Poll: Which stock is the best for local/stopping/commuter travel?

[whole diary]

[Doctor Gideon Ceefax]

Mark III would be useless as it needs something to haul it ; )

Underfloored engines with wide centre doors win every time for this sort of work. 170 variants are by far the most suitable, although to be fair for short distance stop start stuff, electric units win every time.

This is how it could be done (with HD refreshed Mk3 stock) for commuters  http://www.wrexhamandshropshire.co.uk/livery.html

Or even for longer distances - lots of room in DVT^‡(resolve) for bikes as well.

Acceleration would be very poor, unless it was literally the four carriages + loco (which compared to a multiple unit is highly uneconmical - B.R. study recommended anything less than six carriages to be better off as a unit, anything more as hauled). And Wrexham and Shropshire are not proposing a local commuter stopping service anyway, in fact it appears from the timetable to set down only at Banbury and then run fast to London!

For this stock to be suitable for local services, the loco would have to be re-geared and extra wider doors would be needed in the centre of the carriages. Time would still be lost opening up and closing the DVT, much like the power car bike situation. I certainly wouldn't want to see this sort of thing on Oxford to London stoppers, or whatever else counts as a commuter service.

That said a DVT + loco and a few mark III's wouldn't be too bad for London - Bristol / Cardiff.

HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), DVTs + Locos were never designed for commuter operations, and putting them on it doesn't work well. Equally using 150s on mainline express trains isn't acceptable.

[eightf48544]

I'm not sure I can vote for any. Most are diesel so not suitable for local services which should be electric. Continental diesel units tend to have power packs rather than underfloor engines to give low floor units for disabled access. It also gives a quiter ride, Stadler have a number of units both electric and deisel with a an articlated power pack between two passenger coaches, with a passage way through the middle.

A proper continental Desiro/Talent (articulated) would be good as are the DB^» (Deutsche Bahn - German State Railway - about) 424? EMUS these are four car units with wide doors plenty of standing room and 2 by 2 seating also wide corridor connections so you can see the length of the unit. They run the HAnover S Bahn services from the Airport.

[Btline]

The only reason I included Mark 3 refurbs was because I thought FGW^▸ (First Great Western) wanted them to be commuter/local.

I, agree, though. DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) with 1/3 2/3 doors are better.

(I think some people are getting mixed up between Turbos (ie 165, 166) which have good acceleration and lots of seats; and a Turbostar (170) which have POOR acceleration and less seats!)

I like 175s.

[devon_metro]

Turbostar acceleration is probably better than the sprinter varient.

At least according to the BVE train simulator: http://www.bverailnetwork.co.uk/download.htm#Trains

[dog box]

The Turbostar is a far superior unit to the turbo

[Chris from Nailsea]

As with Btline's other poll on long distance travel, I considered my own commute from Nailsea to Bristol (ten minutes), and voted accordingly.

Well, I didn't, actually: due to my two-fingered typing (if you'll pardon the expression!) I made a mess of it and apparently voted for 150s and Pacers, when I meant to vote for 150s and 158s - sorry, Btlines!

Among the trains that turn up for my daily commute are 150s and 158s - they're fine for the ten minutes it takes to get me into Bristol - even standing, due to crowding.

Other trains that call at Nailsea are HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) (Mk3 refresh), but they are not really suited to Nailsea - due to our short platform / SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) / bicycle-wielding passenger complications - from my commuter perspective, anyway!

Also, we have a solitary Voyager service that calls at Nailsea, the 0846: while this does provide a useful additional service, it's not really suitable for such commuter work, due to SDO being used (even though all five carriages are well and truly platformed!) and similar bicycle-wielding passenger complications.

Vacman, I take your point about 158s generally being slow to load/unload due to limited door access - but for me, on my particular commute, that's more of an issue with the HSTs and Voyagers using SDO!

However, this is just my opinion, based on my daily commute: let the discussion (and the voting) continue!

 

[Btline]

Turbostar acceleration is probably better than the sprinter varient.

At least according to the BVE train simulator: http://www.bverailnetwork.co.uk/download.htm#Trains

No. I know that Sprinters (and Thames Turbos) have better acceleration than 170 Turbostars. It is mentioned in many places, that 170s could not keep to local timetables when replacing sprinters (unless there was enough track above 75 mph to compensate).

The new 172s for LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise), Chiltern and LO are to have better acceleration than the 170s.

[tramway]

Mark III would be useless as it needs something to haul it ; )

IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly) there were quite a few MKII/III's (?) exported to Ireland and Australia which were destined for conversion for urban use, extra doors etc etc. Loco hauled with a DVT^‡(resolve)

The system here just doesn't seem to lend itself to to encouraging this sort innovation, which seems a pity. Too late now as they are all abroad.

Finally found this after much hunting, there have been something over 70 MkII's sent to New Zealand, and this is what they did with them. Pity similar efforts couldn't have been made here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:38522796_59f6c38d59.jpg

[Btline]

I have locked the voting.

Surprisingly (for me), the Sprinters are the wasy winners!

Not surprisingly, Mark 3 refresh and Buses on rails are the least popular!

Methinks FGW^▸ (First Great Western) were wrong in thinking Mk3s could do local! But at least there are more seats.

Thanks for voting.