Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 today - GWRA Auction, Pershore
21/11/2018 - First Bath Bus panel
21/11/2018 - Consultation end - Angel Road
26/11/2018 - TransWilts Board and Members
26/11/2018 - Bath Clean Air consult ends
28/11/2018 - Melksham RUG
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
November 17, 2018, 01:01:32 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[249] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[50] Closure of Old Oak Common (81A) December 2018
[49] Use of senior railcards at peak times
[46] Cornwall signalling upgrade - ongoing discussion, merged topic...
[44] Four track for Filton Bank - ongoing discussion
[38] Vale of Berkeley Railway
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Poll
Question: What should be running From Ryde to Shanklin in 5 years time?  (Voting closed: June 26, 2018, 04:57:05 pm)
Current trains - 2 (7.7%)
Newer cascaded tubes - 11 (42.3%)
Next generation tube trains - 5 (19.2%)
Trams / light rail with streeet running - 7 (26.9%)
Buses - 0 (0%)
Something else - 1 (3.8%)
Total Voters: 26

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Isle of Wight futures.  (Read 586 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22482



View Profile WWW Email
« on: June 19, 2018, 04:57:06 pm »

It just struck me that with all the talk of more hand-me-downs for the Isle of Wight, why not bite the bullet and add a run-on of a few more trains to the next newbuild tubes?    Statement suggests that costs are reduced by doing a big standard run

http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/tfl-hires-siemens-to-build-94-next-generation-tube-trains-for-the-piccadilly-line/

This is totally unscientific to provoke discussion.   I have not added an O2 option though.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
bignosemac
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 16215


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2018, 05:48:36 pm »

Can the new trains be adapted to shorter lengths though.

Modern tube stock design is geared to fixed formation fully open walk through. The traction package is designed for the required length too.

I don't think it would be as simple as just paring down a full length train to 2/3 carriages length required by Island Line.
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4143


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: June 20, 2018, 09:01:07 am »

Class 230s?  Possibly battery.

I believe one of the problems with using full sized trains is the restricted tunnel in Ryde. Would require gauge enhancement.
Logged
ray951
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 233


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 20, 2018, 09:54:31 am »

This London Reconnections article is worth reading about the future of the Wight line.
https://www.londonreconnections.com/2018/third-ryde-tube-transfer-troublesome/
Logged
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6778


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 20, 2018, 10:30:51 am »

The trouble is there are numerous problems to overcome (both financial and technical) with all the potential solutions.  The quality of ride is shocking, especially at the southern end, so I feel the best way forward would be to do a proper job rather than a sticking plaster one with old D Stock or Piccadilly Line trains.  That would suggest re-laying most of the track, removing most if not all of the signalling, minor changes to the track layout so that a 20-minute interval service can operate, overhead electrification from Ryde St. Johns southwards and custom built trams that would operate on battery power between Ryde Pier Head and Ryde St. John's. 

Several new tram stops could be added at convenient locations in Ryde, and between Sandown and Shankling.  Indeed at Ryde you could consider an entirely new street section from Esplanade that removes the problem of Ryde Tunnel whilst taking trams through the centre of Ryde rather than the largely industrial area it currently passes through.

Who would pay for major works like that though?  It's unlikely that it would ever pay for itself, though there's no doubt in my mind that there is potential for significant growth to potentially reduce the losses.  Also, keeping the old trains going long enough to get those major works financed and built would be asking a lot.

I also like the idea of the steam railway somehow being able to share tracks through to Ryde.  Perhaps it could be the first tram/steam railway in the world?  Wink
Logged

To view my cab run over the new Reading Viaduct as well as a relief line cab ride at Reading just after Platforms 12-15 opened and my 'before and after' video comparison of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/1
Phantom
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 164



View Profile Email
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2018, 10:55:09 am »

...The quality of ride is shocking

I stayed in Sandown last weekend and had the misfortune of catching the "train" to Ryde.
I forgot how bumpy and rocky the service was, at one point a young lad was even thrown from his (sideways) seat with the motion of one bump

Even a horse drawn carraige would be an improvement to what they currently have !
Logged
Fourbee
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 519


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 20, 2018, 11:10:15 am »

The fares on the buses seemed expensive to me (Shanklin - Ventnor was 6 return when I was on the island in 2016, which was 2 x 3 singles as they don't do returns). Currently you can travel Ryde Pier Head - Shanklin day return for 6.10.

Maybe if all those ENCTS holders had to pay Island Line would have a few more quid in it's pocket...
Logged
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4143


View Profile Email
« Reply #7 on: June 20, 2018, 11:55:25 am »

I also like the idea of the steam railway somehow being able to share tracks through to Ryde.  Perhaps it could be the first tram/steam railway in the world?  Wink

I'm afraid the Germans have got there first. Nordhausen to to Ifeld 1897 Mallet tanks and 2005? ED trams which run onto the streets of Nordhausen.

Also Karlesruhr extensive tram train system I've run behind steam up one of the tram lines.
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22482



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #8 on: June 21, 2018, 06:23:53 am »

Can the new trains be adapted to shorter lengths though.

Modern tube stock design is geared to fixed formation fully open walk through. The traction package is designed for the required length too.

I don't think it would be as simple as just paring down a full length train to 2/3 carriages length required by Island Line.

I'll give you a definite "don't know" on that.   The latest trains for the underground (S7 and S8) are subsurface rather than tube and probably would not fit (nor would D trains). But i do note 6 slightly different formations, powered axles in all carriages, and pickup shoes on end and 2 centre cars with power being passed to neighbouring cars via cable in all cases except one on the 7 car varient.  Unless the train software is written around 4 pickup cars per set, a 4 car formation - surely - shouldn't be too much of a problem.   3 and 2 cars slightly more questionable as none of the longer formations have a drive motor car without an attached car with motors but no pickup shoes.

Examples ...
8 car  DM M1 M2 MS MS M2 M1 DM
7 car  DM M1 MS MS M2 M1 DM
4 car  DM M1 M1 DM
3 car?  DM M1 DM
2 car?  DM DM
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3031


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 21, 2018, 08:03:33 am »

I thought I had read somewhere here that VivaRail was being considered for IoW services and that it had been confirmed that they would fit the tunnel.

Logged
Red Squirrel
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2286


The first town plan. An idea that had legs.


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 21, 2018, 09:54:45 am »

I thought I had read somewhere here that VivaRail was being considered for IoW services and that it had been confirmed that they would fit the tunnel.



You may well have done, but the article ray951 linked to suggests otherwise. Worth a read!
Logged

Sir. Does this mean that Ann-Margret's not coming?
didcotdean
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 952


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2018, 10:21:49 am »

It also seems from that article and comments that the actual present-day situation regarding clearances throughout the route might be at variance with the 'received wisdom' and public domain information.
Logged
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4143


View Profile Email
« Reply #12 on: June 21, 2018, 11:26:53 am »

I thought I had read somewhere here that VivaRail was being considered for IoW services and that it had been confirmed that they would fit the tunnel.



You may well have done, but the article ray951 linked to suggests otherwise. Worth a read!

Interesting article perhaps we should look to Stadler who produce many types of units for in particular Swiss narrow gauge. Many seem to be one off variants of standard types produced in small batches.

Like the idea of NSE total route modernisation.

The main problem will still be cost and who pays.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants