woodenhead Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So what does that mean for Laira when the AT300 and SETs take over from the HSTs? I went past Old Oak last week, the old loco buildings so long gone that even the Crossrail depot that replaced it is being built over and all that expanse of carriage sheds for the HSTs will be pretty much redundant in just a few years with North Pole waiting for its SETs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher125 Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 So what does that mean for Laira when the AT300 and SETs take over from the HSTs? Apparently it will still see use for the AT300s but for stabling and basic maintenance only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 Questions, the west of England AT300s, will they be owned by First or leased, were they ordered by First or the DFT and finally will they be maintained alongside all the SETs or have their own depot (Laira?)? The outline details of the lease will probably be announced at the same time as the confirmation of the order going ahead (DfT approval etc). At the time of the announcement of this order, back in March, the news release said that financing arrangements were near to completion. Again subject to DfT approval of the order. At a guess, the ROSCO concerned is very likely to be Hitachi, with a maintenance package and supply of serviceable trains/diagrams contract, similar to that for the SouthEast Trains Class 395 Javelins and for the IEP SET fleet. The end result for FGW (GWR) may be a virtually identical arrangement for the IEP procured SET's and these FGW procured SET's, with only the address where the bill comes from being different; i.e.. Agility Trains or Hitachi. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ron Ron Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 ......I went past Old Oak last week, the old loco buildings so long gone that even the Crossrail depot that replaced it is being built over and all that expanse of carriage sheds for the HSTs will be pretty much redundant in just a few years with North Pole waiting for its SETs. Yep. It will all vanish in due course, leaving just the new Crossrail depot and the North Pole depot for the FGW (GWR) SET's. What's left of the old depot is earmarked to be the site of the proposed HS2/GWML/WLL interchange station. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 (edited) Have the actual final production weights, opposed to the design spec, been released into the public domain? I understand from comments on another forum that Hitachi are being a bit coy about them and the test unit didn't have them printed on the end of the vehicles. This may make any power to weight comparisons subject to revision? Actual figures for the class 800 that's being delivered and is under test are known (and given in the article) - the only unknown involved is that the unit currently doesn't have an interior, so a reasonable guesstimate for fitting out has been applied - the figures quoted in the article shouldn't be that far out. From memory of the article the power to weight of the 5 car bi mode IEP was better than a 2+8 HST, so the AT300 with more available power should be considerably so, so lack of power isn't the issue! Just re-read it, and i'd got the wrong end of the stick in my earlier post... So - the reference to the IEP sets having higher power-to-weight ratio is based on the power of the engines installed, with them running derated the power to weight is slightly lower than an HST - the reference to 100mph ***may*** be referencing these class 800s, as I suspect they won't need more than 100mph. (Unless, as Roger Ford says, Electrification gets so far behind that they need to start operating as diesel sets first!) But the AT300 proposal wouldn't have the engines derated, so would likely be higher than the HST provided the design changes don't add too much weight. It does make me wonder whether that extra power is as much for the rest of the route as just the Devon banks! Edited May 4, 2015 by Glorious NSE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted May 5, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 5, 2015 Actual figures for the class 800 that's being delivered and is under test are known (and given in the article) - the only unknown involved is that the unit currently doesn't have an interior, so a reasonable guesstimate for fitting out has been applied - the figures quoted in the article shouldn't be that far out. Just re-read it, and i'd got the wrong end of the stick in my earlier post... So - the reference to the IEP sets having higher power-to-weight ratio is based on the power of the engines installed, with them running derated the power to weight is slightly lower than an HST - the reference to 100mph ***may*** be referencing these class 800s, as I suspect they won't need more than 100mph. (Unless, as Roger Ford says, Electrification gets so far behind that they need to start operating as diesel sets first!) But the AT300 proposal wouldn't have the engines derated, so would likely be higher than the HST provided the design changes don't add too much weight. It does make me wonder whether that extra power is as much for the rest of the route as just the Devon banks! The extra power would certainly be needed between Somerton and Savernake/Bedwyn in the Up direction and of course from Exeter to Whiteball as these are long climbs with some steep bits, and in places some not too helpful curvature. The Down direction is not so bad but again there is the climb to Savernake and also up to Whiteball although neither is such heavy going as eastbound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodenhead Posted May 5, 2015 Share Posted May 5, 2015 The extra power would certainly be needed between Somerton and Savernake/Bedwyn in the Up direction and of course from Exeter to Whiteball as these are long climbs with some steep bits, and in places some not too helpful curvature. The Down direction is not so bad but again there is the climb to Savernake and also up to Whiteball although neither is such heavy going as eastbound. So we wont be seeing a Caledonian Sleeper style classic traction reintroduced on the Devon Banks in the form of preserved Westerns or Warships piloting the AT300s. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted May 6, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 6, 2015 Personally I think its good news that the West of England is getting new trains rather than being forgotten as part of the GW upgrading and electrification works. As for the specification of the trains, perhaps there is a hidden ulterior motive for the 5+5 option for Plymouth and Penzance. Instead of splitting at Plymouth, at some time in the future some of the trains will instead split at Exeter, with one set going to Penzance via Newton Abbott and the other to Plymouth via a reopened Okehampton line 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Joseph_Pestell Posted May 6, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 6, 2015 Personally I think its good news that the West of England is getting new trains rather than being forgotten as part of the GW upgrading and electrification works. As for the specification of the trains, perhaps there is a hidden ulterior motive for the 5+5 option for Plymouth and Penzance. Instead of splitting at Plymouth, at some time in the future some of the trains will instead split at Exeter, with one set going to Penzance via Newton Abbott and the other to Plymouth via a reopened Okehampton line Probably not the Okehampton option, as much as we might like it. But the 5+5 arrangement does give lots of flexibility that could be exploited to improve journey opportunities/times west of Exeter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talisman56 Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 The order is still subject to approval by the DfT, expected to be in June, but I believe the plan is for a conventional lease through a ROSCO. According to a post on WNXX Laira was assessed but they've decided to go with the existing IEP depots at Stoke Gifford and North Pole. Long way to go for maintenance... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJS1977 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 The order is still subject to approval by the DfT, expected to be in June, but I believe the plan is for a conventional lease through a ROSCO. According to a post on WNXX Laira was assessed but they've decided to go with the existing IEP depots at Stoke Gifford and North Pole. I wonder if the post-Dawlish issues getting HSTs to Laira for maintenance influenced that decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted May 7, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted May 7, 2015 I wonder if the post-Dawlish issues getting HSTs to Laira for maintenance influenced that decision? Unlikely I would have thought. There will obviously have to be some sort of turnround servicing facilities in the south-west but it strikes me as logical that having spent a lot of money on two major depots they should circulate the sets through them, or rather one of them, for major maintenance work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher125 Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) RAIL have an article regarding Laira and the AT300s - Laira Depot secures role for AT300s Laira and Long Rock (Penzance) depots will service the AT300s, with maintenance carried out at North Pole alongside the similar Class 800s. The announcement follows concerns about potential job cuts at Laira as a result of the introduction of the new trains. While a servicing role means the depot will retain work on long-distance trains, it still stands to lose much of the major engineering it has been undertaking on the High Speed Train fleet. Chris Edited May 9, 2015 by Christopher125 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium HillsideDepot Posted June 26, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 26, 2015 With the major closure of Box Tunnel looming https://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/travel-updates/2015/bath-2015-eletrification-work I was rather surprised yesterday to note 4 lengths of CWR laid in the four-foot of the up road from the western portal of the tunnel into the darkness. This seems a little odd given the whole track bed is about to be lowered by 1.5 metres, but I'm a layman. It had been assumed that the second phase of the blockade was to lower the track in Sydney Gardens, but I'm told the work is actually to increase clearance at Dundas Aqueduct in the Avon Valley. Apparently NR are very nervous about the Sydney Gardens work. Not the engineering aspect of it, but the possibility of uncovering Roman remains. If that happens the heavy plant will be ushered off the site and be replaced by archaeologists with toothbrushes! Nothing much else to report from Wiltshire (at least not that I've seen), apart from on-going bridge reconstruction, and the work to electrically link the railway at Thingley to the National Grid at Beanacre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St. Simon Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Hi, If you want to see what the GWML will look like once electrified, the Swindon Electrification School has now been kitted out with wires, gantries, tensioners etc... I haven't got a photo, but it looks like some very substanial kit is used for the tensioning equipment. Simon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 It had been assumed that the second phase of the blockade was to lower the track in Sydney Gardens, but I'm told the work is actually to increase clearance at Dundas Aqueduct in the Avon Valley. Dundas isn't even on the route to be electrified, and presumably has clearance for existing trains although perhaps not IEPs or intermodals. Hard to see why this should be a priority now. The latest Modern Railways, which probably went to press less than a fortnight ago, definitely says it is for Sidney Gardens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium HillsideDepot Posted June 26, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 26, 2015 Dundas isn't even on the route to be electrified, and presumably has clearance for existing trains although perhaps not IEPs or intermodals. Hard to see why this should be a priority now. The latest Modern Railways, which probably went to press less than a fortnight ago, definitely says it is for Sidney Gardens. I agree Edwin, this info was from a recent fGW staff briefing and it surprised them, I'm told. Dundas is "tight" so maybe having booked the blockade they have decided to do that now while they reconsider Sydney Gardens, or perhaps use the time to do some exploratory archaeological work. If I get anything more from my informant which I can share, I will of course do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Western Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 As far as I'm aware, the first block is to undertake work inside Box tunnel and the second half is to remodel Bathampton junction and lower the track under the Dundas to allow Turbo stock to pass through and to increase the loading gauge for intermodel wagons. Great Western 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PenrithBeacon Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 The photo below, which is a screen grab and not therefore hi res, shows that the GWML is not going to be suspension wiring but that the catenary is going under cantilevered beams. This is going to wreck photography! Regards 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Kazmierczak Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Suppose as long as it's robust, reliable and reasonably priced, that's all that matters in most locations. Not to say that something a touch more elegant would'nt have been better though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted June 28, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) What's the Dundas Aqueduct got to do with GWML electrification I wonder - the possibility that the lowered pans on diverted trains might be foul of it seems the only reason I can think of? Interesting to hear about Turbos but I wouldn't have thought that Dundas Aqueduct is hardly the 'tightest' spot on the Bathampton - Westbury line - the bores at Avoncliff (doh!!) are rather on the tight side and I also wonder about the aqueduct south of Bradford Jcn? (I seem to recollect the latter two had 29973 restrictions on in the past whereas Dundas didn't have any!) The design of the new overhead structures has long been known and explained on the 'net by NR with specific reference to avoiding the problems caused by the use of headspan construction on the ECML and of course some have been in place for quite a long time. In the meanwhile a bunch of local residents in the Goring gap areas have for some months been kicking up a fuss and getting the local MP involved because they want headspans to be used - notwithstanding the explanations given by NR regarding reliability etc. Looks like whatever is done poor old NR can't win - but at least masses of lineside treees are at long last being felled so maybe leaf fall problems could ease off? Edited June 28, 2015 by The Stationmaster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 What's the Dundas Aqueduct got to do with GWML electrification I wonder - the possibility that the lowered pans on diverted trains might be foul of it seems the only reason I can think of? Probably doing some gauge-enhancement work whilst the line through Bath is shut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ess1uk Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Apparently NR are very nervous about the Sydney Gardens work. Not the engineering aspect of it, but the possibility of uncovering Roman remains. If that happens the heavy plant will be ushered off the site and be replaced by archaeologists with toothbrushes! what have the Romans ever done for us? I'll get my coat. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Apparently NR are very nervous about the Sydney Gardens work. Not the engineering aspect of it, but the possibility of uncovering Roman remains. If that happens the heavy plant will be ushered off the site and be replaced by archaeologists with toothbrushes! Which should give just enough time for the Great Crested Newts to install themselves.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted June 28, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 28, 2015 Apparently NR are very nervous about the Sydney Gardens work. Not the engineering aspect of it, but the possibility of uncovering Roman remains. If that happens the heavy plant will be ushered off the site and be replaced by archaeologists with toothbrushes! And should that happen, just watch how quickly Network Rail, First and the Government get blamed for the delays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now