Voyagers for Stirling-Euston?

[driverd]

I don't understand all these complaints abouts diesel under the wires. Whilst I appreciate its unfortunate not to use the infrastructure, we shouldn't loose sight of the positive impact a rail service (irrespective of traction), will take cars off the road and reduce aviation demands.

Its not an ideal long term solution, but of it proves the viability of a service, why not use this assett?

 

[JonathanH]

They could also start back from Perth with 221s.

Yes that’s another bonus in utilising this fleet.

Starting from Perth might give an excuse to use 221s, but it would be an hour or more where GU's rolling stock would not be earning a lot of money. That might be reasonable at either end of the day, if they could use the servicing facility there, but wouldn't make a lot of sense for a London starter.

London to Stirling is a journey that would take the best part of 5 hours in itself. There is clearly a need with a small operation to keep the units in traffic and earning revenue yet not adding to costs for the majority of the day.

 

[Huntergreed]

I don't understand all these complaints abouts diesel under the wires. Whilst I appreciate its unfortunate not to use the infrastructure, we shouldn't loose sight of the positive impact a rail service (irrespective of traction), will take cars off the road and reduce aviation demands.

Its not an ideal long term solution, but of it proves the viability of a service, why not use this assett?

Absolutely!

Much better to introduce a rail service which is one diesel train and reduce potentially hundreds of cars or a much more polluting A320!

Unfortunately, many have lost sight of this and seem to write off the idea of 'diesel under the wires'.

I'm sure it wouldn't be a permanent solution and would much more likely be a 'market test', where if demand was sufficient, BMU's/EMU's would be purchased!

Starting from Perth might give an excuse to use 221s, but it would be an hour or more where GU's rolling stock would not be earning a lot of money. That might be reasonable at either end of the day, if they could use the servicing facility there, but wouldn't make a lot of sense for a London starter.

London to Stirling is a journey that would take the best part of 5 hours in itself. There is clearly a need with a small operation to keep the units in traffic and earning revenue yet not adding to costs for the majority of the day.

It's not just about London to Perth/Stirling though. People living in Dunblane/Alloa/Bridge of Allan/Dunkeld etc... will see this as a huge advantage and will likely be less inclined to drive for a large proportion of their journey, which is the ultimate aim here!

The more seats we can provide to/from Scotland and London, the less cars/plane seats are used.

 

[RailWonderer]

I don't understand all these complaints abouts diesel under the wires. Whilst I appreciate its unfortunate not to use the infrastructure, we shouldn't loose sight of the positive impact a rail service (irrespective of traction), will take cars off the road and reduce aviation demands.

Its not an ideal long term solution, but of it proves the viability of a service, why not use this assett?

I totally agree, especially as there are no secondary regional routes these trains could run on without high track access charges, not being able to use SP speeds, and being too long for platforms on secondary regional routes. The only alternative would be to scrap them and I'm glad this looks very unlikely now. We just need the remainder to be mopped up by XC next year after the first 7 they've taken on already, plus GU trains' plans to happen and all 18 will be spoken for.

 

[The Planner]

Not a new user here. Merely forgot all my details after an absence.

The freight companies are private concerns. Their primary motive has to be profit else they don’t operate and misallocation of resources pushes up prices and is wasteful. The issue is electricity (due to the worshipped net zero) is too expensive. No economy grows with expensive energy. The results are crystal clear. The Voyagers are a poor train but the right decision under the circumstances. The sad part about 800’s is, they are slower than the Pendolinos and slower than the Voyagers they are replacing. Liverpool will be 10-15 minutes slower to London. It is criminal really. Billions and tops speeds decline by intent. Voyagers will at least keep a 125mph timetable.

Where are you getting 10-15 minutes from?

 

[AJDesiro]

Not a new user here. Merely forgot all my details after an absence.

The freight companies are private concerns. Their primary motive has to be profit else they don’t operate and misallocation of resources pushes up prices and is wasteful. The issue is electricity (due to the worshipped net zero) is too expensive. No economy grows with expensive energy. The results are crystal clear. The Voyagers are a poor train but the right decision under the circumstances. The sad part about 800’s is, they are slower than the Pendolinos and slower than the Voyagers they are replacing. Liverpool will be 10-15 minutes slower to London. It is criminal really. Billions and tops speeds decline by intent. Voyagers will at least keep a 125mph timetable.

The IETs are operating a new service though (though it happens to be the current paths), the other tph will be a pendolino path, so there’s twice as many trains. Comparing 390 paths to 80X paths, a 390 path can take 2:23, while an 80X path also exists for the same duration to Liverpool. On another note, the Coventry corridor is actually faster with IETs.

 

[dave59]

As awareness grows operating a DEMU end to end under the wires will not go down well with passengers. Witness LUMO's heavy promotion of their "clean 100% all electric fleet". It wins votes. Diesel doesnt. There are many sections suited to 125mph using non-tilt stock - a change which would benefit TPX services too. 225 sets would be imeasureably better than Voyagers for the WCML Stirling route. Or is there some catch that these could only ever be used on the Eastern region?

 

[RichW1]

The 10-15 minute difference I read on here a long time ago I believe it was. The point was stated that not only won’t the 800’s tilt, they are incapable of 125 (123mph in reality unfortunately, and to be pedantic) for a lot more of the route. I read on the other page just now 115-120mph maybe as good as gets for them.

There is no way that can be timed the same as a Pendolino. From Warrington a Pendolino can achieve it in 1hr38 timed for 1hr43. An 800 achieve that? I cannot see how. We are chopping a few mph off all over the network. Nothing goes as fast as an HST today except a Pendolino and a Voyager on the East Coast section (even then they are limited) Acceleration and braking is superior on an 800, I hear this is the entire substitute for speed. I remember when the mindset was every minute counts on the engineering led railway; canting, top speed, yes acceleration (HST’s were not slow off the mark in the 1980’s) and so on. The mindset seems to have gone into reverse. The culture is less speed all the time.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

The 10-15 minute difference I read on here a long time ago I believe it was. The point was stated that not only won’t the 800’s tilt, they are incapable of 125 (123mph in reality unfortunately, and to be pedantic) for a lot more of the route. I read on the other page just now 115-120mph maybe as good as gets for them.

A good example is this path:

Realtime Trains | 1A12 0643 Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston | 23/09/2023

Real-time train running information for 1A12 0643 departure from Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston on 23/09/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Timed for a 80x, it saves time
- 1m at Runcorn (lost due to departing on time)
- 1m at Crewe (lost due to departing on time)
gained loads of time reaching -8 by Hanslope Junction, at which 4m is lost as a LNWR is given priority. (leaving it at -4)
Then it arrives into Euston 10 early
Obviously only 1 case but I count at least 16 minutes of early (+more lost along the way likely due to other trains)

 

[RichW1]

A good example is this path:

Realtime Trains | 1A12 0643 Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston | 23/09/2023

Real-time train running information for 1A12 0643 departure from Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston on 23/09/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Timed for a 80x, it saves time
- 1m at Runcorn (lost due to departing on time)
- 1m at Crewe (lost due to departing on time)
gained loads of time reaching -8 by Hanslope Junction, at which 4m is lost as a LNWR is given priority. (leaving it at -4)
Then it arrives into Euston 10 early
Obviously only 1 case but I count at least 16 minutes of early (+more lost along the way likely due to other trains)

Happy to be corrected. What is tilt and higher top speed for then on a Pendolino? Are we saying acceleration and braking fills in for an entire 193 miles? I am surprised. How does this stack up to Warrington? An 800 manage 1hr38 on a 1hr43 timetable if it had to?

The post at hand, a Voyager seems the only option. To be honest, I want my trains just to run right now, their environmental credentials I couldn’t care less about given their contribution. They have been environmentally friendly since the steam age given the amount of goods they moved and people later on v cars.

 

[Energy]

The point was stated that not only won’t the 800’s tilt, they are incapable of 125 (123mph in reality unfortunately, and to be pedantic) for a lot more of the route. I read on the other page just now 115-120mph maybe as good as gets for them.

Huh? The electronic limit is 124mph (200kph), and they can easily get to 140mph on electric.

(HST’s were not slow off the mark in the 1980’s)

I doubt the engine change has made them much slower...

Acceleration and braking is superior on an 800, I hear this is the entire substitute for speed. I remember when the mindset was every minute counts on the engineering led railway; canting, top speed, yes acceleration (HST’s were not slow off the mark in the 1980’s) and so on. The mindset seems to have gone into reverse. The culture is less speed all the time.

Money always wins, the plan for TASS/Tilt and planned 140mph on the WCML was to enhance the offering to Birmingham and Manchester not for the thrill of speed.

A tilt bodyshell would be expensive to develop for such a small order, assigning them to west midlands and Wales minimizes the loss. Using them on Liverpool is purely because only the 807s fit at Liverpool South Parkway.

Happy to be corrected. What is tilt and higher top speed for then on a Pendolino? Are we saying acceleration and braking fills in for an entire 193 miles? I am surprised. How does this stack up to Warrington? An 800 manage 1hr38 on a 1hr43 timetable if it had to?

Lets make this clear, the 807s will be a tad slower, but its only a couple mins. The options are accept its a couple mins slower and the only choice for Liverpool South Parkway or spend millions on developing a tilting train for a small order which will have journey times decimated by HS2 (well when they were ordered...)

 

[RichW1]

Huh? The electronic limit is 124mph (200kph), and they can easily get to 140mph on electric.

I read your reply with interest and all understood. The above however means the 800’s are driven at 123mph in reality so as not to hit the limit. On the West Coast however, they will likely be slower still due to curvature without tilt. There will be limited scope for 123mph running nevermind 125mph as they should be across the UK frankly. If a Pendo has a 129mph limiter than there’s no reason the 800’s need to be restricted so heavily to less than an HST! My point wasn’t that 800’s aren’t able to be programmed for 140mph, more the curvature on the West Coast means they’ll seldom get past 120mph… permanently. Only HS2 would increase speeds and that now looks like a dead duck sadly! If you live in Glasgow, even a Pendo is crap option. You have to fly. So many in the South forget there’s cities north of Manchester and Leeds!

 

[Energy]

I read your reply with interest and all understood. The above however means the 800’s are driven at 123mph in reality so as not to hit the limit.

They can be driven to the limit, its electronic and is fine to hit. Officially trains shouldn't be going over 125mph anyway so 124mph isn't a massive loss.

If a Pendo has a 129mph limiter than there’s no reason the 800’s need to be restricted so heavily to less than an HST!

The AT300s originally had no limiter, it got put on after a TPE 802 hit 145mph as a driver failed to set the speed limiter. I'd imagine that it gets dropped in ETCS mode.

more the curvature on the West Coast means they’ll seldom get past 120mph… permanently.

Yes, unfortunately, either its fixing the infrastructure, spending a lot on developing tilt for a small batch of trains, or accepting a tiny bit slower until HS2 arrives, at some point.

 

[Wapps]

Makes sense to have 221s on this route, given the tilt. If folks are upset about diesel under the wires then start with Grand Central on the east coast, where there’s no tilt so no impact to having non-tilt trains. Or just order more titling trains - they are still being made around the world…

As an aside, would it be possible to have an electric locomotive (eg class 92/93) dragging a 221 that operates with tilt on, so can be dragged at 125mph (but no diesel!)?

The IETs are operating a new service though (though it happens to be the current paths), the other tph will be a pendolino path, so there’s twice as many trains. Comparing 390 paths to 80X paths, a 390 path can take 2:23, while an 80X path also exists for the same duration to Liverpool. On another note, the Coventry corridor is actually faster with IETs.

Please could you explain this quote about the Coventry corridor? Will it be quicker to/from Coventry from/to Euston on IET or one of the titling fleet?

 

[dave59]

Makes sense to have 221s on this route, given the tilt. If folks are upset about diesel under the wires then start with Grand Central on the east coast, where there’s no tilt so no impact to having non-tilt trains.

Grand Central run onto unwired routes.

 

[The Planner]

The IETs are operating a new service though (though it happens to be the current paths), the other tph will be a pendolino path, so there’s twice as many trains. Comparing 390 paths to 80X paths, a 390 path can take 2:23, while an 80X path also exists for the same duration to Liverpool. On another note, the Coventry corridor is actually faster with IETs.

Please could you explain this quote about the Coventry corridor? Will it be quicker to/from Coventry from/to Euston on IET or one of the titling fleet?

Its 30 seconds quicker towards New St from Rugby and 1 minute from New St. I reckon those will get altered back down to 30 seconds each way once the 800s are bedded in to be honest. 30 seconds of it is between Proof House and New St, the other is between Cov and Rugby Trent Valley.

Happy to be corrected. What is tilt and higher top speed for then on a Pendolino? Are we saying acceleration and braking fills in for an entire 193 miles? I am surprised. How does this stack up to Warrington? An 800 manage 1hr38 on a 1hr43 timetable if it had to?

The post at hand, a Voyager seems the only option. To be honest, I want my trains just to run right now, their environmental credentials I couldn’t care less about given their contribution. They have been environmentally friendly since the steam age given the amount of goods they moved and people later on v cars.

The original planned SRTs (they may have been tweaked since) clearly vary by stopping pattern. If you ran Euston to Warrington non stop then a 390 is 5½ minutes quicker on the down, 8 minutes on the up.

A good example is this path:

Realtime Trains | 1A12 0643 Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston | 23/09/2023

Real-time train running information for 1A12 0643 departure from Liverpool Lime Street to London Euston on 23/09/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Timed for a 80x, it saves time
- 1m at Runcorn (lost due to departing on time)
- 1m at Crewe (lost due to departing on time)
gained loads of time reaching -8 by Hanslope Junction, at which 4m is lost as a LNWR is given priority. (leaving it at -4)
Then it arrives into Euston 10 early
Obviously only 1 case but I count at least 16 minutes of early (+more lost along the way likely due to other trains)

That is an awful example as its a Northampton path with a shed load of pathing in it. A clean Liverpool 800 path with MK, Crewe and Runcorn is 2 hours 17.

 

[Master29]

As awareness grows operating a DEMU end to end under the wires will not go down well with passengers. Witness LUMO's heavy promotion of their "clean 100% all electric fleet". It wins votes. Diesel doesnt. There are many sections suited to 125mph using non-tilt stock - a change which would benefit TPX services too. 225 sets would be imeasureably better than Voyagers for the WCML Stirling route. Or is there some catch that these could only ever be used on the Eastern region?

It could win votes until punters see the cheaper tickets (and who can blame them). Personally I agree using electric stock where there is the infrastructure makes better sense but not going to happen here.

 

[Taunton]

As awareness grows operating a DEMU end to end under the wires will not go down well with passengers.

That's a railway-centric viewpoint. The majority of Scotland to London travel is done by plane, coach or car, all oil-fuelled. None of whom care anything about it.

 

[Snow1964]

It could win votes until punters see the cheaper tickets (and who can blame them). Personally I agree using electric stock where there is the infrastructure makes better sense but not going to happen here.

There are currently (strictly soon will be) surplus 221s and 222s

I agree ideally would have an electric unit, but there aren't any surplus 125mph electric trains (there are the Transpennine mk5s, but no spare express locos), remaining 91s seem to have homes.

So stuck between hiring (leasing) old spare diesel trains, or waiting until build something (which might get stuck with, if service is unsuccessful). More a failure of the way privatisation didn't insist on pool of trains being kept available for short term hire.

 

[43096]

As awareness grows operating a DEMU end to end under the wires will not go down well with passengers. Witness LUMO's heavy promotion of their "clean 100% all electric fleet". It wins votes. Diesel doesnt. There are many sections suited to 125mph using non-tilt stock - a change which would benefit TPX services too. 225 sets would be imeasureably better than Voyagers for the WCML Stirling route. Or is there some catch that these could only ever be used on the Eastern region?

There being no 225 sets available is a bit of an issue.

 

[dave59]

That's a railway-centric viewpoint. The majority of Scotland to London travel is done by plane, coach or car, all oil-fuelled. None of whom care anything about it.

Well both the Lumo and Grand Union marketing suggests people do care and that, certainly for a new rail service, environmental credentials matter. Grand Union quote "electric or dual mode" which they will need to retract if they use Voyagers.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

221s might not be able to run at their current EPS speeds after the MU speed profile comes in (south of Weaver Jn).
221s have some lower EPS speeds (compared to 390s) posted in some locations, and I believe these will be removed and replaced with the lower-speed MU profile.

 

[zwk500]

Well both the Lumo and Grand Union marketing suggests people do care and that, certainly for a new rail service, environmental credentials matter. Grand Union quote "electric or dual mode" which they will need to retract if they use Voyagers.

Meanwhile Lumo's results suggest that people are primarily conscious of price.

 

[dk1]

Meanwhile Lumo's results suggest that people are primarily conscious of price.

That’s what I would have thought. I don’t personally know anybody who cares much about how a train is powered. Cost is the priority.

Maybe GU will need to pipe down a bit on the environmental line.

 

[zwk500]

That’s what I would have thought. I don’t personally know anybody who cares much about how a train is powered. Cost is the priority.

I've certainly never met anybody who has deliberately chosen to make a train journey or not on the basis of how their train is powered. The closest I get is when people talk about Eurostar, and even then the hassle of airports (even compared to St Pancras) and the convenience of the city centre drop off in about 2 hours is the first thing they mention before 'oh it's also greener than flying as well which helps'. Most people who've said they looked at Eurostar and didn't take it have usually mentioned it being too expensive above any other consideration.

 

[Class 170101]

Time to extened the London ULEZ to cover railways.

Treasury would tell the DfT to close Chiltern lines rather than spend the money.

As awareness grows operating a DEMU end to end under the wires will not go down well with passengers. Witness LUMO's heavy promotion of their "clean 100% all electric fleet". It wins votes. Diesel doesnt. There are many sections suited to 125mph using non-tilt stock - a change which would benefit TPX services too. 225 sets would be imeasureably better than Voyagers for the WCML Stirling route. Or is there some catch that these could only ever be used on the Eastern region?

Except Lumo pack up when the East Coast is shut on the core route, the diversionary routes except Hertford North are unwired.

 

[dave59]

There are currently (strictly soon will be) surplus 221s and 222s

I agree ideally would have an electric unit, but there aren't any surplus 125mph electric trains (there are the Transpennine mk5s, but no spare express locos), remaining 91s seem to have homes.

So stuck between hiring (leasing) old spare diesel trains, or waiting until build something (which might get stuck with, if service is unsuccessful). More a failure of the way privatisation didn't insist on pool of trains being kept available for short term hire.

Why is 125mph tilt so important for just 4 trains/day? Grand Central's Euston - Blackpool service using Class 90/non-tilt mk4's was approved.

TPX mk5 using Class 90/91 or short formed IC225 sets (any left?) may be more difficult to path further south but no issues north of Preston which is full of EMU's running at 100/110 and this weekend Class 80x diversions from the ECML also running at this speed.

 

[Chester1]

The phrase "making the perfect the enemy of the good" springs to mind. There are no suitable EMUs available. Using Voyagers to get the service established and then procuring EMUs at a later date is much better for the environment than not running the service at all or waiting an extra couple of years for new build stock to be ready. Lumo has demonstrated that you can get people in the central belt to switch from planes to trains to London.

 

[JonathanH]

It's not just about London to Perth/Stirling though. People living in Dunblane/Alloa/Bridge of Allan/Dunkeld etc... will see this as a huge advantage and will likely be less inclined to drive for a large proportion of their journey, which is the ultimate aim here!

It indeed isn't just about London to Stirling, but equally Grand Union aren't looking to set up services that lose money. If an operator is given access rights between London and Stirling (or Perth), they need to use their trains in such a way that they bring in the most revenue. All I was saying was that if Grand Union were to run beyond Stirling, the part of the journey between Stirling and Perth needs to bring in revenue, not just provide extra options.

Why is 125mph tilt so important for just 4 trains/day? Grand Central's Euston - Blackpool service using Class 90/non-tilt mk4's was approved.

Journey time over a 400 mile distance is quite important to be competitive.

Lumo has demonstrated that you can get people in the central belt to switch from planes to trains to London.

For the right offering.

 

[43096]

The phrase "making the perfect the enemy of the good" springs to mind. There are no suitable EMUs available. Using Voyagers to get the service established and then procuring EMUs at a later date is much better for the environment than not running the service at all or waiting an extra couple of years for new build stock to be ready. Lumo has demonstrated that you can get people in the central belt to switch from planes to trains to London.

The problem is that once the 805/807/810 orders are complete there are no further 80x derivative orders in prospect in any quantity. That means anyone wanting to order small numbers - such as Open Access operators - are going to pay a really high price to get new trains, which may well cripple the business case. 22x units are an ideal alternative: mid-life, available and reliable.