XC HST's

[YorkshireBear]

How much worse is the performance of a 7 car HST compared to voyager?

Cos i have noticed regularly the HST workings running late through sheffield. Almost every single one. So maybe ti would be worth useing them on a faster (less stops more high speed strectches) reading newcastle service? replace all 5 car's currently used on service?

Although as i right this ive just relaised Scotland devon services need the higher capacity. Just a thought though

 

[MCR247]

Reading - Newcastle is normally 4 car, and I'm not sure they're much quicker, the only thing I can think of its the fact that they don't call at TAM and Burton :? And as you said they don't need the capacity

 

[dave_wm]

I've never really got why the Plymouth - Edinburgh's call at Burton and Tamworth, surely the stop would be much better on the Reading - Newcastle's that are quieter (don't go to Leeds) and quicker (go via Doncaster) - sure you'd lose the direct train to Leeds, but it would improve journey times from Birmingham to Leeds as well as shifting the passenger loads.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Reading - Newcastle is normally 4 car, and I'm not sure they're much quicker, the only thing I can think of its the fact that they don't call at TAM and Burton :? And as you said they don't need the capacity

I was also thinking about no chesterfield and the much quicker route they take between sheffield and york (No wakefield and 125 between doncaster and york) I know it's same as other service north of york (except for occasional call at chester le street) but i dont know what the route is like Birmingham to reading.

Saw 3 5 car's on it the other day

That's something i mean to mention also, making the shorter reading newcastle the stopper and the long distance service the more fast service. Agree with you there

 

[Darandio]

Saw 3 5 car's on it the other day

All coupled together? In service?

 

[MCR247]

No, I think he meant he saw 3 5 car 221s on the route on one day

 

[Sherlock37]

All coupled together? In service?

Virgin did this once with their Class 221s.

Made an interesting sight, but I don't recall of a XC Voyager doing the same.

 

[YorkshireBear]

i meant instead of a 4 car voyager on reading newcastle three times i saw a 5 car instead sorry for not being clear

 

[MCR247]

Maybe they're are diagrammed as a common pool?

 

[YorkshireBear]

probably was just something that crossed my mind as i can guess voyagers have better acceleration that a HST.

I think it would be better to remove stops at chesterfield burton and tamworth maybe even alternating between darlington and durham? try make it a bit quicker as at moment it can be very slow.

 

[MCR247]

Why alternate between Darlington & Durham, they're both pretty important, and it would only speed it up by around 5 minutes which may not even be possible due to pathing etc at places like New St

 

[YorkshireBear]

fair enough well maybe i should just let them leave it as it is but ask them ot run more HST's and time it to be HST friendly

 

[sprinterguy]

With the amount of recovery time that is built into the Crosscountry schedules at the likes of Sheffield and York, the HSTs should be able to keep to time, but with shorter station dwell times: And therein lies the problem, as ideally the HSTs need longer station dwell times than the Voyagers due to them having slam doors, and more of them. I have been following the Crosscountry HSTs extensively this summer, and to their credit the vast majority, if not all, have been running to time. I have been subject to major delays with them in the past though, but more often than not it's something outside of Crosscountry's control: Copper fairies having their wicked way with the signalling is a common one.

The HSTs should remain on the Edinburgh/Manchester-Cornwall trains, as they are intended to provide more capacity on the longest distance services to offer the greatest benefit, but I concur that using them on more limited stop services would be of benefit to running times.

For reference, an XC 2+7 HST weighs roughly 395t with 4,500hp, whereas a four car 220 weighs about 195t with 3,000hp. 11.4hp/tonne against 15.4 hp/tonne respectively. Greater distributed power on a 220 as well.

And I was under the impression that the 220s and 221s were operated in a common pool? Can anyone shed any light on that?

 

[mumrar]

In terms of start stop accelerating and decelerating an HST just can't keep pace with a Voyager. The initial dash to 50mph is where most of this is lost for the HST. Couple that to passengers who find slam door totally alien, and the more meticulous despatch carried out due to the risks involved.

For reference, an XC 2+7 HST weighs roughly 395t with 4,500hp, whereas a four car 220 weighs about 195t with 3,000hp. 11.4hp/tonne against 15.4 hp/tonne respectively. Greater distributed power on a 220 as well.

CrossCountry HSTs are fitted with MTU 4000 units rated at 2,700hp, so a set has 5,400hp not 4,500hp, giving power to weight of 13.67hp/tonne. A Class 220 set weighs a fraction over 185tonnes, giving 16.16hp/tonne. Interesting to not is that the weight penalty for a 4-car Class 221 is 41.4 tonnes, a 5-car 221 is 96.3 tonnes!

And I was under the impression that the 220s and 221s were operated in a common pool? Can anyone shed any light on that?

Not really, there are certain diagrams which will be marked for a 5-car and others for a 4-car.

 

[sprinterguy]

In terms of start stop accelerating and decelerating an HST just can't keep pace with a Voyager. The initial dash to 50mph is where most of this is lost for the HST. Couple that to passengers who find slam door totally alien, and the more meticulous despatch carried out due to the risks involved.

Exactly, it's why Virgin reduced their Crosscountry HSTs, as I'm sure you know, down to 2+5 in the last couple of years of their use on XC so that they could better keep pace with the acceleration of the Voyagers. A 2+7 HST just can't compete with Voyager station to station times and acceleration, and then when you throw in the increased station dwell time, ti's no wonder the XC HSTs run late more often than the Voyagers. I'm amazed that so many of my journeys on them recently have been on time.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

CrossCountry HSTs are fitted with MTU 4000 units rated at 2,700hp, so a set has 5,400hp not 4,500hp, giving power to weight of 13.67hp/tonne. A Class 220 set weighs a fraction over 185tonnes, giving 16.16hp/tonne. Interesting to not is that the weight penalty for a 4-car Class 221 is 41.4 tonnes, a 5-car 221 is 96.3 tonnes!

Good grief, I didn't realise the XC HSTs had uprated engines; I thought all the MTU power units were 2,250hp, as using higher powered power units would cause problems with the cooling systems? Although, I suppose the cooling arrangements are completely different for the MTUs so this isn't a problem like it was with the Valentas.

It is interesting to note that a 221 is considerably heavier per coach than a 220. And thanks for the info on the diagrams.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I just can't imagine between sheffield and chesterfield a HST gets up to much speed but between sheffield and derby it could go pretty quick Don't see why long distance is stop but short distance is limited stop i'd of thought common sense would put it other way round.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....It is interesting to note that a 221 is considerably heavier per coach than a 220. And thanks for the info on the diagrams.

I can understand a tilt equipt 221 being so much heavier, but haven't the XC 221s had the tilt equipment removed, leaving the bigger bogie frame as the only real difference?

 

[sprinterguy]

The tilt mechanism has been replaced by a solid metal bar as far as I know. It's more like the tilt system has been isolated than removed in it's entirety.

 

[57315]

There are 220 diagrams and 221 diagrams.
There is not a common pool for both, they have set diagrams. Sometimes changes are made to keep the service running.

 

[leedstraindude]

XC actually get fined if they do not run the correct unit on the correctly planned Diagrams. But as pointed out previously will swap them round to ensure the timetable is intact.
Apparently from December all the HST's will be diagrammed to work as the DFT have stepped in and made XC run them to ensure they are meeting there franchise commitment with seating increases.

 

[YorkshireBear]

XC actually get fined if they do not run the correct unit on the correctly planned Diagrams. But as pointed out previously will swap them round to ensure the timetable is intact.
Apparently from December all the HST's will be diagrammed to work as the DFT have stepped in and made XC run them to ensure they are meeting there franchise commitment with seating increases.

Great i hope that becomes more of an apparently, at moment that will allow 3 more diagrams to have doubled up voyagers

 

[devon_metro]

XC actually get fined if they do not run the correct unit on the correctly planned Diagrams. But as pointed out previously will swap them round to ensure the timetable is intact.
Apparently from December all the HST's will be diagrammed to work as the DFT have stepped in and made XC run them to ensure they are meeting there franchise commitment with seating increases.

They've also been fined for not installing wifi!

 

[57315]

XC actually get fined if they do not run the correct unit on the correctly planned Diagrams. But as pointed out previously will swap them round to ensure the timetable is intact.
Apparently from December all the HST's will be diagrammed to work as the DFT have stepped in and made XC run them to ensure they are meeting there franchise commitment with seating increases.

Thats absolute rubbish, seating commitments?
NO 4 will be in daily service from Dec 10 due to the Dft agreed extension of the NCL -RDG to SOU for the Cruise Liner Market every 2 hours. This means 4 voyagers will be displaced from the NE -SW route requiring HST's to fill the empty spaces.

 

[voyagerdude220]

They've also been fined for not installing wifi!

Apologies for being off the original topic, but I'm curious as to whether XC are meeting their commitment of providing 'hot plated meals' to FC passengers at the moment, in the sense that they're offering a hot option on both of the current menus?

I wouldn't exactly call them meals, more hot snacks, and they certainly aren't plated, I'm just wondering if XC can get around it by just offering mircrowaved up snacks as they are now?

 

[57315]

Apologies for being off the original topic, but I'm curious as to whether XC are meeting their commitment of providing 'hot plated meals' to FC passengers at the moment, in the sense that they're offering a hot option on both of the current menus?

I wouldn't exactly call them meals, more hot snacks, and they certainly aren't plated, I'm just wondering if XC can get around it by just offering mircrowaved up snacks as they are now?

The meals do comply with franchise agreements. Sure their not amazing but since the menu change in june, FC passengers seem to be far more satisfied than pre menu change.
There are no plans to fit additional equipment to utilise plates, the plastic trays cover enviromental health and passenger needs.

 

[voyagerdude220]

Thanks for that 57315.

I've had the lasagne option on XC, and found it to be surprisingly good for a microwaved up thing on a train. It was perfect for what i needed before i got home- not too much, not too little.

My only complaint as such, is the lack of variety on the menus, as it's same 2 menus going back and forth, meaning that i'm used to it, despite only using XC a few times within the last 2 or so months..

 

[57315]

Thanks for that 57315.

I've had the lasagne option on XC, and found it to be surprisingly good for a microwaved up thing on a train. It was perfect for what i needed before i got home- not too much, not too little.

My only complaint as such, is the lack of variety on the menus, as it's same 2 menus going back and forth, meaning that i'm used to it, despite only using XC a few times within the last 2 or so months..

I cant remember if the set menu's change weekly or 2 weekly.
Yes the lasagne goes down well along with the ricotta 2 extremely popular choices.

XC wont ever have a massive variety nor will any TOC, cost an could cause the company to make a massive loss on wasted food which is not being used on trains. Keeping a set menu keeps costs down and easier track of resources.

 

[voyagerdude220]

Yeah that's very true.

What I meant by variety (i should have been more specific), is that i'd prefer XC to have say three set menus rotated on a weekly basis, instead of the two set menus being rotated at present.

 

[sprinterguy]

Thats absolute rubbish, seating commitments?
NO 4 will be in daily service from Dec 10 due to the Dft agreed extension of the NCL -RDG to SOU for the Cruise Liner Market every 2 hours. This means 4 voyagers will be displaced from the NE -SW route requiring HST's to fill the empty spaces.

So no freed up Voyagers to double up? That sucks: So there's going to be basically the same sub-standard capacity as now, but most likely with more late running on the long distance services as the HSTs fail to cope with Voyager-based schedules. Thanks so much Mr Branson and DfT for putting your heads together and giving the UK a four carriage train on an Intercity route :roll: Although at least reliabiity is a lot better now and the trains present a much better image to the passenger (not to the basher mind ), plus at least there'll be a few "proper train" diagrams knocking about.

 

[MCR247]

You can't blame Virgin, they wanted 6/7 coaches