22000's on the Cork route

Run_to_da_hills

I have traveled on these a few times recently on this route. Today it was a three car set. Is this the way things are going?

It would make sense to have smaller train off peak on this route. I find these trains more comfortable than the MK 4 DVT's plus they have power points at each seat.

foggy_lad

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I have traveled on these a few times recently on this route. Today it was a three car set. Is this the way things are going?

It would make sense to have smaller train off peak on this route. I find these trains more comfortable than the MK 4 DVT's plus they have power points at each seat.

There is little point sending a full mark4 set when there is hardly a bus load of passengers, I don't know if it is the way things are going but it should be!

IR/CIE need to get out of the whole loco/first class nonsense which serves only a few people while costing the company so much in laying on catering and special dining carriages and train hosts for a couple of board members in first class.

It would make sense to scrap the mark4 fleet and use the 22000s on all services as they appear to perform better and are better able to keep to schedule and arrive at all stations on time. They are also more comfortable than the other old carriages with their shunting movement and uncomfortable seats.

flyingsnail

I think its fixed to one link per day. Open to correction but I think its 09:00 Ex Dublin and 13:30 Ex Cork.

foggy_lad

flyingsnail wrote: »

I think its fixed to one link per day. Open to correction but I think its 09:00 Ex Dublin and 13:30 Ex Cork.

Afaik there are currently two trains each way which are usually 6car 22000 ICR sets

8am and 9am from Heuston and 11.30am and 12.30pm from Cork,

Run_to_da_hills

foggy_lad wrote: »

Afaik there are currently two trains each way which are usually 6car 22000 ICR sets

8am and 9am from Heuston and 11.30am and 12.30pm from Cork,

The 13.30 Dublin bound today was a three car set and at that there was a number of spare seats.

foggy_lad

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The 13.30 Dublin bound today was a three car set and at that there was a number of spare seats.

The 6.15am Cork-Heuston train had mechanical fault and was very late but no information made available to passengers about revised ETA. This would lead to the 10am from Heuston being a replacement which would then operate back from Cork at 13.30.

Jamie2k9

The 08.00 and 09.00 on Tue,Wed,Thu to Cork are ICR and they are not always 6 car. They are normally operated by a 3 car set.

The 06.15 ex Cork I think was only 30 mins late in Heuston but no dought it required maintance when it arrived however there would of being another Mark 4 set in Heuston as it would of not operated the 08.00 to Cork. So with this I think its a case of not enough demand for a Mark 4 on 10.00 to Cork.

Remenber there may of being a lot of spare sets in Heuston but most go to maintance or Portlaose during the day and if the Mark 4's were to be scrapped (Which won't happen) there would need to order more 22000 and who would pay for them........

Run_to_da_hills

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Remenber there may of being a lot of spare sets in Heuston but most go to maintance or Portlaose during the day and if the Mark 4's were to be scrapped (Which won't happen) there would need to order more 22000 and who would pay for them........

Not necessary if they juggled around the configurations, made shorter single piece trains ie 5 or 4 cars and freed up some of the cabs from their double piece trains. assuming that all the intermediate cars are powered.

LeftBlank

foggy_lad wrote: »

The 6.15am Cork-Heuston train had mechanical fault and was very late but no information made available to passengers about revised ETA. This would lead to the 10am from Heuston being a replacement which would then operate back from Cork at 13.30.

The 10am this morning was a MkIV.

foggy_lad

LeftBlank wrote: »

The 10am this morning was a MkIV.

Maybe the 1.30pm from cork was another train failure? it seems those locomotives are not very reliable, not a day goes by without a cork train or belfast train being delayed due to train faults.

Jamie2k9

Not necessary if they juggled around the configurations, made shorter single piece trains ie 5 or 4 cars and freed up some of the cabs from their double piece trains. assuming that all the intermediate cars are powered.

Intermediate cars are not the same mainly to do with breaking system.

Foggy Lad don't always blame the 201 class loco as a lot of the time it is the DVT on the Mark4 and Entreprise which has a fault and nothing to do with the loco.

end of the road

foggy_lad wrote: »

It would make sense to scrap the mark4 fleet and use the 22000s on all services as they appear to perform better and are better able to keep to schedule and arrive at all stations on time. They are also more comfortable than the other old carriages with their shunting movement and uncomfortable seats.

are you having a laugh? IE have scrapped (sorry mothballed) enough young stock as it is without scrapping these. i agree they and a lot of the 201s should have never been bought in the first place but were stuck with them now. i agree about the 22000s performence it is rather good.

AngryLips

I much prefer the 22000s from a passenger comfort point of view. I feel like a heroin addict in public toilets in the Mk4's what with those blue-tinted windows.

Dublin Spotter

I know the 22000 trains can operate at a max speed of 110mph but are they capable to operate at 125 mph but are restricted?? I am almost certain somebody told me or I read this somewhere can someone confirm.

bk

Dublin Spotter wrote: »

I know the 22000 trains can operate at a max speed of 110mph but are they capable to operate at 125 mph but are restricted?? I am almost certain somebody told me or I read this somewhere can someone confirm.

The 22000 are capable of 100mph or 160km/h, while the mark 4 are capable of 125mp/h or 200km/h.

However given that the Cork to Dublin line is only rated to 120km/h and the VERY long term plan (as in 20 years) is to increase it to 160km/h, it shouldn't be an issue.

Dublin Spotter

the 201 class can only do a max of 100?

goingnowhere

bk wrote: »

The 22000 are capable of 100mph or 160km/h, while the mark 4 are capable of 125mp/h or 200km/h.

However given that the Cork to Dublin line is only rated to 120km/h and the VERY long term plan (as in 20 years) is to increase it to 160km/h, it shouldn't be an issue.

Its 90mph/145kph, about 20% of the route is currently 100mph/160kph

end of the road

Dublin Spotter wrote: »

the 201 class can only do a max of 100?

yes i believe so, should speeds be increased as far as i know the plan is to have the mkiv's work with twin power cars some of which will be made out of the dvt's. thats what i read anyway.

bk

end of the road wrote: »

yes i believe so, should speeds be increased as far as i know the plan is to have the mkiv's work with twin power cars some of which will be made out of the dvt's. thats what i read anyway.

Given the cost of upgrades (not likely to happen for about 20 years), they will probably electrify the line and switch to EMU's at the same time.

Captain Chaos

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Intermediate cars are not the same mainly to do with breaking system.

Foggy Lad don't always blame the 201 class loco as a lot of the time it is the DVT on the Mark4 and Entreprise which has a fault and nothing to do with the loco.

On the Enterprise I'd say it's more the loco. I know the DVTs were giving brake release/lock up problems a few years back but that seems to have been sorted.

Last year 233 bogies locked up and the loco had to be lifted out of Connolly yard and brought by road to Inchicore. Two days ago 207 failed in Belfast, and 113 had to haul it back to Connolly while 231 was sent from Connolly to get the stranded Enterprise set in Belfast.

206 was almost lost to fire while on an Enterprise at Drogheda about 6-7 years ago, it spent about a year being internally re-wired and re-built.

While the 201 failure rate on the Enterprise has massively improved, which is ironic as only 9 locos can now operate the DD sets as apposed to 23 that could before the new safety systems for NIR were introduced. Some of the 201s that I have never seen work with the DD sets (besides 201-205,210-214) are 215,216,221,222,225,226,232,234.

When IE could use any capable 201 they seemed to allocate 220,223,224 and 227 most of the times.

end of the road

bk wrote: »

Given the cost of upgrades (not likely to happen for about 20 years), they will probably electrify the line and switch to EMU's at the same time.

you could be right. that would probably be the best option. would make sense to get it all done at the same time. guess we will have to wait and see what happens.

Captain Chaos

end of the road wrote: »

yes i believe so, should speeds be increased as far as i know the plan is to have the mkiv's work with twin power cars some of which will be made out of the dvt's. thats what i read anyway.

The Mk4 DVTs were designed so that they can be converted into power cars at a future date while still providing the light and aircon for the train. IE would need to purchase around 10 high speed locos similar to the British class 43 HST locos for 125mph operation. 7 for every day use, 1 for the back up set and 3 maintenance/spare units.

dowlingm

bk wrote: »

given that the Cork to Dublin line is only rated to 160km/h and the VERY long term plan (as in 20 years) is to increase it to 200km/h

FYP.

foggy lad wants carriage stock worth 117m euro at purchase eight years ago junked. If IE proposed it he'd be hopping up and down about waste of taxpayers money. :rolleyes:

run_to_da_hills - I asked about juggling sets when 22033 was down a coach but apparently there would have to be a new safety case to operate 4 or 5 carriage trains, I don't know how much work that would be.

The problem with the locohaul sets is that when they were ordered, Kildare Route Project was supposed to go further than Hazelhatch and the railcars were supposed to be doing a lot more intermediate services serving places like Templemore or Monasterevin. Instead the cutbacks started to hit and the KRP got truncated so now the expresses are harder to schedule away from the stoppers and North Wall freights.

I also think that now 22000s are doing some Cork-Dublin rotations (matching capacity to demand) perhaps a Mark 4 set could be spared for a Limerick-Dublin service like the 0730 ex Colbert and 1725 ex Heuston (which is currently listed as 1st Class 22K).

I have argued previously that IE/NIR should do a swap of 22000s and DDs to consolidate all locohaul in Heuston because while the Heuston sets have at least some fast tracks to use, the Northern Line won't see any bypass tracks for a couple of decades and the distributed traction of the 22s would probably help them deal with traffic and speed restrictions. Having the sets near Inchicore might get the bloody EGV fiasco finished once and for all.

As for 22000s on the Cork run, what I want to see is IE add a 3 car 22000 at 0600 Heuston-Limerick Junction-Charleville-Mallow-Cork. It would be a damn sight better use of them than beetling through 40mph sections of North Tipp.

end of the road

the HST class 43s were re-designated as a loco but were originally designated as a power car.

bk

Dowlinm my speed figures came from the Irish Rail consultants report into intercity transport from a few minths ago.

Perhaps they got it wrong? But that would be very surprising.

CIE

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

I have traveled on these a few times recently on this route. Today it was a three car set. Is this the way things are going?

It would make sense to have smaller train off peak on this route. I find these trains more comfortable than the MK 4 DVT's plus they have power points at each seat.

Awesome that IE was in such a hurry to get rid of the Mark 3s, ain't it?

bk wrote: »

Given the cost of upgrades (not likely to happen for about 20 years), they will probably electrify the line and switch to EMUs at the same time

They've been talking about that since the 60s, for as long as they've been talking about a suburban underground in Dublin. How come all the money they spent on the Mark 4s and 22000-class wasn't re-allocated towards electrification? If they didn't electrify by now, it's not going to happen ever, sorry. Could have done a minor rebuild to the Mark 3s and used something like a Bombardier Traxx electric engine, and 200 km/h electric service right out of the box could have ensued. But no...had to go the old government waste route instead.

200 km/h. Would be nice to get Ireland into the latter half of the 20th century, yes? Germany was running 200-km/h trains intercity by the 1970s, as was the USA, France, Britain et cetera. On traditional railway lines, with minimal rebuild. How much could it really cost?

bk wrote: »

Dowlingm my speed figures came from the Irish Rail consultants report into intercity transport from a few months ago.

Perhaps they got it wrong? But that would be very surprising.

Why would it be surprising for consultants to get things wrong? or for them to report things that politicians want to hear instead of what's actually possible?

end of the road

CIE wrote: »

Awesome that IE was in such a hurry to get rid of the Mark 3s, ain't it?
Could have done a minor rebuild to the Mark 3s and used something like a Bombardier Traxx electric engine, and 200 km/h electric service right out of the box could have ensued. But no...had to go the old government waste route instead.

well that would make sense but no, IE wanted shiny new rolling stock and now the poor
mark 3s are being b//////isedinto oblivian in (storage) only a matter of time before them and the 2700s are banished to the gass torch.

CIE wrote: »

200 km/h. Would be nice to get Ireland into the latter half of the 20th century, yes? Germany was running 200-km/h trains intercity by the 1970s, as was the USA, France, Britain et cetera. On traditional railway lines, with minimal rebuild. How much could it really cost?

this is IE, they want to keep our railways back in the days of the railway children. the trains probably ran faster back then compared to now. driving the customers away is what they want as part of their self destruction program. sack the management and get in people who actually have a clue on how to run a railway properly before its to late and our railways are ran into oblivian for good.

dowlingm

The Mark 3s wouldn't have been a minor rebuild to be fair. The expectation would be most of pushpull+DVT or AC/100mph;wifi;PIS;power sockets in addition to retention toilets which would be first on the list. The fun police would likely have added a raft of other accessibility modifications.

They were withdrawn too quickly though - it was around the peak of Tiger service demand and with the loss of 22009/10/37 for various reasons IE lost a lot of goodwill by opting to cram people into smaller consists rather than find a way to operate some peak time pushpull diagrams. Between that, Broadmeadow and the M8/M6 it's hard to see IE regaining a fraction of its former pre-eminence without a massive increase in petrol prices or something.

CIE

dowlingm wrote: »

The Mark 3s wouldn't have been a minor rebuild to be fair. The expectation would be most of pushpull+DVT or AC/100mph;wifi;PIS;power sockets in addition to retention toilets which would be first on the list. The fun police would likely have added a raft of other accessibility modifications

There were already Mark 3 DVTs, albeit not equipped with AC. They have been operated with the 201 class. The only major difference between IE's Mark 3s and BR's would be the electrical systems, TIR.

dowlingm wrote: »

They were withdrawn too quickly though - it was around the peak of Tiger service demand and with the loss of 22009/10/37 for various reasons IE lost a lot of goodwill by opting to cram people into smaller consists rather than find a way to operate some peak time pushpull diagrams. Between that, Broadmeadow and the M8/M6 it's hard to see IE regaining a fraction of its former pre-eminence without a massive increase in petrol prices or something

Petrol prices ought to have nothing to do with it. Government policy is the chief factor here. There's far too much of a stranglehold on transport infrastructure at the top.

end of the road

surely it would have cost less to refurbish the mark 3s rather than getting the mark 4s? after all if replacing trains is cheeper than refurbishment then how come britain didn't just scrap their mark 3 sets and buy new? probably because the government rightly said work with what you've got. waste not want not seems to be the motto of the private operators, something CIE/IE could learn from all though they won't.

corktina

end of the road wrote: »

the HST class 43s were re-designated as a loco but were originally designated as a power car.

It's t'other way round. The original power cars were designated as Class 41 locos and later designated as power cars with numbers in the 43000 coaching stock series. The original Class 43 was of course the North British Warship Class.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_41_(HST)

Jamie2k9

The problem with the locohaul sets is that when they were ordered, Kildare Route Project was supposed to go further than Hazelhatch and the railcars were supposed to be doing a lot more intermediate services serving places like Templemore or Monasterevin. Instead the cutbacks started to hit and the KRP got truncated so now the expresses are harder to schedule away from the stoppers and North Wall freights.

If the Kildare Route Project when as far as Kildare or Cherryville it would greatly improve services in particular Intercity services.

Victor

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Not necessary if they juggled around the configurations, made shorter single piece trains ie 5 or 4 cars and freed up some of the cabs from their double piece trains. assuming that all the intermediate cars are powered.

There goes the flexibility to send any set, on any departure, anywhere.

AngryLips wrote: »

I much prefer the 22000s from a passenger comfort point of view. I feel like a heroin addict in public toilets in the Mk4's what with those blue-tinted windows.

I can't actually see the blueness when I'm on the train (only in photos) as my eyes adjust the colour spectrum to look normal.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120209-do-we-all-see-the-same-colours

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b71rT9fU-I

dowlingm wrote: »

FYP.

foggy lad wants carriage stock worth 117m euro at purchase eight years ago junked. If IE proposed it he'd be hopping up and down about waste of taxpayers money. :rolleyes:

run_to_da_hills - I asked about juggling sets when 22033 was down a coach but apparently there would have to be a new safety case to operate 4 or 5 carriage trains, I don't know how much work that would be.

The problem with the locohaul sets is that when they were ordered, Kildare Route Project was supposed to go further than Hazelhatch and the railcars were supposed to be doing a lot more intermediate services serving places like Templemore or Monasterevin. Instead the cutbacks started to hit and the KRP got truncated so now the expresses are harder to schedule away from the stoppers and North Wall freights.

I also think that now 22000s are doing some Cork-Dublin rotations (matching capacity to demand) perhaps a Mark 4 set could be spared for a Limerick-Dublin service like the 0730 ex Colbert and 1725 ex Heuston (which is currently listed as 1st Class 22K).

I have argued previously that IE/NIR should do a swap of 22000s and DDs to consolidate all locohaul in Heuston because while the Heuston sets have at least some fast tracks to use, the Northern Line won't see any bypass tracks for a couple of decades and the distributed traction of the 22s would probably help them deal with traffic and speed restrictions. Having the sets near Inchicore might get the bloody EGV fiasco finished once and for all.

As for 22000s on the Cork run, what I want to see is IE add a 3 car 22000 at 0600 Heuston-Limerick Junction-Charleville-Mallow-Cork. It would be a damn sight better use of them than beetling through 40mph sections of North Tipp.

CIE wrote: »

Awesome that IE was in such a hurry to get rid of the Mark 3s, ain't it?They've been talking about that since the 60s, for as long as they've been talking about a suburban underground in Dublin. How come all the money they spent on the Mark 4s and 22000-class wasn't re-allocated towards electrification? If they didn't electrify by now, it's not going to happen ever, sorry. Could have done a minor rebuild to the Mark 3s and used something like a Bombardier Traxx electric engine, and 200 km/h electric service right out of the box could have ensued. But no...had to go the old government waste route instead.

200 km/h. Would be nice to get Ireland into the latter half of the 20th century, yes? Germany was running 200-km/h trains intercity by the 1970s, as was the USA, France, Britain et cetera. On traditional railway lines, with minimal rebuild. How much could it really cost?Why would it be surprising for consultants to get things wrong? or for them to report things that politicians want to hear instead of what's actually possible?

dowlingm wrote: »

The Mark 3s wouldn't have been a minor rebuild to be fair. The expectation would be most of pushpull+DVT or AC/100mph;wifi;PIS;power sockets in addition to retention toilets which would be first on the list. The fun police would likely have added a raft of other accessibility modifications.

They were withdrawn too quickly though - it was around the peak of Tiger service demand and with the loss of 22009/10/37 for various reasons IE lost a lot of goodwill by opting to cram people into smaller consists rather than find a way to operate some peak time pushpull diagrams. Between that, Broadmeadow and the M8/M6 it's hard to see IE regaining a fraction of its former pre-eminence without a massive increase in petrol prices or something.

end of the road wrote: »

surely it would have cost less to refurbish the mark 3s rather than getting the mark 4s?

In a mark(!) of utter perversion, nobody realised that the Mark 3s could be painted a different colour.

after all if replacing trains is cheeper than refurbishment then how come britain didn't just scrap their mark 3 sets and buy new? probably because the government rightly said work with what you've got. waste not want not seems to be the motto of the private operators, something CIE/IE could learn from all though they won't.

Importantly, there is bigger and more varied fleet and a (limited) market in the UK between the train leasing companies and the train operating companies. This means that all stock is assigned some value and is more likely to be used.

dowlingm

Victor wrote: »

there is bigger and more varied fleet and a (limited) market in the UK between the train leasing companies and the train operating companies. This means that all stock is assigned some value and is more likely to be used.

Bingo. When ROSCOs have spare stock they need to find use for it because it's shareholders assets/paying off bank loans. Remember when HSBC Rail tried to send the Class 222s to Enterprise? They managed to find a use in Britain for them but at that time all they could see was an expensive set of trains doing nowt.

IE just go to Dept of Finance with a sob story and suddenly it's the Mark3s replaced instead of just the 2s and Cravens, the 8200s left in a Fairview ditch and now the 2700s heading for the boneyard as their heavy checks approach. One of the first thing I'd do as Minister for Transport is take meetings with Porterbrook, Angel Trains and HSBC Rail about a sale and leaseback of some IE stock. I don't know what would happen next but I doubt it would be carriages left in the open to rust and moulder. Even if it was the scrapper at least there would be an end to it.

Also: for those who think refurbishment is easypeasy (and have forgotten how long the 8100 contract took) there was this shocker out of Moncton last week - this will put a major spanner in the VIA Rail fleet management plan as carriage refurb will now slip timewise.