|
paul7575
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2014, 10:18:00 » |
|
It would be harder once the 173s are introduced, unless the conversion to 168s include the tripcocks.
More interestingly, is where they're going to depot / maintain them as Aylesbury & Wembley are somewhat fll & unexpandable....
170/3s I think? I suspect it might be relatively straightforward for increased stabling to be provided at Banbury - that would also possibly make sense for services starting and finishing at Oxford, that's if ECS▸ paths are available via the Cherwell Valley. I believe the Chiltern route is not going to be an independent line anymore, so whichever option is chosen for the Oxford layout changes there's probably going to be a usable route... Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #31 on: March 07, 2014, 10:26:22 » |
|
Stabling isn't really the issue - maintenance is. And yes, 170/3s - sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #32 on: March 07, 2014, 10:35:30 » |
|
There's also Oxford itself for stabling, though I agree with ChrisB that maintenance is the key issue - though I'm sure the relevant bods have a plan.
|
|
|
|
|
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 #33 on: March 07, 2014, 10:38:07 » |
|
oh they do....I'm hearing rumours....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
northwestuser
|
|
« Reply #34 on: March 07, 2014, 11:02:15 » |
|
Conversion of the 170/3s to 168s would have the following advantages:
1. Easier diagramming and easier to swap units between services if one fails or gets stranded due to disruption.
2. Not having to get crews to have to add 170s to their traction cards.
3. Not having to do the paperwork for route clearance for the 170s.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #35 on: March 07, 2014, 11:04:49 » |
|
They already have 170s in service, so 2 and 3 are already happening / happened
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
northwestuser
|
|
« Reply #36 on: March 07, 2014, 20:05:39 » |
|
What 170s do Chiltern have? Have they loaned 170s off LM▸ , XC▸ , Anglia or Scotrail? If not then they don't have any, only different types of 168s, some of which are effectively modified 170s.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #37 on: March 07, 2014, 22:38:10 » |
|
They already have 170s in service
Really? Chiltern have four 172s in service. Not aware that they have any 170s. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: March 07, 2014, 22:43:37 by bignosemac »
|
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."
|
|
|
|
Network SouthEast
|
|
« Reply #38 on: March 08, 2014, 03:49:58 » |
|
What 170s do Chiltern have? Have they loaned 170s off LM▸ , XC▸ , Anglia or Scotrail? If not then they don't have any, only different types of 168s, some of which are effectively modified 170s.
Chiltern have never had any 170s. And the 168 design came before the 170! Yes, latter 168s have the same front end styling as the 170, but that was due to research Chiltern and Bombardier did once the original batch of 168s entered service that said the public did like them but felt the front end made it look more like a metro train than a distance one (source, The Chiltern Railways Story by Hugh Jones). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #39 on: March 10, 2014, 11:04:32 » |
|
Sorry, I meant 17x's....
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #41 on: March 13, 2014, 09:43:27 » |
|
Some fascinating elements Northern Rail is believed to operate around 100 Pacers on routes across the North-East and Yorkshire, despite their unpopularity with passengers. ... but no-one knows for sure. Why "believed"? Nine locomotives are due to be taken from the TransPennine Express franchise, which also runs trains across the re ... which will leave them with minus nine, as they don't run any locomotives at presentAnd Andy McDonald, the Middlesbrough MP▸ , said: ^The performance is shocking. The travel time from Saltburn to Darlington is 53 minutes. ... and how much better would it be with a 150 / 153 / 156? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
Lee
|
|
« Reply #42 on: March 13, 2014, 09:48:39 » |
|
Can you add to grahame's list, folks?...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #43 on: March 13, 2014, 11:09:45 » |
|
Can you add to grahame's list, folks?...
In my defence for not noticing, I'll point out that he was formerly minister for transport. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
Southern Stag
|
|
« Reply #44 on: March 13, 2014, 11:55:07 » |
|
Are suggestions that the new Northern franchise will be required to dispose of all pacer trains slightly worrying. They aren't the best trains on the network, but as the FGW▸ 143s show they can be brought up to a reasonable standard and Porterbrook believes there is a case for making the necessary modifications to them to allow continued operation beyond 2020. The reality is that Pacers are very cheap to lease so it seems to me that they'd be an ideal train to keep some around of to cater for future growth. Considering that we currently have a shortage of DMUs▸ it seems madness to scrap hundreds of DMUs because they have been released by new EMUs▸ . Who knows what will happen in 5 or 10 years time, the Pacers could potentially still have a useful role to play.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
