Trains question

[DrTre]

Midland mainline uses trains that have an engine at the front and back whereas cross country seem to have trains where there's a power unit under each carriage.
(MM trains also seem to have 'stuff'under the carriage that could also be power units weirdly).

What are the pros and cons of each? Or aren't there any and it's just company preference?

[Tootles the Taxi]

East Midlands Trains use a combined fleet of:

1.High Speed Trains (HST) originally built in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which consist of two Class 43 power cars (one at each end) with a rake of Mk3 unpowered coaches between.
2.Class 222 "Meridian" Diesel Hydraulic multiple units which have an engine beneath each coach, but are more modern than the HSTs
3.Some Class 158 two-car Diesel Multiple Units known as "Super Sprinters"
4.Some Class 153 single-unit Diesel Units, which were originally built as two-car units by Leyland and later split into individual cars with an additional driver's cab at one end.

HSTs and Meridians can't couple up to each other, but the Class 158 and 153 units can work together in multiple to form a longer train.

Hope this helps.

[DrTre]

Cheers.
For some reason it only dawned on me that there are a variety of 'long haul' trains.
I kinda thought they were gradually converging on one type but clearly that's not the case.

[Rich1973]

HSTs are vastly more comfortable than the noisy vibrating Voyager unit. Older really is better in this case

[Talksteer]

Rich1973 said:

HSTs are vastly more comfortable than the noisy vibrating Voyager unit. Older really is better in this case

I never get why DMU's are so rough and noisy. Generally larger vehicles should be easier to insulate, it is really noticeable how much rougher they are than a car despite you sitting much closer to the engine in the car and the car being much more highly tuned.

[986S]

I don't think the operating companies have an awful lot of choice in the rolling stock they use - I believe there's higher-level strategic thinking going on - hence a lot of stock gets shifted around when it becomes available as some lines are upgraded.

You have to feel for anyone who has to use Arriva Trains Wales - many of their commuter routes were covered by Mk3 coaches hauled by Class 37s until around a decade ago, when they were 'upgraded' to Pacers(busses on rails).

Amazingly, the HSTs with their engine upgrades and new interiors (especially first class) are still just about the best way to travel on non-electrified lines.

Edited by 986S on Friday 11th September 18:24

[mcdjl]

Rich1973 said:

HSTs are vastly more comfortable than the noisy vibrating Voyager unit. Older really is better in this case

Very much this. It'll be a sad and uncomfortable day when the HSTs go. I even try to organise my journey to let me catch one rather than a meridian thing if i have the option.

[RichB]

DrTre said:

Midland mainline uses trains that have an engine at the front and back whereas cross country seem to have trains where there's a power unit under each carriage. What are the pros and cons of each? Or aren't there any and it's just company preference?

To go back to you original question; the cross country services tend to serviced by trains that are adaptable for length, so 3 coaches, 5 coaches, 8 coaches (a 3 and 5 coupled together). These are the ones with the power unit under the chassis and are known (for obvious reasons) as multiple units or multi's. The long distance routes are the equivalent of the old express trains and the operator knows these will always run with 7 or 9 coaches. Because they are a standard length they are built with a power unit (locomotive) at each end and traditional coaches in between. Basically it's long distance express vs local services and adaptability.

[MitchT]

Rich1973 said:

HSTs are vastly more comfortable than the noisy vibrating Voyager unit. Older really is better in this case

Indeed. I once travelled from Leeds to St Erth (last stop before Penzance) on a Virgin Voyager as far as Taunton, then a First Great Western HST for the rest of the journey. It was like stepping from a 20 week old Fiat Punto to 20 year old Rolls Royce. Night and day. Unpowered carriages with separate locos make for far a superior rail travel experience. Quite why the rail authorities are driving the design of long-haul trains in the other direction is inexplicable. Voyager type trains would have made a perfectly credible replacement for Sprinters on cross country routes, but they're no HST.

[mcdjl]

MitchT said:

Indeed. I once travelled from Leeds to St Erth (last stop before Penzance) on a Virgin Voyager as far as Taunton, then a First Great Western HST for the rest of the journey. It was like stepping from a 20 week old Fiat Punto to 20 year old Rolls Royce. Night and day. Unpowered carriages with separate locos make for far a superior rail travel experience. Quite why the rail authorities are driving the design of long-haul trains in the other direction is inexplicable. Voyager type trains would have made a perfectly credible replacement for Sprinters on cross country routes, but they're no HST.

My understanding is that you end up with redundancy, if one engine fails on a multi, it carries on, just slower. If one fails on a hst, it stops. The mu layout also means more passenger space per train length as most of the machinery is under the floor rather than taking up a carriage at each end.

[DrTre]

Marvellous!
Cheers for the info guys.
Funny, hadn't registered that the nvh is worse in the cross country trains (which I'd what I've been using daily for the last few months).
Thinking about it though, it was noticeably quieter on the MM I was on last week.

Equally, now it's pointed out to me it's obvious that you can carry more passengers per given length of train with a multi. Doh!

I hadn't realised though that the train companies can't pick and choose their rolling stock with freewill?

Where did the Virgin pendolinos go?!

[RichB]

DrTre said:

I hadn't realised though that the train companies can't pick and choose their rolling stock with freewill?

My understanding is that the rolling stock is leased by the train companies and one company will often take on the lease from another company and refurbish the stock. I think they do have some say in what they run.

[W124Bob]

I've driven both for XCTrains, biggest economic reason for newer diesel powered passenger trains having engines under floor is lower down times. Loose an HST power car and the whole set could be out of action for several days unless the company has spare power cars. Loose a Voyager engine and Bombardier has a 10 day dispensation window to effect repairs, our 5car sets have an engine isolated simply to save fuel, middle 3 rotated on a daily basis. The engines themselves can be changed out relatively quickly because of the modular design of the underfloor components. Very common for a Voyager set to be in service with an engine isolated. HST maintenance is old school heavy lifting and big tools! Meridian 222 is diesel electric and is an improved Voyager basically,all have 2 under floor traction motors per coach with carden shaft drive to the inner axle mounted diff(not car style as the axle are fixed) . Hydraulic tilting on XC 5car sets was isolated within in weeks of Arriva taking over the XC franchise, Virgin have stuck with it as the WC timings require 125 running.

Edited by W124Bob on Friday 11th September 12:02

[Pugland53]

mcdjl said:

MitchT said:

Indeed. I once travelled from Leeds to St Erth (last stop before Penzance) on a Virgin Voyager as far as Taunton, then a First Great Western HST for the rest of the journey. It was like stepping from a 20 week old Fiat Punto to 20 year old Rolls Royce. Night and day. Unpowered carriages with separate locos make for far a superior rail travel experience. Quite why the rail authorities are driving the design of long-haul trains in the other direction is inexplicable. Voyager type trains would have made a perfectly credible replacement for Sprinters on cross country routes, but they're no HST.

My understanding is that you end up with redundancy, if one engine fails on a multi, it carries on, just slower. If one fails on a hst, it stops. The mu layout also means more passenger space per train length as most of the machinery is under the floor rather than taking up a carriage at each end.

HST's are perfectly capable of running on one engine. They just accelerate a lot slower and can only get up to around 100 mph. The only problem they have is if they have to go up a steep bank, in some instances you have to get the signalman to give you green signals on the approach so you can build up some speed to get up the bank.

[W124Bob]

I suspect the reason so many think the Voyager is inferior is the body was designed to fit within the UK loading gauge when tilting, regardless of wheather this was fitted or not. Internal toilet waste tanks dont help either. XC don't put HST's into service off a depot with one powercar. Chiltern at least have gone for good old fashioned loco and coaches, indeed they've invested a fair bit of money refurbishing an already good coach(BR mk3) .

[alangla]

Pugland53 said:

mcdjl said:

MitchT said:

Indeed. I once travelled from Leeds to St Erth (last stop before Penzance) on a Virgin Voyager as far as Taunton, then a First Great Western HST for the rest of the journey. It was like stepping from a 20 week old Fiat Punto to 20 year old Rolls Royce. Night and day. Unpowered carriages with separate locos make for far a superior rail travel experience. Quite why the rail authorities are driving the design of long-haul trains in the other direction is inexplicable. Voyager type trains would have made a perfectly credible replacement for Sprinters on cross country routes, but they're no HST.

My understanding is that you end up with redundancy, if one engine fails on a multi, it carries on, just slower. If one fails on a hst, it stops. The mu layout also means more passenger space per train length as most of the machinery is under the floor rather than taking up a carriage at each end.

HST's are perfectly capable of running on one engine. They just accelerate a lot slower and can only get up to around 100 mph. The only problem they have is if they have to go up a steep bank, in some instances you have to get the signalman to give you green signals on the approach so you can build up some speed to get up the bank.

There's also places they can't stop if they're only on one engine (Inverkeithing for example & I think Totnes) as they'd never be able to get going again up the hill. They do, at least, have the option of a reasonably quick power car swap if they arrive at a location where there's a spare power car available in the depot, usually somewhere like Edinburgh, Leeds or Plymouth.

[gazapc]

I get a HST to work most days. Had several occasions operating on only one power unit.

Doing a lot of train travel to Cornwall, avoiding XC is my main goal! How they manage to make voyagers so uncomfortable and smelly (the toilets) I don't know.

Hoping the new intercity trains are a step in the right direction...

[blueg33]

I also like the old intercity 125's for comfort. Xc voyager are hateful, first class is just tolerable.

FHW have some new HST's on the Cotswold line. Can't remember what type they are but they are pretty comfy in standard.

Pacers are really properly horrible. Twice a week is enough for me!

[DrTre]

W124Bob said:

Hydraulic tilting on XC 5car sets was isolated within in weeks of Arriva taking over the XC franchise, Virgin have stuck with it as the WC timings require 125 running.

Edited by W124Bob on Friday 11th September 12:02

Thanks very much for all the info

Why was the tilting disabled?

[Tootles the Taxi]

DrTre said:

Thanks very much for all the info

Why was the tilting disabled?

Arriva Cross Country decided that the benefits of having tilting trains wouldn't be used enough on the routes they operate, so the mechanism was de-commissioned to save money on maintenance. It was also thought that the tilt mechanism was prone to failure, meaning that the train would have to come out of service. Anyone who's had the "fortune" to use Arriva Cross Country trains will know that cancelling a train just adds to the chronic overcrowding on other trains.

The Voyagers are pretty awful trains. My abiding memory of using them when Virgin had the franchise was the all-pervading smell of poo the hit you as soon as you got on the train. Fore some reason, the Meridians used by East Midlands Trains don't have quite the same dungy ambiance.