What Kind of EMU Does Northern Need?

[tbtc]

Northern probably won't want extra 321s anyway as currently they are all Yorkshire based so until Manchester-Leeds electrification is complete so it would mean a micro fleet of 321s for the North West that's completely separate to the other small 32x fleet.

Although there will be additional electrification around Leeds (York, Selby) that may be completed before the full line from Leeds to Manchester is wired up.

 

[northwichcat]

Since this is a thread specifically about Northern, and that service is run by TPE then no, that wasn't what I suggested.

As I said earlier in this thread, the EMU requirements may well change in light of any franchise boundary changes - I wouldn't put 323s on the faster TPE routes, but they would be suited to the capacity required on the stoppers currently run by Northern.

While we don't know what will happen with the franchises we do know that Deansgate-Leyland electrification is set to be undertaken at the same time as Preston-Blackpool, meaning the latter should be completed slightly quicker. So if Manchester Airport-Blackpool were to get a different type of stock it might also be suitable for Liverpool-Blackpool, Man Vic-Blackpool or/and Hazel Grove-Preston - possibly with a different seating layout. Manchester Airport-Blackpool by itself is too small to justify a rolling stock order.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I've just noticed that Salwick (west of Preston) has only 3-car platforms.
Currently only Blackpool South services call there but if it is to have 4-car electric services it will need lengthening.
In Yorkshire, Marsden, Slaithwaite, Deighton, Cottingley and South Milford are only 3-car, so some work will be necessary if 4-car EMUs are used.

 

[northwichcat]

I've just noticed that Salwick (west of Preston) has only 3-car platforms.
Currently only Blackpool South services call there but if it is to have 4-car electric services it will need lengthening.
In Yorkshire, Marsden, Slaithwaite, Deighton, Cottingley and South Milford are only 3-car, so some work will be necessary if 4-car EMUs are used.

Given how low the usage at Salwick is currently I doubt any Manchester or Liverpool services will be made to do additional calls there.

I thought all stations on the Victoria-Huddersfield line will get platform lengthening to be able to take 4 carriages. The new bay platforms at Stalybridge will also be built to take 4 carriages.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I've just noticed that Salwick (west of Preston) has only 3-car platforms.

I believe half of the platform at Salwick is overgrown though - if the disused half could be cleared and have all necessary work done to bring it up to standard (coping stones etc) then it shouldn't be a huge problem. However as jcollins said I doubt the demand will ever be there to stop anything other than the Colne-Blackpool South loclas there - the majority of the passengers tend to go to Preston or Blackpool only.

 

[Oswyntail]

Would it not be sensible, rather than have the disruption and expense of platform lengthening at stations that don't need it, to have selective door opening as standard on all new build stock?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And who's going to pay for all that?
....

Isn't that what ROSCOs are for?

 

[northwichcat]

Would it not be sensible, rather than have the disruption and expense of platform lengthening at stations that don't need it, to have selective door opening as standard on all new build stock?

OK but then where are you going to send the 319s? They seem to be the cause of all the platform length concerns being 20m 4 carriage trains.

Maybe to Southern and Southeastern who can then cascade their dual voltage 37xs with SDO north?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Would it not be sensible, rather than have the disruption and expense of platform lengthening at stations that don't need it, to have selective door opening as standard on all new build stock?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Isn't that what ROSCOs are for?

Roscos might buy the trains, but only if they can pass the cost on to a TOC (and therefore on to the franchise bottom line).
The TOC has to get DfT clearance to acquire the trains from the Rosco (old or new).
Northern is one of the worst-performing franchises for subsidy (along with ATW and similar ex-Regional operators).
It has historically had little success in growing its fleet, with every handful of extra trains having to be fought for in association with the local PTEs.

It comes down to business case.
We are talking here about operational efficiency and optimum deployment, but the DfT will be talking lease costs, subsidy profile and fare levels, even for used class 319s.
That is why new trains will go to the Thames Valley and not elsewhere.
TPE-type services are a bit different because the subsidy profile is better and is improving rapidly.

Yet another view is that having made the decision to invest in electrification and the Northern Hub, it would be stupid to skimp on the trains running over the new infrastructure.
There's a lot to sort out!

 

[northwichcat]

Northern is one of the worst-performing franchises for subsidy (along with ATW and similar ex-Regional operators).

Bit of a misleading statement. Northern and London Midland are the only franchises to be paying back subsidies given to them. A number of operators are on revenue support from making less revenue than the terms the franchise were let on. Northern may have been let on high terms but an amount of that is being paid back, while other operators have got extra.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Bit of a misleading statement. Northern and London Midland are the only franchises to be paying back subsidies given to them. A number of operators are on revenue support from making less revenue than the terms the franchise were let on. Northern may have been let on high terms but an amount of that is being paid back, while other operators have got extra.

I wouldn't call these recent DfT figures misleading: http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/dft-business-plan-indicators-input-01/
Northern are way off the rest (ATW and Scotrail, which are excluded from this list, are nearly as bad).

 

[YorkshireBear]

But that is due to the geographical area. Not because Northern are performing badly as you put it. They are performing very well. Just that no Northern route is profitable, not their fault.

6 car 323 = 138
8 car 319 = 160.
That is only 22 metres difference. I imagine most stations could be made a little bit longer. Not only that, why can't we use SDO, it is not a new or difficult concept. Then we can have the large fleet of 319s and bobs your uncle...

 

[Greybeard33]

We will have to wait for the contracts to be signed to know for definite, but at the moment its 4-car 319s for Northern with 4-car 317s still being considered to filling the gap between the wires being switched on and the 319s becoming available.

I understand there are some 317s currently in storage, so is there any good logistical/operational (as opposed to commercial/contractual) reason why Northern could not have a few of them now? They could avoid the need for DMUs routinely to work some of the Manchester - Alderley Edge/Crewe/Macclesfield diagrams for lack of 323s. This would also enable train crew and maintenance staff familiarisation with 317s in advance of switch-on of the new wires. The DMUs could be redeployed to strengthen other services.

From a passenger and environmental perspective, it seems to me to make no sense to have 142s, 150s and 156s operating services that are entirely under the wires, when there are EMUs sitting idle in another part of the country.

 

[northwichcat]

I wouldn't call these recent DfT figures misleading: http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/dft-business-plan-indicators-input-01/
Northern are way off the rest (ATW and Scotrail, which are excluded from this list, are nearly as bad).

I said it was misleading because you said Northern are one of the worst performing for subsidies, not one of the highest subsidies. It's not the same thing. Likewise, the worst performing operator is the one that has the highest level of delays and cancellations not the one that runs the least services to start with.

Like I said Northern are performing above their target. The DfT shows Virgin as paying one of the highest premiums but Virgin are actually performing very poorly and paying a much lower premium than the terms the franchise were let on.

Scotrail are much worse than Northern for needing government support - they get over 20p per mile subsidy and a high network grant. So, no ATW and Scotrail aren't nearly as bad - Scotrail are a lot worst. I haven't ever seen the ATW figures but I would imagine it's worst than Northern given the ridiculous level of funding for the WAG express.

 

[87015]

I said it was misleading because you said Northern are one of the worst performing for subsidies, not one of the highest subsidies. It's not the same thing. Likewise, the worst performing operator is the one that has the highest level of delays and cancellations not the one that runs the least services to start with.

If Northern are above their targets (ie in some form of revenue share with DfT?) it seems off that the overall subsidy per passenger mile has gone up from 2010/11 to 2011/12? Or was that always the plan (which looks most odd)?

 

[northwichcat]

I understand there are some 317s currently in storage, so is there any good logistical/operational (as opposed to commercial/contractual) reason why Northern could not have a few of them now?

Simple answer is Northern aren't interested because it would be the Dec 2014 timetable change before they'd all be in operation and the franchise ends in April 2014.

I believe two of the 317s in store are being refurbished to two different DDA complaint standards and then going to be used as spot hire units.

 

[HSTEd]

One of said units is also being used as the testbed for a proposal to refit all the Mark 3 derived EMUs with new traction packages.

 

[northwichcat]

If Northern are above their targets (ie in some form of revenue share with DfT?) it seems off that the overall subsidy per passenger mile has gone up from 2010/11 to 2011/12? Or was that always the plan (which looks most odd)?

I understand the terms of the franchise are for a subsidy of around 8p per passenger mile but a 33% increase in patronage brought that down to around 5p per passenger mile and it's gone up but still not as high as the terms the franchise was let on.

 

[tbtc]

While we don't know what will happen with the franchises we do know that Deansgate-Leyland electrification is set to be undertaken at the same time as Preston-Blackpool, meaning the latter should be completed slightly quicker. So if Manchester Airport-Blackpool were to get a different type of stock it might also be suitable for Liverpool-Blackpool, Man Vic-Blackpool or/and Hazel Grove-Preston - possibly with a different seating layout. Manchester Airport-Blackpool by itself is too small to justify a rolling stock order.

If we are talking about EMUs for all of the electrified lines in northern England then we are going to come up with a very different answer than "what kind of EMUs does Northern need".

Northern have no First Class, few tables, 3+2 seating, plenty of slow stopping services... so most EMUs would be suitable.

If the question is expanded to include the fast limited stop longer distance services that TPE have got (which currently have some of the "luxuries" mentioned above) then there's a whole separate class potentially required for routes like Liverpool - Newcastle, which is a whole other argument (though certainly a lot more than just Manchester Airport - Blackpool).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I understand there are some 317s currently in storage, so is there any good logistical/operational (as opposed to commercial/contractual) reason why Northern could not have a few of them now?

Because they can't afford them.
I'm not at all saying Northern are performing badly as a TOC, just that the total subsidy level (by route, passenger or whatever basis) is very high.
The DfT is not going to willingly increase the subsidy levels by throwing a lot of extra stock (new or old) at the franchise.

Keeping them in store is also a way of DfT reminding the Roscos that they have to work to get a lease renewal (refurbishment etc).
And dare I mention the word McNulty?
Some big cost reductions are needed in franchises like Northern (we are back to subsidy).

 

[IanXC]

Because they can't afford them....

And dare I mention the word McNulty?
Some big cost reductions are needed in franchises like Northern (we are back to subsidy).

And/or some significant increases in revenue (see Northern's increasing appearances in Fares Ticketing and Routeing).

 

[Greybeard33]

Because they can't afford them.
I'm not at all saying Northern are performing badly as a TOC, just that the total subsidy level (by route, passenger or whatever basis) is very high.
The DfT is not going to willingly increase the subsidy levels by throwing a lot of extra stock (new or old) at the franchise.

Keeping them in store is also a way of DfT reminding the Roscos that they have to work to get a lease renewal (refurbishment etc).
And dare I mention the word McNulty?
Some big cost reductions are needed in franchises like Northern (we are back to subsidy).

So are you saying that an old DMU is really cheaper to operate on an electrified line than an even older EMU? If so where is the business case for more electrification? Or is this actually the artificial economics of the franchising and rolling stock leasing systems?

 

[YorkshireBear]

So are you saying that an old DMU is really cheaper to operate on an electrified line than an even older EMU? If so where is the business case for more electrification? Or is this actually the artificial economics of the franchising and rolling stock leasing systems?

The buisness case lies in that these old DMUS will not meet DDA requirements soon! And then we will be in trouble if we don't have any replacement.

 

[tbtc]

So are you saying that an old DMU is really cheaper to operate on an electrified line than an even older EMU? If so where is the business case for more electrification? Or is this actually the artificial economics of the franchising and rolling stock leasing systems?

At the moment it's a lot cheaper to lease a thirty metre Pacer than it is to lease an eighty metre EMU from the ROSCO

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Replacing DMUs with EMUs gives you a cheaper railway (assuming you don't end up with a zoo of different types like the current DMU fleet).
It also future-proofs the operation (no more DMUs to buy).
I'm sure there will be an increase in capacity overall.
But where it seems to go haywire is assuming that all trains will be 4-car, as this would increase the fleet cost more than the saving you have made by going electric.
I suspect someone somewhere is expecting frequencies to fall to keep the fleet size within bounds.
I don't have the answers.
It's just that I think the next franchise spec will be a difficult juggling act to deliver the benefits within the cost bounds the DfTis likely to set.

Adding the TPE services into the mix just makes it harder.
319s Liverpool-Newcastle anybody (with 2+2, aircon, first class, catering etc)?
It's not much further than Bedford-Brighton.

 

[Greybeard33]

At the moment it's a lot cheaper to lease a thirty metre Pacer than it is to lease an eighty metre EMU from the ROSCO

That's what I meant by artificial economics. I suspect that if a single (commercially driven) company owned both the infrastructure and the rolling stock, they would find it cheaper to run the 317, even with plenty of empty seats off-peak, and leave the 142 parked. I am sure they would not form the 0806 Macclesfield to Piccadilly from 2x142, as happens at the moment, if they had a 317 sitting in a siding.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I'm not sure why people are talking about TPE getting 319s. As I understand it they are due to get 350s for the Manchester-Scotland initially and then get new EMUs later (presumably in time for the Manchester-Leeds electrification) in addition to, and to replace, the 350s.

 

[northwichcat]

If we are talking about EMUs for all of the electrified lines in northern England then we are going to come up with a very different answer than "what kind of EMUs does Northern need".

I really don't think you can look at Northern in isolation. The 319s will provide more additional units than Northern will require but won't be enough to allow Northern to have 319s as their only EMU.

There have been suggestions that Manchester Airport to Liverpool services may get First Class seating - the Airport are apparently wanting more trains that serve the Airport to have First Class to encourage more business travellers to use public transport.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not sure why people are talking about TPE getting 319s. As I understand it they are due to get 350s for the Manchester-Scotland initially and then get new EMUs later (presumably in time for the Manchester-Leeds electrification) in addition to, and to replace, the 350s.

Nothings been confirmed for North TPE and I imagine it'll partly depend on whether the commuter IEP option is taken up which may replace some of the 350s and 365s.

Also the TPE routes may be split between different franchises. One option that's been looked at is for the East Coast or Cross Country franchise to include some TPE routes and for others to go in to other franchises which could include South TPE in to EMT, Blackpool in to Northern and Scottish services in to Virgin or LM. If that happens I can't see one new rolling stock fits all.

 

[sprinterguy]

I really don't think you can look at Northern in isolation. The 319s will provide more additional units than Northern will require but won't be enough to allow Northern to have 319s as their only EMU.

There have been suggestions that Manchester Airport to Liverpool services may get First Class seating - the Airport are apparently wanting more trains that serve the Airport to have First Class to encourage more business travellers to use public transport.

If the 319 fleet ends up being split roughly equally between Northern and Great Western, then it is likely that one TOC is going to have to have a mixed fleet that includes the 319/1s as well as some of the 319/0s. If Northern deem it necessary or desirable to have first class accommodation on routes such as Manchester Airport to Liverpool and Manchester to Blackpool, then it could make sense for Northern to take on the mixed fleet and set up one sub-class with first class seating, and the other all standard class. Although given Northern's present regular practice of seemingly assigning units randomly to services (Due to diagrams being "stepped up", trains failing, etc) I wouldn't hold out much hope of Northern succeeding in assigning appropriate units to the correct routes.

 

[northwichcat]

Although given Northern's present regular practice of seemingly assigning units randomly to services (Due to diagrams being "stepped up", trains failing, etc) I wouldn't hold out much hope of Northern succeeding in assigning appropriate units to the correct routes.

When we're talking about what fleet Northern will have post-April 2014 we're really talking about the Northern franchise and not specifically Northern Rail. It may be a First, Stagecoach, Arriva, Go Ahead etc. franchise by that time who manage things differently.

I wouldn't hold out much hope of Northern succeeding in assigning appropriate units to the correct routes.

Really for that to happen Northern need more 3 car DMUs. Too many services have seen 'upgrades' from single Sprinters to doubled up Pacers when really a 3 car 172 or equivalent would be better suited and be cheaper to run.

 

[sprinterguy]

When we're talking about what fleet Northern will have post-April 2014 we're really talking about the Northern franchise and not specifically Northern Rail. It may be a First, Stagecoach, Arriva, Go Ahead etc. franchise by that time who manage things differently.

Though not neccessarily for the better. I am, on the whole, in support of the present Serco-Abellio operation. I am not sure that any other operator would be any more effective in controlling unit diagrams given Northern's raggle-taggle array of ageing rolling stock. Improvements in adhering to the rostered diagrams in the future might come about as a product of the electrification programme (With diesel units concentrated over fewer routes) rather than through the management processes of the incumbent operator.