wrote:

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 11:13:54 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
Sorry, which modern electric trains exactly - the 378s which run on
the NLL *and* the 3rd rail ELL all the way down to crystal palace? Do
they run faster
or with better acceleration on the NLL then?

3rd rail is fine for frequent suburban and metro services but increasingly
hopeless for long distance passenger and freight services. The huge benefit
derived from power electronics is that dual system trains are so much
cheaper and more versatile so there is no reason to keep third rail where
25KV would allow bore versatile traffic, hence the electric spine
re-powering project. It may have been ahead of its time but it will come so
freights too heavy for diesel haulage can run in and out of Southampton.

I understand that all other things being equal 25Kv is the better choice.
However all the 378s are capable of 3rd rail and installing 3rd rail on
the goblin line would have meant little to no disruption of services plus
it would have cost a damn site less. Ok, so freight on the line would
still have to use diesels or 92s. So what - it always hauled by diesels
anyway from my experience probably because the wires don't extend to
whatever port or sidings its heading for anyway, not because the goblin
isn't wired up.

But the reson for electrifying Goblin is for freight thus need 25kV

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...chment_data/fi
le/209279/PU1524_IUK_new_template.pdf

"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight
corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "





--
Mark

In article ,
(Mark Bestley) wrote:

wrote:

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 11:13:54 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
Sorry, which modern electric trains exactly - the 378s which run on
the NLL *and* the 3rd rail ELL all the way down to crystal palace? Do
they run faster or with better acceleration on the NLL then?

3rd rail is fine for frequent suburban and metro services but
increasingly hopeless for long distance passenger and freight
services. The huge benefit derived from power electronics is that dual
system trains are so much cheaper and more versatile so there is no
reason to keep third rail where 25KV would allow bore versatile
traffic, hence the electric spine re-powering project. It may have been
ahead of its time but it will come so freights too heavy for diesel
haulage can run in and out of Southampton.

I understand that all other things being equal 25Kv is the better
choice. However all the 378s are capable of 3rd rail and installing 3rd
rail on the goblin line would have meant little to no disruption of
services plus it would have cost a damn site less. Ok, so freight on the
line would still have to use diesels or 92s. So what - it always hauled
by diesels anyway from my experience probably because the wires don't
extend to whatever port or sidings its heading for anyway, not because
the goblin isn't wired up.

But the reson for electrifying Goblin is for freight thus need 25kV


https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...t_data/file/20
9279/PU1524_IUK_new_template.pdf

"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "

And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Is Spud related to Mr Ludd by any chance?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
wrote:
"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "

And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?
I find that hard to believe.

Is Spud related to Mr Ludd by any chance?

No. I'm simply Mr Taxpayer who isn't thrilled by seeing huge wads of cash
spent on this project when there was a much simpler and cheaper alternative.
The whole freight argument is bogus since the vast majority of UK freight is
diesel hauled and there is already a 25KV path for freight across north london
anyway.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
wrote:
"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "

And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?

No

I find that hard to believe.

Do you *really* not know what trains are being built for the line?


Is Spud related to Mr Ludd by any chance?

No. I'm simply Mr Taxpayer who isn't thrilled by seeing huge wads of cash
spent on this project when there was a much simpler and cheaper alternative.
The whole freight argument is bogus since the vast majority of UK freight is
diesel hauled and there is already a 25KV path for freight across north london
anyway.

With your expert knowledge of LO, the Goblin, UK railfreight and electric
traction, you must be right. But the people actually putting up the money
thought differently. If only they had had access to some expert consulting
from you!

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:15:42 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
wrote:
"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "

And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?

No

I find that hard to believe.

Do you *really* not know what trains are being built for the line?

Unlike you I have a job to do and don't spend my life researching every little
piece of obscure information about railways.

With your expert knowledge of LO, the Goblin, UK railfreight and electric
traction, you must be right. But the people actually putting up the money
thought differently. If only they had had access to some expert consulting
from you!

Ah yes, the people putting in the money. The ones who made sure specs were
being followed in the installation of the wiring. Would those be the guys?

--
Spud

wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:15:42 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
wrote:
"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "

And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?

No

I find that hard to believe.

Do you *really* not know what trains are being built for the line?

Unlike you I have a job to do and don't spend my life researching every little
piece of obscure information about railways.

With your expert knowledge of LO, the Goblin, UK railfreight and electric
traction, you must be right. But the people actually putting up the money
thought differently. If only they had had access to some expert consulting
from you!

Ah yes, the people putting in the money. The ones who made sure specs were
being followed in the installation of the wiring. Would those be the guys?

You seem to have, even by your standards, a rather poor understanding of
the difference between putting up the money, and on-the-ground engineering.
I suppose, as always, ignorance is your defence.

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 17:17:15 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:15:42 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
wrote:
"electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking rail corridor, to improve
a key freight corridor and improving reliability for passengers. "

And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin
then?

No

I find that hard to believe.

Do you *really* not know what trains are being built for the line?

Unlike you I have a job to do and don't spend my life researching every
little
piece of obscure information about railways.

With your expert knowledge of LO, the Goblin, UK railfreight and electric
traction, you must be right. But the people actually putting up the money
thought differently. If only they had had access to some expert consulting
from you!

Ah yes, the people putting in the money. The ones who made sure specs were
being followed in the installation of the wiring. Would those be the guys?

You seem to have, even by your standards, a rather poor understanding of
the difference between putting up the money, and on-the-ground engineering.
I suppose, as always, ignorance is your defence.

Ah ok. So TfL shouldn't have bothered checking how things were progressing
or putting any men on the ground to double check the work? You should apply
for a job there, you'd be a shoe in.

--
Spud

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?
I find that hard to believe.

TfL are buying 45 four-car 710s for use on the West Anglia Routes and
the Watford DC, GOBLIN and Romford to Upminster lines

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:29:45 +0000
David Walters wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?
I find that hard to believe.

TfL are buying 45 four-car 710s for use on the West Anglia Routes and
the Watford DC, GOBLIN and Romford to Upminster lines

I should have guessed. Another pointless new EMU design costing extra when
there's already perfectly servicable one in the 378. I guess shiny new toys
are more important than saving money and having interoperability with
existing equipment when its someone elses money you're spending.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:29:45 +0000
David Walters wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:04:48 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 08:15:01 -0600
And 378s won't be used on GOBLIN either.

Are they planning on buying a whole new set of EMUs just for the goblin then?
I find that hard to believe.

TfL are buying 45 four-car 710s for use on the West Anglia Routes and
the Watford DC, GOBLIN and Romford to Upminster lines

I should have guessed. Another pointless new EMU design costing extra when
there's already perfectly servicable one in the 378. I guess shiny new toys
are more important than saving money and having interoperability with
existing equipment when its someone elses money you're spending.

By that impeccable logic, they should have ordered some new-build 313s, not
shiny new 378s.