Enterprise Generator Van Enters Service

dowlingm

If circumstances demanded a reversion to four sets rather than the current 3 long plus spares it would be nice to have one EGV per set.

Captain Chaos

Well the 3 EGVs together didn't last long.

230 passed me today at 15:40 in HEP mode on set 9004. No EGV to be seen.

Jamie2k9

There was an EGV at Inchicore yesterday, would of expected any issues to of being resolved by now.

LXFlyer

Bizarrely enough all rolling stock does need to be serviced from time to time.

Captain Chaos

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

There was an EGV at Inchicore yesterday, would of expected any issues to of being resolved by now.

Could have been the spare, there are 4 and 3 are needed at any one time.

Jamie2k9

Bizarrely enough all rolling stock does need to be serviced from time to time.

They are just about in service five minutes and they need to be serviced already. Anyway are NIR not going to take care of that side of things.

Could have been the spare, there are 4 and 3 are needed at any one time.

Not the spare it came from Connolly AFAIK.

pointsman

Yesterday and today - All 3 diagrams have HEP in use and NO Mk3 EGV in the formations.

Captain Chaos

pointsman wrote: »

Yesterday and today - All 3 diagrams have HEP in use and NO Mk3 EGV in the formations.

Suppose that explains why 209 moved back onto Cork diagrams last week so.

Not good for the EGV project, all the pre work, test trains and still there are serious underlying issues or seems to be at least.

Jamie2k9

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Suppose that explains why 209 moved back onto Cork diagrams last week so.

Not good for the EGV project, all the pre work, test trains and still there are serious underlying issues or seems to be at least.

Lets just hope that IE havn't wasted time and money for the project. Anyone know what are the problems as when they are in operation they are fine but get taken off soon after.

LXFlyer

Perhaps there is a modification programme required for them for whatever reason. It can happen.

pointsman

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Lets just hope that IE havn't wasted time and money for the project. Anyone know what are the problems as when they are in operation they are fine but get taken off soon after.

I've seen reports coming through of the engines shutting down whilst in motion...Between that and Parking brake issues they seem to be the most common ones

Jamie2k9

pointsman wrote: »

I've seen reports coming through of the engines shutting down whilst in motion...Between that and Parking brake issues they seem to be the most common ones

Take it that is when the loco is pushing rather than pulling. Will be interesting to see if they can sort out the problems as when they do work they are good.

Grandeeod

Very sad to read all this because IE and NIR benefitted from so much money to get the route up to scratch. What a pity it has come to patching it up and then it doesnt work.

No vision?

Bad design?

Poor use of money?

Or maybe a minor teething issue? People on here always assume the worst.

The fuel savings alone would be enough to justify it, let alone the reduction in regular engine rebuilds.

Captain Chaos

Karsini wrote: »

The fuel savings alone would be enough to justify it, let alone the reduction in regular engine rebuilds.

But a question is what uses more fuel? A 201 on HEP hauling a 7 coach train or a 201 hauling a 8 coach train plus the fuel that the two generators use in the EGV. I don't think there would be too much of a difference in it.

The less stress on the 201s is a big saving though in the long term.

Ultimately though the whole 201, Mk3 EGV and DD stock mix has to be replaced with a proper express passenger set. EMD told them it wouldn't work back in 1994. All IE had to do was order some DVGTs for the DD stock like they did got for the Mk4 sets.

Captain Chaos

Captain Chaos wrote: »

But a question is what uses more fuel? A 201 on HEP hauling a 7 coach train or a 201 hauling a 8 coach train plus the fuel that the two generators use in the EGV. I don't think there would be too much of a difference in it.

I'm not sure what the power output of the generators is but I'd think that two small engines of maybe 300hp each wouldn't use as much diesel as a 3200hp lump running at full whack. A 201 on HEP can't even make two round trips without refuelling.

Jamie2k9

Or maybe a minor teething issue? People on here always assume the worst.

The fuel savings alone would be enough to justify it, let alone the reduction in regular engine rebuilds.

I see where your coming from but this is not minor as its going on for months. Hopefully they will get the issues sorted out for the benefit of passengers and operators.

Just as well NIR are now relaxed about 2900 class operating to Belfast from Connolly, doesn't seem to be any problems recently.

dowlingm

I wonder if the thinking wasn't so much fuel saving as maintenance - less stress on the prime mover, lots of spare EGV engines in the EGVs not converted. However, it would be nice to see 22000s start to make those runs now that the excuse that they haven't made clearance runs is gone.

Jamie2k9

dowlingm wrote: »

I wonder if the thinking wasn't so much fuel saving as maintenance - less stress on the prime mover, lots of spare EGV engines in the EGVs not converted. However, it would be nice to see 22000s start to make those runs now that the excuse that they haven't made clearance runs is gone.

IE now know that NIR will allow 2900's run so they will use them if they have to. Having the correct 22's in Connolly to step in is impossible unless they are not in regular service but then again any 22's could run if 2900's can.

Captain Chaos

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

IE now know that NIR will allow 2900's run so they will use them if they have to. Having the correct 22's in Connolly to step in is impossible unless they are not in regular service but then again any 22's could run if 2900's can.

The 29s are allowed run on NIR so long as there is a second man in the cab at all times even though they have no TPWS. There is no reason now why any 22 cannot seeing as they are cleared to York Road.

Seeing as there are a few good 22 sets surplus to requirements it would be relatively easy to have sets 1-4 based at Connolly to Drogheda, even with rotating other sets around for maintenance. But for Enterprise service a 6 car set is more suitable than a 2x3 formation.

dowlingm

The 22000s can manage 90mph (and more but not on those rails) whereas the 29000s are limited to 75mph, run under a safety waiver since they lack TPWS/AWS (despite usage on the scheduled Newry-Connolly service) and not configured as interregional trains. There are six 22000 3-car sets configured with TPWS and those of the six not in maintenance should always be Connolly-side. If that's not enough then fit more sets with TPWS.

But "ah shure t'will do", "shure if we did that people might use it" and "d'ould anti social elements would wreck those nice trains if we ran them" still rules on the Dublin-Belfast line, plus there's the danger that regular appearances of 22000s on that line will cause calls for additional economy-only scheduled services to close the ridiculously wide gaps between the island's two biggest population centres, as well as give fatal conniptions to the remaining passengers still obliged to ride 29000s between Rosslare and Connolly.

dowlingm

dowlingm wrote: »

But "ah shure t'will do", "shure if we did that people might use it" and "d'ould anti social elements would wreck those nice trains if we ran them" still rules on the Dublin-Belfast line

I'm not shooting the messenger here, but if such attitudes really do exist then they must be nipped in the bud. The railway shouldn't be a play thingy for "the boys" and everything possible should be done to ensure that services are marketed and run properly.

If it were me I'd ban commuter stock from intercity routes except in emergencies; it should never, ever had been done at all.

dowlingm

You're right, but the problem is Karsini that IE is virtually unaccountable. In the Assembly you get some idea of Translink's thinking, but the only thing the Oireachtas gets worried about is some fella in permanent way selling sleepers. Ask serious questions about the actual management of the service and suddenly it's commercial confidentiality and operational matters. That leaves discussion here in the realm of rumour and speculation - the "t'will do" is inferred and IE rarely careless enough to say it out loud, just like how they told us there were plans for the Mark 3s - even NIR get away with some of that when they spent a large sum on the white elephant that was the Gatwicks and the DBSO.

If a company buys 22000s, the first six in fact, fit TPWS to them and then wait years to use that capability, what does that say to the public at large?

Set/Delivery/DateInTraffic
22001 06/03/07 01/04/08
22002 06/03/07 19/12/07
22003 06/03/07 09/01/08
22004 06/03/07 09/01/08
22005 01/06/07 03/01/08
22006 01/06/07 19/12/07

http://www.irishrailcargricers.com/ie22000class.htm

The 22000 did trials in NI in September 2012, four years and more after EIS (and six months ago from now). The Drogheda depot was a reason proposed here or elsewhere at one point and the fact that it took years to commission that depot for 22000s should be regarded as another error rather than an excuse.

highlydebased

I've given up on the Enterprise. The coaches have gone past a joke really, they are terribly grotty and in need of some TLC. Not to mention arriving at Belfast not-very-Central, the overcrowding and scrum for the door at the Connolly waiting room. Before it was cheap with 9.99 each way available online (which is primarily the reason I used it) but its now well over twice the price I'll be using the Aircoach next time...