On 9 Apr, 15:01, Roland Perry wrote:
I have given up (apart from to odd heckle from the sidelines like today)
tracking the numbers. Especially when people say this 1100 might be on
top of an earlier 1300, and I was only trying to track a different 1000.

The problem is the Rolling Stock Plan (the 1300) only covers until ca.
2014, which means only the first batch of NGEMU are included in it
(the 1100, due in 2015) . Roger Ford says 100 carriages.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On 9 Apr, 14:57, EE507 wrote:
On Apr 9, 11:48*am, wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/5asy9b
http://tinyurl.com/5deoog

I love the fact that at the end of a highly detailed, demanding
technical specification for a train that is meant to be suitable for
metro-style ATO as well as Kings Lynn to Eastbourne runs, there is the
following:

"Maintenance downtimes must be significantly reduced from the current
increasing trend that has arisen due to unnecessary sophistication".

Look, I've been out all day wandering round Longsight (tough job, but
someone has to do it, cracking story to come) and I find someone is
pinching my jokes.

In the Laughing Stock Plan DfT said

The completion of the Thameslink Programme KO2 in 2015 requires the
introduction of up to 1300 new vehicles.

So that's the starting point. I think we will find that the new
Director Technical & Professional will kick things like 32 tonne axle
loads into the weeds.

Analysis starts tomoirrow.

On 9 Apr, 13:20, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"D7666" wrote in message

...
On Apr 9, 1:10 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

What clouds the issue further
So many clouds I have given up trying to track all this.

Perhaps Roland should too - we can collectively pay the Rail Press to do it
for us!

But make sure to pick the right magazine - I see Railway Magazine itself had
a 'bollock-o-gram' from Tom Harris MP after they ran a highly pessimistic
piece, suggesting that the majority of the Rolling Stock plan was simply a
reshuffle of existing stock between TOCs...

LOL

Paul

Don't rub it in Paul. I never get bollock-o-grams from Ministers.
Must be getting past it.

Mr Thant wrote:

The problem is the Rolling Stock Plan (the 1300) only covers until ca.
2014, which means only the first batch of NGEMU are included in it
(the 1100, due in 2015) . Roger Ford says 100 carriages.

The NGEMUs are distinct from the RSP 1300 (well the latest figure is
more like 1200+ but I can't remember exactly what it is). According to a
certain Modern Railways contributor (yes, it's Roger again), the DfT are
recommending that 256 of the 'RSP 1300' should be set aside for FCC.

64 of these will be allocated to FCC GN (10 321s + 8 313s), which means
FCC TL will be allocated 192 vehicles, of which 92 are the 23 377s
coming over for KO0 (March 2009). That leaves 100 vehicles for KO1
(December 2011), which will most likely be 25 377s and certainly not
NGEMUs as you suggest - the first NGEMU won't even be in passenger
service for another 2 months!

EE507 wrote:

Kings Lynn to Eastbourne runs

The SL RUS has led to what appears to be a more compact Thameslink
network (at least south of the Thames anyway) - I refer you this diagram
(http://tinyurl.com/3lj8jq), which U Thant has extracted from the SL RUS
pdf and posted on his wonderfully informative blog.

On 9 Apr, 19:03, Sky Rider wrote:
O0 (March 2009). That leaves 100 vehicles for KO1
(December 2011), which will most likely be 25 377s and certainly not
NGEMUs as you suggest - the first NGEMU won't even be in passenger
service for another 2 months!

Well I was quoting from last month's MR, though on another read it's
unclear - the DfT state "the Thameslink project will also introduce
new vehicles", but in the table beside Roger has them as 25 377s from
Southern. But then a couple of pages on in the Thameslink article the
latter is sort of framed as his own suggestion.

If only he were around to clarify.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

Mr Thant wrote:

Well I was quoting from last month's MR

So was I, as it happens.

though on another read it's unclear - the DfT state "the Thameslink project will also introduce new vehicles", but in the table beside Roger has them as
25 377s from Southern.

But then a couple of pages on in the Thameslink article the latter is sort of framed as his own suggestion.

Point accepted, but I did say 'most likely'. Perhaps we agree on the
NGEMUs now, but just to further my case, I will quote a paragraph from
the RSP:

'15. In addition, the [Thameslink] programme requires additional
vehicles for KO1 in 2011. It is expected that these vehicles will be
either cascaded existing EMU vehicles or new vehicles based on existing
designs with some, but maybe not all, of the features of the next
generation vehicles. However, it is possible that the next generation
vehicles proposed for KO2 in 2015 could be delivered earlier, possibly
by 2010 – 2011, if manufacturers are capable of delivering the required
outputs.'

As we already know, the first NGEMU should be in passenger service by 1
February 2012, but certainly not another 24. For some reason (once again
I have the Captain to thank for this) the DfT expect the first NGEMU to
be delivered more than a year before the first IEP train despite the
fact that NGEMU procurement has only just started, whereas IEP
procurement has been active for months.

If only he were around to clarify.

Agreed. And he was around less than 2 hours ago. g

"Sky Rider" wrote in message
...
EE507 wrote:

Kings Lynn to Eastbourne runs

The SL RUS has led to what appears to be a more compact Thameslink network
(at least south of the Thames anyway) - I refer you this diagram
(http://tinyurl.com/3lj8jq), which U Thant has extracted from the SL RUS
pdf and posted on his wonderfully informative blog.

I suspect the 'public' shortening of the routes north of the Thames can only
be a matter of time - you may recall how the Kings Lynn route suddenly
appeared in line for the IEP half sets a few months back, pointing to a
change of plans.

Paul

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message
,
at 03:48:54 on Wed, 9 Apr 2008, remarked:
http://tinyurl.com/5asy9b
http://tinyurl.com/5deoog

Now we are looking at 1,100 vehicles

That's 200 more than last time Ruth Kelly announced it in July last
year:

http://www.gos.gov.uk/gose/news/news...rojectForRail/

(equivalent to 275 EMUs in 4-car formation), which according to
the DfT is a net increase of 380 vehicles.

An increase of 380 in the size of Thameslink's fleet. [1].

So is that 380 out of the "famous 1000 more", or are they 100 over
their budget already?

Nice to see this re-announced again, anyway (it confirms our
prejudices); I wonder how many more times the same thing will be
announced

[1] Is that 380 more than the original size, or 380 more than the
size of the fleet after expansion with the 48 carriages announced
almost exactly a year ago?

And does it include the GN units, 40 (or even 41) times class 365 and
about a dozen class 317s.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at 13:20:24
on Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Paul Scott
remarked:
What clouds the issue further

So many clouds I have given up trying to track all this.

Perhaps Roland should too - we can collectively pay the Rail Press
to do it for us!

I have given up (apart from to odd heckle from the sidelines like
today) tracking the numbers. Especially when people say this 1100
might be on top of an earlier 1300, and I was only trying to track
a different 1000.

On the other hand I may still try to track the announcements, and
in the longer term whether or not anything like the promises were
delivered.

If you have been keeping up since 1997, you know that's doomed to
failure!

--
Colin Rosenstiel