On 9 Apr, 20:26, Sky Rider wrote:
Mr Thant wrote:
Well I was quoting from last month's MR

So was I, as it happens.

though on another read it's unclear - the DfT state "the Thameslink project will also introduce new vehicles", but in the table beside Roger has them as
25 377s from Southern.
But then a couple of pages on in the Thameslink article the latter is sort of framed as his own suggestion.

Point accepted, but I did say 'most likely'. Perhaps we agree on the
NGEMUs now, but just to further my case, I will quote a paragraph from
the RSP:

'15. In addition, the [Thameslink] programme requires additional
vehicles for KO1 in 2011. It is expected that these vehicles will be
either cascaded existing EMU vehicles or new vehicles based on existing
designs with some, but maybe not all, of the features of the next
generation vehicles. However, it is possible that the next generation
vehicles proposed for KO2 in 2015 could be delivered earlier, possibly
by 2010 - 2011, if manufacturers are capable of delivering the required
outputs.'

As we already know, the first NGEMU should be in passenger service by 1
February 2012, but certainly not another 24. For some reason (once again
I have the Captain to thank for this) the DfT expect the first NGEMU to
be delivered more than a year before the first IEP train despite the
fact that NGEMU procurement has only just started, whereas IEP
procurement has been active for months.

If only he were around to clarify.

Agreed. And he was around less than 2 hours ago. g

Right,

All these figures for Thameslink are inferred, as explained in the
write up on the Laughing Stock Plan.

FCC inferred from their net gain that they got 192 vehicles for KO. I
made it 100. I think I am right..

Either way, these are South Central 377s converted to dual voltage.
Hence South Central get 100 new vehicles to back fill.

The suggestion by DafT that the NGEMU could be delivered for KO1,
when tendering had not started and no detailed spec existed is par for
the course.

Meanwhile I have sussed out how the 1300 vehicles for Thameslink have
turned into 1100. Apparently further work since the LSP was published
shows that 1300 was over the top and 1100 will now do the job.

Hope this helps.

In article
,
(Capt. Deltic) wrote:

Meanwhile I have sussed out how the 1300 vehicles for Thameslink have
turned into 1100. Apparently further work since the LSP was published
shows that 1300 was over the top and 1100 will now do the job.

Doesn't that make some heroic assumptions that "they" know what the job
is? Lynn to Eastbourne requires more stock than Lynn to East Croydon or
Gatwick, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article
,
(Capt. Deltic) wrote:

Meanwhile I have sussed out how the 1300 vehicles for Thameslink have
turned into 1100. Apparently further work since the LSP was
published shows that 1300 was over the top and 1100 will now do the
job.

Doesn't that make some heroic assumptions that "they" know what the
job is? Lynn to Eastbourne requires more stock than Lynn to East
Croydon or Gatwick, surely?

I believe there is enough evidence in the public domain to strike both Kings
Lynn and Eastbourne from the route, namely the recent discovery of Kings
Lynn in the IEP programme, and the dissapearance of places like Eastbourne
and Littlehampton from the Thameslink final route maps in the more recent
South London RUS...

Paul S

In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article

,
(Capt. Deltic) wrote:

Meanwhile I have sussed out how the 1300 vehicles for Thameslink
have turned into 1100. Apparently further work since the LSP was
published shows that 1300 was over the top and 1100 will now do the
job.

Doesn't that make some heroic assumptions that "they" know what the
job is? Lynn to Eastbourne requires more stock than Lynn to East
Croydon or Gatwick, surely?

I believe there is enough evidence in the public domain to strike
both Kings Lynn and Eastbourne from the route, namely the recent
discovery of Kings Lynn in the IEP programme, and the dissapearance
of places like Eastbourne and Littlehampton from the Thameslink
final route maps in the more recent South London RUS...

IEPs on the Cambridge fasts then?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 10 Apr, 22:33, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
I believe there is enough evidence in the public domain to strike
both Kings Lynn and Eastbourne from the route, namely the recent
discovery of Kings Lynn in the IEP programme, and the dissapearance
of places like Eastbourne and Littlehampton from the Thameslink
final route maps in the more recent South London RUS...

IEPs on the Cambridge fasts then?

It's looking likely. The South London RUS saw a major contraction in
the route map at the south end to inner-ish suburban, and there's also
been a recent disappearance of 2 ECML trains per hour from the final
MML/ECML split (was 14/10, now 16/8).

The old plan would have made poor use of King's Cross, leaving it half-
empty just as its redevelopment was complete. Although I don't know
what use the suburban shed will be post 2015.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

In article
,
(Mr Thant) wrote:

The old plan would have made poor use of King's Cross, leaving it half-
empty just as its redevelopment was complete. Although I don't know
what use the suburban shed will be post 2015.

Yes, I'd wondered about that too.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article
,
(Mr Thant) wrote:

The old plan would have made poor use of King's Cross, leaving it
half- empty just as its redevelopment was complete. Although I don't
know what use the suburban shed will be post 2015.

Yes, I'd wondered about that too.

One of the options might be to dedicate it to sundry open access operators
running short formations, or Adelantes, Pioneers or whatever, leaving more
platforms free in the main shed for longer EMUs? For cheap travel go next
door!

My thoughts about the outer reaches of Thameslink have been coloured by the
trains needing high standing capacity, large doors and short dwell times.
The theory of having two types of unit, touched on in the recent Thameslink
rolling stock details appears flawed, because if all trains are stopping in
the core section, clearly short distance pax aren't going to differentiate
between trains with the high capacity or long distance interiors...

Paul S

In message
, at
15:02:00 on Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Mr Thant
remarked:
IEPs on the Cambridge fasts then?

It's looking likely.

Terminating at KX, presumably. That's a shame, I was looking forward to
being able to get a through train.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message
,
at 15:02:00 on Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Mr Thant
remarked:
IEPs on the Cambridge fasts then?

It's looking likely.

Terminating at KX, presumably. That's a shame, I was looking
forward to being able to get a through train.

Me too, at least on occasion.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Capt. Deltic wrote:

FCC inferred from their net gain that they got 192 vehicles for KO. I
made it 100. I think I am right..

Which KO? Is it still 92 for KO0 and 100 for KO1 as before?

Either way, these are South Central 377s converted to dual voltage.
Hence South Central get 100 new vehicles to back fill.

That point I remember from MR March 2008.

The suggestion by DafT that the NGEMU could be delivered for KO1,
when tendering had not started and no detailed spec existed is par for
the course.

Interesting...

Meanwhile I have sussed out how the 1300 vehicles for Thameslink have
turned into 1100. Apparently further work since the LSP was published
shows that 1300 was over the top and 1100 will now do the job.

I see...the bidders could still propose anything between 900 and 1300
vehicles though, right?