine whining noise that resonates throughout the passenger compartments. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieEbHwAKS5w

In the absence of a production run of Class 151s, the Pacers, (particularly the Class 143s and 144s), were the next best thing.

I much prefer 156s to 150s, but as already mentioned, they are not ideal as suburban commuter trains owing to the door width and position. They were designed for cross country services and one of the first routes they were used on (in the summer of 1988), was the Blackpool North to Cambridge service via Bolton and Manchester Piccadilly.