Waterford Tall Ships specials - 3-piece 2700 class

Master and commander

Over the weekend IE laid on specials from clonmel and LJ to ferry people to waterford for the festivities. There was speculation over on IRN that they would be using 3 or 6piece ICRs for this. Instead they used the unusual configuration of 3 piece 2700 class, made even more unusal by the mixture of liveries. Basically the sets consisted of a 2 piece 2700 in "ICR" livery coupled to a single unit from split set in the older commuter livery. The ICR liveried sets now have the gangways removed at either end during their upgrade recently so it would have been impossible to pass from the 2 railcar part into the third extra car. Not a big deal you might say, but on the LJ/Waterford branch there are no manned stations or ticket machines- the tickets are sold on the train by the ticket checker. So how would he have managed to do his job and sell tickets when he can't access all of the train?? Did they have 2 ticket checkers, one in each part? were the gangways refitted for the special services? I don't think they would sell them on the platform before the train departed as this would have taken ages and caused mayhem.

Also as of monday the service has reverted to 3 trains each way, and are now 2 piece 2700 class in ICR livery.

Losty Dublin

Cars 2724, 2715 and 2753 worked as a three car set for the weekend. The gangway cover would have had to have been removed for H+S reasons so I guess just the conductor worked each train.

Master and commander

i'm guessing 2753 is in consist with one oft he other two in ICR livery. Which one was the commuter do you know?
Gang way covers removed - does that mean they refitted the gangways? they were taken off and a metal sheet put over the opening. one of the class was poorly modified with an unpainted panel covering up the hole. It's been like that for ages now and looks awful.
It would have been better to have used a four piece set as I heard that the trains were packed full overloaded in cariick on suir. Theres no way the ticket chacker could have got everyone, some people must have dodged him. LOL

goingnowhere

The railway safety commission won't allow 4 coach as they are too long for some platforms.

They got in trouble recently for doing it...

Master and commander

goingnowhere wrote: »

The railway safety commission won't allow 4 coach as they are too long for some platforms.

They got in trouble recently for doing it...

Thats a good one. I was on the Knock special in may, and that was a 6 piece 22000, way longer than a 4 piece 2700. Did they get in trouble for that? That train ex waterford stopped at carrick, clonmel and cahir with no problems. Maybe tipperary is the short platform then
Can they not only allow the opening of the doors on a certain number of cars, and disable others that would be beyond the end of the pf.

Losty Dublin

Master and commander wrote: »

i'm guessing 2753 is in consist with one oft he other two in ICR livery. Which one was the commuter do you know?
Gang way covers removed - does that mean they refitted the gangways? they were taken off and a metal sheet put over the opening. one of the class was poorly modified with an unpainted panel covering up the hole. It's been like that for ages now and looks awful.
It would have been better to have used a four piece set as I heard that the trains were packed full overloaded in cariick on suir. Theres no way the ticket chacker could have got everyone, some people must have dodged him. LOL

2753 is in the IRC colour scheme; 2715 and 2724 are still in the older green livery. The gangway covers can be removed and replaced easy enough so that wouldn't take any time to sort out.

On the ticket conductor, I'd say a lot of the passengers were families so he'd fly though them as it would just be the one transaction.

LXFlyer

Presumably they could pay on arrival at Waterford also.

steamengine

Aaargh me hearties !!! - A 3 piece 2700 class - a bit 'schooner rigged' as Long John Silver might say !!!

Aaargh !!! - that dockside don't be long enough to bring the 'tall' ship alongside - Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum :D:D

Losty Dublin

steamengine wrote: »

Aaargh me hearties !!! - A 3 piece 2700 class - a bit 'schooner rigged' as Long John Silver might say !!!

Aaargh !!! - that dockside don't be long enough to bring the 'tall' ship alongside - Yo ho ho and a bottle of rum :D:D

Just as well they didn't send down a 2X29000 set railcar.... Pieces of 8:D

steamengine

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Just as well they didn't send down a 2X29000 set railcar.... Pieces of 8:D

Aaaargh Jim lad !!! Pieces of 8 trains need Doubloon platforms !!!

corktina

no photos?:eek:

foggy_lad

corktina wrote: »

no photos?:eek:

Aaaaaarrrgh no but i'll do yer a draring if i can get me hook into a pencil:D:D:D

Losty Dublin

corktina wrote: »

no photos?:eek:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/finnyus/5891456820/in/set-72157626550927148/

steamengine

corktina wrote: »

no photos?:eek:

Piece of 8, I think !!!

Buffman

Losty Dublin wrote: »

http://www.flickr.com/photos/finnyus/5891456820/in/set-72157626550927148/

That panel on the front of 2724 looks horrendous.

I'm sure Dublin Bus would've given them a loan of some yellow paint if they were that stuck!:D

Can anyone tell me what was the point of removing the gangway?

Victor

Master and commander wrote: »

Thats a good one. I was on the Knock special in may, and that was a 6 piece 22000, way longer than a 4 piece 2700. Did they get in trouble for that? That train ex waterford stopped at carrick, clonmel and cahir with no problems. Maybe tipperary is the short platform then
Can they not only allow the opening of the doors on a certain number of cars, and disable others that would be beyond the end of the pf.

The doors at each end of a train always need to be openable.

D'Peoples Voice

Victor wrote: »

The doors at each end of a train always need to be openable.

thats my new word for the day

Captain Chaos

Buffman wrote: »

Can anyone tell me what was the point of removing the gangway?

There was an accident a number of years ago with a 6 piece 27 unit on the Rosslare line. The train split up leaving a number of cars behind and the front of the train continuing on for a good distance before the driver was aware of what happened.

Then after that there were issues of getting the 2700s coupled together. Something up with the auto couplers. I watched one day at Connolly station for about 30min, there was a 4 piece and 2 piece 2700 units outside the Connolly shed and they tried and tried to couple them up and they could not. Alot of staff were standing around on the tracks beside them tweeking various things.

Every since then the gangway doors were always locked shut. Shortly after all the 2700 units were moved to Cork and Limerick and mainly operated as 2 cars sets only for a while. The gangway doors were never used again after the Rosslare accident and they's why they were removed with the overhauls. Strange it was not done when they got refitted with new head light units. All seem to be gone now even if they did not get a repaint.

steamengine

2011 and ridiculous really that the size of a train is restricted to the shortest platform length en route. Ok platforms can't be extended overnight, but carriage overhang on platforms could be facilitated by temporarily isolating the opening switches on the respective carriage doors for the stations in question, and only for as long as required - coupled with suitable PA announcments and signage on the carriage windows as to what carriages should be occupied by passengers going to the horizontally challenged stations. Safety is paramount, but in the commercial world the challenge is that productivity and safety requirments are both satisfied with the priority on safety.

corktina

Losty Dublin wrote: »

http://www.flickr.com/photos/finnyus/5891456820/in/set-72157626550927148/

oh my god! what hope is there for a company that would do that!

Niles

steamengine wrote: »

2011 and ridiculous really that the size of a train is restricted to the shortest platform length en route. Ok platforms can't be extended overnight, but carriage overhang on platforms could be facilitated by temporarily isolating the opening switches on the respective carriage doors for the stations in question, and only for as long as required - coupled with suitable PA announcments and signage on the carriage windows as to what carriages should be occupied by passengers going to the horizontally challenged stations. Safety is paramount, but in the commercial world the challenge is that productivity and safety requirments are both satisfied with the priority on safety.

I agree. This is the reason why 6 car ICRs can't operate south of Greystones on the Rosslare service. Surely in this day and age it's not beyond the bounds of possibility to have a Selective Door Operation system fitted to the railcars, of course ideally they should have had to them to begin with.

Losty Dublin

Niles wrote: »

I agree. This is the reason why 6 car ICRs can't operate south of Greystones on the Rosslare service. Surely in this day and age it's not beyond the bounds of possibility to have a Selective Door Operation system fitted to the railcars, of course ideally they should have had to them to begin with.

Rathdrum is the main problem on the line as both platforms can't be extended. The SDO systems are something that will be retro fitted soon but the longer term ideal is for longer platforms as a whole where possible.

An cheaper solution would be to not stop at the station atall but try selling the parish pumpers that!

Master and commander

Sorry, i was wrong, the knock special was a 3-piece set. But I remember only a 3 or 4 years back the knock special was a rake of 6 0r so mark 3s. These as far as i know did not have SDO. Puzzled by why is is allowed sometimes and not others.

LXFlyer

Master and commander wrote: »

Sorry, i was wrong, the knock special was a 3-piece set. But I remember only a 3 or 4 years back the knock special was a rake of 6 0r so mark 3s. These as far as i know did not have SDO. Puzzled by why is is allowed sometimes and not others.

There was a derogation for the Mark 3 stock and older rolling stock as they had operated for years with shorter platforms. However the Railway Safety Commission have applied the rule rigorously to all new rolling stock.

To be honest asking for longer platforms on a route that does not normally have that much traffic and which is potentially a candidate for closure is pushing things a bit far.

Selective door opening should of course have been fitted as standard to the ICR fleet, but I suspect it boiled down to costs at the time they were ordered.

Taking some positive from this - it is great to see that demand for the rail service from Clonmel and Carrick-on-Suir was so strong. The ICRs were used for the additional Kilkenny shuttles.

As for the 2700s panels - the sets are all being repainted into the silver and green livery, so hopefully they won't be left in that unpainted state for too long.

dowlingm

There was a tender for SDO, but I don't know what came of it. It's needed badly on the Wicklow line to allow longer consists.

No doubt for Knock a special exemption was obtained - like the kind that allows 29Ks to run to Newry every morning :rolleyes:

L1011

lxflyer wrote: »

As for the 2700s panels - the sets are all being repainted into the silver and green livery, so hopefully they won't be left in that unpainted state for too long.

I think the OTHER 2700+2750 merged set has had this paint job done already, for some time

Seeing as the WRC definitely doesn't need the extra capacity, my cynicism says this permanent coupling was done to pretend that the 2750s didn't exist. They'd have been perfect for the south wexford, for instance...

nanu nanu

dowlingm wrote: »

There was a tender for SDO, but I don't know what came of it. It's needed badly on the Wicklow line to allow longer consists.

No doubt for Knock a special exemption was obtained - like the kind that allows 29Ks to run to Newry every morning :rolleyes:

http://www.raildoorsolutions.co.uk/default.asp?p=showtestimonial&n=11

Losty Dublin

MYOB wrote: »

I think the OTHER 2700+2750 merged set has had this paint job done already, for some time

Seeing as the WRC definitely doesn't need the extra capacity, my cynicism says this permanent coupling was done to pretend that the 2750s didn't exist. They'd have been perfect for the south wexford, for instance...

A 2750 simply has the flexibility that it can be added at either end of a 2 car set to expand it with minimal fuss.

Captain Chaos

Losty Dublin wrote: »

A 2750 simply has the flexibility that it can be added at either end of a 2 car set to expand it with minimal fuss.

Just like any of the rest of the 2700 fleet because they all operate in 2 car semi permanent coupled sets.

2751 and 53 allow for shuttle service on very low capacity frequent services as a bubble car and can be added to the other 2700 sets when needed. There was a 2700 formation that ran this year that had both 2751 and 53 along with a 2700 set making up a 4 car formation with the two bubble units which was very strange to see.

L1011

Losty Dublin wrote: »

A 2750 simply has the flexibility that it can be added at either end of a 2 car set to expand it with minimal fuss.

Not now that the gangway doors have been removed at one end, unless you've got a turntable handy...

LXFlyer

MYOB wrote: »

Losty Dublin wrote: »

A 2750 simply has the flexibility that it can be added at either end of a 2 car set to expand it with minimal fuss.

Not now that the gangway doors have been removed at one end, unless you've got a turntable handy...

What are you on about? There's still a drivers cab at both ends - it's just the gangway doors that are gone at both ends.

They can still go out and about on their own.

L1011

lxflyer wrote: »

What are you on about? There's still a drivers cab at both ends - it's just the gangway doors that are gone at both ends.

They can still go out and about on their own.

You can only couple it to one specific end of a 2700 though! Unless you want people to be unable to move carriage.

highlydebased

MYOB wrote: »

You can only couple it to one specific end of a 2700 though! Unless you want people to be unable to move carriage.

But you cant move carriage (to the other set) in a 2700 consist- because the gangways are plated over

You're right about only being able to connect it onto one end of the 2700 though.

Captain Chaos

What are yous on about. All 2700s work as a 2 car set, semi permanently coupled together so anything can couple to any end of the set. 2751 and 2753, the exceptions, have cabs at both ends allowing them to work as a single car as needed and to couple to any end of any 2700 set as needed. The only time the semi permanent couplers are undone is for maintenance.

L1011

Captain Chaos wrote: »

What are yous on about. All 2700s work as a 2 car set, semi permanently coupled together so anything can couple to any end of the set. 2751 and 2753, the exceptions, have cabs at both ends allowing them to work as a single car as needed and to couple to any end of any 2700 set as needed. The only time the semi permanent couplers are undone is for maintenance.

This is nothing to do with the couplers


2751/2753 have been mostly worked, of late, in a semi-permanent set with a 2700 class and have, as far as I know, had one of their gangway doors removed and plated over.

This means that it isn't possible to put them at the *other end* of a 2700 which still has gangway doors and maintain a gangway.

Captain Chaos

MYOB wrote: »

This is nothing to do with the couplers


2751/2753 have been mostly worked, of late, in a semi-permanent set with a 2700 class and have, as far as I know, had one of their gangway doors removed and plated over.

This means that it isn't possible to put them at the *other end* of a 2700 which still has gangway doors and maintain a gangway.

It is possible, it does not matter if the other car has it's gangway plated over or not. 2751 and 2753 can't work in a semi permanent coupled sate as they only have auto couplers, they don't have semi permanent couplers because they don't need to operate in pairs as they have a cab and auto coupler at both ends.

The gangways at the cab ends that are still in place are all locked off any way and have been for some years now. The gangways over the semi permanent couplers between the 2 cars sets still are in use as there is no risk of them uncoupling in service.

Zoney

Unless I'm mistaken, three car 2700s are a regular enough sight in Limerick station as at least one is used on Limerick-Galway. These are in a silver/green "irishrail.ie" livery with yellow plates over the former gangways at both ends of the train. They don't look particularly odd.

Fairly sure this is what I've travelled on myself unless I've miscounted the cars. Also pretty sure you can walk from the 1st car through to the 3rd (was looking for a free table with power socket at end of a carriage).

And yes, it would be formed from one of those "one car" 2700s (275x) with a two-car unit.

L1011

Captain Chaos wrote: »

It is possible.

No it isn't. Because you didn't read my damn post properly before hitting reply!!

"This means that it isn't possible to put them at the *other end* of a 2700 which still has gangway doors and maintain a gangway."

Read before replying, please.

foggy_lad

Zoney wrote: »

Unless I'm mistaken, three car 2700s are a regular enough sight in Limerick station as at least one is used on Limerick-Galway. These are in a silver/green "irishrail.ie" livery with yellow plates over the former gangways at both ends of the train. They don't look particularly odd.

Fairly sure this is what I've travelled on myself unless I've miscounted the cars. Also pretty sure you can walk from the 1st car through to the 3rd (was looking for a free table with power socket at end of a carriage).

And yes, it would be formed from one of those "one car" 2700s (275x) with a two-car unit.

I have seen and travelled on this set but you can only move between two of the cars as the third is not accessible except from the platform as the interconnecting doors on the single car have been removed and sealed up.

Losty Dublin

MYOB wrote: »

No it isn't. Because you didn't read my damn post properly before hitting reply!!

"This means that it isn't possible to put them at the *other end* of a 2700 which still has gangway doors and maintain a gangway."

Read before replying, please.

The point that you are clearly and missing is that these two specific railcars can be easily added to the end of a 2 car set with minimal fuss to increase capacity, and at short notice if required. The plating at either end can be removed if and when required but regardless it's immaterial what end is closed off as the solo unit simply joins on at the unclosed end to enlarge the set as needed.

Victor

Drawing?