Class 180 Adelantes - discussions, including their return to FGW

[whole diary]

[laird]

Were the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) 458s intended to be coupled in service or coupling and uncoupling intended to be a depot task?
Certainly the nose design for the 458 seems very different to those of the other operators.

[paul7575]

For instance in the weekday peak at Southampton they split 10 car down direction trains during an overall 5 min station stop, the front unit leaves 2-3 mins after arrival non stop to  Bournemouth, the rear follows as a stopper 2 mins later (which is the soonest it can due to signalling headways). 

There's only one train a day in each direction that I know of running non stop from Southampton to Bournemouth.

The up trains from Bournemouth at 0625, 0656, 0726; and the down departures from Southampton at 1821, 1851 and 1951 are non stop through Brockenhurst.  The 1654 and 1753 also split at Soton but do call at Brock, I'd missed that.

Paul

[Deltic]

Is there currently any splitting in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)-land?

[willc]

What fun Andy, something I wrote two years ago when a series of people here were advocating running pairs of 180s between Oxford and London, then splitting or joining them at Oxford, with one dashing off to Worcester while the other sat kicking its heels at Oxford until it could set off to Charlbury to deliver people to all the stations at the eastern end of the line once the single line was clear for it to use, or two sets chasing each other towards Oxford to join there. All this was being suggested at the time FGW^▸ (First Great Western) was getting rid of them from its fleet.

Maybe you would like to quote all the other posts I was responding to, in order to put my remarks in the context in which they were made? Or at least point people in the direction of the thread they were made in. I have no problem with you quoting my past remarks, if you have the common courtesy to do either of those things. I do have a problem with them just being plonked in here at random to make it appear I am contradicting myself.

Here I am suggesting splitting or joining of perhaps a couple of trains a day to better reflect the typical loadings on the sectors of the journey- and if the workings were to regain an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) (the 05.48/08.58 and what replaces it from September) or you retained the HST on the 17.50, you wouldn't need to do it anyway.

[laird]

Rather than putting both down the Cotswold line, what about sending one forward to Banbury?
The Voyagers tend to be quite heavily loaded over that section so a 180 could alieviate the crush by taking Reading and Oxford passengers bound for Banbury, Leamington or Birmingham to Banbury to join the quieter Chiltern services at Banbury. It could be marketed as linking Oxford with Stratford on Avon too, I've certainly been on trains that have tourists making that journey.
Perhaps we could end up with a four train per hour service from Oxford to Banbury, non-stop every 30 minutes with Cross Country then followed by the stopping services from FGW^▸ (First Great Western). Now the signalling at Banbury permits turnbacks from both traditionally Northbound platforms in addition to the Southern end bay there wouldn't be too many infrastructure costs I guess.

Or thinking out of the box could the split be done after the station stop at Oxford, if the station duties were completed then the train pulled forward into the loop where the split would be performed, I've noticed before that because the doors are closed on both sets when uncoupling and then reopened to allow passengers on up to the departure time that this can result in little delays, perhaps if the split was done away from the platform the process might be quicker?

[ChrisB]

I'd hate to have the job of shunter in the sidings waiting to do the splitting....

[Deltic]

I think the overall time taken to stop twice would be greater than performing the split during the station stop, although it would free up the platform.  Is the loop passed for passenger trains?

[ChrisB]

Yes, for a little while now, both on the up- and down-lines

[willc]

Outside the peaks, FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s Oxford-Banbury services are extremely quiet and there are usually seats on Voyagers too. FGW need the capacity south of Oxford, so if you split there, you do it so a train can go back to London sharpish. There is no access to the sidings from the loop north of Oxford and I'm not even sure the loop is signalled to allow you to turn a train back into platform 1.

[Ollie]

Is there currently any splitting in FGW^▸ (First Great Western)-land?

There are yeah.
First one that springs to mind is the train in peak that goes from Paddington to Bourne End which splits at Maidenhead.

Fairly sure there is probably other services.

[willc]

Pretty sure the 09.22 from Paddington splits at Oxford, with the front set going forward to Worcester and the rear one heading to the sidings at Oxford. The 08.58 from Malvern couples to another Turbo set at Oxford.

[Andy W]

The concept that you lease on the inflation adjusted cost of the original build is frankly bizarre.

It is not bizare for the leasing cost to be related in to the new build cost.  When you lease a car that is exactly what you expect.  A cheap car is cheaper to lease than an expensive car.

inflation adjusted -. Are you suggesting that if you lease a Capri today the lease price is based on the inflation adjusted price of the new car? You should lease on the current value. Leasing companies invariably offer that as the residual value (buy back value) on a car lease, lease / purchase agreement.

No I am not.  But if you do not inflation adjust the figure the leasing costs look even more out of proportion with the orginal cost of the asset.  Also it is the inflation adjusted cost that gives you some idea of that it might cost to build a new train to the same spec today.  if you are on a 20 year fancchise, wouldn't it make finacial sense to pay ^700,000 now rather than ^100,000 per year for twenty years.

Tim, I would never suggest you have an initial lease over 20 years - you would lease over 10 years with a low residual value then a follow on peppercorn lease for subsequent years. A common practice for high value leases.
Now the 180s are around 10 years old their depreciated value should be far lower than when new hence a commensurate lowering of the lease costs.
Will correctly pointed out that this hasn't worked in the past with stock that is completely written down still having high lease costs. This is one factor the either a) increases fares or b) lowers profits. I don't see any reason why those in charge don't enter the real world the rest of us inhabit.

[dog box]

I'd hate to have the job of shunter in the sidings waiting to do the splitting....

why not ? easy job

[ChrisB]

in the pouring rain / inclement weather, waiting for a couople of trains an hour? Nah, not for me. Not enough to do...

[super tm]

I'd hate to have the job of shunter in the sidings waiting to do the splitting....

why not ? easy job

Shunters dont split 180's. Drivers do inside the nice warm cab