• 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!

Why is LHCS unfavourable nowadays?

Status
Not open for further replies.

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,397
Carrying big underfloor engines up and down the ECML under the new Hitachi units seems bonkers compared to the option of new LHCS plus loco

This argument has been done to death. As passengers I suspect much prefer an extra carriage or two to the dead space that a locomotive produces. And it's certainly less bonkers than continuing to sling long-distance diesel units under the wires, or going through the whole shenanigan of locomotive swapping.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,276
Well, if a 3-car unit had an unpowered centre car, the amount of power would drop by 33% but the weight would drop by significantly less- so they'd be slower and more sluggish, along with a subsequent drop in performance under poor rail conditions.

Theoretically their performance in terms of timekeeping would be unchanged, but the timings themselves would be poorer as performance would have been poorer from the start.

Alternatively, if the build requirement at the time had been for unpowered intermediate cars, they'd have specified and fitted bigger engines to the powered cars...
 

Grumpy

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2010
Messages
1,064
This argument has been done to death. As passengers I suspect much prefer an extra carriage or two to the dead space that a locomotive produces. And it's certainly less bonkers than continuing to sling long-distance diesel units under the wires, or going through the whole shenanigan of locomotive swapping.

TPE's recent order for new LHCS suggests there's plenty of life in the argument.

I don't understand the statement "prefer an extra carriage or two to the dead space that a locomotive produces". The incremental space taken up by a locomotive compared to a driving trailer (with built in Sexy front end, cab,crumple zone etc.) wouldn't provide for one extra carriage, never mind two.

I can appreciate that this marginal increase might be valuable in some cases but I cant see this for the ECML. The new 9 car class 800/1 are quoted at 242m whereas an 1c225 set is some 249m and seems to fit in the existing platforms with space to spare. I would suggest you could have bought LHCS+Loco with a similar passenger carrying capacity to the class 800 that would have fit the platforms and given the passengers a much better journey.
This morning I travelled in a class 322 MS. It provided a clear reminder that the noise from the traction kit on acceleration can be very intrusive.

Similarly " the whole shenanigan of locomotive swapping" seems nonsensical. Whatever's difficult about loco swapping? The time taken need hardly be much more than the time realistically needed for passengers to join/alight at the likes of Waverley.

The fools who authorised the class 800's are the same fools who authorised the associated GWML electrification and we now know how much thought they had given to that.
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
TPE's recent order for new LHCS suggests there's plenty of life in the argument.
The order for LHCS has been discussed at length on here, and was due to necessity of obtaining new stock in the absence of new DMU/EMU manufacturing capacity, and a decision not to re-use existing 442s.
The fools who authorised the class 800's are the same fools who authorised the associated GWML electrification and we now know how much thought they had given to that.
Just what are you on about? Clearly you have no grasp of what's needed on the GWML, and have a singular obsession with LHCS.
 

Grumpy

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2010
Messages
1,064
The order for LHCS has been discussed at length on here, and was due to necessity of obtaining new stock in the absence of new DMU/EMU manufacturing capacity, and a decision not to re-use existing 442s.

The order for LHCS may well have been discussed on here but that's mainly people giving their opinions rather than contributing hard facts. How do you know that CAF said they couldn't manufacture DMU/EMU's (but have the capacity to manufacture LHCS)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just what are you on about? Clearly you have no grasp of what's needed on the GWML, and have a singular obsession with LHCS.

Do you ever read and consider what people write before you leap in with criticism? I have made two short postings on this matter yet you say I have a singular obsession. Similarly I made no comment on what is needed on GWML. However having worked on the GWML for some years I suspect I may have a better gasp than you.
 

CosherB

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2007
Messages
3,041
Location
Northwich
The order for LHCS may well have been discussed on here but that's mainly people giving their opinions rather than contributing hard facts. How do you know that CAF said they couldn't manufacture DMU/EMU's (but have the capacity to manufacture LHCS)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Do you ever read and consider what people write before you leap in with criticism? I have made two short postings on this matter yet you say I have a singular obsession. Similarly I made no comment on what is needed on GWML. However having worked on the GWML for some years I suspect I may have a better gasp than you.

So can you share with us all your enlightened facts and points of view?
 

Philip Phlopp

Established Member
Joined
31 May 2015
Messages
3,004
The fools who authorised the class 800's are the same fools who authorised the associated GWML electrification and we now know how much thought they had given to that.

Meh, criticise away.

The wiring is going up, the Class 800 are undergoing testing and at the end of it, another 270ish route miles will be electrified with a huge fleet of new trains seamlessly transitioning from diesel to electric at Newbury.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top