Rolling stock announcement regarding TPE (updated)

[northwichcat]

However, you can't deny that that's splitting hairs, and 290 is still a *lot* more than 169. I can't see how that is even remotely something to complain about.

The reason I explained that is because I used 290 seats (not your figure of 300) in the calculation that followed.

And like I subsequently explained it looks like there could be some services which see 4 car 156s between Manchester and Preston instead of 6 car 185s, so it's not just a case of comparing the capacity of 4 car 156 to a 3 car 185.

One thing that wasn't included in the press release yesterday is whether Northern will still use a unit freed up by Chat Moss electrification on Hazel Grove-Preston services or whether the TPE changes are in lieu of that.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Yes, I do wonder if it's pathing related. I doubt the linespeed is 100mph for much of the route, and 185s with 2 engines going don't seem to accelerate much faster than 15x.

No part of the Manchester Airport-Blackpool route supports more than 75mph, except the 3 miles of WCML fast line between Euxton Jn and Preston (110mph).
But no doubt 185s have better acceleration and dwell times than 156s.

In all the machinations about stock deployment, the 5-month Farnworth blockade will also have to be organised.
So during that period no doubt there will be diversions via Wigan and some through workings reduced to shuttles.

The pressure is building on the new franchise ITTs to paint a better picture than this shambolic short-term measure.
I just hope a different set of people at DfT are working on it!
The FTPE announcement at least holds out some hope:

The Government is expected to release franchise specifications for both the Northern and Transpennine franchises in early 2015 and this will likely include the requirement to provide modern and appropriate rolling stock (trains) for the north of England. New franchises are due to start in February 2016

 

[samj]

So what happens when a 142 replaces a 156 on the Blackpool-Man Airport service?

 

[Holmbridge]

If I have missed this forgive me but in all of this shuffling of the pack upt' north....where do Chiltern stand with 4 less trains to play with?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So what happens when a 142 replaces a 156 on the Blackpool-Man Airport service?

Then people put up with it. TPE isn't supposed to be some sort of safeguard about not travelling in Pacers.

I expect, though, as TPE staff are being trained on 156s rather than 142s, that it will be a 156 whatever, to the detriment of a Northern service which might get Pacered.

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

If I have missed this forgive me but in all of this shuffling of the pack upt' north....where do Chiltern stand with 4 less trains to play with?

They probably don't need them all to start with - some are for the added Oxford services when that opens. Are some perhaps to replace the Banbury LH set? In that case they could keep that.

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

I'm surprised BBC North West Tonight practically read out the press release word for word yesterday after the fuss they previously made about rumours Northern Rail trains would make up for the shortfall at TPE. They even had David Cameron in the studio so could have grilled him on it if only they'd realised it's the same story and DfT were trying to hide the negative implications by boasting about the positive ones. :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

So what happens when a 142 replaces a 156 on the Blackpool-Man Airport service?

Then people put up with it. TPE isn't supposed to be some sort of safeguard about not travelling in Pacers.

Won't happen as TPE crews will only be trained on 156s. If Northern did give them a 142 in lieu, it'll go nowhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If I have missed this forgive me but in all of this shuffling of the pack upt' north....where do Chiltern stand with 4 less trains to play with?

Chiltern never needed all 9 to start with - they only needed 5 x 170s in service from August and I think the rest are needed in service from May 2016.

Their plan is to reform the 170/3s and the 4 car 168s in to 18 x 3 car trains.

 

[deltic08]

yawn - perhaps you would like to walk instead.

No. I have a choice of daily commute, train, bus or car. Since Northern/DfT imposed evening peaktime fare increases, I have commuted by car. Cheaper, especially at the current petrol prices, only 10 minutes longer journey time door to door, no waiting on cold, wet, draughty platforms and much more comfortable journey environment than a crush loaded Northern Rail Pacer/150.

This is what 30 year old trains are up against, better quality buses and cars with buses equipped with leather seats and wifi and cars with greater flexibility.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No. I have a choice of daily commute, train, bus or car. Since Northern/DfT imposed evening peaktime fare increases, I have commuted by car.

Why were you not using a season ticket?

If one wasn't applicable, then that's not really "commuting" in that sense...

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

If one wasn't applicable, then that's not really "commuting" in that sense...

Not necessarily. Weekly season tickets up here are usually more expensive than 5 x off-peak day returns, so if someone can make a commute after the morning peak has finished then buying 5 x off-peak day returns is usually the cheaper option.

For instance, if you live in Buxton and work in Manchester from 10am to 6.30pm you can easily travel to and from work on a £10.10 off-peak day return, a weekly season ticket costs £71.00. Which is the better option? (Note: That wouldn't usually work on other commutes as long as Buxton to Manchester but would work on short commutes on some lines e.g. Knutsford to Northwich.)

 

[swt_passenger]

They probably don't need them all to start with - some are for the added Oxford services when that opens. Are some perhaps to replace the Banbury LH set? In that case they could keep that.

Neil

What usually gets forgotten is that as well as the Oxford services (which are mainly already in the timetable as Bicester and Banbury terminators and therefore don't need much extra stock), there's a separate platform lengthening project going on at the moment to allow them to run more 9 car trains between Banbury and Marylebone.

As you suggest it is possible that may also involve replacement of the Banbury LH set as well, but I haven't seen that explicitly mentioned anywhere.

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

Prepares to be shot...
I believe that SWT 158s mainly run in multiple, and as TPE services currently use trains with 1st class, I believe that 11 Northern 156s should have been transferred to SWT in return for there 158s, and SWT should be told to diagram 158+159 wherever possible, reducing services no longer containing first class.

I assume you meant to write '156+159' otherwise that doesn't make sense as you've moved the 158s elsewhere.

SWT 158s don't mainly run in multiple, about half the daily diagrams are single units, and most are services with advertised first class.

156s and 159s in multiple won't be pathable as 90 mph trains to fit between EMUs on the fast lines between Basingstoke and Waterloo. West of Basingstoke I doubt they'd manage to keep the current timetable either - which on the face of it isn't as big a problem, as 158s are not normally diagrammed west of Salisbury.

 

[CC 72100]

Prepares to be shot...
I believe that SWT 158s mainly run in multiple, and as TPE services currently use trains with 1st class, I believe that 11 Northern 156s should have been transferred to SWT in return for there 158s, and SWT should be told to diagram 158+159 wherever possible, reducing services no longer containing first class.

I don't think that creating a microfleet of 75mph units on a railway that is timed for 158s is a very sensible idea at all. Training on these units and arranging sufficient staff would take substantially more time and effort than the current arrangement that will go ahead. It seems a hell of a lot of trouble just to maintain 1st class on one route...

 

[BantamMenace]

Leeds to Carlisle should be looked at as a LHCS replaced service as well in my opinion to free up the much sought after 158s.
This service could be ran fast between Leeds and Skipton so not to mess up the timings that badly.

 

[theblackwatch]

Subsequent comments corrected to 37s and DBSOs. AFAIK, DRS have 2 DBSOs (9705/07), both at RVEL, with one due to go to Anglia, unless something has been renegotiated. Have DRS acquired 9713 from Riviera as well as 2 coaches for 2 sets seems a bit risky.

As far as I'm aware, 9713 belongs to RVEL. It was never owned by Riviera Trains, although they did lease for a while but then handed it back to Eversholt and it was subsequently sold (not to the MNR which keeps being claimed by some - that sale was never finalised).

 

[alexl92]

Leeds to Carlisle should be looked at as a LHCS replaced service as well in my opinion to free up the much sought after 158s.
This service could be ran fast between Leeds and Skipton so not to mess up the timings that badly.

Northern have been trying to persuade the DfT to pay for that one for YEARS apparently :/

 

[deltic08]

Why were you not using a season ticket?

If one wasn't applicable, then that's not really "commuting" in that sense...

Neil

Are you being serious or sarcastic?

 

[158722]

As far as I'm aware, 9713 belongs to RVEL. It was never owned by Riviera Trains, although they did lease for a while but then handed it back to Eversholt and it was subsequently sold (not to the MNR which keeps being claimed by some - that sale was never finalised).

Cheers for the confirmation.

 

[30907]

Leeds to Carlisle should be looked at as a LHCS replaced service as well in my opinion to free up the much sought after 158s.
This service could be ran fast between Leeds and Skipton so not to mess up the timings that badly.

No doubt, though not sure the loadings justify it when you've stripped out the Airedale commuters. The advantage of Cumbrian Coast seems to me
1. Relatively low speeds, depending how far south they run, and the only heavy loads are commuters at Sellafield who don't have heavy luggage and will quickly get used to slam doors again.
2. Not straying too far from home!

 

[Philip]

I'm surprised BBC North West Tonight practically read out the press release word for word yesterday after the fuss they previously made about rumours Northern Rail trains would make up for the shortfall at TPE. They even had David Cameron in the studio so could have grilled him on it if only they'd realised it's the same story and DfT were trying to hide the negative implications by boasting about the positive ones. :roll:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---




Won't happen as TPE crews will only be trained on 156s. If Northern did give them a 142 in lieu, it'll go nowhere.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Chiltern never needed all 9 to start with - they only needed 5 x 170s in service from August and I think the rest are needed in service from May 2016.

Their plan is to reform the 170/3s and the 4 car 168s in to 18 x 3 car trains.

TPE crews have worked 142s before, I remember getting on an evening TPE Blackpool North service from Manchester to Salford Crescent in about 2007. It was after TPE had taken the route from Northern and after 185s had replaced 175s on the route. I believe it was a booked diagram though I'm not sure when it ended.

 

[BantamMenace]

No doubt, though not sure the loadings justify it when you've stripped out the Airedale commuters. The advantage of Cumbrian Coast seems to me
1. Relatively low speeds, depending how far south they run, and the only heavy loads are commuters at Sellafield who don't have heavy luggage and will quickly get used to slam doors again.
2. Not straying too far from home!

Could a diagram not be Crewe to Preston ECS, Preston to Carlisle via Barrow, Carlisle to Leeds, Leeds to Carlisle. Overnight in Carlisle.

And the other diagram be Carlisle to Leeds, Leeds to Carlisle, Carlisle to Preston via Barrow and then ECS back to Crewe. Overnight in Crewe.

That way one ends up in Crewe and the other in Carlisle with a 158 freed from Leeds to Carlisle duty.

 

[deltic08]

Could a diagram not be Crewe to Preston ECS, Preston to Carlisle via Barrow, Carlisle to Leeds, Leeds to Carlisle. Overnight in Carlisle.

And the other diagram be Carlisle to Leeds, Leeds to Carlisle, Carlisle to Preston via Barrow and then ECS back to Crewe. Overnight in Crewe.

That way one ends up in Crewe and the other in Carlisle with a 158 freed from Leeds to Carlisle duty.

The Leeds-Carlisle services are mainly 2x158s so would free up two units.

I doubt loco hauled would operate the entire length from Carlisle to Barrow.

 

[DarloRich]

The Leeds-Carlisle services are mainly 2x158s so would free up two units.

I doubt loco hauled would operate the entire length from Carlisle to Barrow.

there is talk of Carlisle - Preston via Barrow.......

I did wonder why the S&C wasn't considered for the loco hauled services. Perhaps there is to much conflict timing wise at the Leeds end.

 

[47802]

there is talk of Carlisle - Preston via Barrow.......

I did wonder why the S&C wasn't considered for the loco hauled services. Perhaps there is to much conflict timing wise at the Leeds end.

The S&C has a perfectly good service with 158's and if you want Loco hauled there are plenty of charter trains.

DRS and their parent company have been interested in improving capacity and running DRS loco hauled services along the Cumbrian coast for some time now so it would seem to be the obvious choice.

 

[thealexweb]

there is talk of Carlisle - Preston via Barrow.......
.

Running end to end all day?

 

[DarloRich]

The S&C has a perfectly good service with 158's and if you want Loco hauled there are plenty of charter trains.

DRS and their parent company have been interested in improving capacity and running DRS loco hauled services along the Cumbrian coast for some time now so it would seem to be the obvious choice.

I use the line fairly often thanks. I am quite happy with 2 x 158 units. Much better than it used to be! Also much cheaper between Leeds & Carlisle/Glasgow

I just thought that it might be considered for LHCS due to the potential for tourist traffic and also the fact that several 158 units could be released to offer capacity on other routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Running end to end all day?

I dont know. I would assume morning and evening only.

 

[matt]

As far as I'm aware, 9713 belongs to RVEL. It was never owned by Riviera Trains, although they did lease for a while but then handed it back to Eversholt and it was subsequently sold (not to the MNR which keeps being claimed by some - that sale was never finalised).

Three DBSOs were moved from Eastleigh to Derby in 2013 https://flic.kr/p/e4VJ3z

 

[northwichcat]

TPE crews have worked 142s before, I remember getting on an evening TPE Blackpool North service from Manchester to Salford Crescent in about 2007. It was after TPE had taken the route from Northern and after 185s had replaced 175s on the route. I believe it was a booked diagram though I'm not sure when it ended.

It's possible that was a TPE service operated by Northern. If it was worked by TPE crews then it's so long ago that they would have to be retrained on 142s to be able to work them again.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I use the line fairly often thanks. I am quite happy with 2 x 158 units. Much better than it used to be! Also much cheaper between Leeds & Carlisle/Glasgow

I just thought that it might be considered for LHCS due to the potential for tourist traffic and also the fact that several 158 units could be released to offer capacity on other routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I dont know. I would assume morning and evening only.

The NDA who run Sellafield (and own DRS) are probably funding this.
They won't have any interest in the S&C.

 

[Chester025]

These diagrams are 'doing the rounds' -

05:19 PRE - CAR [09:24]
09:38 CAR - BIF [12:08]
12:31 BIF - CAR [14:56]
15:12 CAR - PRE [19:30]


06:15 CAR - BIF [08:43]
09:08 BIF - CAR [11:34]
11:50 CAR - BIF [14:19]
14:52 BIF - CAR [17:19]

 

[hairyhandedfool]

....I did wonder why the S&C wasn't considered for the loco hauled services. Perhaps there is to much conflict timing wise at the Leeds end.

Wild stab in the dark here, but I believe the Cumbrian Coast is operated by 153s and 156s, that the S&C uses 158s and that TPE are getting some 156s on loan from Northern in May. I realise I might be guilty of getting five from two lots of two here, but I would be a little surprised if 319s on the MCV-LIV run is going to release 6x 156.

 

[Philip]

It's possible that was a TPE service operated by Northern. If it was worked by TPE crews then it's so long ago that they would have to be retrained on 142s to be able to work them again.

Wouldn't it depend on how long it is since the diagram finished as to whether retraining is needed? It was definitely a TPE service with TPE staff and I saw it a few times, normally a 156 but sometimes a 142.