Post by Sou';westerPost by RobertWe were talking about the Thames Valley branches. There are, or will
be, no interworking from the branches to the main lines - with the
possible exception of the Reading - Basingstoke branch. The 3 coach
emus will not be joined to or separated from any trains on the Reliefs
at Twyford, Maidenhead or Ealing or on the Main lines at Slough.
Why is there this desire to complicate things? The existing trains will
be suitable, but not ideal, for service on these branches for decades
to come.
--
Robert
Because leaving the branches as diesel "islands" brings in other
complications! Traction Knowledge for train crew and maintenance staff,
separate fuel arrangements for the diesels, separate depot and workshop
requirements,different safety cultures for infrastructure staff within
the same small area. All this can be avoided by a small and cheap wire
scheme,
Get this into your head - Network Rail does not understand the concept
of a 'cheap wiring scheme'. The GW electrification is *2 years*, not
*months* but *years* late, and is costing more than a BILLION pounds
more than the budget. And a fleet of diesel powered trains has been
ordered to run on it...one has to ask why they bothered with the wires.
The north western scheme is over budget and running late, the EGIP
electrification in Scotland has been reported as being delayed and
costing more than planned.
And you think that electrifying the Thames Branches will be cheap? Bah!
The other issues you mention are straw men. I see no reason why
intelligent men and women are incapable of remembering that diesels and
electrics are different. The branch trains - for the umpteenth time -
run no great distance at low speeds. A 165 or 166 can run over 700
miles on a daily diagram including 90mph running before fuelling. This
means it could do at least 140 round trips - about 3 days work - on the
2 1/2 mile Slough to Windsor branch. Then fuel it from a bowser at
Slough twice a week. Brake pads would last for weeks. Reading
maintenance depot has been designed as a dual-purpose building - just
keep using it like that. The staff know the diesels now - just continue
as it is.
To avoid having different safety cultures - treat the branches as if
they were electrified. It's not as if they see many maintenance staff
anyway.
Post by Sou';westerand a small order for driving motor vehicles. Just because no requirement
for an AC driving motor has happened for a long time doesn't make it
impossible or expensive.
Not impossible, but it will be expensive as the design and approvals
costs will have to be written off over a very small number of vehicles.
Post by Sou';westerSurely better to send those diesels off to the west of England or Chiltern
where they can expand a compatible fleet.
On the subject of Cheap Wiring schemes, does anyone know what saving was
achieved on the Paisley Canal scheme a few years ago? That scheme was,
admittedly done for the opposite reason, to increase utilisation of already
existing electric stock.
--
Robert
