In message , at 20:50:40 on Wed, 9 Apr
2008, Paul Scott remarked:
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.

Do you think that'll involve giving the whole Hitchin-Cambridge route
the chop (from Thameslink)?
--
Roland Perry

Paul Scott wrote:

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.

Ah yes - the ECML (Phase 2) option. If it is exercised then the IEP half
sets are currently expected to be delivered between March 2015 and
October 2015, so they could well be fully operational before Key Output 2.

Roland Perry wrote:

Do you think that'll involve giving the whole Hitchin-Cambridge route
the chop (from Thameslink)?

The ECML (Phase 2) option is currently set at 55 vehicles. While I am
not au fait with the frequencies of the various FCC GN routes I think 55
vehicles would only cover the King's Lynn (via Cambridge) fasts and not
the Cambridge semi-fasts etc.

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, John B wrote:

Other interesting highlights:

* the trains must weigh less than 32 tonnes per coach

Is there an external driver for that requirement, or does it just come
from the Good Ideas Club at the ministry?

tom

--
Yesterday's research projects are today's utilities and tomorrow's
historical footnotes. -- Roy Smith

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Tom Anderson wrote:

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, John B wrote:

Other interesting highlights:

* the trains must weigh less than 32 tonnes per coach

Is there an external driver for that requirement, or does it just come
from the Good Ideas Club at the ministry?

Oh, here we go:



4.1 Train mass (weight) is a critical parameter for whole system, whole
life cost because it affects both track maintenance and train energy
consumption. The Department and Network Rail both understand the virtuous
circle that can be created between track quality and train mass and
Network Rail is committed to improve track quality through its new
standards for maintenance.

4.2 The Department and Network Rail wish to work with Bidders to establish
a set of weight targets which can be set in the ITT. The Department is
aiming at a target of 256 tonnes (tare) per 162m train or 384 tonnes
(tare) per 243m train which is believed to be achievable.



A 162 metre train made of 20 metre cars is an 8 car train, and an 8 car
train which weights 256 tonnes has 32 tonne cars. If the supplier goes for
26 metre cars, six per train, they could weigh 42 tonnes. I have no idea
if there are reasons 26 metre cars can't be used; i believe the Southern
network has curves which preclude their use, but don't know if Thameslink
will use those.

tom

--
Yesterday's research projects are today's utilities and tomorrow's
historical footnotes. -- Roy Smith

Tom Anderson wrote:

On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, John B wrote:

Other interesting highlights:

* the trains must weigh less than 32 tonnes per coach

Is there an external driver for that requirement

No, the driver can be on board.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13309739.html
(43 090 at London Kings Cross, 29 Nov 1980)

In message , at 21:59:07
on Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Chris Tolley remarked:
* the trains must weigh less than 32 tonnes per coach

Is there an external driver for that requirement

No, the driver can be on board.

The DfT needs to get everyone on board for this project to be a success.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 20:59:17 on
Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Sky Rider remarked:
Do you think that'll involve giving the whole Hitchin-Cambridge route
the chop (from Thameslink)?

The ECML (Phase 2) option is currently set at 55 vehicles. While I am
not au fait with the frequencies of the various FCC GN routes I think
55 vehicles would only cover the King's Lynn (via Cambridge) fasts and
not the Cambridge semi-fasts etc.

There's only one Kings Lynn fast per hour, and currently it splits at
Cambridge so that only 4 cars go further north (partly problems with
power supply, as well as customer demand).
--
Roland Perry

On Apr 9, 8:50*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

EE507 wrote:
Kings Lynn to Eastbourne runs
The SL RUS has led to what appears to be a more compact Thameslink network

I suspect the 'public' shortening of the routes north of the Thames can only
be a matter of time


And somehting I think is for the better - the core TL route through
central London is too valuable a part of underground / overground /
tube / metro / whatever-you-wish-to-call-it to be anything else than a
high capacity all trains stopp all stations section.

I'm not against RER type systems but London needs a new north-south
route with unrestricted double deck loading gauge not a twiddling of
an existing route that is gauge limited in the middle and access
constrained [even after the works] at both throats of the core
section.

--
Nick

On Apr 9, 10:46 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
4.2 The Department and Network Rail wish to work with Bidders to establish
a set of weight targets which can be set in the ITT. The Department is
aiming at a target of 256 tonnes (tare) per 162m train or 384 tonnes
(tare) per 243m train which is believed to be achievable.

A 162 metre train made of 20 metre cars is an 8 car train, and an 8 car
train which weights 256 tonnes has 32 tonne cars. If the supplier goes for
26 metre cars, six per train, they could weigh 42 tonnes. I have no idea
if there are reasons 26 metre cars can't be used; i believe the Southern
network has curves which preclude their use, but don't know if Thameslink
will use those.

The central Thameslink route has trouble with stock longer than 20m, I
think. There's another bit in the document where DfT suggests that
it'd be happy to think about longer trains as long as the manufacturer
thinks about ways of making them fit [presumably along the lines of
'we'll add GBP15m of extra value if you do GBP10m of widening'].

To achieve the two required total lengths, 20m trains would need to be
4-car units and 26m trains 3-car units.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org