Electrification & Rolling Stock Cascade Impact Review

[Manchester77]

I'd imagine the mark IVs going to MML but not the 91s I'd imagine they'd be replaced by Traxx - 140 mob is a bit overkill

 

[Class83]

The 222s could be reformed to give 21 6-car sets (and a few spare vehicles/5-car sets) and fitted out as 1 First & 5 Standard for the Edinburgh/Glasgow-Aberdeen/Inverness services.

 

[tbtc]

I've seen it mentioned a few times recently that "Scotland" wants the Voyagers/ Meridians, but there any genuine evidence of this?

Is "Scotland" the whole Scottish Government? FirstGroup? The SNP? And how many do they want (34x220? 44x221? 27x222? All of them? They won't need that many long distance DMUs post-EGIP)?

The danger is that things are repeated enough they become received wisdom.

(that's ignoring whether units that will be over fifteen years old by the time of potentially moving to ScotRail will be suitable, when roughly half of the 22xs have fewer seats than the 170s that operate longer distance services, given the lack of need for 125mph stock, whether you'd want to put up with narrow bodied stock on routes where tilting won't be happening etc etc)

 

[SkinnyDave]

I've seen it mentioned a few times recently that "Scotland" wants the Voyagers/ Meridians, but there any genuine evidence of this?

Is "Scotland" the whole Scottish Government? FirstGroup? The SNP? And how many do they want (34x220? 44x221? 27x222? All of them? They won't need that many long distance DMUs post-EGIP)?

The danger is that things are repeated enough they become received wisdom.

(that's ignoring whether units that will be over fifteen years old by the time of potentially moving to ScotRail will be suitable, when roughly half of the 22xs have fewer seats than the 170s that operate longer distance services, given the lack of need for 125mph stock, whether you'd want to put up with narrow bodied stock on routes where tilting won't be happening etc etc)

Hi, I'm sure I read in last couple of months Modern Railways mag that Transport Scotland have expressed an interest in taking on Virgins 221 stock should they become available if baby Pendos are ordered etc..

There was also a bit of a storm in teacup when ASLEF members went to a conference in Inverness via HST claiming 170s were not up to those jobs. I think speculation started then too
I think it will be left with whoever wins new franchise

 

[Bodie]

This is a very interesting thread.

To go back to the 350's and their introduction by TPE.
So typical of railways these days to put the cart before the horse.
I have loathed the 185's on long distance ever since they started Manchester - Scotland, and the 350's are a step up the ladder in terms of rolling stock.
However TPE have created problems for themselves by changing the route of their trains, this isn't a short term thing.
Who can say they'll ever go back???
My idea for 185's to pair up and drag the 350's surely isn't that bad.

Never know why projects have to take so flaming long these days. Get on with it!
Dispite what I said above, I don't blame TPE for getting the 350's built now.

Are the 350's starting come the December timetable change???
And are any of the class in the country now?
I know TPE had 350252 on loan from London Midland for crew training. Has that gone over to a newly arrived 350/4 yet?

My little tuppence regarding DMU cascades...

Talk on here of 220's being wanted by Transport for Scotland for Glasgow/Edinburgh - Aberdeen/Inverness.
That I would like to see, if only to get rid of 170's and their centrally located doors - No matter were I sit on a train like that, on a long journey it really begins to bug me. Even worse on a cold day.
I don't think it will happen though, nor do I think my dream of totally upgrading the Highland Mainline to HS1 level and taking the journey times down from three and half hours to around one and half hours.

We can but dream...

 

[Manchester77]

The change will allow to TPE Manchester - Scotland service to become EMU electrified.

Well really it shouldn't even be with TPE it was operated by VXC until it transferred as part of the midland franchising shake up. Ideally as part of the next ICWC franchise they will transfer allowing services to be operated by new IC EMUs as proposed in the last franchise bids.

Class377/5 has said on SCC that full service will begin at the May 2014 timetable change however it's expected a few will be ready for December.

 

[D365]

I know TPE had 350252 on loan from London Midland for crew training. Has that gone over to a newly arrived 350/4 yet?

I'm not sure any 350/4s are even complete yet, let alone ready for service. Usually with the first complete unit a news snippet and photo will 'leak'.

 

[Eagle]

The current news is that the first 350s will be ready for use "in December" (which could be either side of the timetable change).

FTPE have put up some pictures of the units being constructed on their various social media sites, but nothing complete yet.

 

[Manchester77]

They posted on google+ or something that the first of their 350s was going to Wildenrath for testing, early. https://plus.google.com/app/basic/stream/z12zebopsyyne15ll23owl54mpy5ynopr04

 

[starrymarkb]

Something to remember for those saying about 125s or 22x running under the wires on GW far west services. It's only 50 miles under the wires from Paddington to Newbury, on a 300 mile run that's not a big percentage

 

[anthony263]

TPE already have one of their class 350/4's on test in Germany. It is expected to arrive in the uk pretty soon I have heard.

In fact Siemens seems to be running a little ahead of schedule with the building of the class 350/4's. That said if they work out of the box I dont think TPE and London Midland will complain since Siemens can then get started on the construction of the class 350/3's which London Midland will be glad to get

 

[The Ham]

I the Future of the Intercity 125s thread I calculated that the entire fleet of 222s seem to be exactly the number required to operate the Paddington-Plymouth/Penzance services, with all services made up of two units which split at Plymouth (with one set terminating at Plymouth) to provide Penzance with 1tph to London.

It was also suggested that, if there were enough units, that rather than return straight to London one part of the service could serve other destination such as Paighton (splitting at Exeter, no extra units required) and Newquay (splitting at Plymouth which to run the current 3 trains per day would require up to four units, but removing the need for the extra DMU's which currently run the service between Par and Newquay).

the link to the post in question is here:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1267232&postcount=249

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

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

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.

Something to remember for those saying about 125s or 22x running under the wires on GW far west services. It's only 50 miles under the wires from Paddington to Newbury, on a 300 mile run that's not a big percentage

...and the extra wires from Newbury to Bedwyn make little or no difference.

 

[Class377/5]

Siemens is now marketing a variant of the Desiro City design (ordered for Thameslink) called the Desiro Express that's 115mph. According to Roger Ford reporting, Siemens state the units will run "comfortably" within the IEP timetable for GWML on the outer suburban services.

 

[jimm]

This is a very interesting thread.

To go back to the 350's and their introduction by TPE.
So typical of railways these days to put the cart before the horse.
I have loathed the 185's on long distance ever since they started Manchester - Scotland, and the 350's are a step up the ladder in terms of rolling stock.
However TPE have created problems for themselves by changing the route of their trains, this isn't a short term thing.
Who can say they'll ever go back???
My idea for 185's to pair up and drag the 350's surely isn't that bad.

Never know why projects have to take so flaming long these days. Get on with it!
Dispite what I said above, I don't blame TPE for getting the 350's built now.

Are the 350's starting come the December timetable change???
And are any of the class in the country now?
I know TPE had 350252 on loan from London Midland for crew training. Has that gone over to a newly arrived 350/4 yet?

My little tuppence regarding DMU cascades...

Talk on here of 220's being wanted by Transport for Scotland for Glasgow/Edinburgh - Aberdeen/Inverness.
That I would like to see, if only to get rid of 170's and their centrally located doors - No matter were I sit on a train like that, on a long journey it really begins to bug me. Even worse on a cold day.
I don't think it will happen though, nor do I think my dream of totally upgrading the Highland Mainline to HS1 level and taking the journey times down from three and half hours to around one and half hours.

We can but dream...

TPE operates from Manchester to Scotland at the behest of the DfT, after it decided to stop XC running up the West Coast. TPE used the only stock it had available, the 185 - stock which should be in use to cut overcrowding in the North of England anyway. The route is being altered because of the way the North West electrification is being carried out, again a decision taken by DfT in conjunction with Network Rail. It's not "the railways" or TPE, doing these things, it's the government!

 

[158722]

TPE operates from Manchester to Scotland at the behest of the DfT, after it decided to stop XC running up the West Coast. TPE used the only stock it had available, the 185 - stock which should be in use to cut overcrowding in the North of England anyway. The route is being altered because of the way the North West electrification is being carried out, again a decision taken by DfT in conjunction with Network Rail. It's not "the railways" or TPE, doing these things, it's the government!

Hasn't it been suggested that the Manchester-Scotland services will get integrated in future West Coast franchise, as opposed to TPX, at some point in the future? Of course, we all know what fun and games the WC franchise has caused, so who knows how this one will develop!

Once the NW schemes have been completed, there is some logic in grouping these services together, along with Virgin's (I think) proposal to replace the 221s on the Brum-Scotland runs with 6-car mini-Pendos or whatever. Brum, Manchester and even Liverpool to Scotland, all operated by the same fleet, backed up with a full full size Pendos, as now.

You are quite right though - it is the DfT dictating what goes on, not the railway...

 

[SkinnyDave]

Hasn't it been suggested that the Manchester-Scotland services will get integrated in future West Coast franchise, as opposed to TPX, at some point in the future? Of course, we all know what fun and games the WC franchise has caused, so who knows how this one will develop!

Once the NW schemes have been completed, there is some logic in grouping these services together, along with Virgin's (I think) proposal to replace the 221s on the Brum-Scotland runs with 6-car mini-Pendos or whatever. Brum, Manchester and even Liverpool to Scotland, all operated by the same fleet, backed up with a full full size Pendos, as now.

You are quite right though - it is the DfT dictating what goes on, not the railway...

Two issues past from Modern Railways suggested Virgin have been discussing the Manc-Sco services to be included in next Franchise with one fleet .
I think it makes sense or possibly an open access operator??

 

[northwichcat]

TPE operates from Manchester to Scotland at the behest of the DfT, after it decided to stop XC running up the West Coast.

Just to be clear Arriva XC never operated Manchester to Scotland. It used to be operated by XC t/a Virgin Trains but for an interim period in the latter part of 2007 it was operated by Virgin West Coast.

 

[anthony263]

I have just been reading through the latest informed sources article from Mr Ford which I received in my email this morning. According to the article Siemens suggest that trains complying with the conventional TSI (Technical Specifications for Interoperability ) will be able to run up to 190km/H or 118mph without restrictions on leading vehicle occupancy subject to meeting crash worthiness specifications.

Well it seems Seems Siemens is offering a 115mph express version of its new Desiro platform (According to Mr Ford it is just a class 380 with some extra Oomph!!). Siemens are claiming that these units could fit easily in the proposed IEP timetables.

Link to the article here:

http://home.ezezine.com/759/759-2013.09.23.04.00.archive.html


Certainly I wonder if perhaps some operators might be interested in this new desiro, perhaps Maybe London Midland should order some sending the class 350/3's to TPE.

 

[HSTEd]

If they can really deliver flat-front 115mph units then that is a game changer as far as regional expresses go.
(Could you do 115mph with no tilt on significant stretches of the WCML for instance? If so that drops the value of tilt yet again in travel time terms, improving the case for ditching the Pendos after HS2 comes on line).

 

[anthony263]

I agree and such units would be good for some semi-fast services which use the GWML potentially being better suited than the IEP units.

Considering LM use the class 350's on Crewe - London Euston services a 115mph capable class 380 style emu I think would be good for the London - Newbury/Bedwyn- Westbury - Taunton service. The doors would be useful especially when there are large crowds with lugguage.

 

[JamesRowden]

I calculate that the Thames Valley will need the following number of sets of 4-car EMUs in service once Crossrail and all planned electrification is complete if my guess of the peak service pattern occurs:

""

""

TOTAL: 56 sets (NOT INCLUDING SPARES) (some branch services might need to be shorter than 4-cars to fit in the platforms and the through services to Paddington will need to be lengthened at Twyford/Maidenhead [or maybe some stock could be saved by linking these services together at Maidenhead]), some stock will be needed to run the Bletchley-Bedford stopping service if Great Western operate it, alternatively another operator might operate the Reading-Bedford service)

I forgot to include a replacement of the (London)-Oxford-Banbury stoppers. This could be run during the peak in a similar way to present as an extension of the slower Paddington-Oxford services with two extra sets required if 1tph and four extra sets if 2tph.

 

[D365]

If they can really deliver flat-front 115mph units then that is a game changer as far as regional expresses go.
(Could you do 115mph with no tilt on significant stretches of the WCML for instance? If so that drops the value of tilt yet again in travel time terms, improving the case for ditching the Pendos after HS2 comes on line).

I thought Scotland was at one point after 125mph EG units?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If they can really deliver flat-front 115mph units then that is a game changer as far as regional expresses go.
(Could you do 115mph with no tilt on significant stretches of the WCML for instance? If so that drops the value of tilt yet again in travel time terms, improving the case for ditching the Pendos after HS2 comes on line).

WCML is 110mph max without tilt, except for an odd bit of 125mph Bushbury-Stafford which was upgraded for XC HSTs, also a similar stretch around Coventry I think - but none on the WCML proper.
Speed Oxenholme-Penrith and north of Carstairs is mostly lower (80-100).
A lot would depend on the weight of the new Desiro if it is to run at 115mph anywhere.

 

[Manchester77]

With the possibility of these new Desiro City Express variants (701s as I shall refer to them in this post) this seems to bring an end to the idea of TPE getting an add on to SWTs new EMU order as posted on WNXX.

I'd imagine that post electrification, Thameslink 2000, crossrail etc. that:
TransPennine Express
- Operating the recently ordered 110 mph 377s
- The 350/4s are sent down to LM causing the cascade of their 321s to GA
Northern
- Operating all 319s giving the north a kind of standard EMU (excluding the 333s)
- Without repeating other posts 323s to LM, 321s GA etc.
Greater Western
- IEP on IC routes
- 222s on the un electrified IC routes replacing the IC125s
- Thames Turbos off Thames Valley onto GW rural services in the West
- 701s operating the electrified Thames Valley services (replacing Turbos)
SouthWestTrains
- New EMUs in the form of 4/5 car 700s

It'd make sense looking at everything we have. There was always going to be another order made, whether that'd be for TPE EMUs or Thames Valley EMUs. I've shown if this happened for Thames Valley EMUs which seems more likely however, things can change...

 

[158722]

With the possibility of these new Desiro City Express variants (701s as I shall refer to them in this post) this seems to bring an end to the idea of TPE getting an add on to SWTs new EMU order as posted on WNXX.

I'd imagine that post electrification, Thameslink 2000, crossrail etc. that:
TransPennine Express
- Operating the recently ordered 110 mph 377s
- The 350/4s are sent down to LM causing the cascade of their 321s to GA
Northern
- Operating all 319s giving the north a kind of standard EMU (excluding the 333s)
- Without repeating other posts 323s to LM, 321s GA etc.
Greater Western
- IEP on IC routes
- 222s on the un electrified IC routes replacing the IC125s
- Thames Turbos off Thames Valley onto GW rural services in the West
- 701s operating the electrified Thames Valley services (replacing Turbos)
SouthWestTrains
- New EMUs in the form of 4/5 car 700s

It'd make sense looking at everything we have. There was always going to be another order made, whether that'd be for TPE EMUs or Thames Valley EMUs. I've shown if this happened for Thames Valley EMUs which seems more likely however, things can change...

I've just updated the first post with which I started this thread with more notes added in - including these points you have just noted.

 

[Bevan Price]

I was going to suggest something a bit more radical.


The 34x 220s and 4x 4-car 221s look to be sufficient to cover XC Cardiff-Nottingham and Brum-Stansted vice 170s (20-22 diagrams) as well as EMT's Liverpool-Norwich (12 diagrams). The cascaded 158s and 170s then start to see off the 150s and 156s, which will be approaching their 40th birthdays by the end of CP6.

.

4 car 220 or 221 on Liverpool - Norwich would be a disaster - about 100 fewer standard class seats than the current Class 158 4 car formations.

Personally, I think if Voyagers are eventually cascaded to secondary routes, their engines will need to be de-rated to lower power, in order to reduce fuel consumption.

 

[Kneedown]

4 car 220 or 221 on Liverpool - Norwich would be a disaster - about 100 fewer standard class seats than the current Class 158 4 car formations.

Nothing to prevent the seating layout being revised. Besides, bums on seats isn't a problem nowadays, but luggage accomodation is, of which there is a good deal more of on a Voyager/Meridian than a 158.

 

[Eagle]

Nothing to prevent the seating layout being revised.

Apart from the fact that a 4-car Voyager only actually has three and a bit carriages' worth of space for seating, because of the tapered ends and crumple zones. Even if you made the whole train standard class it'd still have fewer standard seats than 2x158.

Also about luggage accommodation: you can't increase the number of seats whilst keeping the luggage racks.

 

[Manchester77]

As voyagers wouldn't be running above 110mph on Norwich - Liverpool could the crumple zones not be replaced with seating

 

[Eagle]

Not without making significant changes to the body shell.

The crumple zones aren't just bits of the train marked off; they're an integral part of the train's body.

(Also they could in theory do the full 125 between Grantham and Peterborough.)