Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>
>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>
>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>
>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>
>>
>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>
> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
> side).
>
>> The trial will be for between one and three years. I don't know if they
>> plan to use the unit that was last in use in Glasgow.
>>
> That seems to be the main suspect.
>
>> I'm sure the 92s will be happy to greet an old friend from across the Mile
>> End platforms!
>>
> Isn't Mile End a bit over the local horizon from Greenford or Ealing ?
>

That's where they met across a platform in the past.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 23:13:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>
>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>
>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>> side).
>>
>>> The trial will be for between one and three years. I don't know if they
>>> plan to use the unit that was last in use in Glasgow.
>>>
>> That seems to be the main suspect.
>>
>>> I'm sure the 92s will be happy to greet an old friend from across the Mile
>>> End platforms!
>>>
>> Isn't Mile End a bit over the local horizon from Greenford or Ealing ?
>>
>
>That's where they met across a platform in the past.
>
Yes, I got that (eventually) after trying to work out where the
District Line was in sight of class 92s.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 23:13:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>
>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>> side).
>>>
>>>> The trial will be for between one and three years. I don't know if they
>>>> plan to use the unit that was last in use in Glasgow.
>>>>
>>> That seems to be the main suspect.
>>>
>>>> I'm sure the 92s will be happy to greet an old friend from across the Mile
>>>> End platforms!
>>>>
>>> Isn't Mile End a bit over the local horizon from Greenford or Ealing ?
>>>
>>
>> That's where they met across a platform in the past.
>>
> Yes, I got that (eventually) after trying to work out where the
> District Line was in sight of class 92s.
>

On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 23:48:13 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 23:13:12 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>
>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>> side).
>>>>
>>>>> The trial will be for between one and three years. I don't know if they
>>>>> plan to use the unit that was last in use in Glasgow.
>>>>>
>>>> That seems to be the main suspect.
>>>>
>>>>> I'm sure the 92s will be happy to greet an old friend from across the Mile
>>>>> End platforms!
>>>>>
>>>> Isn't Mile End a bit over the local horizon from Greenford or Ealing ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's where they met across a platform in the past.
>>>
>> Yes, I got that (eventually) after trying to work out where the
>> District Line was in sight of class 92s.
>>
>
>I thought Mile End was a pretty strong hint…
>
That is "92 stock", I've never heard/seen them called just "92s".

On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 18:06:09 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>Edit: Wikipedia suggests that Chiltern's Mk3 DVTs *are* fitted with
>generators, so presumably the 68 really is just idling to keep the air
>supply up. It'd seem to be fairly trivial to be able to have a compressor
>in the DVT to maintain the main res pipe pressure.

Would still be a noisy diesel engine pumping out fumes though admittedly
probably not as bad a loco engine.

On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:

> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>
>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>
>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>
>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>
>>
>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>
> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
> side).

There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
and for DC since the 466.

Robin

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>
>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>
>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>> side).
>
> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
> and for DC since the 466.
>

On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>
>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>
>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>> side).
>>
>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>> and for DC since the 466.
>>
>
>I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>
It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
OTOH has an existing supply.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>
>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>> side).
>>>
>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>
>>
>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>
> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
> OTOH has an existing supply.
>

Coming back to the original question, I'd guess that Chiltern has been
harder hit than most TOCs by the WfH trend, so it is presumably running a
significantly reduced timetable. This might continue for quite a while, so
it would make sense to park one of its train fleet types. It probably has a
relatively short contract with DRS for the 68s, and so can save costs by
ceasing their operation, and putting the Mk 3 carriages into warm store.

If demand does recover enough in a couple of years, presumably Chiltern
could save money by resuming LHCS operations using 67s, hired at lower cost
from DBC, its sister company. They're not as powerful, so train lengths
would need to be reduced by one carriage, but that's not likely to be a
problem.

I also suspect that 67s idle more quietly than 68s.

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote in uk.railway:
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> > The only significant diesel operations
> > left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
> > (aside from freight)?
> >

> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.

Any prospect of the 769s entering service on Reading-Gatwick any time soon?
I'm sure they were originally expected in service about three years ago.

XC also ran occasional services as far as Guildford in the beforetimes but
I'm not hopeful of seeing those come back.

Robin Stevens <rejs@cynic.org.uk> wrote:
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote in uk.railway:
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>
>
>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>
> Any prospect of the 769s entering service on Reading-Gatwick any time soon?
> I'm sure they were originally expected in service about three years ago.
>
> XC also ran occasional services as far as Guildford in the beforetimes but
> I'm not hopeful of seeing those come back.
>

I think some have *finally* been delivered to GWR and are on test. I gather
TfW have found theirs to be very troublesome, so perhaps GWR will too?

Once they're accepted, there will then need to be a few weeks(?) of driver
training before they enter service.

On 21/01/2022 18:41, Robin Stevens wrote:
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote in uk.railway:
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>
>
>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>
> Any prospect of the 769s entering service on Reading-Gatwick any time soon?
> I'm sure they were originally expected in service about three years ago.
>
> XC also ran occasional services as far as Guildford in the beforetimes but
> I'm not hopeful of seeing those come back.

I saw a 769 passing through Guildford this morning. Didn't stop so
obviously still running trials.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>
>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>> side).
>>>
>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>
>>
>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>
> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
> OTOH has an existing supply.
>

On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>
>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>> side).
>>>>
>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>
>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>
>
> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
> either.
>

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>> side).
>>>>>
>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>
>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>
>>
>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>> either.
>>
>
> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>

On 28/01/2022 22:26, Recliner wrote:
> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter. It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>>> side).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>>
>>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>>> either.
>>>
>>
>> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
>> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
>> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>>
>
> Current rail in the platform track. That's where the the current is picked
> up.
>

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 28/01/2022 22:26, Recliner wrote:
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>>>> side).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>>>
>>>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>>>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>>>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>>>> either.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
>>> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
>>> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>>>
>>
>> Current rail in the platform track. That's where the the current is picked
>> up.
>>
>
> To charge the batteries, you mean?
>

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>> side).
>>>>>
>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>
>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>
>>
>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>> either.
>>
>
> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>

I don't expect that they'll be manually plugging the train in at each
terminus. There'll be some kind of automatic arrangement for the charging.
Vivarail use a short section of 3rd rail which is only live when the train
is present; other manufacturers may use a short length of OLE. You'll also
need an equipment cabinet (IIRC the Vivarail system uses a battery bank to
allow a constant draw of electricity from the supply but a high-speed boost
to the train), and potentially upgraded power supply to the location.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

In message <st2jfr$9ma$1@dont-email.me>, at 05:31:39 on Sat, 29 Jan
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:

>> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
>> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
>> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>
>I don't expect that they'll be manually plugging the train in at each
>terminus. There'll be some kind of automatic arrangement for the charging.
>Vivarail use a short section of 3rd rail which is only live when the train
>is present; other manufacturers may use a short length of OLE. You'll also
>need an equipment cabinet (IIRC the Vivarail system uses a battery bank to
>allow a constant draw of electricity from the supply but a high-speed boost
>to the train), and potentially upgraded power supply to the location.

The latter being in the same fallacy classification as kerbside car
chargers: "There's a streetlight, so we have electricity, and obviously
should be able to plug anything we like in".
--
Roland Perry

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>>> side).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>>
>>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>>> either.
>>>
>>
>> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
>> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
>> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>>
>
> I don't expect that they'll be manually plugging the train in at each
> terminus. There'll be some kind of automatic arrangement for the charging.
> Vivarail use a short section of 3rd rail which is only live when the train
> is present; other manufacturers may use a short length of OLE. You'll also
> need an equipment cabinet (IIRC the Vivarail system uses a battery bank to
> allow a constant draw of electricity from the supply but a high-speed boost
> to the train), and potentially upgraded power supply to the location.
>

I assume you whizz through West Ealing too fast on the main lines to spot
any prep work on the shuttle's bay platform?

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.

This is the Vivarail system:
https://www.railjournal.com/technology/vivarail-demonstrates-fast-battery-charging-system/

3rd and 4th rail and a quite substantial equipment cabinet.

Theo

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I don't expect that they'll be manually plugging the train in at each
>> terminus. There'll be some kind of automatic arrangement for the charging.
>> Vivarail use a short section of 3rd rail which is only live when the train
>> is present; other manufacturers may use a short length of OLE. You'll also
>> need an equipment cabinet (IIRC the Vivarail system uses a battery bank to
>> allow a constant draw of electricity from the supply but a high-speed boost
>> to the train), and potentially upgraded power supply to the location.
>>
>
> I assume you whizz through West Ealing too fast on the main lines to spot
> any prep work on the shuttle's bay platform?
>

Yeah, no chance of spotting anything changing over there unless it's really
obvious, I'm afraid!

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On 29/01/2022 02:59, Recliner wrote:
> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 28/01/2022 22:26, Recliner wrote:
>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the latter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also appease
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>>>>> side).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>>>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>>>>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>>>>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>>>>> either.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
>>>> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
>>>> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Current rail in the platform track. That's where the the current is picked
>>> up.
>>>
>>
>> To charge the batteries, you mean?
>>
>
> Obviously, yes.
>
I don't know what kind of range the batteries on a DMU would allow.

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 29/01/2022 02:59, Recliner wrote:
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 28/01/2022 22:26, Recliner wrote:
>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 28/01/2022 11:04, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 11:18:46 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 22:38:36 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 21:18:18 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>>>>>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 16:29:50 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2022 13:23, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Jan 2022 13:23:38 +0100, Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-18 11:56:43 +0000, Anna Noyd-Dryver said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022-01-17 23:15:37 +0000, Charles Ellson said:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 22:09:17 +0000, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:33, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2022 21:12, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graham Harrison <edward.harrisom.one@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just seen it suggested (on a board that needs a login so I can't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> provide a link) that Chiltern are to stop using 68s. Anyone know any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more? Replace with other locos or withdrawl of loco hauled
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> completely?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not heard that, but if true, it would almost certainly mean the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might be one of the easier ways of cutting costs. It would also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appease
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> neighbours at Marylebone who complain of the noise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from the idling 68s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (same problem as TPE have had at Scarborough).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not think that idling diesel electrics made all that much noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in reality, particularly is the brakes are not charged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's both noise and air pollution. Getting rid of the 68s will reduce
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> noise,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, I thought that a diesel electric on idle with a vented brake pipe
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would not actually make that much noise -- hardly more than a DMU.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but might have less effect on the air pollution until the DMUs are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converted to hybrids.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A ways off yet, AIUI.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/marylebone-station-toxic-train-fuels-government-london-b964118.html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also thought that trains running on diesel were less expensive than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Currently, yes, but Chiltern obviously won't be replacing them with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> electrics!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess not now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any electrification prospects anywhere on Chiltern, however?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The London end is getting increasingly surrounded by wet string so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eventual "fill in" seems a likely consequence but not just yet and not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for long distance services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I guess there can't be much diesel operation left in the Lodon area. I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't think there's any left at Liverpool St, King's Cross is now just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GC, Paddington is down to the Night Riviera and a handful of Oxford
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trains, and on the Southern it's just Salisbury/Exeter and the few
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> throguh trains to Uckfield.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hourly Uckfield since shortly after the 171s we?re introduced, AIUI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (currently terminating at East Croydon, but booked through to London
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bridge).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hadn't realised it was all day, in my mind it was just a peak hours
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> service. I guess I'm living in the past on that one (or that once the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thumpers left it, it became boring and not worthy of attention).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only significant diesel operations
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> left are Chiltern and the Midland mainline services. Have I missed any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (aside from freight)?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depending on your definition of "London Area"; West Ealing-Greenford,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Slough-Windsor, Henley and Marlow branches, Reading-Gatwick.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Reading-Basingstoke is presumably out of scope.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was broadly thinking "M25" or Zone 6 as my definition of London area,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so aside from my forgetfulness about Greenford, I'd regard those as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outside. Of course all such definitions are arbitrary to some extent.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And Greenford should soon be battery operated on a trial basis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because it's an isolate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Only in electrical terms. Traction Juice (two varieties) is available
>>>>>>>>>>>> at both ends of the shuttle so it only needs the battery when on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> move. A quick and dirty bodge could be done with a dual-voltage unit
>>>>>>>>>>>> with an onboard battery, maybe a 313 or similar with the battery in
>>>>>>>>>>>> the locked-out London end as the intermediate stations only have
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2-carriage platforms. The main impediment (if it is) to new OHLE looks
>>>>>>>>>>>> like Drayton Green tunnel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It won't be a 313. Last year, the trial of the two-car battery train was
>>>>>>>>>>> reported to be due to start this April, but I imagine it's been delayed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The last mention seems to have been in Railway World in November which
>>>>>>>>>> isn't inevitably a bad sign. I was thinking in terms of AC/DC trains
>>>>>>>>>> as that seems more logical if there turns out to be a sufficient
>>>>>>>>>> demand between two electrified locations not that far apart. The
>>>>>>>>>> trouble with most (all?) current dual-voltage units is that you can't
>>>>>>>>>> use less than three coaches (motor coach+something with a cab on each
>>>>>>>>>> side).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There's nothing inherent in the technology that would prevent a 2 car
>>>>>>>>> dual voltage EMU (or even 1 car), for example SNCF operate the Z9500
>>>>>>>>> class 2 car 25 kV AC/1500 V DC units, but from the UK perspective,
>>>>>>>>> there aren't many 2 car units that could be easily converted for this
>>>>>>>>> purpose as 2 car EMUs haven't been built for AC routes since the 309/1
>>>>>>>>> and for DC since the 466.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I might pop along and see if there's any evidence of prep work for the
>>>>>>>> D-train. It will need a charger at West Ealing, with a conductor rail. I
>>>>>>>> don't know if any work will be needed at Greenford.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would also need an appropriate substation at West Ealing. Greenford
>>>>>>> OTOH has an existing supply.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was at Greenford yesterday, and saw absolutely no signs of any prep work
>>>>>> for battery trains. I didn't use the GWR shuttle, but it seemed to be
>>>>>> running normally, suggesting that nothing much is happening at West Ealing,
>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What sort of prep work would be necessary on the metal for battery
>>>>> trains, except maybe a connection to shore power? I would have thought
>>>>> that the prep work would be on the rolling stock itself and in shed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Current rail in the platform track. That's where the the current is picked
>>>> up.
>>>>
>>>
>>> To charge the batteries, you mean?
>>>
>>
>> Obviously, yes.
>>
> I don't know what kind of range the batteries on a DMU would allow.
>