LNER HST farewell tours 18-21/12/19

Oh it does, significantly. Especially multiplied up twice daily, week on week.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Is one seriously suggesting an Azuma is in any way more comfortable or better riding than a Pendi?

As for faster, faster for who? I don’t see any difference as yet from Aberdeen to Edinburgh....

 

My few journeys by Pendolino have ended in backache lasting days, and I now actively avoid the things; my journeys in Azumas have been uninspiring but I can face the prospect of commuting in them with equanimity. As for Edinburgh to Aberdeen, the issue there is the lack of electrification - an issue also bedevilling GWR and TransPennine, who do not benefit fully from these trains capability on the most difficult stretches.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I'll concede that the seats on the pendi are cxxx but the ride is Rolls-Royce esque compared to the catatonic twitching of an Azuma.
Thank you for reinforcing my point with the above.
However, it is interesting to note that the Aberdeen London time has barely moved from the previous time which undermines the argument suggesting they are also faster under the wires...

 

The timetables haven’t changed yet, as many (most?) of the Anglo Scottish services are still class 91 hauled. I don’t expect accelerations until the December 2020 timetable, at earliest, given the Azumas don’t finish being delivered till June. And that assumes that power upgrade between Newcastle and Edinburgh finishes this year - at the moment many Azumas have to work on diesel on that section because there isn’t enough power for them.

GWR have only just accelerated their timetable despite the HSTs going a while ago.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Ah. Fair enough. Well, I am looking forwards to that. But what I really want is a drastic reduction in the Aberdeen Edinburgh leg, which I’m fairly sure we aren’t going to get any time soon.

 

Based on my small sample of two trips up there this year, that would probably need infrastructure as well as trains. Busy sections at the southern end and Dundee--Arbroath, constrained layout at Dundee. Limited to zero overtaking.

Again on a small sample of Azuma trips, I'd say they have maybe 5 mins over the 91s on the KX-Doncaster section so have a bit more leeway for recovery. That's probably the same sort of difference as the new platform at Peterborough gives down trains at busy times.

The seats--- it probably depends on the condition of your back. For me, the standard class ones are pretty dire. And I don't like looking at electronic notices either.

 

GWR could have accelerated their timetable years ago with the HSTs. All they had to do was cut out the stations between Bristol Parkway and Paddington. That is exactly the same as they have done with the new 800s. In doing so the timetable has been cut by 17 mins. Prior to the new timetable changes I was at Swindon and was surprised that one service was booked to stop at the station for nine minutes. No wonder savings in travel time have been made.

Unfortunately savings cannot be made on journey times between Newton Abbot and Exeter when the waves are crashing over the seawall. The new units and saltwater just don't get on together. <BJ>

 

How come the power from the wires is enough for the 91-hauled trains but not for the Azumas, if they are running on the same schedules?

 

A very good question. I presume it’s a mixture of frequency - there are more services now - and the characteristics of AC motors as against the DC motors on the 91s. The same problem happened on the Southern when the Mk1s went for scrap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

At a guess, the "hotel services" of the new rolling stock will affect power consumption. Modern rolling stock has more gismos that even 10 years ago.

Cheers, Neil

 

Not much point having more power, when in high winds, the service has to artificially slowed, due to the length between uprights supporting the knitting.

Talk about clutching defeat out of the jaws of victory, when constructed.....

 

Built down to a price ( funded by HM Treasury) not up to a standard. Just like Cambridge, Ely, Kings Lynn which had light foundations on soft soil.
When I was working for NWR, I got the impression that every available possession on the ECML was spent strengthening the overhead structures to improve the problems of the whole lot being too flexible.

Cheers, Neil

 

What most folk don't know is that when HM Treasury released funds for the ECML electrification, they REFUSED ANY FUNDING to go north of Newcastle claiming the number of passengers didn't make it value for money for the taxpayer. If BR wanted to continue electrification north to Edinburgh they would have to fund it themselves out of the money granted for electrification to Newcastle.

Hence BR stretched the mast spacings well beyond what was sensible, extensive use of wire headspans rather than solid portal structures (accepting it might mean speed restrictions occasionally) as well as putting in the minimum amount of electrical feeders thus severely limiting the number of electric trains going north of Newcastle. This generated enough spare cash to take the wires to Edinburgh in spite of what the HM Treasury said.

As you say Network Rail have been trying to find ways to improve the situation ever since - but its a bit difficult given the only real way to make it significantly more robust is tear the whole system down and start again with the stuff they used on the GWML and quite clearly the money to do that sort of wholescale rebuilding won't be coming. Instead its a case of a whole series of minor improvements at selected locations

 

The basic design of seats in the Azuma / 800s / etc. (and pretty much every other new train produced these days) is mandated by the DfT in Whitehall

Apparently these new uncomfortable seats are extremely safe when it comes to protecting passengers in the event of a train crash or on board fire and thus they must be used by all UK TOCs

Anything else is 'non compliant' with the latest standards and while 'legacy' seating can continue to be used in older trains, anything rolling off the production line in Newton Aycliffe, Derby, etc must comply with the latest standards.

Do not fall into the trap the Government have set and blame the TOCs for failures in Whitehall!

The fact that they may be uncomfortable for long journeys, the fact that train crashes / fires are exceedingly rare compared to road transport, the fact that some folk will switch to road or air travel to to their design doesn't seem phase the mandarins responsible - most of whom probably have relatively short commutes from the home counties. and thus are untroubled by any deficiencies in seat design

Make them sit on said seat designs while they are in their Whitehall offices is about the only way things will change....

 

This is an argument often put forward, but is it actually the case that the mast spacing specification was far off other lines?

In most locations on the northern ECML, I find it quite tight to fit a double header between the masts, but have little problem doing so on the northern WCML. There were sections of the WCML that had additional supports put in, particularly over the northern fells in England, but the mast spacing north of the border seems pretty much as constructed and would appear to me to be wider spaced than the ECML?

 

With plenty of HSTs working, there has been less overall requirement for electric power.

It's also worth pointing out that the HST withdrawal has also coincided with the TPE services being extended from Newcastle to Edinburgh with bi-mode 802s. So, not only is there a desire to transfer services previously worked by HSTs to electric, but also to fit in new electric hauled TPE services. I believe that these TPE services will also run in diesel mode until the power supply is upgraded.

 

That's a great reply, makes so much sense. Thanks.