Future of the Intercity 125s

[Kali]

There used to be another route to Newton Abbot, but that is rather unavailable now... practically all of the abandoned route between Okehampton & Tavistock is still doing nothing too, although that is also somewhat tilting train territory and at first glance looks rather a long way round.

If Exeter gets wired, so should Plymouth, IMO - with the slow decline in the major employer it does not deserve to be isolated any more than it is. Whether you built a new route in part or full to take the wires I think should be the argument.

 

[Zoe]

The lack of Motorway is more to do with the Terrain west of Exeter, it would be hard to build the motorway through the hills west of Exeter while keeping gradients and curves within motorway limits. By building as the A38 they could hug the terrain more and go over the hills...

The A38(T) never seems to be that busy though so even if a motorway was possible there may well not be demand for it if the destination for most traffic on the M5 is Exeter. What's more strange is that even though Exeter justifies a 6 lane motorway from the Midlands, there isn't even a continuous dual carriageway direct from London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There used to be another route to Newton Abbot, but that is rather unavailable now...

It was not built to main line standards and would be very slow even if the alignment was available. The GWR did propose a main line inland route avoiding Dawlish in the 1930s but this was never built. This could be seen as a good thing by some as had the inland route been built, Beeching may have ended up closing the route via Dawlish which would have left Dalwish and Teignmouth without a railway.

 

[starrymarkb]

The A38(T) never seems to be that busy though so even if a motorway was possible there may well not be demand for it if the destination for most traffic on the M5 is Exeter. What's more strange is that even though Exeter justifies a 6 lane motorway from the Midlands, there isn't even a continuous dual carriageway direct from London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also there is about a 60/40 split in terms of traffic at the A30 junction (about 40% heads for the A30 to go to Cornwall) and then again a large chunk of traffic heads for Torbay at the A380 split

Which reminds me I need to find this pub in Kingskerswell tonight before I hit the A380

 

[Goatboy]

The lack of Motorway is more to do with the Terrain west of Exeter, it would be hard to build the motorway through the hills west of Exeter while keeping gradients and curves within motorway limits. By building as the A38 they could hug the terrain more and go over the hills...

Quite but its as much about perception as it is reality. I don't have too many problems with the A38 and would advocate that upgrading it to Motorway standards is a waste of money but people CONSTANTLY refer to the lack of a Motorway link as a downside to Plymouth. It puts business off and it puts people off. It shouldn't, but it does. This is a city which needs all the help it can get because the longterm future of its major employer is far from stable.

Withdrawing direct trains and stopping the wires at Exeter further hammers home the point that Exeter is where its at and Plymouth is closed for business in the South West.

The city doesn't need any more perceived isolation.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

As I understand it, the bodywork could keep going until then (if you throw enough money at them), but then the same could presumably be said of some other classes.

The earlier aluminium bodied stock is a "known unknown" so which stock is that? Aluminium fatigues in a different way from steel.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

COULD, my last car could have kept going for several years (as there was no rust), but by the time I'd have paid to have new cam belt fitted, fixed the suspension and got new tyres for it, it wasn't much cheaper to get a replacement which didn't have all the other minor faults that my old car had.

That is the problem as after 2017 that only leaves up to 18 years of life in the HST's, however long before we reach that end date there will be several which are no longer viable to run and they will all need a fairly expensive overhaul at some point in that time frame.

Sounds like those Bombardier TRAXX locos with four diesel engines might be a good investment next time the HST power cars come up for major work. And the TRAXX electric ones too, to replace classes 90 and 91 if they start to look as if the next round of repairs will be too costly.

 

[Xavi]

Few points for clarity:

Never suggested electrification should stop at Exeter, just that it's most likely CP6 end of wires. So could be bi-mode west from there and later Cornwall only as the wires later go further west. No way should through trains to Plymouth and beyond cease.

Plymouth may have largest population west of Bristol, but Exeter has largest hinterland, hence it's always been a larger centre of private commerce, greater GDP per capita, higher retail sales (now actual as well as per capita) etc

Won't be enough double 222s available to give necessary capacity to Devon & Cornwall. So probably HSTs until IEPs... though loco with change at Exeter, or later Plymouth would be best.

 

[The Ham]

Won't be enough double 222s available to give necessary capacity to Devon & Cornwall. So probably HSTs until IEPs... though loco with change at Exeter, or later Plymouth would be best.

There are currently
6 x 7 coach 222's
17 x 5 coach 222's
4 x 4 coach 222's

Running doubled up as 2x5 coach (8 sets), or 4 coach plus 7 coach (4 sets) that is 12 trains (with a spare 5 coach 222 and 2 spare 7 coaches 222's), compare this to the 16 long distance HST's (8 coaches) and you are only 4 sets short.

However if you used single 222's, because of the lighter loadings west of Plymouth, and you could have enough trains to run a decent service with single 5 or (ideally) 7 coach services in Cornwall. That would give you a 5 coach 222 with 192 standard class seats and 50 first class (242 total) or a 7 coach 222 with quite a few more seats than that.

If you reformed the lengths you could have; 7 x 7 coach, 14 x5 coach and 7 x 4 coach giving you 2x5 coach (7 sets) and 4 coach plus 7 coach (7 sets) which is a total of 14 sets (only 2 sets short) without using the trains in single formation.

 

[Eagle]

Quite but its as much about perception as it is reality. I don't have too many problems with the A38 and would advocate that upgrading it to Motorway standards is a waste of money but people CONSTANTLY refer to the lack of a Motorway link as a downside to Plymouth.

There are several other larger urban areas without motorways: SE Dorset, the Sussex coast, Teesside, Southend/Basildon... and yet you don't hear people saying the same about those.

I think it's not so much the lack of a motorway as the long distance from one (40 miles or thereabouts).

 

[JamesRowden]

So that you can see that there are more than enough 222s for Paddington to Penzance services I have attached an editted version of my original post (takes account of more up to date 222 set data):

After looking at the present Paddington-Plymouth-(Penzance) service I have come up with a service pattern that could replace all of the remaining HSTs (after introduction of IEP) on the line with the 222s that would come from Midland Mainline Electrification.

Present off-peak service:
1tph Paddington-Plymouth-(Penzance[1tp2h]) (Fast) (HST)
1tp2h Paddington-Taunton (Semi-Fast) (HST)

Present peak service:
1tph Paddington-Plymouth-(Penzance[1tp2h]) (Fast) (HST)
1tph Paddinton-(Exeter/Paignton) (Semi-Fast) (HST)

My idea for the service pattern (all day):
1tph Paddington-Exeter (semi-fast) (IEP)
1tph Paddington-Plymouth(Train splits)-Penzance (Fast) (222)

Present Journey Times
Paddington-Penzance (5h05m-5h36m)
Plymouth-Penzance (1h56m-2h00m)

Required Stock (in service at peak)
I think that the average of 24-55 minutes (plus any time saved through automatic doors and greater acceleration [when compared to HSTs] minus time taken to split/join sets at Plymouth) to be spent at a terminus might be just enough to clean the train and maintain robustness of the timetable. This would mean that there would be 12 trains at any time operating this service. The present journey time between Plymouth and Penzance of exactly or just under 2 hours fits splitting trains at Plymouth perfectly. If the 5-car 222s were to be used for all services, the required number would be:

A X B - C X D = 2 X 12 - 1 X 4 = 24 - 4 = 20

A = Number of sets per train Paddington-Plymouth
B = Number of trains on service
C = Number of sets detached at Plymouth per train
D = Number of trains on these services between Plymouth and Penzance

tbtc told us that 20 4-car 222s and 7 9-car 222s would become avaliable. I have looked on wikipedia (looked at data on this thread) which states that the sets have been altered so that some 4-car sets are now 5-car and the 9-car sets are now all 7-car (apart from 1 that is now. Three of the 7-car 222s could be put onto the service connected to a 4-car to account for peak demand between Reading and Paddington. A 5-car set could be partnered with another 5-car set to produce a mixture of 10-car and 11-car services between Paddington and Plymouth.

The length of the services would be:

10-car 9 services
11-car 3 services

Out of all the 222 sets the following quanties would be in operation:

4-car: 3 out of 4
5-car: 14 out of 17
7-car: 3 out of 6

These results show that the HSTs could be replaced by the 222s with there being enough spare sets to account for maintainance/breakdowns. Also the services that I have described will have more seats (between Paddington and Plymouth) than the present 8 carriage HST sets. Due to being MUs they will also be able to make more efficient use of any short platforms.

One or two of the 7-car sets that are clearly not needed in my service pattern could be used to take the place of a 5-car set to create a 12-car train in addition to the 11-car trains in my service pattern.

Another possibility is that the frequency between Plymouth and Paddington could be increased to 2tph (in addition to the semi-fast IEP) following this pattern:

1 tph Paddington-Plymouth (fast) (8 X B)
1 tph Paddington-Plymouth-Penzance (fast) (5 X C, 1 X AA, 6 X B)
x tph Paddington-Exeter (semi-fast) (IEP)

Where:

AA = Two 4-car 222s coupled together
B = 5-car 222
C = 7-car 222

This would use:

4-car 222s: 2 of 4
5-car 222s: 14 of 17
7-car 222s: 5 of 6

Spare 4-car or 5-car sets could be used to lengthen servcies during the peak.

 

[IanXC]

If the proposed CP5 electrification goes ahead and the obvious XC infills are electrfied early in CP6:

Birmingham-Derby
Sheffield-Doncaster
Sheffield-Leeds-York

Then I think that across the national network we already have enough 125mph DMUs to replace all of the HSTs (discounting those replaced by IEP and other EMUs) and enough to run all of the remaining services that reqiure such stock.

The Yorkshire element of this isn't even that far! Of Sheffield-Leeds-York, Wakefield-Leeds is already wired, Leeds-York will be done as part of TP North electrification so all that would be required is Sheffield-Wakefield.

 

[Eagle]

The Yorkshire element of this isn't even that far! Of Sheffield-Leeds-York, Wakefield-Leeds is already wired, Leeds-York will be done as part of TP North electrification so all that would be required is Sheffield-Wakefield.

Of which half is shared with Sheffield–Doncaster.

 

[Goatboy]

There are several other larger urban areas without motorways: SE Dorset, the Sussex coast, Teesside, Southend/Basildon... and yet you don't hear people saying the same about those.

I think it's not so much the lack of a motorway as the long distance from one (40 miles or thereabouts).

Not many of those areas are, as you identify, 40+ miles from anything though. Bournemouth is only just off the end of the M27 and is close to other major population centres, for example.

Don't get me wrong - I don't actually think the lack of a motorway to Plymouth is an issue - but the perception is that it is, and its perception not reality that drives opinion.

 

[starrymarkb]

Not many of those areas are, as you identify, 40+ miles from anything though. Bournemouth is only just off the end of the M27 and is close to other major population centres, for example.

Don't get me wrong - I don't actually think the lack of a motorway to Plymouth is an issue - but the perception is that it is, and its perception not reality that drives opinion.

Plymouth is the most remote major city in England - its 50 miles to Exeter and 120 miles to Bristol!

 

[Zoe]

Plymouth is the most remote major city in England - its 50 miles to Exeter and 120 miles to Bristol!

It's only 50 miles by rail, it's shorter direct. Do Exeter and Plymouth count as major cities? Neither of them are on the scale of Birmingham or Manchester.

 

[sprinterguy]

It's only 50 miles by rail, it's shorter direct.

Even by the most direct route by road over Dartmoor it is still over forty miles between the two, and via the quickest route, the A38, closer to 45 miles.

Do Exeter and Plymouth count as major cities? Neither of them are on the scale of Birmingham or Manchester.

Given the low population density of the surrounding area then by comparison they do count as major cities, proportional to the total population of the area. They're the commercial centres for a large area. Devon and Cornwall don't have a city the size of Manchester or Birmingham anywhere in the vicinity so attempting to compare the two seems a bit pointless as Exeter and Plymouth are still the largest conurbations for many miles.

 

[Zoe]

Given the low population density of the surrounding area then by comparison they do count as major cities, proportional to the total population of the area. Devon and Cornwall don't have a city the size of Manchester or Birmingham anywhere in the vicinity so attempting to compare the two seems a bit pointless as Exeter and Plymouth are still the largest conurbations for many miles.

But the Torbay conubration is around the size of Exeter and I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that is a major city other than the fact that it doesn't even have city status. There is no doubt that they are large populations centres relative to the area they are in but the above post suggseted that Plymouth was the most remote "major city" so it would seem that it actually was getting compared to other "major cities" around the country. Places like Birmngham and Manchester have higher populations and so there is more demand for improved road and rail links. The demand from Plymouth is not the same. As I have said, the A38(T) is never that busy and trains that start from Plymouth never seem to be that full.

 

[Goatboy]

trains that start from Plymouth never seem to be that full.

When was the last time you caught a weekday evening XC? Some time ago I'd imagine. The 16:25 particularly fills at Plymouth - several times it's been standing room only on departure and if you are booking less than 4-5 days in advance there are no remaining seat reservations. Many of the Paddington trains that start at Plymouth are also very busy.

It is a city with a population of 250,000. You don't need to have a million people to be classed as a major city - the UK has very few cities with that level of population anyway. 250k in a city in the UK is reasonably large - large enough to have the expectation of half decent transport links and direct trains to other parts of the UK.

Infact the only cities larger than Plymouth and south of Coventry are Bristol, Cardiff and London!

 

[The Ham]

Infact the only cities larger than Plymouth and south of Coventry are Bristol, Cardiff and London!

The thing is all the cities listed have large urban or semi urban populations in close proximity to them (Bristol with Avonmouth, Yate etc. Cardiff with the valleys and London with the many many towns around it). Whilst Plymouth only has Saltash and Ivybridge of any noticeable size close by.

Also you have to be careful with populations, for Instance Reading Borough Council's population is about 155,000, but if you include the urban area around it (including Wokingham) the populations grows to nearly 370,000.

Likewise the population of Aldershot is about 34,000 but if you include it's urban area it is nearly 250,000.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

FYI (so you missed a few like Portsmouth & Southampton):
from http://www.citypopulation.de/UK-UA.html

Name Adm. UA C 2001
i London ENG 8,278,251
i Birmingham ENG 2,284,093
i Manchester ENG 2,244,931
i Leeds ENG 1,499,465
i Glasgow SCO 1,168,270
i Newcastle upon Tyne ENG 879,996
i Liverpool ENG 816,216
i Nottingham ENG 666,358
i Sheffield ENG 640,720
i Belfast NIR 579,276
i Bristol ENG 551,066
i Brighton ENG 461,181
i Edinburgh SCO 452,194
i Portsmouth ENG 442,252
i Leicester ENG 441,213
i Bournemouth ENG 383,713
i Reading ENG 369,804
i Middlesbrough ENG 365,323
i Stoke-on-Trent ENG 362,403
i Coventry ENG 336,452
i Cardiff WAL 327,706
i Birkenhead ENG 319,675
i Southampton ENG 304,400
i Kingston upon Hull ENG 301,416
i Swansea WAL 270,506
i Southend-on-Sea ENG 269,415
i Preston ENG 264,601
i Blackpool ENG 261,088
i Plymouth ENG 243,795
i Aldershot ENG 243,344

 

[Goatboy]

I was purely comparing the city 'proper'.

But even in your list the fact it's even there means it isn't some sort of backwater. I don't see Exeter in the list...

It's certainly large enough that removing its direct services to the rest of the country would be a political hot potato, which is my point.

 

[sprinterguy]

But the Torbay conubration is around the size of Exeter and I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that is a major city other than the fact that it doesn't even have city status. There is no doubt that they are large populations centres relative to the area they are in but the above post suggseted that Plymouth was the most remote "major city" so it would seem that it actually was getting compared to other "major cities" around the country.

That's because the Torbay conurbation is, by and large, subsidiary to Exeter. It doesn't have a commercial and economic "focus" in the same way as cities such as Exeter or Plymouth do, as it is largely a linear collection of residential areas.

Similar can be said for Aldershot, as despite it's urban area holding a population similar to that of Plymouth, it is still subsidiary to the far larger mass of London so does not have the commercial focus of a city.

Exeter and Plymouth are very much out on their own, so there is very little economic draw exercised upon them while their own sphere of influence is dominant over a large area.

Places like Birmngham and Manchester have higher populations and so there is more demand for improved road and rail links. The demand from Plymouth is not the same. As I have said, the A38(T) is never that busy and trains that start from Plymouth never seem to be that full.

So because Plymouth is not as large as Birmingham or Manchester then it should lose out on direct rail services to the capital, or other investments in transport infrastructure, despite being the dominant sphere of influence for the South West region? If you were to compare like for like to take into account the comparative populations of the West Midlands area surrounding Birmingham and the South West area surrounding Plymouth (A half and half split of Devon and Cornwall I suppose, divided by the Tamar up the middle), then I wouldn't be surprised to see similarly sized levels of attraction, per head of population, for each.

Is it not more useful to consider how important a city is to it's surrounding region and the size of it's influence on this area in commercial and economic terms than an arbritrary consideration of population size (Within reason)?

 

[Zoe]

So because Plymouth is not as large as Birmingham or Manchester then it should lose out on direct rail services to the capital, or other investments in transport infrastructure, despite being the dominant sphere of influence for the South West region?

Is it really the dominant sphere of influence in the South West though? Plymouth was important due to the naval base but as time goes on this is becoming less significant and these days Exeter may well be considered the city with the most influence. If a company is planning to relocate from the South East and they had the choice of Exeter or Plymouth I expect that they would choose Exeter.

 

[The Ham]

I was purely comparing the city 'proper'.

But even in your list the fact it's even there means it isn't some sort of backwater. I don't see Exeter in the list...

It's certainly large enough that removing its direct services to the rest of the country would be a political hot potato, which is my point.

I have never said that it should have it's direct service cut, rather that it should be run by 222's between the IC125's and whenever bi-model trains are cleared to there and/or when it is joined to the electric network.

 

[monsento]

Hello all

Why not leave everything as it is and replace the east coast mainline fleet first and cascade down the electric high speed trains to the great western?

 

[Manchester77]

Hello all

Why not leave everything as it is and replace the east coast mainline fleet first and cascade down the electric high speed trains to the great western?

54 HST sets are operated by FGW
There are 30 IC225 sets available

Also the whole route won't be electric

 

[Kali]

I would be quite interested in seeing the comparitive sizes of the Plymouth & Exeter commuting areas - I'm 35 miles away from Exeter and it's still "my city" and there's a fair local population who commute there, just as it was when I lived in Tiverton ( 15 miles ).

Either way it's not like I study the local economy much, but I've always seen it as an East Devon/West Devon split - Plymouth might as well be in Cornwall for all it affects us.

 

[AndyLandy]

Hello all

Why not leave everything as it is and replace the east coast mainline fleet first and cascade down the electric high speed trains to the great western?

I don't really see how that would help anything. The IC225 sets would need to be replaced by new electric trains (most likely IEPs) and could only be cascaded to already fully-electrified routes. So why not just put the new electric IEPs straight on to the fully-electrified GWML routes.

In short, IC225s are of no use whatsoever to the GWML. About the only thing I can think of for them (other than seeing out their entire life on the ECML) is to do the GEML Intercity services to replace the 90s and Mk3s, but even that's of limited benefit.

 

[tbtc]

Does it really matter whether Exeter or Plymouth is bigger? What matters is the train demand, surely.

 

[Manchester77]

I don't really see how that would help anything. The IC225 sets would need to be replaced by new electric trains (most likely IEPs) and could only be cascaded to already fully-electrified routes. So why not just put the new electric IEPs straight on to the fully-electrified GWML routes.

In short, IC225s are of no use whatsoever to the GWML. About the only thing I can think of for them (other than seeing out their entire life on the ECML) is to do the GEML Intercity services to replace the 90s and Mk3s, but even that's of limited benefit.

Yes it would be odd having 140 mph trains on a line where the maximum speed is 100 mph

 

[tbtc]

IC225s are of no use whatsoever to the GWML. About the only thing I can think of for them (other than seeing out their entire life on the ECML) is to do the GEML Intercity services to replace the 90s and Mk3s, but even that's of limited benefit.

Sadly there wouldn't be enough for this and the MML

 

[AndyLandy]

Yes it would be odd having 140 mph trains on a line where the maximum speed is 100 mph

In the same way that it's odd having 140mph trains on lines where the maximum speed is 125mph?

Sad as it may be, I wouldn't be surprised if we see the IC225 sets retired without ever passing 125mph in service.

But seriously, I think the IC225 sets should live out their entire life on the ECML. If for some reason we replace them with IEP before they're life-expired, the best (of a bad bunch) use for them that I can think of is to replace the 90s and Mk3s on the GEML. Having 125mph-capable trains might encourage some line speed improvement works. I understand there are already some small sections of 105-110mph running, now that 110mph-capable 90s are running the line.

Sadly there wouldn't be enough for this and the MML

The MML? I thought that electrifying that would mean IEPs for it. Buying IEPs for ECML, only to move the IC225s to the MML seems a bit pointless to me. It's no better than the earlier suggestion of putting them on the GWML.