|
stuving
|
 |
« Reply #1020 on: July 21, 2017, 20:31:03 » |
|
Did anyone spot this in yesterday's BBC» item about the DfT» 's electrification (really HLOS▸ ) announcements? A Great Western Railway spokesman welcomed the decision to upgrade the power of the trains in diesel mode, saying: "In the context of today's announcement, this offers the best solution to protecting the kind of faster journey times, frequency and capacity benefits customers have been looking for." More to the point, if that means what it seems to - universal unmuzling - is it available from a direct source? I can't find it in anything the DfT have released. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #1021 on: July 21, 2017, 20:44:44 » |
|
Let's hope so, even if it is only temporarily until Cardiff is wired. It really will provide an easy negative headline field day otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
John R
|
|
« Reply #1022 on: July 21, 2017, 20:54:52 » |
|
Wonder who is paying the additional charges that will be levied. And whether the passenger will end up picking up the bill.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #1023 on: July 21, 2017, 21:29:02 » |
|
Last December, Philip Rutnam told parliament (the PAC) that DfT» was paying for all the costs of adding (more) engines to the 801s, whether as a capital sum or annual charge. That should mean that the cost to GWR▸ stays as it previously would have been. Logically any adjustment for making silk 802s out of sows' 800s would be the same, wouldn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #1024 on: July 21, 2017, 21:52:18 » |
|
More to the point, if that means what it seems to - universal unmuzling - is it available from a direct source? I can't find it in anything the DfT» have released.
What the BBC» have understood from GWR▸ has been confirmed to me by GWR as what they're working to. I haven't read anything in a direct DfT release either - but does everything appear in an immediate release? - would we expect to be told? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #1025 on: July 22, 2017, 11:52:18 » |
|
GWR▸ would definitely expect to be told. We know from the Community conference chat that they were asking for permanent unmuzzling as the only way to at least maintain the current timetable & were hopeful as the DfT» wouldn't want to be seen in providing new trains that could only operate a slower timetable.
If that quote is correct, seems as though they got their wish. Hey ho though, yet another iteration of the Dec18 timetable required.....
GWR weren't going to pay a penny more though, so DfT/taxpayer will.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #1026 on: July 22, 2017, 13:09:30 » |
|
Yes, GWR▸ will want to keep costs in check, having shortsightedly relied on HMG/NR» to deliver what was promised.
That shortsightedness led them to run the 'Building a Greater West' advertising campaign that promised jam tomorrow.
GWR should ask HMG for the money back they wasted on that campaign.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"A clear conscience laughs at a false accusation."
"Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."
"Moral indignation is a technique used to endow the idiot with dignity."
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #1027 on: July 22, 2017, 16:40:20 » |
|
Yes, GWR▸ will want to keep costs in check, having shortsightedly relied on HMG/NR» to deliver what was promised.
That shortsightedness led them to run the 'Building a Greater West' advertising campaign that promised jam tomorrow.
GWR should ask HMG for the money back they wasted on that campaign.
..............and I hope HMG tell them where they can stick that request - GWR hung on the coattails of NR's project and disingenuously portrayed themselves as "Building a Greater West", whereas in reality the work was nearly all being done by NR and almost all the money/investment was coming from the taxpayer - now they will no doubt equally quickly rush to disassociate themselves from it. I believe the saying is "hoisted by their own petard" |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #1028 on: July 22, 2017, 18:25:41 » |
|
I very much doubt they'll disassociate themselves with it now that all of the improvements are about to come on stream, albeit delayed and in some cases reduced in scope.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
1st fan
|
|
« Reply #1029 on: July 23, 2017, 13:45:40 » |
|
If everyone gets a seat out of Paddington regularly they *might*.....
I think I have more chance of winning the lottery. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #1031 on: July 25, 2017, 13:51:38 » |
|
The overall "wheels stopped time" also shows very well that wherever the calling pattern lends itself to power changeover during a station call, then the changeover itself should never normally be a critical aspect of the overall dwell time... Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #1032 on: July 25, 2017, 14:08:51 » |
|
I had not twigged, until seeing that, that these units have a 25kV link (bus) along the roof. I guess that's because people rarely take pictures side-on. At least that should save a few tons of dead weight, even if it does always look a bit scary on our small trains. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #1033 on: July 25, 2017, 18:02:22 » |
|
During the wires down episode testerday, viewed from the 1330 to BRI» , I saw a Connect service heading to PAD» pulled by a DRS▸ class 86....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Adelante_CCT
|
|
« Reply #1034 on: July 26, 2017, 10:24:48 » |
|
DRS▸ class 86? Should that not be 66 or 68?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
