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.
 tomorrow - ACoRP board nominations close
29/10/2018 - Avocet line AGM
30/10/2018 - Minehaed Rail Link Group
31/10/2018 - CCIF Applications close
06/11/2018 - Talk Oxford / 800 intro
10/11/2018 - RailFuture National Conference
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
October 21, 2018, 10:54:30 pm *
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
[116] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[80] Weymouth Harbour railway line - merged topic, ongoing discussi...
[66] Where was Lee?
[56] Weekend Engineering Works
[55] Tram Surfer Awarded 485000 Damages
[53] Cambrian ERTMS - Loss of TSR Data (20/10/2017)
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 176
  Print  
Author Topic: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion  (Read 706526 times)
anthony215
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1223


View Profile Email
« Reply #630 on: April 08, 2011, 08:13:50 am »

With them opening a depot in Cardiff does this mean that there will be a lot of service starting from Cardiff in the morning, this will annoy a lot of commuters traveling to London.
Logged
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4133


View Profile Email
« Reply #631 on: April 08, 2011, 08:46:01 am »

As well as the extra cabs and buffets a 2 * 5 car  bimode unit is also carting around 12 extra tons of dead metal when under the wires. Which must add to the running costs.  3 diesel engines per unit are also going to cost an awful lot more to maintain than a straight electric unit.

Plus they are bound to reduce the number of miles between failures.  The newer electric units are now getting on towards 50K miles between failures. In contrast a 142 struggles to reach 5000.

As they going to have auto coulings a  3 MW 160Kph (upgradeable to 200 if the lines are improved) diesel loco with the same couplings and compatible software would almost certainly be cheaper to buy, run and maintain.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6712


View Profile
« Reply #632 on: April 08, 2011, 11:02:39 am »

And let's face it, there's bound to be some sort of bust-up with the unions over the introduction of these trains somewhere down the line

Too right.  I can see Crow/Norman looking at where they can throw a spanner in the works already.
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
willc
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2330


View Profile
« Reply #633 on: April 08, 2011, 09:31:55 pm »

As well as the extra cabs and buffets a 2 * 5 car  bimode unit is also carting around 12 extra tons of dead metal when under the wires. Which must add to the running costs.  3 diesel engines per unit are also going to cost an awful lot more to maintain than a straight electric unit.

Plus they are bound to reduce the number of miles between failures.  The newer electric units are now getting on towards 50K miles between failures. In contrast a 142 struggles to reach 5000.

As they going to have auto coulings a  3 MW 160Kph (upgradeable to 200 if the lines are improved) diesel loco with the same couplings and compatible software would almost certainly be cheaper to buy, run and maintain.

You aren't seriously suggesting a jerry-built railbus is in any way a fair indicator of the reliability of modern diesel units are you?
Logged
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2993


The future is 25,000 Volts a.c.


View Profile
« Reply #634 on: April 08, 2011, 10:01:53 pm »

Can not see what the fetish is for buffet cars, complete waste of space most routes with new rolling stock have trolley service which seems to work fine.

For electric traction at 25kV the 4 tonne weight per engine will not add much to the overall power consumption it could argued that the extra mass will improve rail adhesion hence making better use of the tractive effort thereby improving acceleration also it could aid braking force
Logged

Mark Carne 26 June 2015 - "The challenges of delivering myriad improvement projects while still running a railway seven days a week were simply overwhelming".
woody
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 525


View Profile
« Reply #635 on: April 09, 2011, 09:53:22 am »

Thanks Willc.  I'll have to buy Rail.  Glad to see Hitachi is trying hard to get this right.  There do seem to be a lot of 5 car trains proposed thought.  I assume that they will be used alot in pairs (with the predictable extra cost of providing catering twice and the revenue protection issues of non-connecting carriages)

Having experienced new trains on other routes, I dont assume that they will be "used a lot in pairs" I cynicly assume that they will run mainly as single units as with voyagers.
And why on earth would they "provide catering twice", not at all more likely, maybe a trolley if you are lucky.

By cramming in lots of high density bus seats, minimising luggage space, removing catering, and reducing the number of toilets, it should be possible to provide "similar" seat numbers to an unimproved HST. "Similar" in this context is railway jargon for "not that much worse"

43009 "First Transforming travel",but not necessary for the better though for all I am afraid.Travelled back to Plymouth on Friday on the 1406 "cattle wagon" Paddington to Penzance HST and being sat with my son in coach B I soon gave up the idea of macheteing my way to the buffet through the vestibule areas which were jammed with passengers and large luggage all the way to the buffet for the entire journey to Plymouth(are cases getting bigger?).Add to that there was no aircon in coach B on what was a warm day all left a bad taste in the mouth despite an on time arrival in Plymouth.
It seems to me that Longer distance journeys to and from say Paddington to Devon and Cornwall were compromised to accommodate the overwhelming need to provide extra seats for FGWs commuter.I hope IEP addresses this compromise.
 
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2175



View Profile
« Reply #636 on: April 10, 2011, 09:59:21 am »

AFAIK the internal layout has yet to be decided, I would however be very suprised indeed if it is an improvement over a proper HST, and it might well be even worse than an "improved" high density bus style one.
The trend is generaly towards shorter trains with high density bus seats, minimal lugage space and no catering, this is known as progress.
I cant imagine that a new 5 car multiple unit will be an improvement over an 8 car HST.

Certainly no chance of a proper restaurant, and I doubt that there even be a hot buffet.
Restaurant services on trains to/from Wales were withdrawn several improvements ago. At the time I said that this was in preperation for downgrading Welsh services to DMUs. DMUs dont normally have restaurants.
Logged

"When customers say that they want a seat, they dont mean they want to sit with their knees behind their ears so that 4 more can sit down. They mean that they want an extra coach so that 74 more can sit down"
"Capacity on intercity routes should be about number of vehicles, not compressing people"
bignosemac
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 16057


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #637 on: April 10, 2011, 11:02:30 am »

Restaurants on trains don't show a profit, nice though that they are. So whilst disappointing, I wouldn't expect the new fleet, either the 8 car electric or 5 car bi-mode to have restaurant provision.

I would hope for hot food provision of some sort though available in both classes. But I won't be surprised if their isn't.

Who knows, we might even see a renaissance in restaurant provision on services to the far west where the HSTs will continue to run for many years. Lots of TFKs that'll no longer be in use offering Travelling Chef between South Wales and Paddington. I suspect though that we are seeing the swansong of restaurants on the franchised UK rail network.

HSTs available for open access could be another possibility..... SWAP Railway* anyone?


*South Wales and Paddington  Wink
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
willc
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2330


View Profile
« Reply #638 on: April 10, 2011, 11:55:35 am »

Broadgage, Hitachi say they can provide pretty much any internal layout (the class 395 presumably is the likely starting point for a high-density layout) and any catering set-up required by the operators but they envisage a maximum of 88 seats in a fully-seated trailer or motor standard coach - a handful more than a current high-density FGW HST coach, in a longer vehicle.

And I think you need to forget your fetish for 'proper' restaurant cars being some kind of defining factor in what constitutes an express train. As of next month, the Plymouth Pullmans will be the last of their kind left in the UK. The world has moved on.

Open access - i don't think so. You would fall foul of the "primarily abstractive" issue trying to operate to pretty much anywhere on the GWML - there is no equivalent to the Yorkshire and North East towns ignored by East Coast that are served by HT and GC.
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6959



View Profile
« Reply #639 on: April 10, 2011, 04:49:36 pm »

I suspect though that we are seeing the swansong of restaurants on the franchised UK rail network.

While not disagreeing with you in the longterm, I was speaking to a member of the catering crew on one of the Pullman Services this week and he confirmed that the existing four services will remain in the May timetable, will have new menus and perhaps most importantly will be promoted.
Logged
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6712


View Profile
« Reply #640 on: April 15, 2011, 01:57:40 pm »

An interesting 'Railnews' article on electrification, touching on the history of railway electrification in the UK, running though the years to the current proposals.

http://www.railnews.co.uk/content/documents/rn170_2011_year_of_sparks_effect.pdf
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
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2732


View Profile
« Reply #641 on: April 15, 2011, 02:21:07 pm »

As well as the extra cabs and buffets a 2 * 5 car  bimode unit is also carting around 12 extra tons of dead metal when under the wires. Which must add to the running costs.  3 diesel engines per unit are also going to cost an awful lot more to maintain than a straight electric unit.

Plus they are bound to reduce the number of miles between failures.  The newer electric units are now getting on towards 50K miles between failures. In contrast a 142 struggles to reach 5000.

As they going to have auto coulings a  3 MW 160Kph (upgradeable to 200 if the lines are improved) diesel loco with the same couplings and compatible software would almost certainly be cheaper to buy, run and maintain.

I only partly agree with this.  You need to remember that 12t x 3 (or x5 on teh 8 car train) is a lot less than the 60t that a powercar on teh original bui-mode proposal would have been.  You also should bear in mind that even the all electric version will have one 12t engine for emergency use. 

As for reliability.  The underfloor engines are likely to be derivatives of extablished truck engines, so likley to be fairly reliable and cheap and compiant with the emissions standards
Logged
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2993


The future is 25,000 Volts a.c.


View Profile
« Reply #642 on: April 15, 2011, 05:53:48 pm »

An interesting 'Railnews' article on electrification, touching on the history of railway electrification in the UK, running though the years to the current proposals.
http://www.railnews.co.uk/content/documents/rn170_2011_year_of_sparks_effect.pdf

The map of the UK shown in the article, I can remember when the BRB DM&EE Electrification HQ was at Paddington in Tournament Hse in the 1990's had a very similar map colour coded to show existing (as was at the time) ac (red I think) and dc (blue I think) electrification also it showed the lines dotted for high priority and a paler shade for lesser priority.  The Western main lines was regarded as high priority to Swansea, even Plymouth vis both B & H and Bristol.   There was even a major feeding diagram which showed the location of all the Grid connections and all the track sectioning cabin locations.
Logged

Mark Carne 26 June 2015 - "The challenges of delivering myriad improvement projects while still running a railway seven days a week were simply overwhelming".
Rhydgaled
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1341


View Profile WWW
« Reply #643 on: April 16, 2011, 12:39:08 am »

Would 9 5-car Voyagers (I think that's what runs entirely under the wires from Birmingham to Scotland) made into bi-modes cover the Cotswold line services? Also, would splitting the PAD - BRI - South-West services at Bristol (electric to Bristol, change onto a 125 at Bristol) and introducing extra PAD - South-West direct via Westbury services to compensate be acceptable, or is it a bad idea like making Cotswold line passengers change at Oxford?
Logged

----------------------------
Don't DOO it, keep the guard (but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the driver unlocked the doors on arrival at calling points).
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9701


View Profile Email
« Reply #644 on: April 16, 2011, 06:39:57 am »

Bad idea anywhere.

Second - where do you maintain these Voyagers?

Thirdly - IF the voyagers were to be used as you suggest, what would XC use in replacement? And where do you suggedt those are maintained?

Rather than pull suggestions out of thin air, cam you please make suggestions that make sense please? Because you've only make nonsensicsl ines so far.
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 ... 41 42 [43] 44 45 ... 176
  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