Following from the various "rumours" about 9 car Meridians ending up in 
North Wales, how easy/feasible is it for tilt packs to be fitted to enable 
them to use fast paths on the WCML?  After all, they are derivative of the 
220/221 so I wouldn't have thought it was much beyond bogies, suspension, 
and of course the associated gubbins.

This also reminds me of the alleged original plans for the Mk4, built to a 
tilt profile so that tilt could be retrofitted in the future.  What ever 
happened to this plan?

"News24"  wrote in message 
news:deqqia01n22@enews1.newsguy.com...

> This also reminds me of the alleged original plans for the Mk4, built to a 
> tilt profile so that tilt could be retrofitted in the future.  What ever 
> happened to this plan?


As with so many things, killed by cost. ISTR that the Class 91 refurbs have 
made it virtually impossible for tilt to be retro-fitted to them.

-- 
*** http://www.railwayscene.co.uk/ ***
Rich Mackin (rich-at-richmackin-co-uk)
MSN: richmackin-at-hotmail-dot-com

"News24"  wrote in message
news:deqqia01n22@enews1.newsguy.com...

> Following from the various "rumours" about 9 car Meridians ending up in
> North Wales, how easy/feasible is it for tilt packs to be fitted to enable
> them to use fast paths on the WCML?  After all, they are derivative of the
> 220/221 so I wouldn't have thought it was much beyond bogies, suspension,
> and of course the associated gubbins.
>
> This also reminds me of the alleged original plans for the Mk4, built to a
> tilt profile so that tilt could be retrofitted in the future.  What ever
> happened to this plan?
>

On more than one occasion tilt has been considered for the ECML, but there
was found to be no business case for it. It wouldn't save any time south of
Darlington, and the small amount saved further north no way justifies the
cost.

When the Mk4 sets were introduced on the ECML the BR plan was to follow this
with tilting Mk4 sets on the WCML, but this plan was overtaken by history.

Peter

"News24"  wrote in message
news:deqqia01n22@enews1.newsguy.com...

> Following from the various "rumours" about 9 car Meridians ending up in
> North Wales, how easy/feasible is it for tilt packs to be fitted to enable
> them to use fast paths on the WCML?  After all, they are derivative of the
> 220/221 so I wouldn't have thought it was much beyond bogies, suspension,
> and of course the associated gubbins.


I think it would be impossible - equipment in the Voyagers has been
installed in the roof and bulkheads etc to free space below the floor for
the tilt gear. As far as I know the Meridians have this stuff below the
floors, making the above-floor construction simpler.

Anyway - and I have pointed this out before - the 9-Car sets cab run in a
single path on the WCML, by cutting out some of the station stops south of
Crewe. This has been proved by Virgin to the satisfaction of Network Rail
(and therefore the SRA/DfT). They don't need tilt packs fitting.
When Virgin told me this I said "Presumably the trains would go via
Northampton to drop into a following path or something?" "No need" they
replied - they can do it anyway.
I think this is why the proposal to use them to Holyhead is gaining a tiny
bit of favour at the DfT - the practical excuses they inherited from the SRA
(rather than financial) all rested on the trains not being able to run in a
single path - this has been disproved conclusively.

TM

I did not think either existing class 91 or Mk.4 were ever seriously
considered for tilt retrofit.

IIRC any tilt fitted 91 or Mk.4 derivatives would have been to a new
build of revised design.

If VXC can't make a business case to add a 5th car to 4-car Voyagers -
a surely better case - then they won't make one for tilt, so it might
follow from that a tilt case for 222s is equally dodgy.

--
Nick

In article ,
News24  wrote:

>Following from the various "rumours" about 9 car Meridians ending up in 
>North Wales, how easy/feasible is it for tilt packs to be fitted to enable 
>them to use fast paths on the WCML?  After all, they are derivative of the 
>220/221 so I wouldn't have thought it was much beyond bogies, suspension, 
>and of course the associated gubbins.


Not possible. There's a lot of equipment which 220 and 221 have in
the bodyshell which in the 222 has been moved to the underside. There's
actually not that much common between the two designs.

-- 
Andy Breen ~ 	Not speaking on behalf of the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
		
		"Who dies with the most toys wins" (Gary Barnes)