2700s being withdrawn, possibly sold off?

Captain Chaos

dowlingm wrote: »

22000s will be taking over 2800 duties in Greater Dublin and they have large commonalities with the 2600 fleet in Cork. 2700 fleet is an outlier. Of course, this was probably known last year when IE was spending money boarding up gangways and repainting said 2700s into "fake 22000" livery.

The reason for boarding up the 2700s is because the gangway access has been locked off for a number of years after some unexpected uncoupling issues on the Rosslare line and in the Connolly shunting yard which I watched one day and could not quite believe it, they just could not get them to form in in a 6 car formation, they seperated every time they ran a brake test. As for the paint job, some 2600s have the same scheme applied for some time now.

Last weekend I noticed a 6 car 22k set heading North through Clongriffen at around 14:00 on Sunday. During the week I have seen either a 6 car or 2x3 22k pass through same at around 23:30 followed closely by a tara.

highlydebased

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The reason for boarding up the 2700s is because the gangway access has been locked off for a number of years after some unexpected uncoupling issues on the Rosslare line and in the Connolly shunting yard which I watched one day and could not quite believe it, they just could not get them to form in in a 6 car formation, they seperated every time they ran a brake test. As for the paint job, some 2600s have the same scheme applied for some time now.

Last weekend I noticed a 6 car 22k set heading North through Clongriffen at around 14:00 on Sunday. During the week I have seen either a 6 car or 2x3 22k pass through same at around 23:30 followed closely by a tara.

I've witnessed a separation too on the Ennis line.

Even if they were not going to use the gangways what was stopping them just keeping them locked off?

Losty Dublin

The main issue with running a DMU with a cab closed off mid train arises in the event of a carriage needing to be evacuated; this would limit them to running as a 2 car set only. That said, it's something that can be reversed in no time by any of the engineering depots should the need arise or the problems rectified. The hybrids may be kept in traffic in some form as the dual cab set up offers a degree of flexibility in class.

Captain Chaos

Losty Dublin wrote: »

The main issue with running a DMU with a cab closed off mid train arises in the event of a carriage needing to be evacuated; this would limit them to running as a 2 car set only.

The hybrids may be kept in traffic in some form as the dual cab set up offers a degree of flexibility in class.

The same applies to the 8100/8300 DART units. Yet no problems there.

I doubt the hybrids will be kept as they can't work in multiple with any other DMU unit as they are they are not compatible with the 2600s and 2700s since their mod work and will always be limited to 2 cars. They can be dragged around by other units alright.

Losty Dublin

Captain Chaos wrote: »

The same applies to the 8100/8300 DART units. Yet no problems there.

I doubt the hybrids will be kept as they can't work in multiple with any other DMU unit as they are they are not compatible with the 2600s and 2700s since their mod work and will always be limited to 2 cars. They can be dragged around by other units alright.

It's not the same, though. Dart units have closed off dedicated cabs at the unit end whereas the 26/27/28 railcars don't, the cab being located beside the gangway at the end of each unit. Correct me if I am wrong but the issue with the units as I understand it relates to the connecting of pairs of 27's and not individual units to each other.

Captain Chaos

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong but the issue with the units as I understand it relates to the connecting of pairs of 27's and not individual units to each other.

Yes, the coupling issue is at the cab ends of 27s, any D1 and D1 or D2 car can be put together with the semi permanent coupled end. But two D2 cars cannot operate end to end. With the cab ends of the 27s boarded up they are exactly the same for evacuation as an LHB DART.

The 27s do have a dedicated cab area as do the 26s and 28s, the drivers just close and lock the cab compartment door thats placed in exacty the same way as a DART or 29K. They open this door in the unused cabs to allow gangway access when it was allowed effectively splitting the cab area in two halfs.

dowlingm

This is more of a logistical question than a proposal - could the 2700 coupling be changed to something a bit more robust and thus result in a 4 or 6 car "set" which could only be changed in a similar fashion to changing cars between existing two car pairs? I had a notion that this was basically what they did with the 2750s when they formed the 3-car consists.

Captain Chaos

dowlingm wrote: »

This is more of a logistical question than a proposal - could the 2700 coupling be changed to something a bit more robust and thus result in a 4 or 6 car "set" which could only be changed in a similar fashion to changing cars between existing two car pairs? I had a notion that this was basically what they did with the 2750s when they formed the 3-car consists.

The 27s have auto couplers at the cab ends just like all the DARTs and DMUs and they all work great all around the world. The ones on the 27s have their off day far to often. The 27s operate in pairs back to back like they were designed with cab end, auto couple facing out. The 2750s are special, 2751 and 53 can operate as a single as their is a cab and therefor an auto coupler at each end.

The auto couplers IE have fitted are Dellners and there is another German made model but I don't know which DMU class use which.

Captain Chaos

dowlingm wrote: »

be changed in a similar fashion to changing cars between existing two car pairs?

That is only done if required for maintenance as it takes time.

dowlingm

It occurs to me that one reason to hide away the 2700s is quite simply there aren't enough drivers to operate additional sets above and beyond any netting up from the incoming 22000s.

Captain Chaos

Looks like the 2700 withdrawal is well under way now.

Sets
2701/02
2703/04
2705/06
2707/08
2751
2753

Are all stored out of service. 2705/06 has even been stripped of parts, including one of it's auto couplers for other 2700 sets that are still running.

CIE

So much for austerity if IE can afford to withdraw railcars that are a mere fourteen years old.

foggy_lad

CIE wrote: »

So much for austerity if IE can afford to withdraw railcars that are a mere fourteen years old.

They can't afford to run them so they must be withdrawn. Which would you prefer to mothball much of the 22000 stock or the much older 2700 stock which is not as suitable for inter city work so therefore less flexible? IE will hopefully make more money with better trains in service.

Cookie_Monster

foggy_lad wrote: »

They can't afford to run them so they must be withdrawn. Which would you prefer to mothball much of the 22000 stock or the much older 2700 stock which is not as suitable for inter city work so therefore less flexible? IE will hopefully make more money with better trains in service.

I'd prefer they'd not pissed away million on unneeded 22k's when there are perfectly good 2700s that'll do the job on a number of lines.

foggy_lad

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I'd prefer they'd not pissed away million on unneeded 22k's when there are perfectly good 2700s that'll do the job on a number of lines.

But they did spend the money which was for the most part well spent on fairly good trains, the money is spent and gone, it is in the past and that cant be changed so people should stop whinging about it and move on! would you have them throw all that money down the drain now by not using those trains?

highlydebased

foggy_lad wrote: »

They can't afford to run them so they must be withdrawn. Which would you prefer to mothball much of the 22000 stock or the much older 2700 stock which is not as suitable for inter city work so therefore less flexible? IE will hopefully make more money with better trains in service.

Where is your proof they can't afford to run them? They are running 2800's instead of them which surely not that much more efficient/costing less to run!

Run_to_da_hills

I wouldn't blame IR for trying to get rid of these trains least they fall into the hands of private operators. :eek:

foggy_lad

highlydebased wrote: »

Where is your proof they can't afford to run them? They are running 2800's instead of them which surely not that much more efficient/costing less to run!

ok so they scrap/mothball the 2800's instead!

Their passenger numbers are dropping through the floor and you want them to put on more and more commuter/local trains to run empty on branch lines?

Dublin Spotter

]I'd prefer they'd not pissed away million on unneeded 22k's when there are perfectly good 2700s that'll do the job on a number of lines.

I'd perfer to be on fast 22 trains and not 2700 which can only operate at half the speed of the 22.

Money on the 22 was well spent and have changed train travel for the better.

dowlingm

The reason the 2700s are being withdrawn has been gone over before. There is significant commonality between the 2600 and 2800, being both of Tokyu Car manufacture. Therefore the parts stock to be kept can be shared between the fleets.

The 2700s have an additional problem in that they have had coupler issues when formed into longer units. Many of them are also due for heavy overhaul. They also have the same engines as 26/28 so perhaps there would be scope to swap engines between the fleets to minimise downtime for the 26/28s. It should also be noted that trains don't drive themselves - were the 2700s to be retained the driver cohort would have to be expanded.

As foggy lad said, the 22s are a done deal and what should be the objective now is to force IE to make proper use of them including completing the necessary procedures to make them usable in the North. Foggy lad defending IE should be enough to persuade anyone there isn't much merit in the charges surely?

corktina

Dublin Spotter wrote: »

I'd perfer to be on fast 22 trains and not 2700 which can only operate at half the speed of the 22.

Money on the 22 was well spent and have changed train travel for the better.

Yes, I'd agree. I don't much like units at all, but the 22s seem to be able to do almost everything and are modern and comfortable. It seems a good business decision to let the 2700s go, circumstances having changed a bit since the 22s were ordered.

end of the road

Dublin Spotter wrote: »

I'd perfer to be on fast 22 trains and not 2700 which can only operate at half the speed of the 22.

Money on the 22 was well spent and have changed train travel for the better.

the 2700s were operating on mostly lines where their speeds were suitable for those lines. the 22000s wouldn't be able to go any faster on these lines.

end of the road

foggy_lad wrote: »

But they did spend the money which was for the most part well spent on fairly good trains, the money is spent and gone, it is in the past and that cant be changed so people should stop whinging about it and move on! would you have them throw all that money down the drain now by not using those trains?

this is a company who has always been and will always b incompitent and a shambles who sees fit to throw away stock when they get board of it or want shiny new trains yet won't improve services or speeds and wastes money like theirs no tomorrow yet you want people to stop whinging and move on? will you say the same thing if they mothball the 28 or 29s in a few years? or maybe a few of the 22000s will end up in (storage)

Jamie2k9

not small branch lines and short distance commuter routes like killdare where 26 27 28 or 2900s are suitable.

Kildare is operated by 22 trains for speed reasons. The line from Kildare is manly 90-100mph and a 26/7/800 could only do around 70mph and would cause intercity services to reduce speed.

As already stated the 27000 would need a complete overhaul/refit after 15 years in service. By the way it also costs money and at some stage they would of had to being withdrawn.

money well spent on some extra non-needed stock at the expense of stock that is only 14 years old.

As you are so well informed why was there a shortage of 22 trains to operate intercity routes until last month?? This is before any 27000 was taken out of service. Not all intercity services are operated by 22s yet.

end of the road

corktina wrote: »

Yes, I'd agree. I don't much like units at all, but the 22s seem to be able to do almost everything and are modern and comfortable.

i agree. their ideal for long distance services.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

By the way it also costs money and at some stage they would of had to being withdrawn.

yes, when fully life expired. what will happen when the rest of the stock need overhall will they be with-drawn rather then overhalled?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

why was there a shortage of 22 trains to operate intercity routes until last month??

why don't you email irish rail and ask them?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Not all intercity services are operated by 22s yet.

you tell me where i said they were.

foggy_lad

end of the road wrote: »

yes, when fully life expired. what will happen when the rest of the stock need overhall will they be with-drawn rather then overhalled?

why don't you email irish rail and ask them?


you tell me where i said they were.

why should people suffer a battered old dirty train when there are shiney new trains to use? those auld heaps are knackered like the auld orange yokes were knackered and should not be taking up space in railway yards, they should be taken apart and parts that can be used on other units stored and the rest scrapped!

end of the road

foggy_lad wrote: »

why should people suffer a battered old dirty train when there are shiney new trains to use?

did i say they should? no.

foggy_lad wrote: »

those auld heaps are knackered like the auld orange yokes were knackered

what has (the auld orange yokes ) got to do with anything? in fairness the cravens and mkiis were around 40 years old so it was about time for them to be nackered.

Dublin Spotter

end of the road wrote: »

yes, when fully life expired. what will happen when the rest of the stock need overhall will they be with-drawn rather then overhalled?

why don't you email irish rail and ask them?


you tell me where i said they were.

You tell me why you think that Jamie2k9 post only refered to you comments as it didn't from what I can see and I think he knows why there was a shortage of trains but his quotes were a follow on from what people say was a wast of money spent on new trains.

Captain Chaos

foggy_lad wrote: »

why should people suffer a battered old dirty train when there are shiney new trains to use? those auld heaps are knackered like the auld orange yokes were knackered and should not be taking up space in railway yards, they should be taken apart and parts that can be used on other units stored and the rest scrapped!

The Mk3s that are stored have or had another 25 years in them with a modest upgrade program like what the LHB DARTs got to last another 15 years or so. They are better than any DMU IE have including the 22s and the Mk4 stock. Only the DD stock is of higher standard.

Train manufactures still hold the Mk3 as the standard for ride quality. CAF could not match it with the Mk4 stock.