|
IndustryInsider
|
 |
« Reply #75 on: November 30, 2011, 11:33:20 » |
|
Anyone got any thoughts as to who might want to operate this service?
Chiltern would seem probable favourites given that they already operate the Marylebone to Aylesbury Vale Parkway service and between Oxford and Bicester Town, though our own MD indicated to me that FGW▸ would be interested and it might be easier to integrate a change like that into a new Greater Western franchise. Not only that, but FGW will have potential traction in the form of displaced Turbos post electrification that could be used to operate the service. It would also be wise not to discount London Midland who run the existing service on the Bletchley to Bedford/Milton Keynes sections.
|
|
|
|
|
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/ |
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #76 on: November 30, 2011, 11:38:56 » |
|
I reckon it'll either be added to the new FGW▸ franchise or become its own separate franchise. One thing's for sure - Chiltern haven't got the stock.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #77 on: November 30, 2011, 12:01:42 » |
|
I reckon it'll either be added to the new FGW▸ franchise or become its own separate franchise. One thing's for sure - Chiltern haven't got the stock.
It isn't that long ago that one of the rail mags reported on an interview with Adrain Shooter in which he implied a complete lack of interest in EWR. But times change. Of course there is no reason why the whole thing should go to one TOC▸ - the Aylesbury to Milton Keynes leg on its own definitely fits in well with Chiltern, and as far as stock is concerned there seems very little reason why ex-FGW Turbos couldn't be transferred to Chiltern as they come off lease... Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #78 on: November 30, 2011, 12:08:40 » |
|
Chiltern would need increased depot space & the turbos tripcocking....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Electric train
|
|
« Reply #79 on: November 30, 2011, 18:22:30 » |
|
I feel it will be a separate franchise, the consortium my even be looking for a TOC▸ to partner it. It is likely to have its own stock, I thought also the plan is to electrify the line, this would fit in with current Government, ATOC» , DfT» , ORR» and Network Rail (NR» ) policy
Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 17, 2021, 13:53:22 by VickiS »
|
Logged
|
Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #80 on: November 30, 2011, 19:47:32 » |
|
Surely a bit small for a franchise. We're talking about 2 routes neither are not self contained, nor short of links (so don't say "look at c2c")
The stock would not need LU signalling installed, as I believe they would run via HW. I doubt there are any spare paths via Amersham (then again, will there be enough paths via HW?!). Even so, they could still be terminated at Aylesbury as I doubt anyone will travel MK▸ - London this way.
I would imagine CH for the Aylesbury route and XC▸ or LM▸ for the Oxford to Bedford route.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #82 on: December 01, 2011, 10:46:40 » |
|
Which, oddly, *would* necessitate said signalling equipment installing....
In any case, Chiltern won't want a few turbos without, would mean they couldn't be used on the LU route. Flexibility in usage is always a priority.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #83 on: December 01, 2011, 11:26:25 » |
|
I would assume they'd have to also increase the length of trains to cater for the extra passengers. Can the Marylebone platforms cope? I thought that in the peaks, space was getting tights, esp now with the loco hauled trains. Add in trains to Oxford...
I have seen a document where the map shows the service travelling via HW. There are some direct Aylesbury to London via HW services as well which could be extended. But I suppose they'd want the equipment installed for flexibility.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #84 on: December 01, 2011, 11:29:16 » |
|
that's why they talk about *extending* Aylesbury services - so no extra trains arriving into MYB▸ .
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #85 on: December 01, 2011, 12:47:47 » |
|
Which, oddly, *would* necessitate said signalling equipment installing....
LU are resignalling the Met completely by 2018 anyway, so they'll have moved on from 'almost normal' signals with trainstops to something more like the latest ATO▸ systems on the 'tube' lines, so the Chiltern fleet is going to have to be completely refitted anyway. (At least the Met Line units anyway.) The additonal costs of a few more units to run to Milton Keynes would be lost in the numbers. Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #86 on: December 01, 2011, 13:44:00 » |
|
that's why they talk about *extending* Aylesbury services - so no extra trains arriving into MYB▸ .
I know, but there are problems with the platforms not being long enough. CH often have 2 trains per platform in the peak, so there is a limit on length, especially if the loco hauled set is one of them. I assume they'll have to make the trains longer to cater for the extra passengers. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #87 on: December 01, 2011, 14:11:53 » |
|
6 car platfoerms ought to be long enough. Frankly, it's not going to generate much traffic from myb to Milton Keynes, is it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #88 on: December 02, 2011, 01:23:53 » |
|
6 car platfoerms ought to be long enough. Frankly, it's not going to generate much traffic from myb to Milton Keynes, is it?
That's right. The 'Met' line is at it's busiest between Amersham and Marylebone where the only extra custom generated from extending the service from/to Milton Keynes will be that generated from Winslow - hardly likely to be massive. I think 'Btline' is missing the point of this link, which is primarily to provide connections from Aylesbury and the surrounding area with Milton Keynes and the wider WCML▸ . I personally doubt it has huge potential, unlike the Oxford arm of the service which I will happily predict I think will be a resounding success. Anyone got any thoughts as to who might want to operate this service?
Chiltern would seem probable favourites given that they already operate the Marylebone to Aylesbury Vale Parkway service and between Oxford and Bicester Town, though our own MD indicated to me that FGW▸ would be interested and it might be easier to integrate a change like that into a new Greater Western franchise.
Mark Hopwood specifically mentioned the new link in his weekly staff column this week. Going as far as to say that FGW would be delighted to take it on board in the new franchise (provided they get it of course), and would do all they could to persuade the D fT! |
|
|
|
|
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/ |
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #89 on: December 05, 2011, 11:32:21 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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/ |
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
