Scotrail Turbostars moving to Southern

[Bald Rick]

When National Express had the Anglia franchise they suggested to Network Rail in a RUS response that their own franchise was a suitable one for taking on the 171s, saying that could allow them to release their Sprinters to another operator such as Northern. Network Rail didn't seem interested though.

Really? I'd love to see a source for that.

 

[Minstral25]

At peak times there are already 4 trains an hour East Grinstead<>London, in the pattern you describe. Most of those that presently need to be are 12 coaches long. The Oxted bay cannot turn round anything more than 4 coaches long, so could not handle current peak Uckfield train lengths - the only alternative is to shunt them to platform 2. Even if you shortened them all to 4 car, then Oxted becomes a bottleneck, and even more so if you run more electrics from East Grinstead (or even just from Oxted) to handle the changing passengers.

Running trains through from Uckfield to London is the most sensible capacity solution, at least in the peaks.
.

Capacity is needed at East Croydon for other trains from other routes. The Uckfield Diesels block capacity on the BML in the peak, both because of their short formation and because they are slower than electrics.

The usage on the line compared to other local routes is very low as well, in fact as stated earlier in this thread the only crowded trains are a couple of morning peak services and returns.

If the bay was extended then a 6 coach train from Uckfield could turn around. Passengers could swap to East Grinstead trains timed to follow shortly behind. Then an extra 12 coach train from East Grinstead (we have lines that can do 24 trains per hour so I am sure the double track to East Grinstead can handle 6 or 8 per hour in the peak).

All users of the BML south of East Croydon will benefit from removal of the Diesels at East Croydon. Probably also free up some spare stock to create additional trains on Marshlink or to go up north.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Capacity is needed at East Croydon for other trains from other routes. The Uckfield Diesels block capacity on the BML in the peak, both because of their low short formation and because they are slower than electrics.

The usage on the line compared to other local routes is very low as well, in fact as stated earlier in this thread the only crowded trains are a couple of morning peak services and returns.

If the bay was extended then a 6 coach train from Uckfield could turn around. Passengers could swap to East Grinstead trains timed to follow shortly behind. Then an extra 12 coach train from East Grinstead (we have lines that can do 24 trains per hour so I am sure the double track to East Grinstead can handle 6 or 8 per hour in the peak).

All users of the BML south of East Croydon will benefit from removal of the Diesels at East Croydon. Probably also free up some spare stock to create additional trains on Marshlink or to go up north.

Bearing in mind Southern got additional Class 171s to allow them to run all Uckfield services to London Bridge I can't see them terminating at Oxted. The reality is that if you are going to terminate at Oxted you might as well not run them at all as the passengers will desert in virtually their entirety. It is only the direct service that has increased passenger numbers.

Personally I am unsure as to why East Grinstead is deserving of so many trains I doubt they are any busire than the Uckfield trains. Maybe some one can produce some details of passenger loadings at Oxted for both the East Grinstead and Uckfield trains.

 

[LBSCR Times]

As it is, the two evening services that start from Oxted will often depart before the late running down East Grinstead has arrived, due to constraints on the single line sections.
Thus meaning Uckfield line passengers are delayed 30' or so going home.

 

[OxtedL]

If the bay was extended then a 6 coach train from Uckfield could turn around. Passengers could swap to East Grinstead trains timed to follow shortly behind. Then an extra 12 coach train from East Grinstead (we have lines that can do 24 trains per hour so I am sure the double track to East Grinstead can handle 6 or 8 per hour in the peak).

The station site at Oxted is extremely constrained topographically, and the existing points to the south are right up against the viaduct. If they can't already (and I don't think they can) then I'm not sure they will ever fit 6x23m Turbostar coaches in the bay.

The only way to get to the bay is via a shunt across the down line. This gets in the way of lots of things and becomes a timetabling constraint, which is a problem if we increase the number of trains through Oxted in the manner you propose, although this is not insurmountable.

The believe the line south of Hurst Green towards East Grinstead has ~8 minute headways and 2 aspect signalling, so is pretty inflexible. At present trains are pathed down it on 10 minute headways (followed by 20 minutes) which helps with reliability - running more than the present 4 tph like this becomes something of a gamble, although again not impossible. The Oxted lines are branch lines, not main lines, and are presently signalled as such.

I don't think there are many upsides to your proposal until we completely run out of options through Croydon, since removing direct trains from Uckfield to London would be politically difficult. It is frustrating that the trains are short and so can't relieve much at East Croydon, but that of course is what the lengthening is for...!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Personally I am unsure as to why East Grinstead is deserving of so many trains I doubt they are any busire than the Uckfield trains. Maybe some one can produce some details of passenger loadings at Oxted for both the East Grinstead and Uckfield trains.

The provision of so many carriages on the East Grinstead line is very much about providing capacity north of East Croydon in the rush hour.

That said, the high peak ones all get well loaded by Sanderstead (which is a more relevant place to check loadings than Oxted).

 

[physics34]

The station site at Oxted is extremely constrained topographically, and the existing points to the south are right up against the viaduct. If they can't already (and I don't think they can) then I'm not sure they will ever fit 6x23m Turbostar coaches in the bay.

The only way to get to the bay is via a shunt across the down line. This gets in the way of lots of things and becomes a timetabling constraint, which is a problem if we increase the number of trains through Oxted in the manner you propose, although this is not insurmountable.

The believe the line south of Hurst Green towards East Grinstead has ~8 minute headways and 2 aspect signalling, so is pretty inflexible. At present trains are pathed down it on 10 minute headways (followed by 20 minutes) which helps with reliability - running more than the present 4 tph like this becomes something of a gamble, although again not impossible. The Oxted lines are branch lines, not main lines, and are presently signalled as such.

I don't think there are many upsides to your proposal until we completely run out of options through Croydon, since removing direct trains from Uckfield to London would be politically difficult. It is frustrating that the trains are short and so can't relieve much at East Croydon, but that of course is what the lengthening is for...!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The provision of so many carriages on the East Grinstead line is very much about providing capacity north of East Croydon in the rush hour.

That said, the high peak ones all get well loaded by Sanderstead (which is a more relevant place to check loadings than Oxted).

its ok in the down direction, but can you imagine a 6 car full of uckfield line commuters having to make their way down the subway up to platform 1? Chaos.

ANd yeh i also believe that there is no room to extend the bay to a 6 car anyway.

 

[Minstral25]

Bearing in mind Southern got additional Class 171s to allow them to run all Uckfield services to London Bridge I can't see them terminating at Oxted. The reality is that if you are going to terminate at Oxted you might as well not run them at all as the passengers will desert in virtually their entirety. It is only the direct service that has increased passenger numbers.

Personally I am unsure as to why East Grinstead is deserving of so many trains I doubt they are any busire than the Uckfield trains. Maybe some one can produce some details of passenger loadings at Oxted for both the East Grinstead and Uckfield trains.

South of Oxted - East Grinstead branch had 2.7 million entries over 4 stations. The Uckfield branch 1.7 million over 8 stations. Neither have particularly great loadings and if the Uckfield line was just a diesel branch from Oxted my assumption is about 25% loss of passengers who mostly would go to Haywards Heath, East Grinstead, Edenbridge or Tonbridge.

To give this scale the Redhill Route (Coulsdon South to Horley and Reigate) has 9.8 million passengers on the same comparison. All numbers are from Network Rails station usage for 2013-14.

Which leads me to the question why run the Diesels to London when they reduce the capacity from East Croydon to London Bridge - particularly during the works currently being undertaken. Yes you will lose some passengers but overall you will get more on the trains. Quicker and better win would be to run more and longer electrics from East Grinstead or Redhill for that matter

 

[northwichcat]

Really? I'd love to see a source for that.

I tried to find it and found the below. I think the Sprinter cascade to Northern was actually someone's analysis of the below statement

While a linkage between electrification scheme sequencing is made to infrastructure schemes such as signalling immunisation (and the commitment to automatically make provision for future electrification in such schemes is welcomed) we believe there should also be a linkage to the opportunities provided by rolling stock replacement/introduction. Thus, for instance, if Pacer vehicles are to be replaced due to life expiry, this should prompt a review/reprioritising of routes currently served by such trains. This might prompt a cascade opportunity – thus as an example, a need to replace Pacers on the Blackpool South to Colne service might prompt either an advancing of electrification of that line(frankly unlikely) or of the Uckfield Line thereby releasing modern diesel units for cascade.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...consultation responses/n/national express.pdf

 

[Bald Rick]

I tried to find it and found the below. I think the Sprinter cascade to Northern was actually someone's analysis of the below statement

Ah okay. I was going to say that in my time in Anglia (at around that time), NX never asked for it, but you never know!

 

[Chrisgr31]

South of Oxted - East Grinstead branch had 2.7 million entries over 4 stations. The Uckfield branch 1.7 million over 8 stations. Neither have particularly great loadings and if the Uckfield line was just a diesel branch from Oxted my assumption is about 25% loss of passengers who mostly would go to Haywards Heath, East Grinstead, Edenbridge or Tonbridge.

To give this scale the Redhill Route (Coulsdon South to Horley and Reigate) has 9.8 million passengers on the same comparison. All numbers are from Network Rails station usage for 2013-14.

Which leads me to the question why run the Diesels to London when they reduce the capacity from East Croydon to London Bridge - particularly during the works currently being undertaken. Yes you will lose some passengers but overall you will get more on the trains. Quicker and better win would be to run more and longer electrics from East Grinstead or Redhill for that matter

To give this scale one actually needs to work out the average number of passengers per train, rather than taking the total number of passengers. After all Uckfield only has 2 trains an hour at the maximum, some stations on the line only have 1, Horley has 7, East Grinstead has 4, Reigate 3 etc.

The capacity constraint at East Croydon is in the peak hours and it doesnt matter where the trains are coming from they are all full at East Croydon. Moving passengers from the Uckfield line to other routes won't help anyone. It is also of course remarkably bad for the environment to have these people driving to alternative routes.

I strongly suspect that you would lose a lot more than 25% of the passengers. The change at Oxted adds significant time to the journey, made worse by the fact most of the electrics stop at all stations between Oxted and Sanderstead. It is a proven fact the improved service to Uckfield has dramatically increased demand on the line and in fact the thread wouldn't exist at all if that wasn't the case!

As I have said train use off-peak could be better and I think it is improving. It takes a long time to change peoples perception of the line, and I suspect many potential off-peak users are those that commuted a few years ago and remember the pre Southern days when the service was awful you had to change etc so they still go elsewhere.

Of course rail users from Horley to South Coulsdon alsways have the option of using the East Grinstead/Uckfield lines if the service is that much better with plenty of space.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Of course rail users from Horley to South Coulsdon alsways have the option of using the East Grinstead/Uckfield lines if the service is that much better with plenty of space.

Alternatively, one could start the Tattenham trains back from Reigate instead,
and just run a shuttle between Tattenham and Purley......

 

[Yabbadabba]

Alternatively, one could start the Tattenham trains back from Reigate instead,
and just run a shuttle between Tattenham and Purley......

The only problem with that is that the Tattenham service is due to go over to 8 car cl700s and Riegate can't take more than a 4 car cl377s, wouldn't that mean a drop in capacity?

 

[LBSCR Times]

The only problem with that is that the Tattenham service is due to go over to 8 car cl700s and Riegate can't take more than a 4 car cl377s, wouldn't that mean a drop in capacity?

It was a rather tongue-in-cheek comment.....

Although as that is another 3 years away, there is plenty of time to upgrade the Reigate branch to take 12 car 700's. Plenty of standing room inside too!
Then services that come from south of Three Bridges wouldn't need to run via Redhill, and give those commuters a quicker journey.

 

[hwl]

It was a rather tongue-in-cheek comment.....

Although as that is another 3 years away, there is plenty of time to upgrade the Reigate branch to take 12 car 700's. Plenty of standing room inside too!
Then services that come from south of Three Bridges wouldn't need to run via Redhill, and give those commuters a quicker journey.

Isn't NR already proposing some upgrade work at Reigate?

 

[Yabbadabba]

Isn't NR already proposing some upgrade work at Reigate?

From 2019 onwards if it passes the draft stage and the money is put into the scheme.

 

[mr_jrt]

Would it be worth either extending a 3rd track from the junction up to Hurst Green and building a bay there to totally segregate the Uckfield line from the East Grinstead one to simplify matters, or perhaps just rebuilding the east side of Oxted station to enable platform 2 to be used as a turnback by linking up northwards.

...or reinstate the loop at East Grinstead and (re)build the line to Eridge

 

[bramling]

The station site at Oxted is extremely constrained topographically, and the existing points to the south are right up against the viaduct. If they can't already (and I don't think they can) then I'm not sure they will ever fit 6x23m Turbostar coaches in the bay.

The only way to get to the bay is via a shunt across the down line. This gets in the way of lots of things and becomes a timetabling constraint, which is a problem if we increase the number of trains through Oxted in the manner you propose, although this is not insurmountable.

The believe the line south of Hurst Green towards East Grinstead has ~8 minute headways and 2 aspect signalling, so is pretty inflexible. At present trains are pathed down it on 10 minute headways (followed by 20 minutes) which helps with reliability - running more than the present 4 tph like this becomes something of a gamble, although again not impossible. The Oxted lines are branch lines, not main lines, and are presently signalled as such.

I don't think there are many upsides to your proposal until we completely run out of options through Croydon, since removing direct trains from Uckfield to London would be politically difficult. It is frustrating that the trains are short and so can't relieve much at East Croydon, but that of course is what the lengthening is for...!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The provision of so many carriages on the East Grinstead line is very much about providing capacity north of East Croydon in the rush hour.

That said, the high peak ones all get well loaded by Sanderstead (which is a more relevant place to check loadings than Oxted).

The south end of the East Grinstead line must be one of the best places to commute by train to London. Guaranteed to be boarding an empty train at East Grinstead, and always long and frequent trains right through the day - in the off-peak quite possible to have a carriage to yourself for much of the journey. All trains formed by air-conditioned Electrostars with areas of 2+2 comfortable seating. The only downside is that the journey time isn't fantastically fast.

 

[LBSCR Times]

The south end of the East Grinstead line must be one of the best places to commute by train to London. Guaranteed to be boarding an empty train at East Grinstead, and always long and frequent trains right through the day - in the off-peak quite possible to have a carriage to yourself for much of the journey. All trains formed by air-conditioned Electrostars with areas of 2+2 comfortable seating. The only downside is that the journey time isn't fantastically fast.

The main downside is in the morning if one of the ECS moves is late and gets behind another service at South Croydon, then it will be terminated short, usually starting back from either Hurst Green or Oxted.
Crowborough, on the Uckfield line, is probably a close second! Any late running in the morning usually see's the train start back from there, and seating is a maximum of 2+2!

 

[Minstral25]

To give this scale one actually needs to work out the average number of passengers per train, rather than taking the total number of passengers. After all Uckfield only has 2 trains an hour at the maximum, some stations on the line only have 1, Horley has 7, East Grinstead has 4, Reigate 3 etc.

The capacity constraint at East Croydon is in the peak hours and it doesnt matter where the trains are coming from they are all full at East Croydon. Moving passengers from the Uckfield line to other routes won't help anyone. It is also of course remarkably bad for the environment to have these people driving to alternative routes.

I strongly suspect that you would lose a lot more than 25% of the passengers. The change at Oxted adds significant time to the journey, made worse by the fact most of the electrics stop at all stations between Oxted and Sanderstead. It is a proven fact the improved service to Uckfield has dramatically increased demand on the line and in fact the thread wouldn't exist at all if that wasn't the case!

As I have said train use off-peak could be better and I think it is improving. It takes a long time to change peoples perception of the line, and I suspect many potential off-peak users are those that commuted a few years ago and remember the pre Southern days when the service was awful you had to change etc so they still go elsewhere.

Of course rail users from Horley to South Coulsdon alsways have the option of using the East Grinstead/Uckfield lines if the service is that much better with plenty of space.

From January 2015 trains arriving from the Redhill Route at London Bridge in the high peak between 8:00 and 9:00 is 1, from Uckfield it is 2.

That means a group of stations with 9.8 million passengers have one train and 1.7 million passengers have 2.

Agreed Redhill Passengers get plenty of Victoria trains but then they change at East Croydon to ex-Uckfield trains which are short and too full to get on.

Hence my view that Uckfield trains need to be cut short at Oxted and a 12 coach train added from East Grinstead to provide genuine capacity from East Croydon to London or even better a 12 coach train from Redhill.




Reigate gets 1 train per hour to London plus 2 North Downs trains which don't go to London requiring changing at Redhill and often East Croydon too

 

[Chrisgr31]

From January 2015 trains arriving from the Redhill Route at London Bridge in the high peak between 8:00 and 9:00 is 1, from Uckfield it is 2.

That means a group of stations with 9.8 million passengers have one train and 1.7 million passengers have 2.

Agreed Redhill Passengers get plenty of Victoria trains but then they change at East Croydon to ex-Uckfield trains which are short and too full to get on.

Hence my view that Uckfield trains need to be cut short at Oxted and a 12 coach train added from East Grinstead to provide genuine capacity from East Croydon to London or even better a 12 coach train from Redhill.




Reigate gets 1 train per hour to London plus 2 North Downs trains which don't go to London requiring changing at Redhill and often East Croydon too

Uckfield passengers changing trains at Oxted won't provide any further capacity at East Croydon. After all the 8 coach diesel train is a similar length ot a 10 coach electric one. It is full and standing at Oxted, so any 12 coach train we all transferred on to would also be full and standing at East Croydon.

The plan to lengthen all the Uckfield services will provide additional capacity at East Croydon, well assuming of course that those Oxted passengers who currently avoid them because they cant get a seat dont fill them!

 

[Minstral25]

Happy New year all

Uckfield passengers changing trains at Oxted won't provide any further capacity at East Croydon. After all the 8 coach diesel train is a similar length ot a 10 coach electric one. It is full and standing at Oxted, so any 12 coach train we all transferred on to would also be full and standing at East Croydon.

The plan to lengthen all the Uckfield services will provide additional capacity at East Croydon, well assuming of course that those Oxted passengers who currently avoid them because they cant get a seat dont fill them!

I agree if you left it to current services, my point was to add an additional 12 coach service from East Grinstead. The extra 4 coaches would have both more seats and more standing space for everyone.

It's not going to change unless significant problems are found in the January 2015 timetable with overcrowding at East Croydon anyway.

My main view is that the automatic "only" solution to Uckfield is electrification is not the case. Truncating at Oxted is a valid alternative to increasing capacity at East Croydon and removing diesels from running under the wires (3rd rail variety)

 

[physics34]

Was looking for something concrete about the rumour of Southern leasing all 9 Eversholt Scotrail 170s and have found it here.

https://www.abellio.com/sites/default/files/downloads/abellio_scotrail_qa_summary_v2_181214.pdf

As mentioned before, 5 units being sub-leased back to Abellio Scotrail...but for how long..!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

That's a protected link for authorised users only judging from the message it just gave me?

 

[physics34]

That's a protected link for authorised users only judging from the message it just gave me?

hmmm,loaded for me no problems.

Can you view .pdf s?

 

[Chrisgr31]

hmmm,loaded for me no problems.

Can you view .pdf s?

Loaded for me OK as well.

 

[notadriver]

Does anyone know how reliable are turbostars are ? On the Ashford to Brighton route there always seems to be a rail replacement bus on standby at Ashford. The driver told me that the trains are always overcrowded and that passengers often prefer the coach over the train due to the severe overcrowding on it. Is this true?

 

[Altnabreac]

Was looking for something concrete about the rumour of Southern leasing all 9 Eversholt Scotrail 170s and have found it here.

https://www.abellio.com/sites/default/files/downloads/abellio_scotrail_qa_summary_v2_181214.pdf

As mentioned before, 5 units being sub-leased back to Abellio Scotrail...but for how long..!

My guess is that it will be until sometime in 2017. The first new electric trains for Scotrail are due to arrive in April 2017.

http://www.abellio.com/scotrail-pas...edinburgh-glasgow-and-stirling-alloa-dunblane

December 2017 is the date for full entry into service of the new Hitachi trains for Edinburgh - Glasgow via Falkirk services.

So the 5 subleased units will probably be needed until around summer 2017.

From December 2017 there will be additional Class 170s going off lease from Scotrail available for other franchises, although they may well choose to phase out the loco hauled stock first. In 2018 the HSTs arrive and Stirling is electrified so large amounts of 170s will be available.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Does anyone know how reliable are turbostars are ? On the Ashford to Brighton route there always seems to be a rail replacement bus on standby at Ashford. The driver told me that the trains are always overcrowded and that passengers often prefer the coach over the train due to the severe overcrowding on it. Is this true?

As a matter of interest was this a particularly large bus? After all the seating capacity of a 2 car class 171 is 102 standard class seats with 9 first class seats and a few flip down ones the total seated capacity is 124. It would have to be a very large bus to take all those passengers in more comfort than the train!

As regards reliability the Southern cynics will tell you they are very unreliable and are always braking down. However whilst it is true there are often cancellations or short formations due to faulty units the issue is that there are no real spare units. Therefore the moment one breaks down, is involved in an accident etc then it immediatly hits the service. Not only that but the units are working exceptionally hard and therefore more likely to have breakdowns due to the mileages being done.

I think you will find that the reality is they are one of the most reliable fleets but the perception is different due to the factors mentioned.

 

[notadriver]

Just a standard 50 seater coach. I don't believe my friend when he told me regular passengers prefer his coach over the regular train service but he is one of these people that knows and is best at everything.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think you will find that the reality is they are one of the most reliable fleets but the perception is different due to the factors mentioned.

[Pause to look up Roger Ford's analysis in the Jan Modern Railways...]

Southern's 171s are 5th out of 15 'new generation DMUs', which includes Turbos and newer classes up to 185s and 172s.

In comparison with the similar age Class 170 fleets they are behind XC and LM, but ahead of GA, TPE, and SR.