• 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!

Talgo trains enter service in Russia -why not here?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,983
See this article in Railway Gazette.

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/...ew/talgo-trains-enter-service-in-russia.html?

Talgo trains enter service in Russia

The first of Federal Passenger Co’s seven Talgo trainsets was inaugurated by Russian Railways President Vladimir Yakunin and Talgo Chairman Carlio de Palacio with a ceremony at Moscow’s Kurskaya station on June 1.

The first service operated by the Talgo stock was the 14.00 from Moscow to Nizhny Novgorod. The launch marked ‘the culmination of 20 years of work and negotiations’, according to Guillermo Martinez, Managing Director of Talgo in Russia, who said ‘we can finally see Spanish technology running across this country, a very important milestone for both Russia and Spain.’

RZD has branded its Talgo trainsets as Strizh (swift), continuing the ornithological theme of the Sapsan (peregrine) and Lastochka (swallow) fleets. The locomotive-hauled trainsets painted in the colours of the Russian flag have passive tilt and run at up to 200 km/h, giving a journey time from 3 h 35 min for the 440 km route.

Each trainset has 18 passenger coaches and two technical cars, with a total capacity of 414 passengers...
Is there some specific reason why the design is unsuitable here? I see there could possibly be a platform height problem but perhaps not on dedicated high speed routes. One would think the advantage of using them on height restricted routes would be most attractive.

I travelled on one from Madrid in 1970 (!) and it was the height of smoothness and luxury, although my wife felt a bit queezy ('too smooth').
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Iron Girder

Member
Joined
9 Nov 2014
Messages
15
Is there some specific reason why the design is unsuitable here? I see there could possibly be a platform height problem but perhaps not on dedicated high speed routes. One would think the advantage of using them on height restricted routes would be most attractive.
Loading gauge?

From memory, the Russian loading gauge is HUGE, and most European ones are significantly bigger than ours.

And we don't need gauge-changing stock, unless there are plans to run it on the Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch as well...
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
The Pendolinos with Virgin are built for a 1,435 mm track gauge. That article says one batch of those Talgo trains can run on both a 1,520mm and a 1,435 gauge and will switch between the two in Brest.
 

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,223
The Talgo design has the carriage floor very low above the rail level, which is a major problem in Great Britain as the loading gauge is too narrow below platform level for even 2+2 seating. The same problem applies to double deck stock in the UK, since the lower deck could only have 2+1 or longitudinal seating and so the capacity improvement it could bring would be far lower than it would be on the Continent, even if the vertical height were available for an upper deck.
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Loading gauge?
From memory, the Russian loading gauge is HUGE, and most European ones are significantly bigger than ours.
And we don't need gauge-changing stock, unless there are plans to run it on the Romney, Hythe and Dymchurch as well...

Talgos "tilt at will" which isn't allowed on our narrow structures gauge.
They are also articulated which Network Rail doesn't like.
They are very smooth, quiet and comfortable to ride in though.
The new RENFE variable gauge trains (from several manufacturers, not just Talgo) are able to navigate the gauge changers at up to 30kph without stopping which is an amazing achievement.
 

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,983
Thanks for the replies, very comprehensive. I was not citing the Talgo because of its gauge changing properties, but just because the design could be perhaps adapted to NR conditions. You have collectively made clear that can't be done on conventional routes.

What about dedicated HSLs though? One can make that large enough surely? (I expect mods will move my thread again now I've opened that one up! Thanks, by the way mods; I was unsure where to put it). Also HST's are fixed units, so articulation should be fine, I would have thought.
 

sprinterguy

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2010
Messages
11,048
Location
Macclesfield
Also HST's are fixed units, so articulation should be fine, I would have thought.
It's not the fixed formations that are an issue, the bigger concern is the likely higher axle loadings with articulated and Talgo type stock, though I believe that articulated bogies can actually exert lower track forces than conventional bogie stock so it's not a clear cut argument. There are also gauge clearance issues on curves to be considered, which differ for articulated stock compared to conventional stock - shorter vehicles are often utilised as part of the solution.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The Talgo design has the carriage floor very low above the rail level, which is a major problem in Great Britain as the loading gauge is too narrow below platform level for even 2+2 seating.
Is there any technical reason why a high floor variant of the Talgo could not be developed if there was the will to do so? The TGV-derived Eurostar can cope with both high and low height platforms, for example, though it's not clear to me if this required any alteration to the floor height compared to prior TGV designs.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
There's nothing to stop Talgo bidding for the stock for HS2 when the time comes, though the tilt system would be of little of benefit on a pure high speed line with no "classic" line running. The carriage sets can be built without the tilt system, simplifying them.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,396
Don't suppose they'd be interested in supplying a tilt-capable classic-compatible set, for the WCML portion?
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
it would have to use entirely different technology to what they make, so I doubt it.
 

47802

Established Member
Joined
8 Oct 2013
Messages
3,455
Putting it another way why do we Talgo trains in the UK.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,635
You would actually have to do proper gauge clearance since the passive tilt on the Talgo carriages is very difficult to restrain based on location.

Of course we might, like the Japanese, need tilting trains on high speed lines eventually..... when 450km/h comes along or something.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
17,624
Location
Another planet...
It's not the fixed formations that are an issue, the bigger concern is the likely higher axle loadings with articulated and Talgo type stock, though I believe that articulated bogies can actually exert lower track forces than conventional bogie stock so it's not a clear cut argument. There are also gauge clearance issues on curves to be considered, which differ for articulated stock compared to conventional stock - shorter vehicles are often utilised as part of the solution.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is there any technical reason why a high floor variant of the Talgo could not be developed if there was the will to do so? The TGV-derived Eurostar can cope with both high and low height platforms, for example, though it's not clear to me if this required any alteration to the floor height compared to prior TGV designs.

Isn't the whole point of the Talgo design the ability to have a low floor? On that basis a high floor version would be pointless. There's no reason why we couldn't have articulation (370s were, and 373s are), but it does lead to higher track access charges, as the weight is spread over fewer axles.
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
9,564
I'm scratching my head at which 'height restricted routes' there are left on the UK network? Wasn't the Burry Port and Gwendraeth Valley railway the last mainline route that required modified loading gauge stock?

A solution looking for a problem!
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
3,074
The obvious reason Talgo technology isn't in use here is that none of their designs are compatible with our network and there's no obvious advantage to using it.
 

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,983
The obvious reason Talgo technology isn't in use here is that none of their designs are compatible with our network and there's no obvious advantage to using it.

The question was whether they *could* be used here if the design were modified appropriately. Thanks to those who explored the question further, in the above discussion. Their advantage lies in the use of 'lean on' two wheel coaches, as I understand it, thus saving cost and giving a smooth ride. I suppose we shall see if they tender for HS2 captive stock, although the above replies seem to indicate they could try for CC stock too.
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
3,074
The question was whether they *could* be used here if the design were modified appropriately.

Surely anything could be used here if modified appropriately, but there needs to be a justification for doing so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top