Watford rail link support boost
 

"Andy" wrote :
Maybe, in the end, it will turn out that Chiltern will release
165s to LOROL and take all the 172s. I think that for a
substantial capacity increase, the GOBLIN trains need to
be 3 car units ...

It would certainly make sense for chiltern to take the new units and
cascade - all LOROL need to do is what they've done with 313 units - hack
off the third seat. That immediately increases circulating room, with a
wider aisle than 2+2. I think the LOROL order was for three-car trains, so
they'd need to cascade three care units.

Unless Boris is cutting corners again ...
--
Andrew


If you stand up and be counted,
From time to time you may get yourself knocked down.
But remember this:
A man flattened by an opponent can get up again.
A man flattened by conformity stays down for good.
- Thomas J. Watson Jr.

Watford rail link support boost
 

On Jan 21, 8:28*am, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
"Andy" wrote :

Maybe, in the end, it will turn out that Chiltern will release
165s to LOROL and take all the 172s. I think that for a
substantial capacity increase, the GOBLIN trains need to
be 3 car units ...

It would certainly make sense for chiltern to take the new units and
cascade - all LOROL need to do is what they've done with 313 units - hack
off the third seat. That immediately increases circulating room, with a
wider aisle than 2+2. I think the LOROL order was for three-car trains, so
they'd need to cascade three care units.


Nope, the LOROL units ordered are only 2 car units. I think that the
LOROL excuse was that 3 car units would require some infrastructure
work. There are a couple of questions to the Mayor with answers on the
following page (look about half way down):

http://www.barking-gospeloak.org.uk/news.htm

Unless Boris is cutting corners again ...
--
Andrew

If you stand up and be counted,
From time to time you may get yourself knocked down.
But remember this:
A man flattened by an opponent can get up again.
A man flattened by conformity stays down for good.
- Thomas J. *Watson Jr.

Watford rail link support boost
 

On Jan 21, 8:28*am, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
It would certainly make sense for chiltern to take the new units and
cascade - all LOROL need to do is what they've done with 313 units - hack
off the third seat. That immediately increases circulating room, with a
wider aisle than 2+2. I think the LOROL order was for three-car trains, so
they'd need to cascade three care units.

Unless Boris is cutting corners again ...

I was amazed, travelling on LO for the first time in a while the other
weekend, at the improvement in the 313 travelling experience that
removing the 3rd seat has made.

I was under-impressed that they're still running 2tph on Sundays,
though.


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

Watford rail link support boost
 

"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
"Andy" wrote :
Maybe, in the end, it will turn out that Chiltern will release
165s to LOROL and take all the 172s. I think that for a
substantial capacity increase, the GOBLIN trains need to
be 3 car units ...

It would certainly make sense for chiltern to take the new units and
cascade - all LOROL need to do is what they've done with 313 units - hack
off the third seat. That immediately increases circulating room, with a
wider aisle than 2+2. I think the LOROL order was for three-car trains, so
they'd need to cascade three care units.


No, they are two car units as originally ordered - and it's nothing to do
with Boris either.

I also think the 165 loan idea is more about the slow delivery of the 172s,
which are affected by the same problems as the Capitalstar (and Electrostar)
378s, though as others have said it is difficult to see where a spare 165
might come from.

Paul

Watford rail link support boost
 

On 21 Jan, 11:05, John B wrote:

On Jan 21, 8:28 am, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:

It would certainly make sense for chiltern to take the new units and
cascade - all LOROL need to do is what they've done with 313 units - hack
off the third seat. That immediately increases circulating room, with a
wider aisle than 2+2. I think the LOROL order was for three-car trains, so
they'd need to cascade three care units.

Unless Boris is cutting corners again ...

I was amazed, travelling on LO for the first time in a while the other
weekend, at the improvement in the 313 travelling experience that
removing the 3rd seat has made.


Indeed.

And contrary to the popular take on things - at least during off-peak
times when it's not so packed you can't move around - on the NLL I've
seen plenty of people offer up their seats to those 'less able to
stand' (as the phrase has it). Including multiple offers of a seat to
a hippy-ish woman whom I think many took to be pregnant but was in
fact just rather rotund - her increasingly strained grin rather
betrayed her growing frustration as this misinterpretation!


I was under-impressed that they're still running 2tph on Sundays,
though.


They are. Not sure why this is still the case - demand would surely
justify at least a service with a 20 minute frequency (as happens late
evenings M-S) if not every 15 minutes.

Sunday staffing costs presenting an issue, perhaps? When the new DOO
trains eventually arrive then LO won't be having to pay for guards I
suppose.

Watford rail link support boost
 

"Paul Scott" wrote :
It would certainly make sense for chiltern to take the new units and
cascade - all LOROL need to do is what they've done with 313 units - hack
off the third seat. That immediately increases circulating room, with a
wider aisle than 2+2. I think the LOROL order was for three-car trains,
so they'd need to cascade three care units.
No, they are two car units as originally ordered - and it's nothing to do
with Boris either.
I also think the 165 loan idea is more about the slow delivery of the
172s, which are affected by the same problems as the Capitalstar (and
Electrostar) 378s, though as others have said it is difficult to see where
a spare 165 might come from.

Quite right; apologies to all and to Boris. The order makes for more
frequent trains, with an option to increase, and Boris hasn't touched it
(yet). Though the relative cheapness of the networkers probably appeals ;o)

I suspect the 165 plan (how definite is that?) is a clever move by Chiltern;
they've been promised new trains, as have FGW; one will get new trains,
cascading 16x units to the other.

As Chiltern is already the proud owner of many turbostars, shifting yet
more networkers to their sister company (LOROL) puts them in prime position
to say "give us the new trains, then we'll have a standardised turbostar
fleet, while FGW suburban can have a standardised networker fleet."

They already have a stronger case, as their line speeds are frequently much
faster than suburban FGW can muster. In fact, I suspect they'll still need a
few 165s, as the combined FGW/LOROL needs will not take them all - but their
case is much stronger than FGW, who have no Turbostars at all.

This is, of course, pure conjecture!
--

Andrew

"If A is success in life, then A = x + y + z.
Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut." ~ Albert Einstein

Watford rail link support boost
 

"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
As Chiltern is already the proud owner of many turbostars, shifting yet
more networkers to their sister company (LOROL) puts them in prime
position to say "give us the new trains, then we'll have a standardised
turbostar fleet, while FGW suburban can have a standardised networker
fleet."

Whooops!
I now remember that FGWs 'new' trains are mostly for Bristol and the west,
not London suburban - but I still think that Chiltern will be most likely to
get the new Turbostars.
--

Andrew

Watford rail link support boost
 

John B wrote:

I was amazed, travelling on LO for the first time in a while the other
weekend, at the improvement in the 313 travelling experience that
removing the 3rd seat has made.

I wish someone would do that to the 315s used on the Shenfield Metro
services. These are getting ever more packed at peak hours and more aisle
space would prevent the scrums at Stratford where people litterly ram their
fellow passengers in.

Watford rail link support boost
 

"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
As Chiltern is already the proud owner of many turbostars, shifting yet
more networkers to their sister company (LOROL) puts them in prime
position to say "give us the new trains, then we'll have a standardised
turbostar fleet, while FGW suburban can have a standardised networker
fleet."

Whooops!
I now remember that FGWs 'new' trains are mostly for Bristol and the west,
not London suburban - but I still think that Chiltern will be most likely
to get the new Turbostars.

FGW are supposed to get 52 new vehicles with only a net increase of 12 being
for the Bristol area, the rest being for LTV. However, although this could
be achieved by all the new units going to the Bristol area, with a cascade
of various second hand DMUs to LTV, this is very unlikely, as LTV routes
are not suited to the various 158s, 150s, and 143s etc that FGW currently
use out west...

The Rolling stock plans did not include any transfers out of Chiltern, they
are down for 8 x 172 carriages, believed to be 4 x 2 car units.

Paul S

Watford rail link support boost
 

On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 03:05:15 -0800 (PST), John B
wrote:

I was amazed, travelling on LO for the first time in a while the other
weekend, at the improvement in the 313 travelling experience that
removing the 3rd seat has made.

Merseyrail removed the third seat from the middle coach of their units
way back in the late 1980s/early 1990s - this area was indicated by a
green cantrail stripe. As few people like sitting in the 3 part of
3+2, it made sense, though I recall it was sold as allowing easier
access for prams etc to be wheeled in to your seat instead of needing
to be left in the vestibule.

Proper 2+2 now, of course, with almost IC spacing and high-back seats.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.