"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message
, at
03:48:54 on Wed, 9 Apr 2008, remarked:
http://tinyurl.com/5asy9b
http://tinyurl.com/5deoog

Now we are looking at 1,100 vehicles

That's 200 more than last time Ruth Kelly announced it in July last year:

http://www.gos.gov.uk/gose/news/news...rojectForRail/

(equivalent to 275 EMUs in 4-car formation), which according to the DfT is
a net increase of 380 vehicles.

An increase of 380 in the size of Thameslink's fleet. [1].

So is that 380 out of the "famous 1000 more", or are they 100 over their
budget already?

Nice to see this re-announced again, anyway (it confirms our prejudices);
I wonder how many more times the same thing will be announced

[1] Is that 380 more than the original size, or 380 more than the size of
the fleet after expansion with the 48 carriages announced almost exactly a
year ago?


A few more confusing numbers - I'd recommend waiting until Roger Ford gets
the real inside info and explains the figures!

Remember the latest Rolling Stock Plan (RSP) had a number (256) of EMUs for
FCC, rather than just Thameslink, in context this included the GN side as
well. However, I reckon these 'Thameslink 1100' are in addition to the 1300
in the RSP.

What clouds the issue further is the '48' and more recent '44' 377 vehicles
going to Thameslink for KO0, by all accounts they only stay until the new
units with their amazing acceleration and short dwell times arrive in time
for the 24 tph through the core route. Clearly 377s won't be able to keep
up!

Also - one other odd aspect - the Ruth Kelly sponsored press release states
1100 - but another document on the DfT site:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/th...ndoverview.pdf

says 'between 900 and 1300'. Don't they really know what they want?

In the same paragraph they say that configurations other than 20m cars are
welcomed - presumably any longer and the tunnels would have to be
straightened?

Paul