RMweb Premium Claude_Dreyfus Posted July 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 14, 2011 An interesting article here on the BBC website. They have given themselves a tight deadline - 2014 - to obtain and modify the stock, electrify the routes, and make the necessary modifications to the track layouts to support these operations. It is an interesting idea, and a good way to use redundant ex-LUL stock. Wish them luck; however it is very ambitious... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew1974 Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Just read this on the BBC website before logging on to RMWEB.....seem bonkers to me....there is talk of storing class 142's in a few years...and we want to replace them with old underground stock on a non electrifed line.... ....just don't 'get it'. Andrew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium melmerby Posted July 14, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 14, 2011 Third rail electrification is easier to do than O/H, I assume they won't be using a fourth rail! I like the claim that the conductor rail is "a couple of feet above the tracks" - really? That could cause problems. Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidH Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 It would suggest that the person writing the report didn't understand the technicalities, to clarify the system to be used. In one breath the articles says "A similar system is already used in the south east of England, on the London Underground and on a large part of Merseyside's commuter network" and in another "Chamber chief executive Brian Dunsby said: 'The chamber's solution is a modern low-cost ground-level electrification system, similar to that used on the Docklands Light Railway'." Aren't there three different systems here - 3rd, 4th and the raised rail of the DLR? I reckon the system that is proposed is the DLR one, although whether the tube stock can be modified is another matter. I assume they have already looked into that. It sounds like a sensible idea to at least look into, even if it ultimately goes nowhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRman Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Just put it at platform level then passengers can step out onto it!! Are you sure the article isn't dated April 1st??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidH Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 That's a good point, are the Underground trains designed for lower platforms? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Accurascale Fran Posted July 15, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted July 15, 2011 District line stock have shared stations such as Gunnersbury with 313's for many years and now the new Capitalstar stock. So I'm guessing platform height might not be a big issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 15, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 15, 2011 In general LT "surface" underground stock is smaller than BR stock simply because it has to fit into smaller spaces and tight clearances. There have been and continue to be places where the two systems operate in parallel and in those places there continue to be some compromises in terms of structure clearance and platform height. C-stock trailers are only around 49' long for example. Anything coming off the LU network will be very tired. Those trains work in one of the toughest rail environments there is. They are built for it but no machine lasts for ever. Maybe someone had a bad dream or a dodgy pint before coming up with that idea however well-intentioned it might be. Or has someone just come back from a holiday to the Isle of Wight and been watching the 1938 stock there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisf Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 The first two words of the report are "business leaders". This says much about the state of British business. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 15, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 15, 2011 I could describe myself as a "Business leader". I owned and managed a publication (a gig guide) which operated at a surplus and which in turn promoted other businesses (pubs and bands). It was only a few sheets of paper and a very early static-page web presence but it led the way in its field at the time and it shows that the definition of "business leader" can be quite loosely interpreted and used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Whilst I think the is great idea I fear that Network Rail would oppose any new 3rd rail electrification. Maybe OHLE could be fitted providing 750V DC but designed to be updated to 25KV in the future when the D Stock is retired. Pantographs would need to be fitted - as an aside this how the Seashore Trolley Museum http://www.trolleymuseum.org/ run their former Underground stock, but using trolley poles rather that pantographs. This idea was mooted by Alan Williams in his column in Modern Railways a few months ago; he suggested was push-pull operation utilising diesel locomotives. With Alan living not to far away from Leeds I wonder if he has been doing some local lobbying for this idea. I have read Alan Williams column in Modern Railways since it first started he is one of the finest railway journalists with great vision. Xerces Fobe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 For some years, it has been publicly stated that HMRI would not grant approval for further above-surface 3rd rail electrification, apart from 'infill' projects within the existing third-rail areas (principally TFL and Merseyrail). So, before buying the stock and carrying out the infrastructure modifications, the 'business leaders' would have to build a convincing safety case to persuade them to change this. Somehow, I think 2014 is a little optimistic.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 15, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 15, 2011 Brian's comment is equally relevant for electrification proposals outside existing "Southern" areas as well. Redbridge / Eastleigh - Salisbury, Basingstoke - Reading / Salisbury would almost certainly not gain approval now as they are not "within" but Hurst Green - Uckfield and Ore - Ashford probably would. Wokingham - Ash / Guildford - Reigate might be an interesting case to make. Back to the use of LU stock in Yorkshire I'd be willing to bet if you asked regular users up there whether they would prefer to carry on with classes 142 / 144 or have 50-year old A-stock (or possibly 40-year old D stock) most would opt for the elderly LU stock. But offer them new air-conditioned stock (whether diesel or electric) in return for slightly higher fares towards offsetting the cost and the result might be an interesting split. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 As much as I would love to see it A stock is not in the frame they are showing their age and would need to be rewired and their bogies do not give the best ride. D stock is in the frame here - I rode on one a few weeks ago and since they have been refurbished they are provide a nice travelling environment.. With there use of District green on the poles etc they are a class act and reminded me of Underground trains long gone C, COP, R& Q stock spring to mind. Xerces Fobe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin_m Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 They would indeed appear to be preferring the DLR under-contact third rail, which as well as being safer is also less prone to snow and ice. But remember that people do not walk on the DLR track when trains are running - there could still be some difficulty getting a safety case to use it on Network Rail where there are routinely workers on the track during operating hours. If nothing else a raised third rail could be a serious tripping hazard, which sounds trivial but is rather more serious if the person who trips over is moving clear of an approaching train. Sub-surface stock is similar size to C1 loading gauge on the main line - didn't they once run some Mk2s round the circle line on a railtour? D stock uses the same platforms as the Overground on the Richmond branch. When it was talked about for Bidston to Wrexham, Network Rail quoted a very high figure for extending the third rail - much higher than those being talked about for 25kV. The same might apply here, especially as you'd probably need a higher-voltage feeder cable along the route to power all the substations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted July 15, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 15, 2011 There are valid reasons for 750vDC electrification to be priced at more per mile than 25KvAC. More substations and TP huts are required for one thing and even with modern electronic control these things don't come cheap. Yes BR stock has been worked around most of the Circle Line, both Mk1 and Mk2. LU themselves own several former 4TC cars which are used at times on sub-surface tours behind No.12 (Sarah Siddons). Remember that the earliest tunnel sections date from 1863 and were built by and for shared use with the GWR. The dimensions are fairly generous. Later tunneled sections were forced to adopt similar dimensions to enable the existing stock to be used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kintbury jon Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I like this idea. With money so tight these days, we should make use of old stock. Whilst the stock is 30 years old, think how long the 1938 stock has lasted on the Isle of Wight. It's now over 70 years old but still running. There must be another 15-20 years still left in the D stock. A good example of trains built to last is the SNCF 3rd rail metre gauge 'Cerdagne' line. Some of the original stock is over 100 years old. How long before someone photoshops a D stock train in West Yorkshire PTE colours? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerces Fobe2 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 LU themselves own several former 4TC cars which are used at times on sub-surface tours behind No.12 (Sarah Siddons). . Only one 4TC now in Met Teak vinyl livery, they disposed of the other one after "Steam in the Met" finished, Xerces Fobe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 seem bonkers to me....there is talk of storing class 142's in a few years...and we want to replace them with old underground stock on a non electrifed line.... I think 142s being stored long term is unlikely, the UK has no spare diesel units at the mo, and whilst there's a (relatively small) number being built to cascade 150s from Birmingham there's near little chance of any further builds. Electrification in the North West and Thames Valley (assuming 319s are released as planned to work the local trains!) ought to put some into store - but remember many have been stored before and are now running again as demand keeps increasing. Maybe OHLE could be fitted providing 750V DC but designed to be updated to 25KV in the future when the D Stock is retired. Pantographs would need to be fitted - as an aside this how the Seashore Trolley Museum http://www.trolleymuseum.org/ run their former Underground stock, but using trolley poles rather that pantographs. This idea was mooted by Alan Williams in his column in Modern Railways a few months ago; he suggested was push-pull operation utilising diesel locomotives. If you're going to build OHLE to 25kv specs why not just do it 25kv and use a spare 25kv unit, plenty of which are coming up for grabs within the next few years. And if loco haulage was the answer you ought to be able to pick up a couple or three DVTs, some Mk2s and hire in a 67 without bothering with converting these. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I like this idea. With money so tight these days, we should make use of old stock. Whilst the stock is 30 years old, think how long the 1938 stock has lasted on the Isle of Wight. It's now over 70 years old but still running. There must be another 15-20 years still left in the D stock. A good example of trains built to last is the SNCF 3rd rail metre gauge 'Cerdagne' line. Some of the original stock is over 100 years old. How long before someone photoshops a D stock train in West Yorkshire PTE colours? Whilst the idea is possibly appealing from an enthusiast's point of view, there is a bit of a difference between running what are essentiallty tourist services at low speeds over fairly short distances and longer-distance commuter services. Whilst the 'Cerdange'/'Train Jaune' retains some of the original stock which is wheeled out for high-days and holidays, most normal services are worked by Stadler units built within the last couple of decades. These have such luxuries as roofs and upholstered seats, unlike some of their 'heritage' fleet. Maximum speeds on the French line are also somewhat lower than would be tolerated on commuter services, at about 40 kph- mind you, this is probably about the maximum speed on the Underground stock for comfort.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I like this idea. With money so tight these days, we should make use of old stock. Whilst the stock is 30 years old, think how long the 1938 stock has lasted on the Isle of Wight. It's now over 70 years old but still running. There must be another 15-20 years still left in the D stock. A good example of trains built to last is the SNCF 3rd rail metre gauge 'Cerdagne' line. Some of the original stock is over 100 years old. It doesn't look good though, having old stock running. If people ore familar with things age isn't quite such an issue because they'll be used to it but introduce 'old' stock from elsewhere and they'll view it with disdain I think. Think of it in car terms - someone buys a car and runs it for ten years, to them it's the same car and they're probably still ok with it. If someone has to buy a ten year old car, they m,ay not be quite so happy... The 'business leaders' are, I suspect, without much railway experience. The Leeds - Harrogate - York plan is interesting - I wonder how happy NR would be with a third rail in 25kV areas?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_mcfarlane Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 This sounds very much like an idea that the business leaders thought up over lunch in the pub, rather than a scheme backed by NR and Northern. I would expect lots of frothing when it inevitably gets shot down in flames. I can imagine them talking to the local paper (for local people) about how NR isn't interested in their fantastic idea. They definitely haven't costed it properly if they claim 3rd rail is cheaper than 25KV overhead. They could simply aquire a few extra DMUs. Far less expense and far nicer for the passengers than being bounced around in ex Underground stock that isn't designed for interurban services (small wheels, lots of doors, low top speed). They could satisfy their desire to reuse random bits of ancient rolling stock by using regauged class 80 and 450 DEMUs...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
great central Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I have an idea, following something a few years ago. When the Leeds area was under Arriva, they used a pair of 37/4s either end of four through wired mk2 coaches for an extra service over the Settle and Carlisle line. On it's return to Leeds in the afternoon it formed a commuter service to Knaresborough, I think. After Knaresborough it ran empty to somewhere, did it go right to York? DRS have now taken on the remaining DBS 37/4s, there are still quite a few mk2s knocking about, we could even learn from New Zealand, where I understand they have fitted sliding doors to mk2 stock to make them more commuter friendly? Oh, time to wake up and take the tablets Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 They definitely haven't costed it I properly if they claim 3rd rail is cheaper than 25KV In some instances the installation of the 3rd rail itself will be much cheaper than OHLE - on wooden sleepers it may just straight on and would be very cheap. But if there are concrete then track renewal will be required and then we have the power supply itself, etc, etc... Seems like they lack a real understanding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stuartp Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 In some instances the installation of the 3rd rail itself will be much cheaper than OHLE - on wooden sleepers it may just straight on and would be very cheap. But if there are concrete then track renewal will be required and then we have the power supply itself, etc, etc... Seems like they lack a real understanding. Large parts of it were relaid a few years ago on what look like steel sleepers. At least LUL stock wouldn't have a problem on Crimple curve. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.