Abellio Greater: potential timetable improvements, additional rolling stock & cascades?

[dk1]

3 745 Stansted diagrams covered by 10 car 720s today, possibly due to lack of access to Crown Point over the weekend due to engineering works?

Also 745008 running on Norwich services has 3 out of 5 toilets OOU.

Phew!! At least 008 isn’t on my diagram this morning.

 

[720144]

Phew!! At least 008 isn’t on my diagram this morning.

What diagram are you on today?

 

[dk1]

What diagram are you on today?

I was on the 08:00up.

 

[TheWalrus]

Just a couple of questions:
1) Could Ilford calls be added to some of the faster services, also potentially facilitating driver changes with the depot nearby? Although I guess pathing may not allow this?
2) Could linespeeds be raised to allow faster journey times particularly on the Norwich services? Could this reduce journey times enough to take out one diagram? I understand with the relatively short length of the GEML, time savings may be minimal?

 

[dk1]

Just a couple of questions:
1) Could Ilford calls be added to some of the faster services, also potentially facilitating driver changes with the depot nearby? Although I guess pathing may not allow this?
2) Could linespeeds be raised to allow faster journey times particularly on the Norwich services? Could this reduce journey times enough to take out one diagram? I understand with the relatively short length of the GEML, time savings may be minimal?

1) Seven Kings is the station for Ilford Depot.
2) Linespeeds cannot be economically raised. All AHBs would need converting to full CCTV barriers if the lines speed goes above 100mph and there are lots of them particularly north of Stowmarket. Also with the density of commuter and freight any increase south of Ipswich would be worthless.

 

[MP33]

At present, two Greater Anglia trains. One in the early morning and the other late at night, stop at Seven Kings. They are in the timetable, so, although for staff. There would be nothing to stop a passenger getting on or off.

 

[TheWalrus]

Do they change drivers at Seven Kings or is it just to get people to the Depot starting and finishing work?

 

[dk1]

Do they change drivers at Seven Kings or is it just to get people to the Depot starting and finishing work?

Most travel pass on the very frequent EL services from Seven Kings. Only a handful of GA services call there.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

1) Seven Kings is the station for Ilford Depot.
2) Linespeeds cannot be economically raised. All AHBs would need converting to full CCTV barriers if the lines speed goes above 100mph and there are lots of them particularly north of Stowmarket. Also with the density of commuter and freight any increase south of Ipswich would be worthless.

The only real way to speed up journey times is to have less paths south of Ipswich so the Norwich runs get a clear run to Colchester, you already can shave 10mins from Liverpool street to Colchester if there wasn't a commuter train in front at peak times, then you're at 1hr 45 potentially stretching to 1hr 40.

 

[dk1]

The only real way to speed up journey times is to have less paths south of Ipswich so the Norwich runs get a clear run to Colchester, you already can shave 10mins from Liverpool street to Colchester if there wasn't a commuter train in front at peak times, then you're at 1hr 45 potentially stretching to 1hr 40.

Sounds great but never going to happen.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Sounds great but never going to happen.

Isn't going to happen but that's the only way to speed up, doesn't matter if you 125mph working if you have a slower train in front

 

[dk1]

Isn't going to happen but that's the only way to speed up, doesn't matter if you 125mph working if you have a slower train in front

Which there always will be. We just have to accept the GEML is what it is.

 

[TheWalrus]

1) Seven Kings is the station for Ilford Depot.
2) Linespeeds cannot be economically raised. All AHBs would need converting to full CCTV barriers if the lines speed goes above 100mph and there are lots of them particularly north of Stowmarket. Also with the density of commuter and freight any increase south of Ipswich would be worthless.

Could you raise as much as possible of the GEML to 100mph not above and would this give any savings? Certainly the long stretches north of Ipswich would be the most logical and beneficial to do

 

[greataj]

WAML Monday-Friday off-peak for me should be:

LST-SSD / StanEx (as is)
2tph - TOM, BIS, SSD
1tph - TOM, HWN, SSD
1tph - TOM, HWN, SST, SSD

LST-HFE
1tph - HAC, TOM, PON, BMD, ENL, CHN, BXB, RYH, SMT, WAR, HFE
1tph - HAC, TOM, PON, BMD, WLC, CHN, BXB, RYH, SMT, WAR, HFE

LST-CMB
1tph - TOM, CHN, BXB, HWN, BIS, SST, ESM, NWE, AUD, GRC, WLF, SED, (CMS), CBG, CMB
1tph - TOM, CHN, BXB, HWN, BIS, AUD, WLF, (CMS), CBG, CMB

SRA-BIS
1tph - LEB, TOM, ENL, WLC, BXB, HWN, SAW, BIS
1tph - LEB, TOM, ENL, WLC, CHN, RYN, HWN, HWM, SAW, BIS

SRA-MRW (as is)
2tph - LEB, TOM, NUM, MRW

This theoretically should help to slightly speed along stopping services with limited impact on key flows.
RYN & HWM: Would reduce to just 1tph in each direction, but these stations have fairly low patronage anyway for the services they currently get.
SAW: Would go from 3 to 2tph in each direction. Services north of BIS would have to change there and would be no direct LST service, but even with today's timetable it's often quicker to change at HWN for a StanEx connection to LST anyway.
ENL & WLC: Would maintain current capacity of 3tph each way but instead 2tph would go SRA-BIS an 1tph LST-HFE. Frequency from PON and BDM however would be reduced from 2 to 1tph as these would remain only on LST-HFE services, but again these flows are minimal anyway.
CHN/BXB: Would each see only 1tph to SRA but maintain the current 4tph clock-face timetable to TOM/LST as well as between CHN & BXB. This would ideally still allow good connections from TOM-SRA.
NUM: Would no longer be called by SRA-BIS services. With the Meridian Water development, there could be potential to call these, or even a LST-CMB service there instead, giving them a regular northbound service.

 

[dk1]

Could you raise as much as possible of the GEML to 100mph not above and would this give any savings? Certainly the long stretches north of Ipswich would be the most logical and beneficial to do

It is already 100mph north of Ipswich.

 

[Anonymous10]

If there's a need for more flirts, surely the best solution would be a joint order with TFW, if they found themselves needing more or Northern as they're looking at possibly stadler. Whilst I understand they operate / possibly will operate different classes the platform is in essence the same.

 

[Magdalia]

WAML Monday-Friday off-peak for me should be

This proposal has various flaws and weaknesses.

A key feature of the timetable is pacing the Stratford-Stortford trains so that they can recess at Broxbourne or Harlow Town to be overtaken by Stansted Expresses. Messing with the stopping pattern is constrained by that.

SAW: Would go from 3 to 2tph in each direction. Services north of BIS would have to change there and would be no direct LST service

RYN & HWM: Would reduce to just 1tph in each direction, but these stations have fairly low patronage anyway for the services they currently get.

These stations would have no direct trains to/from Liverpool Street which is their most popular destination.

CHN/BXB: Would each see only 1tph to SRA but maintain the current 4tph clock-face timetable to TOM/LST as well as between CHN & BXB. This would ideally still allow good connections from TOM-SRA.

Although not used by many passengers, Cheshunt and Broxbourne provide useful interchanges. Cheshunt has passengers going to and from the Overground trains via Seven Sisters, Broxbourne has passengers coming in from the Hertford direction and going out towards Stortford, and vice versa. I can't see any significant benefit from Stratford trains skipping Cheshunt and Broxbourne, and breaking those connections.

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Could you raise as much as possible of the GEML to 100mph not above and would this give any savings? Certainly the long stretches north of Ipswich would be the most logical and beneficial to do

The only real way to speed it up would be to 4 track it from Shenfield to Colchester but there is many barriers to the and cost is probably the least insurmountable problem, can't 4 track through Chelmsford without knocking half the city down..

 

[dk1]

The only real way to speed it up would be to 4 track it from Shenfield to Colchester but there is many barriers to the and cost is probably the least insurmountable problem, can't 4 track through Chelmsford without knocking half the city down..

Exactly and unfortunately never going to happen. Basic line speed is 90 Maryland to Chelmsford (85 Chelmsford-Shenfield on the up) then 100 north of Chelmsford to the outskirts of Norwich.

 

[TheWalrus]

Exactly and unfortunately never going to happen. Basic line speed is 90 Maryland to Chelmsford (85 Chelmsford-Shenfield on the up) then 100 north of Chelmsford to the outskirts of Norwich.

I’m guessing you would catch up with another service if you sped up south of Colchester?
Also with the maximum design speed of the FLIRTS being 100mph, you would need to do a project similar to what was done with the 350s to make them 110mph, before you could take advantage of any increases in excess of 100mph.

 

[dk1]

I’m guessing you would catch up with another service if you sped up south of Colchester?
Also with the maximum design speed of the FLIRTS being 100mph, you would need to do a project similar to what was done with the 350s to make them 110mph, before you could take advantage of any increases in excess of 100mph.

110mph was looked at and discounted a few years ago as a waste of time and money. We do operate at 100mph as far south as Chelmsford.

 

[TheWalrus]

110mph was looked at and discounted a few years ago as a waste of time and money. We do operate at 100mph as far south as Chelmsford.

Did they have a prediction on how much time 110mph operation would save?

Could 100mph be used south of Chelmsford? Is it only due to the intensity of the commuter trains that it can’t be used?

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Did they have a prediction on how much time 110mph operation would save?

Could 100mph be used south of Chelmsford? Is it only due to the intensity of the commuter trains that it can’t be used?

All south of Ipswich speed improvements won't really make much difference with the commuter trains in front, I don't often travel outside of peak times but during peak between Chelmsford and Shenfield we normally either stop or creep timing trying to get into our slot towards Liverpool street, there is literally no flexibility as there's a commuter directly in front and one joining from the branch behind. Only way to really improve journey times is to add passing lines through the stations at the stations between Shenfield and Witham so you could logically pass the commuter services while they are stopped at the station, obviously can't be done at Chelmsford.

Also you could look at remodeling to improve the turnout speeds in to the non mainline platforms at Witham and Colchester to reduce headways needed there

 

[TheWalrus]

A few months ago on this thread we discussed linespeeds north of Ipswich and if they could be raised. While sat on a northbound LST-NRW service I looked at a speedometer website on my phone (not sure how reliable it is but don’t think it is far out) and at one point it recorded us doing 113mph between Ipswich and Diss! This begs the questions a) is it permitted to exceed 100mph north of Ipswich and b) it would suggest that the Stadler Flirt units are capable of running at at least 110 mph or more? The 113mph was only brief and quickly came back down so unsure if the speedometer I used was accurate? If this is correct then linespeeds could in theory be raised and journey times reduced.

 

[dk1]

A few months ago on this thread we discussed linespeeds north of Ipswich and if they could be raised. While sat on a northbound LST-NRW service I looked at a speedometer website on my phone (not sure how reliable it is but don’t think it is far out) and at one point it recorded us doing 113mph between Ipswich and Diss! This begs the questions a) is it permitted to exceed 100mph north of Ipswich and b) it would suggest that the Stadler Flirt units are capable of running at at least 110 mph or more? The 113mph was only brief and quickly came back down so unsure if the speedometer I used was accurate? If this is correct then linespeeds could in theory be raised and journey times reduced.

Your speedometer website or your phone would be wrong.

 

[Trainbike46]

A few months ago on this thread we discussed linespeeds north of Ipswich and if they could be raised. While sat on a northbound LST-NRW service I looked at a speedometer website on my phone (not sure how reliable it is but don’t think it is far out) and at one point it recorded us doing 113mph between Ipswich and Diss! This begs the questions a) is it permitted to exceed 100mph north of Ipswich and b) it would suggest that the Stadler Flirt units are capable of running at at least 110 mph or more? The 113mph was only brief and quickly came back down so unsure if the speedometer I used was accurate? If this is correct then linespeeds could in theory be raised and journey times reduced.

It was reported that the FLIRTS were delivered with a 100mph maximum speed and the ability to be upgraded to 110mph in the future.

I'm pretty sure there is no linespeeds over 100mph on the GEML and its branches, though dk1 is the expert here!

 

[Brent Goose]

With the old class 90s they never seemed to get beyond mid 90mph between Colchester and Ipswich (where I alighted) according to the navigation app on my device

 

[Adrian1980uk]

It was reported that the FLIRTS were delivered with a 100mph maximum speed and the ability to be upgraded to 110mph in the future.

I'm pretty sure there is no linespeeds over 100mph on the GEML and its branches, though dk1 is the expert here!

This is more of a could but don't scenario, highly likely the electric motor and gearing could do 110 but the computers / driver wouldn't let you.

Similar with the track, between Ipswich and Norwich doing 110mph, nothing is likely to happen as it's mostly straight track etc. but no driver now would even attempt it as the infrastructure isn't rated for that and it's not hidden anymore. I would think it's a bit like doing 80mph on a motorway, not suddenly going crash just because you hit 80 but a camera is likely to catch you at some point, the tracks are much more intensely monitored with sectional timings.

 

[TheWalrus]

It did come down pretty quick to about 101mph which seems more accurate.

Another question regarding the 745s which is more speculation/hypothetical: could they be reduced to 10 cars with more driving cars constructed to give more sets? I know this is unlikely to happen but in theory would it make sense?
As both services I used today seemed very sparsely loaded and 11 or 12 carriages was still overkill. I think I was one of no more than a handful in first class north of Ipswich!

This is more of a could but don't scenario, highly likely the electric motor and gearing could do 110 but the computers / driver wouldn't let you.

Similar with the track, between Ipswich and Norwich doing 110mph, nothing is likely to happen as it's mostly straight track etc. but no driver now would even attempt it as the infrastructure isn't rated for that and it's not hidden anymore. I would think it's a bit like doing 80mph on a motorway, not suddenly going crash just because you hit 80 but a camera is likely to catch you at some point, the tracks are much more intensely monitored with sectional timings.

If it is mostly straight track and nothing is unlikely to happen as you say, how much infrastructure work would actually need doing to upgrade the linespeed or would it be more of a paperwork exercise?

 

[Bald Rick]

If it is mostly straight track and nothing is unlikely to happen as you say, how much infrastructure work would actually need doing to upgrade the linespeed or would it be more of a paperwork exercise?

Lots needs doing. OLE needs retensioning and checking for gradents at Bridges and Level Crossings and power supply might need upgrading (albeit probably not, but would need checking). Signal spacing would need adjusting, and everything would need resighting. Track maintenance would have to be upgraded (more frequent inspections). Every level crossing would need reassessing for risk, all the AHBs would have to be replaced (which itself would drive more signals), and they would all need strike in points moving. Any unprotected footpath crossing would need closing, diverting, bridging or have lights installed. Every bridge / culvert under the railway would need assessing, and some would need strengthening. Every bridge over the railway would need assessing for aerodynamics. There’s more, but you get the gist.

Similar with the track, between Ipswich and Norwich doing 110mph, nothing is likely to happen as it's mostly straight track etc.

You’d be arriving at many level crossings a little earlier than the minimum time required for the barrier sequence, thereby increasing the chance of a collision…