Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: jonporter1052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 31 Dec 2005 13:46:28 -0800
Ian Johnston wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:31:21 UTC, jonporter1052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> :
> : Ian Johnston wrote:
> :
> : > On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:12:36 UTC, jonporter1052@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> : >
> : > : 1. Underfloor dmu's are neither fuel efficient or maintenance efficient
> : >
> : > I bet they said that - the latter, at least - about compounding,
> : > superheating, internal combustion, ...
> :
> : Speaking from experience Ian.
>
> Of course, and I bow to it...
>
> : Simple really, the 180s, 22x dmu's
> : require more man hours,(a lot more!) use more fuel and have track
> : access charges up to 40% more expensive per seat than the HST.
>
> I'd be interested to see what happens to maintenance costs over the
> years - any new technology is almost bound to need more work at the
> start.
>
> : > Tee hee. Perhaps the old TPO mailbag transfer technology could be
> : > adapted to catch flying pigs?
> :
> : Perhaps you could do with working with people that have a bit of
> : vision, as well as practical experience of designing, building,
> : re-building and operating trains such as Eurostars, IC225s, and HST's.
>
> So how likely to ypu think it is that we'll see large scale
> electrification within the next twenty years or so. And if we do,
> won't there be other uses for the diesel trains displaced? After all,
> wonderful old BR could have stuck an electric locomotive and DVT on
> the ECML HSTs...
Likely or not better to be prepared by keeping options open. ECML was
originally to be 140mph, didn't happen.
>
> : Unfortunately you've only managed to associate yourself with failed
> : technical innovations such as XC in it's current form. So I forgive
> : your lack of faith.
>
> What's failed about it from my point of view? I get more numerous
> trains, more rapid trains and more comfortable trains, Sure, it upsets
> the acne cases with notebooks, but that's not really a technical
> problem, is it?
>
It is when my taxes underwrite the horrendous cost overruns, and my
local lines are repeatedly blocked by the things breaking down. These
aren't teething troubles, these are basic design faults, some of them
are simply mind boggling! MML and FHT benefited from Virgin's
misfortune. Technically the 222 series can be good, but they will never
be as economical as the HST, even less the MTU HST. The 220/221
series would need to be rebuilt as 222 equivalents to get reliable
enough to be impressive, and have at least three (or four) of those
huge toilets taken out to become as cost effective per passenger.
MML get 30-40000 and FHT 60-66000 mpc out of their 222s. Virgin got to
around 12,000 max. Now well below that figure. I think the best we can
get realistically is the toilet modules replaced in most of the coaches
and new engines from Cummins. (Warranty?) and the gas vent pipes from
the toilets venting to atmosphere rather than the bodyside interior!
Beef up the fire protection system. Too many fires not being put out by
the onboard equipment and improve the cross feed system so that can at
least keep going at reduced speed and not block the line when certain
engines fail.
What really annoys me is that the people in charge when these things
were ordered dispensed with those within the organisation who rightly
predicted what would happen. Optimism is good, blind faith can be bad.
I appreciate that many do like travelling on them, it's personal
choice. I've suffered too much on them in the West Country to consider
taking them as 1st choice. Ideal service for them would be something
like Pad-Oxford or Trans Pennine, but South of England to Scotland? No.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: Ian Johnston
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- References:
- MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: Mark Wallace
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: allan tracy
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: jonporter1052
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: Ian Johnston
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: jonporter1052
- Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- From: Ian Johnston
- MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- Prev by Date: Re: Why is a North-south railway not being built now?
- Next by Date: Re: Why is a North-south railway not being built now?
- Previous by thread: Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- Next by thread: Re: MML HST's to be stood down - per RAIL magazine
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|