Jump to content
 

First Class 91 goes for the chop


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

Seems the 442's are next for the scrappy followed by the expensively converted ex Gat-Ex fifth cars of the Class 458's.

 

They are going to pull off all the expensive brand new electrical gubbins they just spent a fortune on installing and have never used first mind...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, Derekstuart said:

 

Now, down to the important bit... When do we think Sims will get their first voyagers and pendolinos? Given how each generation seems to last less years than the previous one, I'm hoping we'll see them go in the next few years.

 

 

 

 

 

It all depends on politics!

 

Please remember that the 313s are still trundling along the south coast yet younger units have (or will shortly be) scrapped

 

Before Covid hit, the Government favoured 'total fleet replacement' in their franchise bids - hence we got the entire Grater Anglia fleet replaced with new. Somehow I doubt HM Treasury would have been so keen on that option now given we are moving to a concession based model where more of the costs fall directly to Government than being hidden via franchise agreements.

 

The Pendalios and Voyagers could thus last for quite some time yet, quite possibly longer than would be the situation had Covid not occurred.

Edited by phil-b259
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 hours ago, Derekstuart said:

Well that's been an 'interesting' thread. I have to be honest and say I couldn't give a monkeys about real railways now and haven't since the Brush 4/ HST era ended. Partly out of nostalgia and partly out of a dislike of the interior of the new stuff- it's mainly those seats they've put in on 2000 onwards trains. It's not natural to sit bolt upright for that length of time; what's shocked me is how both first class and worst class are the same there.

 

Now, down to the important bit... When do we think Sims will get their first voyagers and pendolinos? Given how each generation seems to last less years than the previous one, I'm hoping we'll see them go in the next few years.

 

May I just say, "Be careful what you wish for."  I have a horrible feeling your longed-for replacements will still have those interiors you (and I) loathe described in your first paragraph...  The passenger counts for nothing in the comfort of new trains.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Derekstuart said:

Well that's been an 'interesting' thread. I have to be honest and say I couldn't give a monkeys about real railways now and haven't since the Brush 4/ HST era ended. Partly out of nostalgia and partly out of a dislike of the interior of the new stuff- it's mainly those seats they've put in on 2000 onwards trains. It's not natural to sit bolt upright for that length of time; what's shocked me is how both first class and worst class are the same there.

 

Now, down to the important bit... When do we think Sims will get their first voyagers and pendolinos? Given how each generation seems to last less years than the previous one, I'm hoping we'll see them go in the next few years.

 

As for the objective matter here: if you have a monopoly on X item, whether it is a complete locomotive or a specific part such as a spare transformer, you control the market and thus the price. It is not in the stock owners interest to see cheap stock going on the market otherwise how can they command high prices for the newer stuff? We saw this in the bus industry in the 1990s- leasing companies were selling off Nationals and VRs so cheap that operators were buying them and shunning new builds, which made the leasing companies no money.

 

 

Pendolino’s will likely be in service until HS2 phase 1 opens and brings the new classic compatible fleet. It’s due to open to OOC in 2028.

 

As for Voyagers, I doubt they’ll go anywhere soon as the WC 221s will transfer over when the new 80x fleet starts for Avanti. There are also the 222s yet to be allocated once the EMR 80x fleet get deployed.

 

Covid has changed the rules with DfT now in charge and HM Treasury calling the shots funding wise. Wholesale early replacement of mid-life fleets are unlikely to find any backing for a few years whilst the long term effects of Covid on ridership become clear.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Derekstuart said:

Well that's been an 'interesting' thread. I have to be honest and say I couldn't give a monkeys about real railways now and haven't since the Brush 4/ HST era ended. Partly out of nostalgia and partly out of a dislike of the interior of the new stuff- it's mainly those seats they've put in on 2000 onwards trains. It's not natural to sit bolt upright for that length of time; what's shocked me is how both first class and worst class are the same there.

 

Now, down to the important bit... When do we think Sims will get their first voyagers and pendolinos? Given how each generation seems to last less years than the previous one, I'm hoping we'll see them go in the next few years.

 

As for the objective matter here: if you have a monopoly on X item, whether it is a complete locomotive or a specific part such as a spare transformer, you control the market and thus the price. It is not in the stock owners interest to see cheap stock going on the market otherwise how can they command high prices for the newer stuff? We saw this in the bus industry in the 1990s- leasing companies were selling off Nationals and VRs so cheap that operators were buying them and shunning new builds, which made the leasing companies no money.

 

 

Well, XC fleet management are well aware of my keenness to drive the first Voyager into Kingsbury! They’re starting to show their age and the phenomenal mileages that they’re racking up. 

 

Until some form of long term management/franchise type deal is signed then nothing will change for the fleet I reckon. A succession of short term management contracts means that long term stock requirements are not on anyone’s minds. 
 

Suspect that the only change in the short to medium term is that the rest of the 221s from West Coast will replace the HSTs. Further down the line, suspect that fume emissions will drive the fleet choices (a particular problem at New St). Whilst there is nothing that I know of planned currently, the Bi-mode IET spec for the Midland Mainline fleet being developed currently does look like it would suit the XC operation and I wouldn’t bet against that happening. 
 

Will see how close to the mark I am in about a decade’s time. 
 

Andrew

  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving the 222s to XC may be advantageous for passengers - more table space, all depends on patronage post Covid for XC services.  Perhaps these should replace the HSTs rather than the 221s

 

Again passing over the remaining 221s from Avanti will give scope to strengthen other Voyager services.

 

But the future I would say with more DFT control is the Bi-mode IET - maybe this will happen sooner rather than later - how many more IET are to be produced at Newton Aycliffe - there are the Avanti units and the East Coast and they've got the Scotrail units to build.

 

The good news though is that Newton Aycliffe is now able to weld bodyshells as it's workforce is being upskilled so they will no longer just be an assembly line for completed shells.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andrew Young said:

Well, XC fleet management are well aware of my keenness to drive the first Voyager into Kingsbury! They’re starting to show their age and the phenomenal mileages that they’re racking up. 

 

Until some form of long term management/franchise type deal is signed then nothing will change for the fleet I reckon. A succession of short term management contracts means that long term stock requirements are not on anyone’s minds. 
 

Suspect that the only change in the short to medium term is that the rest of the 221s from West Coast will replace the HSTs. Further down the line, suspect that fume emissions will drive the fleet choices (a particular problem at New St). Whilst there is nothing that I know of planned currently, the Bi-mode IET spec for the Midland Mainline fleet being developed currently does look like it would suit the XC operation and I wouldn’t bet against that happening. 
 

Will see how close to the mark I am in about a decade’s time. 
 

Andrew

Bi-mode actually makes quite a lot of sense for XC given the amount of time spent under the wires combined with the fact we are a long way off electrifying everywhere they go. Take the plague out of the equation and I'd have expected a new XC franchise to be let based on killing some/all of the 170's and all the HSTs and having a Voyager-only fleet using cascade from EMR and West Coast, and for a total fleet replacement to be kicked down the road into the 2030's.

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

Pendolino’s will likely be in service until HS2 phase 1 opens and brings the new classic compatible fleet. It’s due to open to OOC in 2028.

 

 

That sort of assumes stealth closure of the "classic" WCML to express passenger traffic!! The trouble is that WCML=Pendos and Pendos=WCML, you can't viably run one without the other and it would take a creative work with the numbers to justify a new build of tilting EMUs and/or a politically suicidal decision to slow down the services to places not reached by HS2, which by then will probably include everywhere that isn't called Birmingham...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps with a more sensible financial regime in place we might see the long talked about pantograph coach's built for the Voyagers?

 

Before covid you could see a fleet replacement happening with the 22x fleet perhaps replacing 158s or similar somewhere (I wondered if they might replace 175s to give more capacity here on the Marches route).

 

Now we're getting new build stock here and there is enough 22x to give XC a standardized (ish) fleet that might not be quite as overcrowded perhaps we'll see sense?  The deadline to remove diesel only stock isn't that far away.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Hesperus said:

Perhaps with a more sensible financial regime in place we might see the long talked about pantograph coach's built for the Voyagers?

 

I'd say a big nope there.  "Project Thor" was abandoned because of the difficulties of rejigging the power distribution systems with the sets (i.e. their total absence currently).

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

Bi-mode actually makes quite a lot of sense for XC given the amount of time spent under the wires combined with the fact we are a long way off electrifying everywhere they go. Take the plague out of the equation and I'd have expected a new XC franchise to be let based on killing some/all of the 170's and all the HSTs and having a Voyager-only fleet using cascade from EMR and West Coast, and for a total fleet replacement to be kicked down the road into the 2030's.


I agree except with the fact of replacing 170s with Voyagers. Due to their weight, Voyagers have many speed restrictions on the Birmingham to Stansted route which don’t affect 170s. Any replacement would need to be light enough to be able to run at 15x/17x weight associated speeds. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, woodenhead said:

Moving the 222s to XC may be advantageous for passengers - more table space, all depends on patronage post Covid for XC services.  Perhaps these should replace the HSTs rather than the 221s

 

Again passing over the remaining 221s from Avanti will give scope to strengthen other Voyager services.

 

But the future I would say with more DFT control is the Bi-mode IET - maybe this will happen sooner rather than later - how many more IET are to be produced at Newton Aycliffe - there are the Avanti units and the East Coast and they've got the Scotrail units to build.

 

The good news though is that Newton Aycliffe is now able to weld bodyshells as it's workforce is being upskilled so they will no longer just be an assembly line for completed shells.


Can see XC having a complete 220 & 221 (plus 170) fleet rather than a mixed 220/221/222 fleet. The lack of coupling compatibility between the 222s and the 220/221 fleet creates more headaches operationally than it solves. 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Andrew Young said:


Can see XC having a complete 220 & 221 (plus 170) fleet rather than a mixed 220/221/222 fleet. The lack of coupling compatibility between the 222s and the 220/221 fleet creates more headaches operationally than it solves. 

But equally a 222 replacing HSTs would not need to couple to 220/221.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

But equally a 222 replacing HSTs would not need to couple to 220/221.

It wouldn’t. But why replace HSTs with 222s when there will be more 221s available than you would need to just replace the HSTs? If you can rid yourself of the non-compatibility this easily then why go for the difficult option?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

That sort of assumes stealth closure of the "classic" WCML to express passenger traffic!! The trouble is that WCML=Pendos and Pendos=WCML, you can't viably run one without the other and it would take a creative work with the numbers to justify a new build of tilting EMUs and/or a politically suicidal decision to slow down the services to places not reached by HS2, which by then will probably include everywhere that isn't called Birmingham...

 

Remember that phase 1 includes a connection to the WCML near Lichfield!

 

That means passengers from Manchester, Liverpool, etc will benefit from the outset, not just Birmingham as the press and antis seem to think! The speed advantage on HS2 will more than wipe out the benefits gained from tilting trains to / from London.

 

The biggest WCML passengers flows are south of Preston and with HS2 slashing journey times there the inability to tilt on the northern reaches will become less of an issue.

 

Longer term the question has to be asked is tilt really that necessary? The industry itself doesn't think so with tilting trains now being perceived as expensive kit for quite modest gains and infrastructure enhancements more likely (and arguably HS2 is ultimately just one very big infrastructure enhancement). Hence IETs being ordered to supplement the current Pendalino fleet and no provision for tilt on the HS2 trains (some of which will extend to Carlisle and Scotland) while NR has progressively been increasing permitted speeds on the existing WCML after extensive modelling showed some modest increases in cant could also be applied in certain locations - the goal is 125mph railway without tilt.

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
28 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

But equally a 222 replacing HSTs would not need to couple to 220/221.

 

1 hour ago, Hesperus said:

Perhaps with a more sensible financial regime in place we might see the long talked about pantograph coach's built for the Voyagers?


 

 

As has been pointed out before to make that solution work you need to completely re-wire the existing train as its designed around having the traction motors powered by the diesel engine under that coach with absolutely none of the HV connections that exist in EMUs to distribute power from a single transformer.

 

Then there is the little matter of the jigs used to build the Voyager fleet having long since been destroyed by the manufacturers - tooling them up (as with model trains) won't come cheap.

 

Add it all up and it doesn't come close to being viable for a train already half way through its expected lifespan.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Andrew Young said:

It wouldn’t. But why replace HSTs with 222s when there will be more 221s available than you would need to just replace the HSTs? If you can rid yourself of the non-compatibility this easily then why go for the difficult option?

I was thinking more because the 222s are set out more like a traditional HST inter city train than the cramped interior of the 220/221s that XC operate - so putting them on the longer distance HST services may be more appealing than more very long journeys in the 220 sardine can trains.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

Longer term the question has to be asked is tilt really that necessary? The industry itself doesn't think so with tilting trains now being perceived as expensive kit for quite modest gains and infrastructure enhancements more likely (and arguably HS2 is ultimately just one very big infrastructure enhancement). Hence IETs being ordered to supplement the current Pendalino fleet and no provision for tilt on the HS2 trains (some of which will extend to Carlisle and Scotland) while NR has progressively been increasing permitted speeds on the existing WCML after extensive modelling showed some modest increases in cant could also be applied in certain locations - the goal is 125mph railway without tilt.

I think it’s fair to say it no longer is. I started my career at Rugby pre-Pendo, I remember cab riding in the 86, 87 and 90’s as well as the odd 321. Nothing like the Pendolino’s or Voyagers. I’ll never forget my first cab at full line speed with tilt authorised, entering Linslade tunnel on the Down Fast was the first time I felt nervous, as we rounded the curve, all you could see was the wall, the Pendo righting itself at what felt like the last second! But for me, the best part was approaching Rugby, doing 125 through the rat hole down to Trent valley junction, and not dropping speed all the way till just south of Colwich Jn. Amazing bits of kit and definitely needed for some of the infrastructure challenges, but I think the limited number of locations which would still need tilt will be acceptable given how limited the benefits would be. Interestingly, Weedon curve was never cleared for 125, 115 being the maximum EPS for Pendo’s and 105 if memory serves for 221’s. It was a great ‘gimmick’ by Mr Branson, it sold the railway, sadly short of it’s actual potential due to the Signalling issues. I think the Pendo’s will be around for some time yet, when it does come to finally replacing them, it won’t be a tilting train. Will also save of the cost and upkeep of the TASS system. It will be interesting to see the new fleet times against that of the current.  

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I was thinking more because the 222s are set out more like a traditional HST inter city train than the cramped interior of the 220/221s that XC operate - so putting them on the longer distance HST services may be more appealing than more very long journeys in the 220 sardine can trains.

 

Given the need to platform share in many locations then the 222s would need to be shrunk down to 4 / 5 car sets and thus still have many of the same issues as the 220/221 fleet.

 

Replacement of the HSTs by shorter (remember rail travel has plummeted due to the Pandemic and won't suddenly recover to pre pandemic levels) 222s might be attractive in some quarters though - although the XC HST fleet has just had rather a lot of money spent on them fitting powered doors and retention tank bogs so if the 222s are going to be more expensive to lease then XC might as well stick with the HSTs anyway.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Given the need to platform share in many locations then the 222s would need to be shrunk down to 4 / 5 car sets and thus still have many of the same issues as the 220/221 fleet.

 

Replacement of the HSTs by shorter (remember rail travel has plummeted due to the Pandemic and won't suddenly recover to pre pandemic levels) 222s might be attractive in some quarters though - although the XC HST fleet has just had rather a lot of money spent on them fitting powered doors and retention tank bogs so if the 222s are going to be more expensive to lease then XC might as well stick with the HSTs anyway.

Not sure who else would take them up now - open access operators might have an issue making the case for any new routes at the moment, if the blackpool trains did re-emerge they will still be electrically hauled Mk4s I would imagine, on the east coast there are new IETs on order leaving only really routes out of St Pancras or Paddington both of which are probably quite constrained and with both being wired would a diesel only unit be acceptable even for open access.  The XC services are the last true cross country routes where a diesel unit may be favourable but as the wiring extends and the bi-modes increase then the justification for a diesel only unit retreats further.  Maybe South Wales to North Wales services - but they have the Mk4 combo or Scotland but they have the shortened HSTs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Given the need to platform share in many locations then the 222s would need to be shrunk down to 4 / 5 car sets and thus still have many of the same issues as the 220/221 fleet.

 

Replacement of the HSTs by shorter (remember rail travel has plummeted due to the Pandemic and won't suddenly recover to pre pandemic levels) 222s might be attractive in some quarters though - although the XC HST fleet has just had rather a lot of money spent on them fitting powered doors and retention tank bogs so if the 222s are going to be more expensive to lease then XC might as well stick with the HSTs anyway.

The smarter move (based on pre-plague loadings) would be to refurbish and reform the 222 fleet into a load of 8 cars (abandoning some of the driving cars) with just one or 1.5 first class coaches and use these to form the hourly Edinburgh-Leeds-Birmingham-Plymouth spine which would release fleet to join up with each other and make the hourly Manchester-Birmingham-Reading-Bournemouth spine into double set 8 cars and/or release 4 cars to work Cardiff-Nottingham in place of the dire 170's.

 

Sadly we are well past the point where adding an extra pantograph coach into the existing 220/221 becomes viable as they are now beyond half way through their lives so the high cost of adding roof mounted power cables linking the cars just couldn't be justified, pity they didn't think of it before they were ordered as being electric motored it would have been ideal and the amount of under the wires running on XC was even greater back then as WCML Birmingham-Scotland would also have benefitted.

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ncarter2 said:

I think the Pendo’s will be around for some time yet, when it does come to finally replacing them, it won’t be a tilting train. Will also save of the cost and upkeep of the TASS system. It will be interesting to see the new fleet times against that of the current.  

I think the Pendo fleet will reach "full life"- the chances of HS2 opening on time based on the CrossRail fiasco are zero, and even when HS2 does open you have to break it to people from Coventry and Rugby that their services are being slowed down to the sort of speeds the vans and Mk3's were capable of in the 1970's albeit with better acceleration.

It was always the problem the WCML had, it needed a bold solution and nobody can deny that 140mph tilting 390's on advanced signalling was as bold as it was ever going to get in the UK without the massive cost of new route. So the project was totally scoped with the assumption that anything fast would tilt and the line speeds for non tilt remained restrictive. What we are now facing is years and years of upheaval, or having to tolerate slowed down services to go from that 'tilt assumption' to line speed improvements for non-tilters just to stand still on overall journey times on the northern sections.

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

 

Sadly we are well past the point where adding an extra pantograph coach into the existing 220/221 becomes viable as they are now beyond half way through their lives so the high cost of adding roof mounted power cables linking the cars just couldn't be justified, 

 

 

Don't they generally do a heavy refurbishment around halfway through a vehicles service life?

 

Would it really be harder to add cables to a 22x than to put diesel engines under a 30 year old 319 or a 40 year old D train?

 

I realise that we are unlikely to see new coach's built but could 222 coach's be converted if they are likely to become surplus?

Edited by Hesperus
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
26 minutes ago, Hesperus said:

 

Don't they generally do a heavy refurbishment around halfway through a vehicles service life?

 

Would it really be harder to add cables to a 22x than to put diesel engines under a 30 year old 319 or a 40 year old D train?

 

I realise that we are unlikely to see new coach's built but could 222 coach's be converted if they are likely to become surplus?

 

Refurbishment does not usually include a full re-wire!

 

Refurbishment generally means new seat covers, repainted panelling, new carpets and minor fettling like adding mobile phone charging sockets. There might be some minor technical tweaks or fitting of upgraded components but in principle nothing serious gets changed.

 

As for the 220 / 221 /22 fleet please note what I said earlier - there is NO provision for distributing traction power between vehicles added to which you also have nowhere to easily stick a 25KV transformer or Pantograph without some serious bodyshell modification! Work to fit these items takes the work well beyond a mere 'refurbishment' its more like a complete rebuild with a complete re-wire, major bodyshell mods plus a completely new train management system. This in turn requires fresh regulatory approvals etc so yet more cost.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, fiftyfour fiftyfour said:

I think the Pendo fleet will reach "full life"- the chances of HS2 opening on time based on the CrossRail fiasco are zero, and even when HS2 does open you have to break it to people from Coventry and Rugby that their services are being slowed down to the sort of speeds the vans and Mk3's were capable of in the 1970's albeit with better acceleration.

It was always the problem the WCML had, it needed a bold solution and nobody can deny that 140mph tilting 390's on advanced signalling was as bold as it was ever going to get in the UK without the massive cost of new route. So the project was totally scoped with the assumption that anything fast would tilt and the line speeds for non tilt remained restrictive. What we are now facing is years and years of upheaval, or having to tolerate slowed down services to go from that 'tilt assumption' to line speed improvements for non-tilters just to stand still on overall journey times on the northern sections.

 

You rather forget that the ONLY reason BR went down the tilting train route is the political environment meant there was zero chance of the Government investing in new build infrastructure. Its noteworthy that across the world Tilt has been something of a niche product with most other countries following the lead of Japan, and later France, who showed that building new rail lines was the way forward - not trying to produce an engineering fudge to avoid it.

 

With HS2 now belatedly happening around 40 years after that concept was proven to be the way forward there is simply no need for tilting trains on the bulk of WCML services as the sheer speed of HS2 will more than make up for any time lost when on the conventional network.

 

The only exception to this is Coventry / Birmingham / Rugby to London but the number of trains needed to provide such a service would be tiny. As such when the Pendalinos come up for renewal then it will most likely be with a non tilting replacement - probably based on the IET platform.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...