|
Title: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Kernow Otter on February 08, 2013, 19:48:40 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21380938 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21380938)
Simple really. Just transfer the 180's to the South West regional fleet, which would free up a rake of 150's and derivatives back to the branchlines where they belong. Discuss ! Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Chris from Nailsea on February 08, 2013, 20:16:29 Many thanks for posting this story, Kernow Otter! :)
It perhaps deserves a wider readership than our specific 'Plymouth and Cornwall' board, so I've moved it here, and I'm inclined to quote the BBC article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21380938) in full, to encourage discussion here: Quote (http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/65779000/jpg/_65779291_65779102.jpg) The partnership said 2,027,544 journeys were made on the branch lines in 2012, a rise of 4.7% on the previous year Rail experts are questioning whether train services in Devon and Cornwall will cope after a record number of journeys were made on its branch lines. In 2012, more than two million journeys were made on the seven lines, according to Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership. The partnership, which promotes travel on rural branch lines, fears delays in securing a new franchise will mean a longer wait for new carriages. Operator First Great Western said it would look to increase rolling stock. Neil Gallacher, BBC South West's business correspondent, said part of the delay in securing a future franchise was the fallout caused by the collapse of the ^5bn West Coast Mainline deal. As a result, FGW's franchise was extended for six months until October. Richard Burningham, of Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership, said: "They [FGW] bring rolling stock down from Bristol, where it's not needed as much in the peak summer, to strengthen holiday services in Devon and Cornwall. That's a big help, but had the franchise started as we hoped in April then there would have been some nice goodies that we were are not going to get until it's resolved." FGW, owned by FirstGroup, runs trains between London, the west of England, south Wales and parts of the Midlands after taking on the franchise in 2005. Mr Gallacher said: "FGW's six month extension gives a breathing space for the government to negotiate a two-year mini-franchise on fresh terms. That also gives a breathing space for civil servants to work out how to run a fully-fledged tendering exercise that will choose the main rail operator for the 10 or 15 years that follow." Retired railway manager Leonard Wooldridge, from Saltash, said: "I'm disappointed that we don't get any new rolling stock, the trains are very overcrowded and it's a grave concern for people here in the West Country." The partnership said 2,027,544 journeys were made on the branch lines in 2012, a rise of 4.7% on the previous year. Julian Crow, FGW regional manager, said the rise in passenger numbers was "great news". "Obviously we need to continue to look at ways of increasing rolling stock for these lines," he said. A spokesman from the Department for Transport said: "The First Great Western franchise was one of three put on hold last October following the cancellation of the West Coast competition." At the time, transport secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, said: "We have had to take some tough decisions regarding franchising, and while they may provide a challenge in the short term, I believe the lessons we have learnt will help deliver a more robust system in the future benefitting fare payers and taxpayers alike." The branch lines in Devon and Cornwall are the Tarka Line, Tamar Valley Line, Looe Valley Line, Atlantic Coast Line to Newquay, Maritime Line to Falmouth Docks, St Ives Bay Line and the Avocet Line to Exmouth. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: LiskeardRich on February 08, 2013, 21:54:35 This evidences the downside of FGW success in Devon and Cornwall. FGW have gone from strength to strength in Devon and Cornwall, and as a result of their unprecedented success the passengers have outgrown the trains.
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: FarWestJohn on February 09, 2013, 19:00:34 I can really believe this. I have just spent a week travelling around our patch with a Freedom of the south west rover.
Apart from an occasional standing load on a Voyager nothing compared with the Saturday 1244 Plymouth to Penzance. A two car 150 which I had extreme trouble squeezing on board, more like the underground!! It was also the only train that I heard passengers complaining, especially those that had got off a terminating Voyager to continue their journey into Cornwall. The 1206 weekday HST to Penzance is also extremely cosy at 1625 [if you are lucky] from Truro especially when the schools are not on holiday. The main line service is extremely patchy and this shows up even more with all the branch line improvements. Plenty of ticket checks on my travels and the RPO on the Exmouth branch yesterday was certainly earning his keep. Overall timekeeping was very good apart from XC going south from Cheltenham Spa. Also a signal failure between Chippenham and Bath slowed things up. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: LiskeardRich on February 09, 2013, 19:56:32 The main line service is extremely patchy and this shows up even more with all the branch line improvements. The main line service is appaling compared to the branches in Cornwall. No service from Truro going west between 1722 and 1850, The station is around a 25-30 min walk from all the industrial estates and office areas of Truro. From my office to the station takes 25minutes walk, the traffic out of Truro is terrible at 5pm, but I am left with no choice but to drive. A week season is also cheaper than a week petrol from Redruth, sadly the train is not a feasable option due to the poor service at evening peak, unless you want to stand around for 90 mins after accounting for the walking time. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: TonyK on February 09, 2013, 21:28:21 The main line service is appalling compared to the branches in Cornwall. Difficult to see when it will get better. A few years ago, we spent a weekend in Cornwall, getting an off-peak HST hoe from Penzance. We had reserved seats. People were standing as we left Penzance, more got on than off at every station until Exeter. A 2-car 150 is always going to be inadequate on that route, although where more will come from is not immediately obvious. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Southern Stag on February 10, 2013, 00:10:02 In the Summer it is better because most of the 150s have a 153 added on the mainline, if that was carried on year round it would be a good improvement. In Summer 2012 the 0935 Exeter-Penzance and 1251 Penzance-Newton Abbot where strengthened to 4 carriages, and it was certainly much needed on the down journey as it has the connection from the first London train of the day.
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: grahame on February 10, 2013, 07:53:23 The 1206 weekday HST to Penzance is also extremely cosy at 1625 [if you are lucky] from Truro especially when the schools are not on holiday. The main line service is extremely patchy and this shows up even more with all the branch line improvements. The main line service is appaling compared to the branches in Cornwall No service from Truro going west between 1722 and 1850 ... In the 4 hours from 16:00 to 20:00 you have five departures - 16:26, 17:23, 18:47, 19:10, 20:00 ... with the prior train at 15:11 and the next at 20:11. I'm very interested in your ideal, purely from a commuter's viewpoint returning home from a town with a lot of employment 20 minutes or so from the station - when would you like to see those 5 leave? And what if you had only four (after all, the 20:00 and 20:11 pair might be considered near-duplicates for your commute!)? Maps to a local situation in Wiltshire - I'm looking to learn here! Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: LiskeardRich on February 10, 2013, 10:08:15 Grahame, I finish work at 1700, walk 25-30 mins, miss 1723 by 2 mins, as do many other commuters as cant reach the station in time, which would mean waiting 90 mins for the next service, therefore left to drive or take the expensive bus (^27.50 per week bus vs rail ticket approx ^13 per week vs petrol ^20 per week for me @ 35mpg) stations to the east of truro will have no service at all during evening rush hour, St Austell for example is known for its horrendous traffic problems, and there is no realistic public transport alternatives.
I realise this doesnt compete with Melksham, but when the branchlines are getting 2 tph against 1tph badly timed on the mainline, it discourages commuters from Redruth and west taking the train to work. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: JayMac on February 10, 2013, 10:59:38 I finish work at 1700, walk 25-30 mins, miss 1723 by 2 mins, as do many other commuters as cant reach the station in time, which would mean waiting 90 mins for the next service, Would a folding bicycle be a possible solution? Turn that 30 minute walk into a 15 minute bike ride. Although Richmond Hill may not be an enticing prospect after a days work. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: grahame on February 10, 2013, 11:26:33 Grahame, I finish work at 1700, walk 25-30 mins, miss 1723 by 2 mins, as do many other commuters as cant reach the station in time, which would mean waiting 90 mins for the next service, therefore left to drive or take the expensive bus (^27.50 per week bus vs rail ticket approx ^13 per week vs petrol ^20 per week for me @ 35mpg) stations to the east of truro will have no service at all during evening rush hour, St Austell for example is known for its horrendous traffic problems, and there is no realistic public transport alternatives. I realise this doesnt compete with Melksham, but when the branchlines are getting 2 tph against 1tph badly timed on the mainline, it discourages commuters from Redruth and west taking the train to work. It's very different to the TransWilts, yes ... and yet there are similarities, and so I'm picking your brain. We currently have an 18:44 departure from Swindon, and that's too late, to the extent of people not using, as per your 18:47. There have been a number of draft options over the years for an extra / earlier service. In days gone by, the service has varied - 17:15, 17:25 and 17:44, and it's worth my / our while learning from others in similar situations what they think of trains at each of these times. Personal view (but with some background / knowledge) would favour extras at 15:44, 17:44, 19:44 and 21:44, with the 18:44 remaining, and arriving into Swindon in the morning at 06:35, 08:35, 10:35 and 12:35 (with the current 07:48 getting in at 07:35). We've got another problem with our current morning train - too early, to the extent of people not using, which is exacerbated by the lateness of the evening train - who requires 11 hours in On the Truro issue, I note that your 17:23 is a local unit that has a substantial turn around time in Penzance (perhaps it's even its last working of the day?). Has anyone suggested running it - say - 20 minutes later, or would that effect dockyard workers, schoolkids in Plymouth, connections to Looe, Padstow, Falmouth and St Ives and trains coming t'other way? Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: paul7575 on February 10, 2013, 11:55:37 This a DfT controlled issue though, despite the supposed freedom for new TOCs to control their own rolling stock. The only way any GW franchisee is going to get additional DMUs suitable for the branches is following electrification of routes nearer London. That process was originally to be driven by availability of post Thameslink 319 cascades, and now appears to be driven by DfT sponsoring Southern to order additional EMU stock for use all over the country.
So how much is under the direct control of an incoming franchisee? Everyone presumes that nearly all the GW Turbos will move to the west following electrification, but what happens if DfT decide some of the displaced 15X units should now go to the North West of the country? I don't think the franchising delay will be as relevant to this matter as the DfT's overarching intentions nationally... Paul Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: swrural on February 10, 2013, 12:10:59 @RW I presume your employer will not countenance flexi-time? If you are behind a public counter and the sole employee doing that - fair enough, otherwise the 2 minutes seems extraordinarily inflexible (take 28 mins for lunch?).
On the broader issue, I do not understand why all FGW stock can only arrive via hand-me-downs from other franchisees. It just does not make sense. If FGW needs more stock in Cornwall, it could go out and order some from a leasing company could it not? If leasing companies are interested in earning profits why don't they order a few suburban types like the Goblin line has done? The design is on the shelf. Why does the DfT have to be involved at all? It has been known about pax increases for over half a decade. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: John R on February 10, 2013, 13:07:09 One leasing company did purchase some dmus on a speculative basis early on in the privatisation era, and they were soon snapped up. However, they are currently very nervous about ordering dmus, particularly on a speculative basis, given the view within the industry that electrification will release enough dmus for the forseeable future. And I can sort of see their point, as there will be an abundance over the next 7 years. So more new dmus would just mean that some of their existing assets would likely become worthless earlier than they would have done.
The other factor is that new EU emissions rules appears to make it very expensive to build an underfloor engine, if such a design even exists. This may be one of the reasons why Bombardier apparently quoted a very high price to lengthen the Goblin dmus they built a couple of years ago, although I am surprised a derogation would not be possible for reasons of compatability with the rest of the unit. New dmus are of course much more expensive to lease than 20 years old ones, so their use on rural branch lines is unlikely to be financially viable. Even if full they are not able to pay their way, so the economics are more likely to favour a cascade of older stock, rather than a new build. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: grahame on February 10, 2013, 13:08:17 If FGW needs more stock in Cornwall, it could go out and order some from a leasing company could it not? Why does the DfT have to be involved at all? Extra carriages are needed at peak time ... let's say that an extra mainline carriage generates an extra single fare (full fare) Penzance to Plymouth in the morning, and a similar return in the evening for each seat. That's 2 x 15.70 = 31.40 per day. This is an existing service / route, so under "cap and collar" as it's currently running, my understanding is that 80% of that income is knocked off the extra subsidy that FGW gets, in effect meaning that they get an income of 6.28 per seat. Multiply your 6.28 per seat by 70 seats, and then by 250 days of peak service in the year, and you have an income of around 110,000 pounds from the carriage. From which you have to take around 170,000 for the lease, and more for track access charges, and for fuel and for cleaning. If running as a separate train you have crew costs too. You need to get the DfT involved to pay you back some of that 80% to make the result of that sum a positive number ... in effect that's what the 29 million (as I recall) for the return of the Adelantes for just over a year is all about. I have been generous here in assuming that (a) all seats would be occupied for 4 hours a day (b) no children, off peak, or season ticket reductions involved and (c) these are all new passengers, and not just people who would have otherwise been standing in a 2 coach train but are now able to sit down because it's three! Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Southern Stag on February 10, 2013, 13:55:13 On the Truro issue, I note that your 17:23 is a local unit that has a substantial turn around time in Penzance (perhaps it's even its last working of the day?). Has anyone suggested running it - say - 20 minutes later, or would that effect dockyard workers, schoolkids in Plymouth, connections to Looe, Padstow, Falmouth and St Ives and trains coming t'other way? It's a busy service from Plymouth and Dockyard with school children, departing Plymouth at 1557 is probably about right for them.Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: LiskeardRich on February 10, 2013, 14:11:07 On the Truro issue, I note that your 17:23 is a local unit that has a substantial turn around time in Penzance (perhaps it's even its last working of the day?). Has anyone suggested running it - say - 20 minutes later, or would that effect dockyard workers, schoolkids in Plymouth, connections to Looe, Padstow, Falmouth and St Ives and trains coming t'other way? The only connections I can see that will be effected by running 20 mins later will be at Liskeard. Liskeard 1632, Looe line departs at 1641, This service has around 25 mins slack if slightly retimed to match the main line Par 1657 next Newquay connection isnt until 1829, so no effect there. Truro 1723 next Falmouth services are 1727 and 1759, so a 20 minute adjustment will just put passengers onto the 1759 with a 15 min connection instead of a 4 min connection. St Erth 1754, St Ives services run at 18 mins and 48 mins past the hour, so 20 mins later will leave a 4 min connection at St Erth. Arrival at Penzance 1806, and may form the 1916 return to Plymouth possibly as that is unit operated. It appears this service runs as a connection from the 1106 paddington to Plymouth service. There is a service slightly later that terminates at Liskeard. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Southern Stag on February 10, 2013, 14:45:04 It has no connection at all at Plymouth from London although it does connect with the 1541 XC arrival from Glasgow. At Penzance it divides, the 153 stays at Penzance overnight and the 150 forms the 1916 to Plymouth.
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: paul7575 on February 10, 2013, 15:37:52 If leasing companies are interested in earning profits why don't they order a few suburban types like the Goblin line has done? The design is on the shelf. Why does the DfT have to be involved at all? The leasing companies will not order new DMUs without DfT guarantees that they will have 30/40 year in service lifetime, AFAICS. No ordinary TOC can give that future commitment. The Goblin units do not really create much of a precedent, because they were ordered (by TfL who probably do have a long life ahead) before the electrification policy changed, however at least they were given an internal layout allowing use elsewhere (eg Chiltern) if Goblin gets wired - hence they did not get the walk through layout provided in LO's EMU stock. They could turn out to be the last order of mainline DMUs for many years. Paul Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Exeter on February 10, 2013, 18:21:51 Surely the stock needed is already there! What's wrong with using the day coaches and 57 off the sleeper?? Plenty of time to work a round trip to Plymouth between sleeper commitments!
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: John R on February 10, 2013, 18:47:34 IIRC the day coaches are first class, and I'm presuming that FGW would want them to be kept in good nick for the sleeper services, so not used in the hurly burly of daytime use (skool-kids feet on seats, etc).
Also, they need to be serviced at some point in the day, along with the 57, though that shouldn't be insurmountable. But generally, splitting the train at Penzance, running the loco round etc etc is all going to be a right palaver, just for one return trip to Plymouth. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: swrural on February 10, 2013, 19:48:23 I forgot that FGW is totally in hoc to the DfT -silly me. This must be holding back sustainable transport initiatives all around the country, at least where there is no PTE (PTA).
Yes I see the point about the short lifespan argument. Perhaps push pull would be better with a class 73 (those bi-mode thingys)? Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Southern Stag on February 10, 2013, 23:22:59 IIRC the day coaches are first class, and I'm presuming that FGW would want them to be kept in good nick for the sleeper services, so not used in the hurly burly of daytime use (skool-kids feet on seats, etc). It's not just keeping them in good nick but the capacity of the carriages would just be totally inadequate. Only 105 seats in the whole train, a low density 150/1 has 116 and a further 25 tip seats.Also, they need to be serviced at some point in the day, along with the 57, though that shouldn't be insurmountable. But generally, splitting the train at Penzance, running the loco round etc etc is all going to be a right palaver, just for one return trip to Plymouth. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: swrural on February 11, 2013, 10:08:04 How about 'heritage' dmus? (see Swanage news). Nice little earner for the lads who own the 'Hampshire' set! ;D
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: swrural on February 11, 2013, 10:09:44 Or lasses who own.... ::) plus red face smiley
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: paul7575 on February 11, 2013, 11:19:22 How about 'heritage' dmus? (see Swanage news). Nice little earner for the lads who own the 'Hampshire' set! ;D There'll be a load of hoops to jump through taking one on the main line in normal passenger service. SWT's use of Mk 1 EMU stock between Lymington and Brockenhurst came with a number of operational caveats, which were possible because it ran alongside the mainline on what was effectively a parallel separate branch, with P4 at Brockenhurst out of normal use by other stock unless the Mk 1 was down the branch. At Wareham, the branch unit will have to join the main line - and I think they hope to use the existing platforms to avoid the expense of re-instating a bay. Paul Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: eightf48544 on February 11, 2013, 11:25:23 Of course the other problem is although there is good case from the pasengers point of view for replacing all 14X and 150 possibly 156 units it's not in the ROSCOs interests because leasing these units is all profit.
Also has anyone considered that with modern construction it would be relatively easy to covert DMUs into unpowered EMU coaches. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on February 11, 2013, 12:21:50 the looe branch is self contained, why not run a heritage dmu on it?
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Chris from Nailsea on February 11, 2013, 12:43:16 They do already. :P
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: grahame on February 11, 2013, 14:09:39 the looe branch is self contained, why not run a heritage dmu on it? There's a limited number of branches where it would be nice to run heritage units (even MORE heritage, Chris!) - not only to release stock but also to boost passenger numbes ... let me see: Liskeard to Looe Brockenhurst to Lymington St Erth to St Ives Slough to Windsor Twyford to Henley on Thames in addition to those where they're used already: Pier Head to Shanklin Princes Risborough to Aylebury Queen Street to Bute Road However ... there's an issue with heritage stock - it's old, it's hard to maintain, and it might not be as reliable as a public service and businesses in the area require. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Southern Stag on February 11, 2013, 16:13:14 And even with a self contained branch you will still have to fit Central Door Locking, OTMR and now also GSM-R. That's not going to come cheap.
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: swrural on February 11, 2013, 18:50:27 I wonder what Swanage has to do then?
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on February 11, 2013, 18:51:53 If the services run above 25mph? Do they on the looe branch?
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: vacmanfan on February 13, 2013, 01:41:14 In reply to RW, I whole heartedly agree that the 1723 down service ex-Truro should be retimed. It is constantly late anyway and misses the 1727 Falmouth service at least once a week. Even if it left Plymouth at the same time but dwelled at Truro until after the Falmouth has cleared Penwithers it would make the train more accessible to more commuters.
Just my 10 pence worth. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: anthony215 on February 13, 2013, 12:18:31 the looe branch is self contained, why not run a heritage dmu on it? There's a limited number of branches where it would be nice to run heritage units (even MORE heritage, Chris!) - not only to release stock but also to boost passenger numbes ... let me see: Liskeard to Looe Brockenhurst to Lymington St Erth to St Ives Slough to Windsor Twyford to Henley on Thames in addition to those where they're used already: Pier Head to Shanklin Princes Risborough to Aylebury Queen Street to Bute Road However ... there's an issue with heritage stock - it's old, it's hard to maintain, and it might not be as reliable as a public service and businesses in the area require. We only have to see the problems Arriva Trains Wales have with their class 121 to see the diffculties in keeping heritage units in regular service Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: swrural on February 13, 2013, 14:06:24 I suppose you've all seen this report about between 13000 and 19000 new coaches needed?
One could have reasonably written that report some years ago. I'm beginning to think my idea of push-pull with a bi-mode engine is a runner. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: eightf48544 on February 13, 2013, 14:34:00 I saw a report in one of the mags about re-engining some class 73s with 1500 hp diesel engines.
That would make them quite smart performers with 3 or 4 30 ton coaches in push pull mode. Much cheaper than a bi mode unit. Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Kernow Otter on February 15, 2013, 18:21:54 Seems someone at FGW Towers is listening as a trial run was carried out today of the new regional stock comprising a single standard class coach, top and tailed with a 43 !
Came through Lostwithiel at about 1400 heading west, took me by surprise so no time for a photo. Seriously, can anyone shed some light on this working ? Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: 6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01 on February 15, 2013, 18:24:51 Most likely on test or going for maintenance
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: Southern Stag on February 16, 2013, 13:02:51 It was an ECS from Plymouth Laira depot to Penzance Long Rock depot. Probably providing some spare powercars and a spare coach at Penzance as the line is blocked Liskeard-Plymouth all this week.
Title: Re: Rail franchise row: Fears of Great Western 'overcrowding' Post by: tramway on April 17, 2013, 20:40:59 I saw a report in one of the mags about re-engining some class 73s with 1500 hp diesel engines. That would make them quite smart performers with 3 or 4 30 ton coaches in push pull mode. Much cheaper than a bi mode unit. More re-engined 31's in push pull would be my favourite. ;) This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. 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 content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net |