TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6594
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: June 19, 2019, 18:37:10 » |
|
Alliance are due to start running services from Euston to Blackpool North in September this year, after 9 years of planning and one lapsed permission. It will be interesting to see how that goes.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #31 on: June 19, 2019, 19:37:01 » |
|
Alliance are due to start running services from Euston to Blackpool North in September this year, after 9 years of planning and one lapsed permission. It will be interesting to see how that goes.
My money’s on nothing whatsoever happening with that plan, because there’s no news of any confirmed rolling stock or staff training. Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6594
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
|
« Reply #32 on: June 19, 2019, 20:09:45 » |
|
My money’s on nothing whatsoever happening with that plan, because there’s no news of any confirmed rolling stock or staff training.
Paul
Which is what happened to the first effort - there were no Pendolinos. This time, they are planning to use Class 91s, but have had to drop some of the stops, because they are limited to 110 mph. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #33 on: June 19, 2019, 22:27:23 » |
|
The local electric trains have caused a few notable blockages when the OHLE fails, at least the IETs▸ can still proceed.
My suggestion of batteries and traction motors in an ex DVT‡ would solve this problem AND improve acceleration.
With paths in short supply, it seems to me that longer trains are the war forward.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6594
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
|
« Reply #34 on: June 19, 2019, 22:42:07 » |
|
The local electric trains have caused a few notable blockages when the OHLE fails, at least the IETs▸ can still proceed.
My suggestion of batteries and traction motors in an ex DVT‡ would solve this problem AND improve acceleration.
With paths in short supply, it seems to me that longer trains are the war forward.
Longer trains mean more wear and tear as well as power use. Less frequent but longer would discourage some from using the train, but I agree in principle. Batteries are big and bulky, and could even need replacement before ever being needed - small diesel instead? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #35 on: June 20, 2019, 13:28:02 » |
|
Battery technology has improved a lot in recent years.
I was proposing a battery not JUST for emergency use when the wires come down, but also for daily short term use in order to improve the acceleration rate.
Something like
Before leaving Paddington---------------battery 100% full
Accelerating away from Paddington-----15% used, now 85% full.
In reserve for acceleration after a signal check, another 15%.
In reserve for wires down, the remaining 70 to 85%.
En-route the battery would normally be at about 70 to 85% but could be fully charged by regenerative braking.
At Cardiff fully charge the battery so that energy is available for improved acceleration.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #36 on: June 20, 2019, 14:05:48 » |
|
Who would pay for the development costs? Modifying DVT‡’s and then the 91s and carriages so they would be compatible would no doubt be expensive. Beyond the means of a small Open Access Operator?
|
|
|
|
|
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/ |
|
|
|
Richard Fairhurst
|
|
« Reply #37 on: June 20, 2019, 19:19:18 » |
|
There is of course a company that specialises in fitting diesel engines and battery packs to formerly electric-only trains. Though a Class 91 + stock is a bit heavier than a D78...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
broadgage
|
|
« Reply #38 on: June 20, 2019, 19:46:21 » |
|
Who would pay for the development costs? Modifying DVT‡’s and then the 91s and carriages so they would be compatible would no doubt be expensive. Beyond the means of a small Open Access Operator?
It would in my view be reasonable for public money to be used, possibly via the research department of a university. The DVTs would need significant work. I do not believe that any modifications to the coaches would be needed, and only very minor modifications to the locomotives. The use of batteries and traction motors in a former DVT is IMHO▸ innovative enough to be publicly funded as a research project. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU▸ is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
|
|
|
|
martyjon
|
|
« Reply #39 on: June 21, 2019, 13:59:59 » |
|
I missed this tread when it first hit the forum.
Filton Bank 4 tracking was a means of increasing capacity between Dr. Days Junction and Filton Junction/Abbey Wood where the 4 tracking ends. All as part of the MetroWest Project and which has noticeably improved the time keeping over the stretch. The 4 tracking ends at Filton Junction and a few hundred metres further on there is another junction, Patchway, with just two tracks to Severn Tunnel Junction with both a down and an up loop at Pilning. We are told that additional services can't be stopped at Pilning due to lack of paths through the Tunnel.
Moving on from Bristol Parkway we have the promise of an additional 2tph from Bristol TM‡ via Parkway to London and the aspiration of an additional local 1/2 hourly service serving Yate and the Gloucester line. The cessation of the coal traffic from Avonmouth to Didcot has freed up some paths on the Badminton line but from Wotton Bassett to Swindon ? Grahame has aspirations for an hourly service for Melksham so onto Swindon.
With an hourly Cheltenham - Paddington service promised together with the 2 additional Bristols means that the defunct coal traffic paths have been gobbled up with these and also we are told that with the looming lack of paths Swindon - Didcot is the reason why a rejuvenated Bristol - Oxford service can't be introduced and this would have an impact on Go-ops open access operation which I have never considered to be 'a starter'.
Moving onto Didcot - Reading there may be available paths here, I'm not clued up enough on that section but on the section Reading - Paddington especially from Hayes / Airport Junction we are told the lines are at near capacity and when the Liz line gets going proper that's it, full.
Paddington station is also claimed to be full and I have known times when Zulus making their way to Cardiff for an event at the MS or as its known now, PS, or other destinations west, their London departure and returning point being one of Victoria, Waterloo or Euston.
Has the shelf at the supermarket that NR» uses been emptied of porkies and fresh supplies are awaited or has THIS Open Access Application seen the cessation of porkie production.
Honestly, people in high profile positions seem to think we, Joe Public, are all the proverbial village Idiots, but it's about becoming more common for us Joe Public to start calling the authorities 'bluff'.
Do I need my tin hat ?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 21, 2019, 15:23:52 by martyjon »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #40 on: June 21, 2019, 15:35:22 » |
|
..on-board ticket sales.. That'd be fun trying to board at Paddington, unless platform 1 is used Or platforms 8 and 9.
It works fine over at King's Cross with Grand Central and Hill Trains, who both allow on board ticket sales without penalty. You just mention to the gateline staff that you're boarding a GC» or HT▸ service and you are let through. And we all know how customer friendly Paddington gateline is. So I foresee no problems there...  |
|
|
|
|
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."
|
|
|
|
Celestial
|
|
« Reply #41 on: June 29, 2019, 11:09:18 » |
|
This may have to be shortened to London to Pilning if the problems with Severn Tunnel electrification are not fixed. (Or more realistically they will switch to HSTs▸ .)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #42 on: July 20, 2019, 08:50:32 » |
|
From The BBC» Plans for a new train service between south Wales and London have been expanded to include more stations.
However operator Grand Union Trains revealed services between Cardiff and Paddington will initially run every two hours from 2021 instead of hourly as originally proposed.
Hourly services will start in 2023 and will run to Llanelli, which currently has one train a day to London.
The changes were made following talks with the Welsh Government.
Grand Union said it would create 135 jobs and a south Wales headquarters.
Currently only Great Western Railway (GWR▸ ) runs services between Cardiff Central and Paddington.
The revised Grand Union Trains timetable would initially see Cardiff to London services operate every two hours, calling at Newport, Severn Tunnel Junction and Bristol Parkway, also stopping at Cardiff Parkway when it opens.
[story continues] |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, TravelWatch SouthWest Board Member
|
|
|
|
Timmer
|
|
« Reply #43 on: July 20, 2019, 10:02:43 » |
|
Any new train service is to be welcomed but I do ask is there enough demand for more trains from South Wales to London, especially with GWR▸ about to operate even more services from December.
In the past, whenever there’s been major disruption on the GW▸ mainline, the first IC▸ services that get pulled are the hourly Cardiff-London trains.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jamestheredengine
|
|
« Reply #44 on: July 20, 2019, 14:08:33 » |
|
Any new train service is to be welcomed but I do ask is there enough demand for more trains from South Wales to London, especially with GWR▸ about to operate even more services from December.
In the past, whenever there’s been major disruption on the GW▸ mainline, the first IC▸ services that get pulled are the hourly Cardiff-London trains.
Maybe revenue apportionment between them and another operator will discourage GWR from doing that. After all, it would make far more sense for them to cancel the Oxford IC services first, direct Oxford passengers to Marylebone, and Slough and Reading ones to the stoppers, but then the money would, as I understand it, go to Chiltern. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
