MML 810s

[Tweed]

Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

All that I’ve heard is that they’re essentially a new design, using new
components, perhaps from new suppliers. Perhaps there are problems with
some of those components?

They are also the first of the family to have a power pack under one of the
(shortened) driving cab cars, presumably along with the pan and
transformer. Perhaps that cramped car design has hit problems?

[Scott]

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

All that I’ve heard is that they’re essentially a new design, using new
components, perhaps from new suppliers. Perhaps there are problems with
some of those components?
They are also the first of the family to have a power pack under one of the
(shortened) driving cab cars, presumably along with the pan and
transformer. Perhaps that cramped car design has hit problems?

Or Aslef disapproval?

[Tweed]

Post by Scott

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

All that I’ve heard is that they’re essentially a new design, using new
components, perhaps from new suppliers. Perhaps there are problems with
some of those components?
They are also the first of the family to have a power pack under one of the
(shortened) driving cab cars, presumably along with the pan and
transformer. Perhaps that cramped car design has hit problems?

Or Aslef disapproval?

Don’t think they’ve got enough for ASLEF to disapprove of yet. There seems
to be just one train, without the interior fitted out, out and about being
tested.

[Scott]

On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 17:27:12 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Scott

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

All that I?ve heard is that they?re essentially a new design, using new
components, perhaps from new suppliers. Perhaps there are problems with
some of those components?
They are also the first of the family to have a power pack under one of the
(shortened) driving cab cars, presumably along with the pan and
transformer. Perhaps that cramped car design has hit problems?

Or Aslef disapproval?

Don’t think they’ve got enough for ASLEF to disapprove of yet. There seems
to be just one train, without the interior fitted out, out and about being
tested.

They must have looked at the plans or made a factory visit?

[Scott]

On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail? Could or should SR order Hitachi
810s instead?

[Tweed]

Post by Scott
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail? Could or should SR order Hitachi
810s instead?

Yes, it’s believed that the displaced Meridians will end up in Scotland. If
ScotRail wants 810s they will probably have to wait quite a bit longer. I
wonder what the difference in leasing costs would be?

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Scott
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail? Could or should SR order Hitachi
810s instead?

Yes, it’s believed that the displaced Meridians will end up in Scotland. If
ScotRail wants 810s they will probably have to wait quite a bit longer.

In any case, I’d suggest that 805s would be a better choice than 810s.

Post by Tweed
I wonder what the difference in leasing costs would be?

I’d imagine that Eversholt would do a good deal on leasing the 222s.

[Recliner]

Post by Scott
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail?

Yes, and/or open access operators, but they’re falling out of favour for
that role.

Post by Scott
Could or should SR order Hitachi 810s instead?

Probably a lot more expensive, and delivery much further away. SR might
prefer a quickly-available diesel option for the next 10-15 years, then get
modern EMUs.

In any case, why 810s and not 802s or 805s?

[Scott]

Post by Scott
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail?

Yes, and/or open access operators, but they’re falling out of favour for
that role.

Post by Scott
Could or should SR order Hitachi 810s instead?

Probably a lot more expensive, and delivery much further away. SR might
prefer a quickly-available diesel option for the next 10-15 years, then get
modern EMUs.
In any case, why 810s and not 802s or 805s?

I was just thinking they could add them to the MML order.

[Recliner]

Post by Scott

Post by Scott
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail?

Yes, and/or open access operators, but they’re falling out of favour for
that role.

Post by Scott
Could or should SR order Hitachi 810s instead?

Probably a lot more expensive, and delivery much further away. SR might
prefer a quickly-available diesel option for the next 10-15 years, then get
modern EMUs.
In any case, why 810s and not 802s or 805s?

I was just thinking they could add them to the MML order.

They could just as well add 805s to the AWC order. Those are probably
cheaper, have more capacity, and are already in service, so may be
available sooner.

This is all assuming that SR needs a uniform fleet of 5-car units. The
Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car, 6-car,
etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

[Roland Perry]

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?

They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do with building them) and the MML, where they operate.
Conceivably, if SR wants them to be heavily renovated, with mechanical as well as cosmetic changes, then Alstom might
bid to do the work in Litchurch Lane, which now does renovations as well as new builds.

For example, might SR ask for one or more power packs in each set to be replaced by batteries? Or maybe just de-rate
the engines, which are overkill for the SR network.

[Roland Perry]

On 06 Jan 2025 12:09:55 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

On 06 Jan 2025 12:09:55 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

No, because you had no idea which factory built them.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

On 06 Jan 2025 12:09:55 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

No, because you had no idea which factory built them.

Once again you are making crass and abusive assumptions about what I
might or might know.

Although in this context it's irrelevant, because any appropriate
factory would do.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

On 06 Jan 2025 12:09:55 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

No, because you had no idea which factory built them.

Once again you are making crass and abusive assumptions about what I
might or might know.
Although in this context it's irrelevant, because any appropriate
factory would do.

Why would it need a factory to do? What factory facilities would be
needed?

Almost certainly, they’ve been reconfigured in the depot till now. The only
complicated thing to adjust might be the software, but that’s not been a
problem with those trains, and it won’t need factory equipment.

[Theo]

Post by Roland Perry

On 06 Jan 2025 12:09:55 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

Which factory did you mean, specifically? You presumably had one in mind.

Given that there's been so much reshuffling of production plants in recent
decades, for any given stock there's a good chance the original plant no
longer exists, and sometimes the original trainbuilder has exited the
rolling stock market. So 'the factory' in many cases doesn't mean the
building they were assembled in.

What's the situation with maintenance on the 22x? I think 220/221 are
maintained at Central Rivers - is there a build+maintain contract in place
like there is with other units, or is XC doing maintenance themselves? I
think the 222 are now handled by Etches Park - is Alstom involved or is it
all EMR? Will that facility need to move to Scotland if they go north?

Theo

[Roland Perry]

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

Which factory did you mean, specifically? You presumably had one in mind.

Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges? Sounds unlikely they're popping
across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly! But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo
Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

Which factory did you mean, specifically? You presumably had one in mind.

Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

Ah, what you actually mean is that you don’t know what maintenance depots
do. That figures.

[Coffee]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's

not

Post by Roland Perry
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so?  In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges?  Sounds unlikely

they're popping

across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly!  But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

Which factory did you mean, specifically?  You presumably had one in
mind.

Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

[Charles Ellson]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:47:32 +0000, Coffee

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's

not

Post by Roland Perry
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so?  In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges?  Sounds unlikely

they're popping

across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly!  But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

Which factory did you mean, specifically?  You presumably had one in
mind.

Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

The LU version used to involve fitting a second compressor to the few
shortened formations used in more recent years.

[Recliner]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 18:47:32 +0000, Coffee

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Theo

Post by Roland Perry
But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's

not

Post by Roland Perry
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so?  In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe
the software allows them to operate in up to 13 car
formations. They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so
that doesn't sound like they had to go back to the
factory where they were built. It's probably something that can be
done in Derby Etches Park depot.

Weren't they built by Bombardier in Bruges?  Sounds unlikely

they're popping

across the Channel to be reformed.

Exactly!  But I didn't think Roland would know that.

It's high time you stopped speculating about what I might know or not.
This stalking campaign is getting extremely tedious.

Etches Park is across the road from Alstom's, formerly Bombardier's,
current UK factory, of course.

Yup, very convenient, both to that factory (which had nothing to do
with building them)

Did I specify which factory?

Which factory did you mean, specifically?  You presumably had one in
mind.

Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

The LU version used to involve fitting a second compressor to the few
shortened formations used in more recent years.

The 222s cannot be used in less than 4-car formations, which have two
compressors, on the intermediate cars. Five-car units have three
compressors, while 7-car units have four compressors (I think 6-car units
would be the same). Only one needs to run at a time.

Of course, the equipment being moved could be things like catering trolley
bays or disabled seats.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

[Bevan Price]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

Not with current units, but for 1st generation units with "blue square"
connections, you could couple any combination with up to (I think) a
maximum of 6 power cars. This even applied to Class 124 "Trans Pennine"
units, where you could replace a power car by, for example, a Class 101
power car. The only snag was that you could not make a corridor
connection between the Class 124 and the Class 101 coach.

[Theo]

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

Not with current units, but for 1st generation units with "blue square"
connections, you could couple any combination with up to (I think) a
maximum of 6 power cars. This even applied to Class 124 "Trans Pennine"
units, where you could replace a power car by, for example, a Class 101
power car. The only snag was that you could not make a corridor
connection between the Class 124 and the Class 101 coach.

I might also nominate the Hastings DEMUs. Commonly run as 6-car units
(sometimes 2x6, splitting en route), they were cut down to the 3R 'Reading'
3-car units (with an EPB trailer), and Hastings Diesels Ltd runs 1001 as an
8-car unit. Not sure what the limit for a DEMU would be, although the SR
liked to assemble random collection of vehicles...

I suppose the semantic question is that, if you can build a train from an
arbitrary collection of driving motor and trailer cars, when you couple two
cabs together does it suddenly become two units, whereas do the same
vehicles turned around so coupled cab to corridor remain one unit?

Theo

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

Not with current units, but for 1st generation units with "blue square"
connections, you could couple any combination with up to (I think) a
maximum of 6 power cars. This even applied to Class 124 "Trans Pennine"
units, where you could replace a power car by, for example, a Class 101
power car. The only snag was that you could not make a corridor
connection between the Class 124 and the Class 101 coach.

I might also nominate the Hastings DEMUs. Commonly run as 6-car units
(sometimes 2x6, splitting en route), they were cut down to the 3R 'Reading'
3-car units (with an EPB trailer), and Hastings Diesels Ltd runs 1001 as an
8-car unit. Not sure what the limit for a DEMU would be, although the SR
liked to assemble random collection of vehicles...
I suppose the semantic question is that, if you can build a train from an
arbitrary collection of driving motor and trailer cars, when you couple two
cabs together does it suddenly become two units, whereas do the same
vehicles turned around so coupled cab to corridor remain one unit?

Good question.

I’d say that if you can split a formation in public service and drive the
two sections away independently, then it’s two units operating in multiple;
if you can’t, it’s a single unit.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo
I suppose the semantic question is that, if you can build a train from an
arbitrary collection of driving motor and trailer cars, when you couple two
cabs together does it suddenly become two units, whereas do the same
vehicles turned around so coupled cab to corridor remain one unit?

Good question.
I’d say that if you can split a formation in public service and drive the
two sections away independently, then it’s two units operating in multiple;
if you can’t, it’s a single unit.

I'm not 100%, but I think you may have been able to drive (some) first gen
D(E)MUs from any cab, even cabs in the middle of the train. You wouldn't
normally do that due to lack of view, but arguably you could have
theoretically split that in public service, ie you have a train formed of
DM-T-DM-T-DM and it could split into DM-T and DM-T-DM which operate
independently.

(A scenario for that might be a train where the front portion forms the fast
service and the rear portion the stopper; the stopper catches up with the
fast at the end of the route and they couple up for the return. Hence no
rear cab is needed on the DM-T portion)

In which case I'm not sure the idea of units is something that is well
defined. The SR was happy to swap around coaches from random EMUs and DEMUs
and it sounds like the first gen DMUs were similar.

Theo

[Charles Ellson]

On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 13:56:29 +0000, Bevan Price

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

Not with current units, but for 1st generation units with "blue square"
connections, you could couple any combination with up to (I think) a
maximum of 6 power cars. This even applied to Class 124 "Trans Pennine"
units, where you could replace a power car by, for example, a Class 101
power car. The only snag was that you could not make a corridor
connection between the Class 124 and the Class 101 coach.

That sounds like a description of how DMUs could be seen assembled at
Glasgow Central.

[Mike Humphrey]

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

The Pacer/Sprinter family can be coupled in any combination up to 12 cars
or 12 cabs. You did specify "with only two cabs" - this is in theory
possible but in practice you'd struggle to find enough intermediate
vehicles as far more driving vehicles were built.

Or, to reopen a can of worms, the InterCity 125 - which has operated in
passenger service in formations ranging from 1+0 to 2+8 (though the first
of those was very much out of the ordinary).

Mike

[Recliner]

Post by Mike Humphrey

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

The Pacer/Sprinter family can be coupled in any combination up to 12 cars
or 12 cabs. You did specify "with only two cabs"

I did, actually.

Post by Mike Humphrey
- this is in theory
possible but in practice you'd struggle to find enough intermediate
vehicles as far more driving vehicles were built.
Or, to reopen a can of worms, the InterCity 125 - which has operated in
passenger service in formations ranging from 1+0 to 2+8 (though the first
of those was very much out of the ordinary).

They’re not multiple units. And I don’t think they’ve run in normal
passenger service with more than eight passenger carriages? But, of
course, there are other, longer loco-hauled trains, not least, the
sleepers.

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Recliner

Post by Mike Humphrey

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

The Pacer/Sprinter family can be coupled in any combination up to 12 cars
or 12 cabs. You did specify "with only two cabs"

I did, actually.

Post by Mike Humphrey
- this is in theory
possible but in practice you'd struggle to find enough intermediate
vehicles as far more driving vehicles were built.
Or, to reopen a can of worms, the InterCity 125 - which has operated in
passenger service in formations ranging from 1+0 to 2+8 (though the first
of those was very much out of the ordinary).

They’re not multiple units. And I don’t think they’ve run in normal
passenger service with more than eight passenger carriages? But, of
course, there are other, longer loco-hauled trains, not least, the
sleepers.

The ECML used to run 2+9, I think. . . . Yes, Wikipedia agrees - second
paragraph at
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterCity_125#Eastern_England_and_Scotland>.

Sam

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Recliner

Post by Mike Humphrey

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

The Pacer/Sprinter family can be coupled in any combination up to 12 cars
or 12 cabs. You did specify "with only two cabs"

I did, actually.

Post by Mike Humphrey
- this is in theory
possible but in practice you'd struggle to find enough intermediate
vehicles as far more driving vehicles were built.
Or, to reopen a can of worms, the InterCity 125 - which has operated in
passenger service in formations ranging from 1+0 to 2+8 (though the first
of those was very much out of the ordinary).

They’re not multiple units.

Were considered as such but not made to run in multiple.

So, we won't see (2+4)*2.

Regards, ULF

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

As the designs are similar, why not Voyagers?

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Good software design would have the carriages talk to each other when
they’re connected and work out what kind of configuration they’re in,
whether it’s valid, and what equipment needs to enabled on which vehicle.
Conceptually that’s very straightforward stuff, but I don’t know whether
there are constraints IRL.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

As the designs are similar, why not Voyagers?

Good question - they’ve only every run in 4 and 5 car configurations, but
there have been 15-car consists at some point. I wonder if the inter-car
protocols (assuming there are such) are the same between sets as within a
set?

Sam

[Recliner]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Good software design would have the carriages talk to each other when
they’re connected and work out what kind of configuration they’re in,
whether it’s valid, and what equipment needs to enabled on which vehicle.
Conceptually that’s very straightforward stuff, but I don’t know whether
there are constraints IRL.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

As the designs are similar, why not Voyagers?

Good question - they’ve only every run in 4 and 5 car configurations, but
there have been 15-car consists at some point. I wonder if the inter-car
protocols (assuming there are such) are the same between sets as within a
set?

I wonder if the tilt capability affected anything?

[Sam Wilson]

Post by Recliner

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Good software design would have the carriages talk to each other when
they’re connected and work out what kind of configuration they’re in,
whether it’s valid, and what equipment needs to enabled on which vehicle.
Conceptually that’s very straightforward stuff, but I don’t know whether
there are constraints IRL.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

As the designs are similar, why not Voyagers?

Good question - they’ve only every run in 4 and 5 car configurations, but
there have been 15-car consists at some point. I wonder if the inter-car
protocols (assuming there are such) are the same between sets as within a
set?

I wonder if the tilt capability affected anything?

Driving car to train: Check in with your capabilities, please.
Carriage 1: <capability-bitmap>
Carriage 2: <capability-bitmap>
:
:
Driving car: Cool, everyone has tilt enabled. Let’s go!

Sam

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Recliner

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Good software design would have the carriages talk to each other when
they’re connected and work out what kind of configuration they’re in,
whether it’s valid, and what equipment needs to enabled on which vehicle.
Conceptually that’s very straightforward stuff, but I don’t know whether
there are constraints IRL.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

As the designs are similar, why not Voyagers?

Good question - they’ve only every run in 4 and 5 car configurations, but
there have been 15-car consists at some point. I wonder if the inter-car
protocols (assuming there are such) are the same between sets as within a
set?

I wonder if the tilt capability affected anything?

Driving car to train: Check in with your capabilities, please.
Carriage 1: <capability-bitmap>
Carriage 2: <capability-bitmap>
Driving car: Cool, everyone has tilt enabled. Let’s go!

If it's made sure all carriages tilt to the
needed side. Had different behaviour of second
units here...

Regards, ULF

[Roland Perry]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Good software design would have the carriages talk to each other when
they’re connected and work out what kind of configuration they’re in,
whether it’s valid, and what equipment needs to enabled on which vehicle.
Conceptually that’s very straightforward stuff, but I don’t know whether
there are constraints IRL.

I got the impression it wasn't so much enabling things that had
previously been dormant, but hardware just not existing on every coach.
An obvious one customer-side is toilets - they are ether there or they
aren't, and no amount of software is going to conjure one up if you
happen to shunt five coaches with no toilets together.

What software could conceivably do is automagically configure signs in
carriages to point to the nearest toilet (and reflect whether they are
occupied or not), but that sounds to me unlikely in practice, and it
probably has to be done by a man with a screwdriver.

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
Nobody has been able to answer my challenge to nominate any other unit
train with such versatility.

As the designs are similar, why not Voyagers?

Good question - they’ve only every run in 4 and 5 car configurations, but
there have been 15-car consists at some point. I wonder if the inter-car
protocols (assuming there are such) are the same between sets as within a
set?

I would expect very little by way of protocols between sets, especially
for operational functions. What they might do is correctly show
"Carriage 6 of 10" when coupled.

Post by Sam Wilson
Sam

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Sam Wilson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Coffee

Post by Roland Perry
Any suitable factory, very likely associated with the original
manufacturer. Not a depot where they empty the toilets, rarely
wash the windows, and don't appear to bother to fix the wifi.

I seem to remember some equipment had to be moved between carriages for
the reformations.

A consequence of the carriages being neither self-contained nor
identical. With services being distributed/de-centralised.

Not identical, not least above the floor, but capable of being formed into
trains of varying lengths, from 4-cars upwards (I think, to 13 or 14 cars,
if any operator has long enough platforms). And, no, they don’t have to be
returned to the factory for this to be done.

Just shunting them around in a depot then?

Good software design would have the carriages talk to each other when
they’re connected and work out what kind of configuration they’re in,
whether it’s valid, and what equipment needs to enabled on which vehicle.
Conceptually that’s very straightforward stuff, but

This would be customer-friendly design.

Maybe trainmakers decide that they shall
be needed for every operation of the kind
other than coupling and uncoupling the
cab sides of two multiple units, as they
want to generate extra income.

Regards, ULF

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest. Just a few specific
projects [9's down to 7's, and 4's up to 5's]. You can probably find out
as easily as I can where it was done. But I'm sure it's not something a
depot can do overnight in order to send out new formed fleets day after
day.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

The Meridians are more flexible, in that they can run in 4-car, 5-car,
6-car, etc, formations as needed on particular routes.

But they need to go back to the factory to be reconfigured, it's not
something which can be done by shunting them around in the depot.

Is that so? In which case, which factory?
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'? All of those have operated in passenger service,
demonstrating the versatility of the design.

Post by Roland Perry
Just a few specific
projects [9's down to 7's, and 4's up to 5's]. You can probably find out
as easily as I can where it was done. But I'm sure it's not something a
depot can do overnight in order to send out new formed fleets day after
day.

I never suggested that it was something that could or would be changed day-to-day, but it would allow SR to adapt the
fleet for specific routes, and occasionally reconfigure it if needed. I don't think that's possible with IETs. For
example, perhaps the Aberdeen to Inverness route needs fewer carriages than the Aberdeen to Glasgow route?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.

I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

[Charles Ellson]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

[Recliner]

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

Yes, over 20 years. The point is that they're a particularly flexible unit
design that can be deployed in many ways, which might be useful to SR. I
wonder if any other designs have been deployed as 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car
units, each with only two cabs?

But Roland inevitably misunderstands, whether deliberately or through
stupidity, who knows?

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

Yes, over 20 years. The point is that they're a particularly flexible unit
design that can be deployed in many ways, which might be useful to SR. I
wonder if any other designs have been deployed as 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car
units, each with only two cabs?
But Roland inevitably misunderstands, whether deliberately or through
stupidity, who knows?

The 222s don’t meet the Scottish Government’s desire to reduce diesel
running under the wires. But at the end of the day I suspect lack of funds
for new bi mode stock will rule the day. Perhaps the 222s will be an
interim solution. I don’t know how much under wire running is involved in
the routes to be operated.

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

Yes, over 20 years. The point is that they're a particularly flexible unit
design that can be deployed in many ways, which might be useful to SR. I
wonder if any other designs have been deployed as 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car
units, each with only two cabs?
But Roland inevitably misunderstands, whether deliberately or through
stupidity, who knows?

The 222s don’t meet the Scottish Government’s desire to reduce diesel
running under the wires. But at the end of the day I suspect lack of funds
for new bi mode stock will rule the day. Perhaps the 222s will be an
interim solution. I don’t know how much under wire running is involved in
the routes to be operated.

Not very much at the moment, but with more to come. But they should still
use less diesel than the HSTs.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

Yes, over 20 years.

Please tell us the rough dates for the two phases of conversion, so we
can see if it spans 20yrs as you claim.

Post by Recliner
The point is that they're a particularly flexible unit
design that can be deployed in many ways, which might be useful to SR. I
wonder if any other designs have been deployed as 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car
units, each with only two cabs?
But Roland inevitably misunderstands, whether deliberately or through
stupidity, who knows?

Recliner, due perhaps to mental health issues**, stupidly and
deliberately misunderstands what I post. Then tells everyone - which
makes it worse!

** In the past we've explored vendettas such as jilted lover and
failed job applicant.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

Yes, over 20 years.

Please tell us the rough dates for the two phases of conversion, so we
can see if it spans 20yrs as you claim.

Post by Recliner
The point is that they're a particularly flexible unit
design that can be deployed in many ways, which might be useful to SR. I
wonder if any other designs have been deployed as 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car
units, each with only two cabs?
But Roland inevitably misunderstands, whether deliberately or through
stupidity, who knows?

Recliner, due perhaps to mental health issues**, stupidly and
deliberately misunderstands what I post.

Me, along with everyone else. You’re the one who misunderstands posts, then
spends weeks proving you were ‘right’.

Post by Roland Perry
Then tells everyone - which makes it worse!
** In the past we've explored vendettas such as jilted lover and
failed job applicant.

Roland, it really isn’t necessary to meet you to find you intensely
annoying.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

[Certes]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

[Recliner]

Post by Certes

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

But those aren’t single units, with only one pair of cabs. The 222s can
also run in multiple if required, as do the Voyagers they’re based on.

[Tweed]

Post by Certes

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.

Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.

I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
Loading Image...
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU
scheduled nonstop travel times?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?

I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

[ColinR]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from
Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?
I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

Depends what you term "long nonstop" distance is. Not sure of current
timetables, but Southampton - Waterloo used to have some non-stop third
rail services - about 70 miles.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by ColinR

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from
Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?
I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

Depends what you term "long nonstop" distance is. Not sure of current
timetables, but Southampton - Waterloo used to have some non-stop third
rail services - about 70 miles.

They haven't run non-stop for many years, the introduction of the stop
for all services at Winchester must go back to the early 1990s at least.
Alternate trains also stop at either Woking or Basingstoke.

[ColinR]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by ColinR

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/
media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?
I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

Depends what you term "long nonstop" distance is. Not sure of current
timetables, but Southampton - Waterloo used to have some non-stop
third rail services - about 70 miles.

They haven't run non-stop for many years, the introduction of the stop
for all services at Winchester must go back to the early 1990s at least.
Alternate trains also stop at either Woking or Basingstoke.

Yep, moved away from that area in mid nineties, and stopped frequent
rail travel in late 80s!

[Recliner]

Post by ColinR

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by ColinR

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/
media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?
I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

Depends what you term "long nonstop" distance is. Not sure of current
timetables, but Southampton - Waterloo used to have some non-stop
third rail services - about 70 miles.

They haven't run non-stop for many years, the introduction of the stop
for all services at Winchester must go back to the early 1990s at least.
Alternate trains also stop at either Woking or Basingstoke.

Yep, moved away from that area in mid nineties, and stopped frequent
rail travel in late 80s!

I wonder what the longest non-stop runs for the 110mph 350s are?

[Bevan Price]

Post by Recliner

Post by ColinR

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by ColinR

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/
media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?
I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

Depends what you term "long nonstop" distance is. Not sure of current
timetables, but Southampton - Waterloo used to have some non-stop
third rail services - about 70 miles.

They haven't run non-stop for many years, the introduction of the stop
for all services at Winchester must go back to the early 1990s at least.
Alternate trains also stop at either Woking or Basingstoke.

Yep, moved away from that area in mid nineties, and stopped frequent
rail travel in late 80s!

I wonder what the longest non-stop runs for the 110mph 350s are?

Now - possibly Milton Keynes to London Euston, but previously when the
350/4s were with Trans Pennine, Lockerbie to Edinburgh (75.7 miles).

[Roland Perry]

Post by ColinR

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222
comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains
from one
or two units as the demand requires.
I don't know how long they did it for, but when through services
to Hull
were introduced (with a great fanfare) the one train each way per day
attached/detached one unit at Nottingham.
Slightly differently, it wasn't unknown for other two unit trains to
only have one unit staffed (and the other locked out) from
Nottingham to
Leicester, and that's not because of platform lengths.
I've also overheard disgruntled First Class passengers complaining to
the train manager (of their half) that there were no seats, and them
helpfully pointing out that there's accommodation in the other
half, but
this train is now non-stop to London [and obviously no corridor
connection]. I think that's what's known as 'progress'.

Such
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_electric_multiple_units#/media/Fil
e:Southern_377_at_Hemel_Hempstead.JPG
design offers limited space for the driver
and higher air resistance at higher speeds.

False dichotomy, to alternative is not to cobble together trains from
smaller units, but have sufficient of the right length available.

To carry heated air or to have problems
with being too long for some stations/platforms
that are okay for 1/2 of a double EMU?
I am not against loco-hauled passenger trains
but adding through cars is complicated and takes
time. Nowadays often reduced to overnight and
holiday services.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner
What were/are the maximum 25kV-front-door-EMU scheduled nonstop travel
times?

I don't understand what the relevance of that is.

I guess the third-rail-only ones do not run
very long nonstop sections, so you may include
them as you please.

Depends what you term "long nonstop" distance is. Not sure of current
timetables, but Southampton - Waterloo used to have some non-stop third
rail services - about 70 miles.

There used to be one Sheffield-London non-stop service, but probably
didn't survive the Meridianisation. So would have had one stop at
Leicester.

London to Cambridge on the "Cambridge Cruisers" was non-stop using EMUs.

[Tweed]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed. I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?

None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot (SR might have a preference for the work to
be done in Scotland). What they won’t need is the heavy work fitting
retention tank toilets and sliding doors that made the HST project so
difficult and time-consuming. The latter, in particular, turned out to be
much harder than expected, as the old, steel monocoque bodies were more
distorted and rusty than anticipated.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.

For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

Found here, although not for the UK,
the old English but now outdated term
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ausbesserungswerk .

Regards, ULF

[Recliner]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

Found here, although not for the UK,
the old English but now outdated term
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ausbesserungswerk .

Yes, they’re sometimes called Works here. For example:

https://www.arlington-fleet.com/workshop.html

[Coffee]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

[Theo]

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

Eastleigh hasn't made new railway vehicles in a very long time (1960s?).
Factories make new things, heavy maintenance depots modify existing things.

As an example, suppose your Toyota needs a new engine. Do you put it on a
ship back to Japan where it was made, or do you take it to a workshop where
they can put it on a lift, hoist the engine out and winch in a new one (that
has been supplied on a pallet from Toyota)? Cars almost never go back to
the site where they were manufactured, and trains are the same.

Some depots do more heavy maintenance than others, just like not all garages
can do engine swaps.

Theo

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Theo

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

Eastleigh hasn't made new railway vehicles in a very long time (1960s?).
Factories make new things, heavy maintenance depots modify existing things.
As an example, suppose your Toyota needs a new engine. Do you put it on a
ship back to Japan where it was made, or do you take it to a workshop where
they can put it on a lift, hoist the engine out and winch in a new one (that
has been supplied on a pallet from Toyota)? Cars almost never go back to
the site where they were manufactured, and trains are the same.

But not sure about faulty trams:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siemens_Combino#2004_recall

[Recliner]

Post by Theo

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed? All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

Eastleigh hasn't made new railway vehicles in a very long time (1960s?).

Yes, 1962. It had been a carriage works since 1891, which expanded into loco building in 1910.

Post by Theo
Factories make new things, heavy maintenance depots modify existing things.

Oddly enough, old steam engine factories probably make better sites for modern heavy maintenance depots than modern
train factories do, because they actually made many of the components of the trains they constructed. Modern train
factories are essentially assembly plants that don't make much on site. They'd struggle to do any sort of maintenance or
refurbishment. Alstom will have to do a lot of re-equipping of Litchurch Lane to make it capable of such work.

Post by Theo
As an example, suppose your Toyota needs a new engine. Do you put it on a
ship back to Japan where it was made, or do you take it to a workshop where
they can put it on a lift, hoist the engine out and winch in a new one (that
has been supplied on a pallet from Toyota)? Cars almost never go back to
the site where they were manufactured, and trains are the same.
Some depots do more heavy maintenance than others, just like not all garages
can do engine swaps.

Yes, for example, Selhurst refurbishes SN's Electrostars.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

On 11 Jan 2025 12:49:29 +0000 (GMT), Theo

Post by Theo

Post by Tweed
Jan
Jan

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort

of

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter,

where

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a

day,

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told

me that

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222

comes via

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains

from one

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within

units,

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming

units

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if

Scotrail

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9

vehicles,

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the

"regularity"

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I

would

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the

interiors are

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending

machines

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them

going to

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers,

etc, and

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh,

too?

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be

done in a

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of

their

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these

depots

Post by Recliner
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify

trains, as

Post by Recliner
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role? Where are the 377s being
refurbished? Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed?

All of

Post by Recliner
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but

they’re

Post by Recliner
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots

are

Post by Recliner
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

Eastleigh hasn't made new railway vehicles in a very long time (1960s?).

Yes, 1962. It had been a carriage works since 1891, which expanded into
loco building in 1910.

Post by Theo
Factories make new things, heavy maintenance depots modify existing things.

Oddly enough, old steam engine factories probably make better sites for
modern heavy maintenance depots than modern
train factories do, because they actually made many of the components of
the trains they constructed. Modern train
factories are essentially assembly plants that don't make much on site.
They'd struggle to do any sort of maintenance or
refurbishment. Alstom will have to do a lot of re-equipping of Litchurch
Lane to make it capable of such work.

Post by Theo
As an example, suppose your Toyota needs a new engine. Do you put it on a
ship back to Japan where it was made, or do you take it to a workshop where
they can put it on a lift, hoist the engine out and winch in a new one (that
has been supplied on a pallet from Toyota)? Cars almost never go back to
the site where they were manufactured, and trains are the same.
Some depots do more heavy maintenance than others, just like not all garages
can do engine swaps.

Yes, for example, Selhurst refurbishes SN's Electrostars.

BTW, faulty Jenbacher trainsets returned to Jenbacher in Jenbach,
Austria.

http://www.regionale-schienen.at/0_thema_201008.asp?mid=23

Regards, ULF

[Theo]

Post by Recliner

Post by Theo
Factories make new things, heavy maintenance depots modify existing things.

Oddly enough, old steam engine factories probably make better sites for
modern heavy maintenance depots than modern train factories do, because
they actually made many of the components of the trains they constructed.
Modern train factories are essentially assembly plants that don't make
much on site. They'd struggle to do any sort of maintenance or
refurbishment. Alstom will have to do a lot of re-equipping of Litchurch
Lane to make it capable of such work.

I'd imagine factories with assembly lines are a poor place to do
maintenance, because the line is all about timely repeatable production
(perhaps with automation).

Meanwhile heavy maintenance is more or less bespoke to each vehicle - even
if the processes are repeated on multiple vehicles there typically aren't
enough to get much of a production line going, nor space for one.

Steam loco shops are a good fit because they used a lot of heavy lifting
gear for installing boilers etc, and the kind of manual fettling they did to
build a steam loco looks more like modern heavy maintenance than it does a
modern automated factory.

And, as you say, steam shops might have the kind of one-off fabrication
facilities that come in useful when you need to replace something that's no
longer available off the shelf.

Perhaps the most manufacturing going on is at heritage railway workshops,
where very far gone rolling stock is brought back to life. Those are
perhaps the closest to factories of the pre Henry Ford style.

Theo

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the
interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role?  Where are the 377s being
refurbished?  Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed?
All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

The last new-build locos at Eastleigh were the West Country class in
1950. The bulk of the class and the Merchant Navys were rebuilt there in
1956-7. The Carriage and Wagon works, where they built DMUs and EMUS
until 1964 when it closed and its maintenance functions transferred to
the old locomotive works.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role?  Where are the 377s being
refurbished?  Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed?
All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

The last new-build locos at Eastleigh were the West Country class in
1950. The bulk of the class and the Merchant Navys were rebuilt there in
1956-7. The Carriage and Wagon works, where they built DMUs and EMUS
until 1964 when it closed and its maintenance functions transferred to
the old locomotive works.

Wiki says Eastleigh Works built the first six BR Class 73 EDs in 1962, but
the remainder of the class were built at the Vulcan Foundry. That seems to
have been its last role as a manufacturing, rather than maintenance, site.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role?  Where are the 377s being
refurbished?  Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed?
All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

The last new-build locos at Eastleigh were the West Country class in
1950. The bulk of the class and the Merchant Navys were rebuilt there in
1956-7. The Carriage and Wagon works, where they built DMUs and EMUS
until 1964 when it closed and its maintenance functions transferred to
the old locomotive works.

Wiki says Eastleigh Works built the first six BR Class 73 EDs in 1962, but
the remainder of the class were built at the Vulcan Foundry. That seems to
have been its last role as a manufacturing, rather than maintenance, site.

Quick check, apparently they were built by the C&W works, not the loco
works! (Eastleigh 100 by Fred Kerr). The former would have had all the
electrical expertise.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Coffee

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told
me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222
comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if
Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc, like they did on the HSTs, which apparently requires them going to
a factory (but not necessarily the one at which they were built).

I’m sure they’ll at least change the livery, carpets, seat covers, etc, and
perhaps the seats themselves. Maybe the toilets will need a refresh, too?
None of that needs a factory visit, but the work will probably be done in a
specialist refurbishment depot

Colloquially known as a factory (in that it's also not just one of their
regular overnight depots).

No, they’re not known as factories. Factories build things, these depots
refurbish or modify things. Different equipment, different skills. You
don’t seem to be aware that depots routinely maintain and modify trains, as
well as cleaning them.
For example, where do you think the 379s destined for GTR are being
refurbished and prepared for their new role?  Where are the 377s being
refurbished?  Where are the IETs having their fatigue cracks fixed?
All of
these are UK built trains, whose builders remains in business, but they’re
not being returned to the factory for the work. That’s because depots are
better equipped for this sort of work than factories.

I thought the IETs were being repaired in Eastleigh which is best
described as a factory.

The last new-build locos at Eastleigh were the West Country class in
1950. The bulk of the class and the Merchant Navys were rebuilt there in
1956-7. The Carriage and Wagon works, where they built DMUs and EMUS
until 1964 when it closed and its maintenance functions transferred to
the old locomotive works.

Wiki says Eastleigh Works built the first six BR Class 73 EDs in 1962, but
the remainder of the class were built at the Vulcan Foundry. That seems to
have been its last role as a manufacturing, rather than maintenance, site.

Quick check, apparently they were built by the C&W works, not the loco
works! (Eastleigh 100 by Fred Kerr). The former would have had all the
electrical expertise.

Yes, I suppose they were much more like EMU power cars than steam locos.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed.

It's needed when you are conflating adjusting carriages within units,
and adjusting trains but the number of units.

Post by Tweed
I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.

The question wasn't about joining units regularly, but re-forming units
'regularly'.

Post by Tweed
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.

Yes, they can. (Also 8). However that would increase the "regularity"
from twice in twenty years to three times in twenty years, which I would
claim is still a mis-use of the term "regularly".

Post by Tweed
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I wonder if they would plan to change the carpets, add vending machines
etc,

Or maybe have seats changed as shown here at pictures 2 (old)
and 3 (new):
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBB-Panoramawagen#Bilder

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Tweed

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

I’m willing to be contradicted, but based on what someone told me that
observed at Bedford, there’s at least one service where a 222 comes via
Corby and joins a 222 that has come via Market Harborough.

That's not reforming the units themselves, simply making trains from one
or two units as the demand requires.

You are arguing where it’s not needed. I was responding to a correspondent
who was remarking about units joining regularly down in NSE land.
Rather than arguing a rather pointless issue, let’s agree that if Scotrail
do take the 222s they can ultimately form trains of 4, 5, 7 or 9 vehicles,
as this has been previously achieved.
They are going to need some decent depot attention as the interiors are
getting tired.

I imagine that SR will want extensive cosmetic restoration, and possibly a
different seating layout. For example, the end coaches of high speed
multiple units have fewer passenger seats, so a single end-car first class
coach (with 22 seats) probably won’t be enough, but another whole first
class car would probably be too much. It would probably therefore want a
mixed coach, with perhaps 12 FC seats, and the rest SC.

I assume they’ll be operated in five and six car formations, with the
optional coach not containing any essential equipment above or below the
floor. Perhaps an all-SC coach with ordinary toilet?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner
I imagine that SR will want extensive cosmetic restoration, and possibly a
different seating layout. For example, the end coaches of high speed
multiple units have fewer passenger seats, so a single end-car first class
coach (with 22 seats) probably won’t be enough, but another whole first
class car would probably be too much.
It would probably therefore want a mixed coach, with perhaps 12 FC
seats, and the rest SC.

In other words, returning to the configuration as originally delivered.
(Albeit on shorter trains).

[Tweed]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
I imagine that SR will want extensive cosmetic restoration, and possibly a
different seating layout. For example, the end coaches of high speed
multiple units have fewer passenger seats, so a single end-car first class
coach (with 22 seats) probably won’t be enough, but another whole first
class car would probably be too much.
It would probably therefore want a mixed coach, with perhaps 12 FC
seats, and the rest SC.

In other words, returning to the configuration as originally delivered.
(Albeit on shorter trains).

EMR seem to do a pretty good job in filling first class, so if Scotrail
compare notes maybe they won’t reduce the capacity.

[Recliner]

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
I imagine that SR will want extensive cosmetic restoration, and possibly a
different seating layout. For example, the end coaches of high speed
multiple units have fewer passenger seats, so a single end-car first class
coach (with 22 seats) probably won’t be enough, but another whole first
class car would probably be too much.
It would probably therefore want a mixed coach, with perhaps 12 FC
seats, and the rest SC.

In other words, returning to the configuration as originally delivered.
(Albeit on shorter trains).

EMR seem to do a pretty good job in filling first class, so if Scotrail
compare notes maybe they won’t reduce the capacity.

Their HSTs have a much smaller FC capacity (32 seats) than EMRs 5-car 222s
(50 seats). ScotRail would probably need to run to London to fill that many
FC seats.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
I imagine that SR will want extensive cosmetic restoration, and possibly a
different seating layout. For example, the end coaches of high speed
multiple units have fewer passenger seats, so a single end-car first class
coach (with 22 seats) probably won’t be enough, but another whole first
class car would probably be too much.
It would probably therefore want a mixed coach, with perhaps 12 FC
seats, and the rest SC.

In other words, returning to the configuration as originally delivered.
(Albeit on shorter trains).

EMR seem to do a pretty good job in filling first class,

Is that just the single end-car FC? (Although with two units you'd have
two)?

Back in the day I think the HSTs had three FC carriages, and they were
lightly loaded except a handful of rush-hour trains. It was often
possible to get a FC AP ticket for less than a SC AP ticket, on the same
train!

FC offering was pretty thin though: catering often south of Leicester
only, and just free tea/coffee and biscuits. They had a token hot snacks
menu, but never ever made an attempt to get people to order from it.

Post by Tweed
so if Scotrail compare notes maybe they won’t reduce the capacity.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Certes

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

Technically twice is "repeatedly", but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

Also 5 and 10 car trains :-) But that's not reforming, the individual
units don't get changed internally.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Certes

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

Technically twice is "repeatedly",

If my wife had said to me last year: "I've repeatedly told you not to do
that, once sixteen years ago in 2008 and before that once in 2006", I
think I'd raise an eyebrow.

Post by Certes
but they don't have the sort of
versatility I was used to in my days as a Southern commuter, where
4, 8 and 12-car trains joined and separated several times a day,
sometimes mid-journey.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner
They've operated in 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations, and I believe the
software allows them to operate in up to 13 car formations.
They've been repeatedly re-formed since introduction, so that doesn't
sound like they had to go back to the factory where they were built.
It's probably something that can be done in Derby Etches Park depot.

They've not been reformed as much as you suggest.

Do you think I made up the list of '4, 5, 7, 8 and 9 car formations'?
All of those have operated in passenger service, demonstrating the
versatility of the design.

They started off as nines (which were mothballed) and fours, but one
project permanently converted some of the fours to fives by reducing the
longer ones to eight, then another project permanently converted more of
the fours to five by stealing a second carriage from each of the longer
ones.
I don't dispute they *can* be reformed, but have an issue with your use
of the words "repeatedly re-formed".

I suspect he meant doing so over a prolonged time period rather than
e.g. whipping out 2 or 3 coaches for the weekend.

I would struggle to accept that the expression "repeatedly reformed"
referred to a one-off project to extend a fleet of 4-car to 5-car
involving taking a 4- car train and extending it, then repeating the
exercise with another 4-car from the same fleet the following (etc).

How do you explain all the other lengths?

9-car: as manufactured, then mothballed.
8-car: one off project to steal carriages to enhance some 4-car
7-car: another one-off project to enhance more 4-car

So you now actually agree that they have been ‘repeatedly reformed’!

Technically twice is "repeatedly",

If my wife had said to me last year: "I've repeatedly told you not to do
that, once sixteen years ago in 2008 and before that once in 2006", I
think I'd raise an eyebrow.

Not to date other women?

[Roland Perry]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly",

If my wife had said to me last year: "I've repeatedly told you not to do
that, once sixteen years ago in 2008 and before that once in 2006", I
think I'd raise an eyebrow.

Not to date other women?

She'd only need to repeatedly tell me something which I took no notice
of. So no.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly",

If my wife had said to me last year: "I've repeatedly told you not to do
that, once sixteen years ago in 2008 and before that once in 2006", I
think I'd raise an eyebrow.

Not to date other women?

She'd only need to repeatedly tell me something which I took no notice
of. So no.

Some believe they will be better in hiding their next try.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly",

If my wife had said to me last year: "I've repeatedly told you not to do
that, once sixteen years ago in 2008 and before that once in 2006", I
think I'd raise an eyebrow.

Not to date other women?

She'd only need to repeatedly tell me something which I took no notice
of. So no.

Some believe they will be better in hiding their next try.

I'm fiercely monogamous, so you are flogging a dead horse here.

[Ulf_Kutzner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Ulf_Kutzner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Certes
Technically twice is "repeatedly",

If my wife had said to me last year: "I've repeatedly told you not to do
that, once sixteen years ago in 2008 and before that once in 2006", I
think I'd raise an eyebrow.

Not to date other women?

She'd only need to repeatedly tell me something which I took no notice
of. So no.

Some believe they will be better in hiding their next try.

I'm fiercely monogamous,

Great!

[Tweed]

Post by Recliner

Post by Scott
On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 15:32:00 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed
Can anyone shed any light as to why the Hitachi 810s for the MML are so
behind in being delivered?

Are these the units to replace Meridians that according to some are
likely to be destined for ScotRail?

Yes, and/or open access operators, but they’re falling out of favour for
that role.

Post by Scott
Could or should SR order Hitachi 810s instead?

Probably a lot more expensive, and delivery much further away. SR might
prefer a quickly-available diesel option for the next 10-15 years, then get
modern EMUs.
In any case, why 810s and not 802s or 805s?

Any advantage of the shorter carriage lengths to the Scottish network?