Was the Pendolino worth it?

[paul1609]

Managed to ride a few 397's recently at the Northern end of the route to compare with 390's.
From a performance point of view - what I can see is that the Pendolino's are barely any slower over the first few miles - maybe 10 seconds maximum in boost mode. Then their ability to run at enhanced speeds 15-20 mph over the non tilt rolling stock yields as much as a full minute advantage from Penrith to Carlisle for example and that is only 18 miles or so, with probably only 12 to 14 miles running at enhanced speeds once you take out the acceleration and braking zones.

I was talking to a Class 397 driver who claims to have test driven the 397's at 125mph and he claims that was done largely over the straighter sections of route. it is understood that Network Rail have to deliver some infrastructure enhancements to make 125mph possible on a day to day basis - though it wasn't clear what that would be - most probably some track realignment and increasd cant. Not sure if signal re-siting is needed as the 397's probably have brakes as good as the Pendolino's.
The current WTT is interesting though as the sectional running times are 4.5 mins slower for 397s than Pendolinos between Preston and Carlisle, yet the overall running time including station dwells is exactly the same over that stretch for both trains - 1 hour 18 mins. So Pendolino's are being assigned longer dwell times and station stops -probably for pathing purposes - remembering there are slower services using the line such as Northerns's services to Windermere and Barrow using 100mph stock that share the two-track WCML from Preston Northbound.
in that case- the extra performance seems wasted! But the WCML is clearly a far busier route than it was in 2004 when Pendolino's were being introduced.

Are we comparing 11 coach trains with 5 coach ones? The 11 coach one will loose an extra 23 seconds clearing a 20 mph speed restriction assuming equivalent performance due to waiting for the rear vehicle to clear.

 

[Bald Rick]

So Pendolino's are being assigned longer dwell times and station stops

As dwell times are station stops, I think you mean the same thing! Presumably you meant dwell times and timetable allowances (ie pathing time and performance time).

If you are comparing timetables now, Avanti have some extra time in for Covid reasons. But they have always had longer dwells (usually at least 2mins, occasionally 1 1/2)

 

[edwin_m]

Managed to ride a few 397's recently at the Northern end of the route to compare with 390's.
From a performance point of view - what I can see is that the Pendolino's are barely any slower over the first few miles - maybe 10 seconds maximum in boost mode. Then their ability to run at enhanced speeds 15-20 mph over the non tilt rolling stock yields as much as a full minute advantage from Penrith to Carlisle for example and that is only 18 miles or so, with probably only 12 to 14 miles running at enhanced speeds once you take out the acceleration and braking zones.

I was talking to a Class 397 driver who claims to have test driven the 397's at 125mph and he claims that was done largely over the straighter sections of route. it is understood that Network Rail have to deliver some infrastructure enhancements to make 125mph possible on a day to day basis - though it wasn't clear what that would be - most probably some track realignment and increasd cant. Not sure if signal re-siting is needed as the 397's probably have brakes as good as the Pendolino's.
The current WTT is interesting though as the sectional running times are 4.5 mins slower for 397s than Pendolinos between Preston and Carlisle, yet the overall running time including station dwells is exactly the same over that stretch for both trains - 1 hour 18 mins. So Pendolino's are being assigned longer dwell times and station stops -probably for pathing purposes - remembering there are slower services using the line such as Northerns's services to Windermere and Barrow using 100mph stock that share the two-track WCML from Preston Northbound.
in that case- the extra performance seems wasted! But the WCML is clearly a far busier route than it was in 2004 when Pendolino's were being introduced.

I'd be very surprised if signals needed re-spacing for 397s to run at 125mph, as it would mean that either they or Pendolinos didn't meet the standard braking distances from that speed. And there shouldn't be any sighting issues either unless the driver's field of view is different between the two classes (which would probably have manifested itself when the 397s were being cleared for existing speeds). I think I posted upthread about the long door cycle times of the Pendolino compared with the 350 but I don't know how a 397 compares. I seem to recall Pendolinos generally get 2min but there may be an element of padding there.

I'm not sure which unit you're referring to as having "extra performance". The 397 can keep up with a Pendolino due to some combination of good, possibly better, acceleration and shorter dwell times despite the latter having a considerable speed advantage on much of the route.