333
|
Journey by Journey / London to Reading / Re: Class 387 coming to Thames Valley - ongoing discussion
|
on: July 24, 2017, 21:24:11
|
Well I hope that isn't the final timetable as the Oxford - Didcot service in the late afternoon is worse than the current timetable.
Currently we have services at 1637, 1707, 1737, 1807, 1837, 1909 the new timetable seems to be 1637, 1707, 1752, 1825, 1906.
|
|
|
336
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: What makes Voyagers so inefficient?
|
on: February 21, 2017, 21:00:47
|
Presumably these driving vehicles would only need a cab at one end, thereby slightly simplifying the design. Use of such a vehicle at each end of the train should give plenty of power and also "get you home" redundancy in the event of one failing. Some sort of remote control would be needed in order that one driver could control both driving vehicles. A speed of 125 miles an hour should be entirely achievable, especially if the cab or driving end was streamlined or sloped. Can anyone think of a suitable name for these new units, something perhaps that indicates the maximum service speed and also denotes that they are for longer journeys connecting major towns and cities.
I am not a marketing expert but do you think Inter-City 125 would work? or failing that High Speed Train or HST▸ for short? Any suggestions for colour schemes?
|
|
|
338
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
|
on: January 09, 2017, 13:44:42
|
But all the sections deferred (and only those) were already not due to complete in CP5▸ , following the Hendy review.
The June 2016 milestones, which in some areas slightly revise the 'post Hendy' timescales, have a regulated output of "Didcot to Oxford complete" June 2019, so only 2 months into CP6▸ . But then there is also an entry for "entry into service for part of route section for train testing" due in Sept 2018. That is only 18 months away, so I would have thought that at least some section of the route will carry on at a slightly slower pace, but I'd be surprised if there was an obvious withdrawal of the entire workforce for a significant period. Paul But didn't the Grayling deferral come after that? And Grayling gave no dates or even any guarantees that electrification would ever be completed. I would say that Sept 2018 was very unlikely given the lack of work undertaken between Kennington Junction and Oxford. No piling or even preparation for piling has ever taken place between those two places.
|
|
|
339
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
|
on: January 09, 2017, 12:11:52
|
AIUI▸ , the deferral means that NR» don't have to meet their statutory obligation to complete the work in CP5▸ , which means that NR, Oxford City Council and the DfT» can take their time to sort out Oxford station (which should be a lot cheaper and less disruptive to rebuild whilst unwired), and likewise, NR can do Filton Bank quadrupling, Bristol resignalling and wiring/rebuilding Temple Meads without it having to be an expensive rush-job full of compromises and requiring expensive alterations later. As luck would have it, that probably saves NR a lot of money in CP5.
But all the sections deferred (and only those) were already not due to complete in CP5, following the Hendy review. Just because they weren't due to complete in CP5 doesn't mean that no money would be spent in CP5, if deferred means stopped until CP6▸ then no money will be spent until CP5. Whatever the reality of the situation I hope they don't use the Oxford station rebuild as an excuse not to complete electrification to Oxford. As as far as I can tell there is no approved/finalised plan for the rebuild and their certainly doesn't appear to be any money so we could be waiting a long time/forever.
|
|
|
340
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
|
on: January 09, 2017, 12:05:03
|
Are they definitely electrification masts, or might they be signalling gantry masts? I only say that because the resignalling between Didcot and Oxford is continuing regardless of any electrification delay, though I also heard that a short section north of Didcot was still to be electrified anyway in relation to stabling of the new trains.
Definitely electrification masts, the signalling gantries are much larger. Does anyone know where this stabling point is going to be? Based on information from Didcot Railway centre I assume it is going to be next to them in the sidings currently used by DB» Cargo. But I have seen no plans and there is no evidence of any work in that area (or any other area in Didcot). Any stabling point would need wiring and masts and currently the only wiring in Didcot, excluding the main-line, is between the station and Didcot West Curve and that is only partially complete.
|
|
|
341
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion
|
on: January 09, 2017, 10:26:10
|
I noticed today that some masts for electrification have appeared between Didcot North Junc and Appleford, these must have gone up over the weekend. This follows on from piling carried out between Didcot East junc and Didcot North Junc on Christmas Day and between Didcot North Junc and Appleford just before Christmas.
Given that Didcot to Oxford electrification has been paused/deferred/cancelled I am surprised that they are putting up masts north of Didcot North Junc.
|
|
|
342
|
Journey by Journey / London to the Cotswolds / Re: 16:22 Paddington - Great Malvern, first few days of January 2017
|
on: January 06, 2017, 15:35:03
|
Maybe this should be in a new topic but is there a 'shortage' of units?
A couple of trains I catch have been running shorter this week: The 0657 Paddington to Oxford has run as 2 carriages instead of 3 which makes it very busy between Didcot (0829) and Oxford (0847) and the 1637 Oxford to Paddington which has dropped from 4 to 3 carriages, not any issue for me but maybe for the 1842 Paddington to Maidenhead, which I believe it returns as.
|
|
|
|