If you could replace all of Northern's stock with a single type of DMU...?

[The Ham]

Do you really see any TOC wanting to use 185's on local or shortish distance semi-fast services ? In their present form, they are far too fuel-hungry for such services. So, do you replace the engines with lower power alternatives, or remove the engine from the centre coach ?.

Or would a better alternative be a multi-operator swap, with the 185's being sent to somewhere like Waterloo - Exeter ?

SWT wouldn't like that as the 185's would have about 26 seats per 3 coach set less than the 159's which wouldn't go down well. However it would mean a more standardised fleet as most of their trains would then be Siemens Desiro trains.

 

[tbtc]

Given that the 158/159s run in triple formation into Waterloo, I can't see any advantage of using non-corridor stock (esp with fewer seats)

 

[Anon Mouse]

Bring back the 141's from Iran.....or class 139.........I'll get my coat

Seriously I would say more 158's, 165's, 166's or 170's. Ditch the 1st class though!!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Or would a better alternative be a multi-operator swap, with the 185's being sent to somewhere like Waterloo - Exeter ?

Why not stay with the oft-quoted vision of keeping all the Class 185 as strengthened formations on the services that will not see the benefit of electrification that currently run to Hull, Scarborough and Cleethorpes, with the Class 170 units finding other routes where they would enhance those services.

 

[tbtc]

Why not stay with the oft-quoted vision of keeping all the Class 185 as strengthened formations on the services that will not see the benefit of electrification that currently run to Hull, Scarborough and Cleethorpes, with the Class 170 units finding other routes where they would enhance those services.

My understanding is that Scarborough's link to Leeds will be an extension of the Blackpool North - York service (cutting its Manchester/ Liverpool link) and that CP6 may well see Hull being wired as an extension of electrification to Selby.

No prospect of electrification to the "South TPE" service, of course.

 

[northwichcat]

and that CP6 may well see Hull being wired as an extension of electrification to Selby.

No prospect of electrification to the "South TPE" service, of course.

If you're bringing up CP6 then Hazel Grove-Doncaster is a possibility as it's came up in the electrification RUS and wasn't dismissed.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Would not CP6 be in a time period somewhat too removed in time with regard to the wording of this current thread ?

 

[Aictos]

In a perfect world, new built 3 coach Class 172s would be used to replace the entire Northern Class 14x fleets - simple

 

[D365]

In a perfect world, new built 3 coach Class 172s would be used to replace the entire Northern Class 14x fleets - simple

In a perfect world we would have HSTed volunteer to personally complete the reported £18bn British rail electrification, including wires on Southern territory while the 3rd is live, and RAGNARØKR to handcraft Mk5 coaching stock hauled by EuroSprinters (Taurus).

 

[Aictos]

In a perfect world we would have HSTed volunteer to personally complete the reported £18bn British rail electrification, including wires on Southern territory while the 3rd is live, and RAGNARØKR to handcraft Mk5 coaching stock hauled by EuroSprinters (Taurus).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

In a perfect world, new built 3 coach Class 172s would be used to replace the entire Northern Class 14x fleets - simple

That'd be the obvious answer, but not every service requires 3 cars, so you'd need to retain some sprinters to avoid overcapacity on those services. Additionally, a 3 car 172 running Leeds-Bradford-Manchester would need a more high-density setup than one on Leeds-Carlisle, so you'd still be needing sub-classes.

 

[LE Greys]

That'd be the obvious answer, but not every service requires 3 cars, so you'd need to retain some sprinters to avoid overcapacity on those services. Additionally, a 3 car 172 running Leeds-Bradford-Manchester would need a more high-density setup than one on Leeds-Carlisle, so you'd still be needing sub-classes.

2-car 172s with corridor connections would make sense (the 3-car ones should have them as well). Whether single-car 172s are worth having is another matter.

 

[Class172]

Having a single car DMU is not really feasible now, for by the time you have allocated space to the cabs, vestibules and disabled toilet, you're not going to be left with much room for actual seating.

 

[Oswyntail]

Having a single car DMU is not really feasible now, for by the time you have allocated space to the cabs, vestibules and disabled toilet, you're not going to be left with much room for actual seating.

Would a single car designed simply for strengthening services be feasible? Say one with "just enough" power and a simplified cab incorporated into a vestibule area, without any toilet, but seating matching the local quality. Only used to strengthen a 2- to 3- car unit for the peaks, rather than running services on its own.

 

[Anon Mouse]

Would a single car designed simply for strengthening services be feasible? Say one with "just enough" power and a simplified cab incorporated into a vestibule area, without any toilet, but seating matching the local quality. Only used to strengthen a 2- to 3- car unit for the peaks, rather than running services on its own.

Like a 139 that can have compatable couplings?

IMO if a TOC had a 1 car unit to that speciafication I suspect it would be used as a single car pretty often rather than just to strengthen services!

 

[The Ham]

Would a single car designed simply for strengthening services be feasible? Say one with "just enough" power and a simplified cab incorporated into a vestibule area, without any toilet, but seating matching the local quality. Only used to strengthen a 2- to 3- car unit for the peaks, rather than running services on its own.

Or just do away with single car trains all together and replace them all with 2 car trains, replace all the existing 2 cars with 3 car trains and replace all the 3 car trains with an addition 25% 3 car trains than at present. That way there will be plenty of spare capacity for future growth.

It would however mean that the current 1 car trains would be running at a greater loss or a smaller profit, but that could be overcome by adjusting the fares to attract more people to the railways on those services.

 

[tbtc]

Having a single car DMU is not really feasible now, for by the time you have allocated space to the cabs, vestibules and disabled toilet, you're not going to be left with much room for actual seating.

True - plus how many lines only need a single coach train nowadays?

The Barton Branch gets one (and seems to cope okay), there's a single 153 on the Scunthorpe/ Adwick - Sheffield - Lincoln services most days, but how many other services are just a single coach? Cardiff Bay branch, Chiltern Bubble Car and... most 153s are used as capacity coupled to other DMUs, so I can't see much need for more single coach trains in future.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Well, the Heart of Wales line is usually a 153 (though sometimes a 150), and Preston-Ormskirk was usually a 153 going back a few years when I used it regularly- apparently though it's a 142/150 more often than not now. I think the Conwy Valley and Bidston-Wrexham see the occasional single dogbox, too.

 

[Class172]

If any single carriage services are still needed you could always bring back some more 121s as Chiltern has, after all, aren't there some 121 trailer vehicles that can be used to extend them...

*hides*

 

[Oswyntail]

Or just do away with single car trains all together ....

Er, that was the idea. Have some low-grade, single "powered coaches" that are not too expensive to leave idle for much of the day, but have them available to bump up provision in the peaks. Not fitted with toilets, or whatever control mechanisms are necessary for main line operation on their own, because they would always run coupled up with 2- or 3- or 4-car sets

 

[sprinterguy]

Having a single car DMU is not really feasible now, for by the time you have allocated space to the cabs, vestibules and disabled toilet, you're not going to be left with much room for actual seating.

I entirely agree, there are very few services that still only warrant a single carriage train, and even less so when you consider the additional amount of space taken up by cabs,toilets, etc. Additionally, with a mix of 2 and 3-car trains it is still possible to make up any length of train between 2 and 6 carriages in length using one or two units.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Haven't Iarnród Éireann recently (last few years) ordered some single car units as part of their fleet replacement programme? Not they'd be suitable for NR, of course!

EDIT: It was the 2750 class I was thinking of, built in 1997 (so not that recent!). Looks similar to the 158 to me, though built by GEC/Alsthom.

 

[Class83]

About 100, 3 car, single class 172s, which should allow the pacers to be scrapped, they're not perfect for all routes, but the bulk of the work requires fast unloading so mid car doors are probably the best compromise. The 156 & 158s to be moved to the more rural routes and the 150s and 172s to run non electrified inter-urban and commuter services. That should be about neutral in terms of units so the additional electric units would cover any growth, and as more routes are electrified the 150s could be replaced with electric units. When the 156s and 158s are finished they could be replaced with an end door DMU, though they should have a few years in them with a bit of refurbishment.

 

[Manchester77]

78 150s and 153s
102 142s and 144s

The 150s and 153s need replacing too as they are nearly life expired and the 153s cannot be made DDA compliment and an economicaly viable train. Factor in growth you'd need around 210 mixed use vehicles. Us one standard design but they'd need different styled interiors and door arrangements

 

[Class83]

78 150s and 153s
102 142s and 144s

The 150s and 153s need replacing too as they are nearly life expired and the 153s cannot be made DDA compliment and an economicaly viable train. Factor in growth you'd need around 210 mixed use vehicles. Us one standard design but they'd need different styled interiors and door arrangements

I agree, but they'll probably last a little longer than the 142s which should hopefully fit in with the spread of electrification so they would be replaced by electric units.

 

[Surreyman]

I agree, but they'll probably last a little longer than the 142s which should hopefully fit in with the spread of electrification so they would be replaced by electric units.

Looks like the Pacer DDA deadline assumption is in question again!
Roger Ford in the latest Modern Railways states in reply to a readers letter on page 41;
'There is no obstacle preventing Pacers running past 2020'
Now Roger Ford knows his stuff, industry insiders etc etc.
Maybe they can be modified at relatively low cost to meet DDA specs.
I have no specialist knowledge of this subject but maybe wheelchair ramps can be made to access the double step and as previously mentioned the toilets could simply be removed.
If this proves to be true, the class 142s and 143s could be cascaded from South Wales and GW to Northern and run mainly as 4 car units i.e to increase capacity.

 

[W230]

Maybe they can be modified at relatively low cost to meet DDA specs.
I have no specialist knowledge of this subject but maybe wheelchair ramps can be made to access the double step and as previously mentioned the toilets could simply be removed.

Seems entirely plausible, especially if passenger numbers keep going up at the rate which they are at the moment.

Maybe i'll get the chance to drive one someday then, though not in London commuter land!

 

[northwichcat]

Looks like the Pacer DDA deadline assumption is in question again!
Roger Ford in the latest Modern Railways states in reply to a readers letter on page 41;
'There is no obstacle preventing Pacers running past 2020'
Now Roger Ford knows his stuff, industry insiders etc etc.
Maybe they can be modified at relatively low cost to meet DDA specs.

We already knew that Pacers could be used post-2019 without being completely rebuilt (or an exemption order) but it would mean putting them on frequent metro style services where the platforms are consistent so you don't have issues like you do with some Northern Pacer operated services where wheelchair users have to be taxied to another nearby station.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Maybe i'll get the chance to drive one someday then, though not in London commuter land!

The London Overground diesel services would actually make an ideal place for Pacer operation.

 

[D365]

The London Overground diesel services would actually make an ideal place for Pacer operation.

Don't think the user group would be best pleased having their 8x2 172s replaced by an hoard of Pacers Electrification and some more 378s are the ideal solution, if someone pays for this!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Don't think the user group would be best pleased having their 8x2 172s replaced by an hoard of Pacers Electrification and some more 378s are the ideal solution, if someone pays for this!

It'd be quite funny to see pacers sent to some of the more wealthy areas of the country for a change... Maybe if the folks of Henley and Windsor had to experience them first-hand, they'd understand what us Northerners are complaining about!