What happens to the Class 172s when the GOBLIN is wired?

[The Snap]

Pretty much what the title says. Any chance of them heading north? Would be nice to see some nearly-new cast-offs rather than 30 year old cast-offs in the North!

 

[jopsuk]

I think they're already spoken for at Chiltern

 

[G_A_C_C_C]

Chiltern are always looking for new stock and they already have 4 of these.

 

[D365]

Does the lack of a tripcock (due to bogie design) inhibit flexibility on their network at all significantly?
Also, toilets may need to be fitted to the eight LO units.

 

[northwichcat]

Northern bidders were allowed to propose taking any 15xs or 17xs which will be released.

That included:
The FGW 150/1s and 153s
Some of the Scotrail 156s, 158s and 170s
The LO 172s

As Arriva and Govia were shorlisted bidders it's possible that they have proposed plans for Northern to benefit from the release of 172s but not to take them on. For example, Govia might have said if LM take on the 172s that allow LM 170s to be released to Northern, while Arriva could have proposed Chiltern taking on some Scotrail 170s converting them to 168s and letting Northern have both the Chiltern and LO 172s for a consistent fleet at Chiltern.

At the moment it is expected Northern will take on cascaded Turbostars in the form of 170s from Scotrail and will also order brand new diesel trains, which are expected to be Bombardier built.

 

[Zoidberg]

For the benefit of the uninitiated, GOBLIN = Gospel Oak to Barking Line

Isn't Google wonderful.

 

[The Snap]

Northern bidders were allowed to propose taking any 15xs or 17xs which will be released.

That included:
The FGW 150/1s and 153s
Some of the Scotrail 156s, 158s and 170s
The LO 172s

As Arriva and Govia were shorlisted bidders it's possible that they have proposed plans for Northern to benefit from the release of 172s but not to take them on. For example, Govia might have said if LM take on the 172s that allow LM 170s to be released to Northern, while Arriva could have proposed Chiltern taking on some Scotrail 170s converting them to 168s and letting Northern have both the Chiltern and LO 172s for a consistent fleet at Chiltern.

At the moment it is expected Northern will take on cascaded Turbostars in the form of 170s from Scotrail and will also order brand new diesel trains, which are expected to be Bombardier built.

Thanks.

I assume the 170s and new stock to Northern forms part of the new Northern franchise conditions for the new franchise next year?

 

[northwichcat]

I assume the 170s and new stock to Northern forms part of the new Northern franchise conditions for the new franchise next year?

Yes the next franchisee has to replace the Pacers and provide additional services. They also have to provide a minimum of 120 new self-powered carriages which can't be rebuilt from old trains, unless they opt for brand new carriages hauled by a locomotive (although that seems unlikely.)

That leaves a gap to fill and DfT have prevented TPE bidders from securing the released 15xs and 17xs, which seems to suggest DfT want Northern bidders to take up that option and not propose only new self-powered trains to replace Pacers (which would increase costs.) Of course DfT want to make it look like TOCs decide what rolling stock they take on even though in reality DfT controls it.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think they're already spoken for at Chiltern

I think they're already spoken for at Chiltern only by posters in rail forums who like to see order everywhere...

Can we find something official that suggests it?

 

[TheNewNo2]

I think they're already spoken for at Chiltern only by posters in rail forums who like to see order everywhere...

Can we find something official that suggests it?

They're spoken for in that whenever any DMU becomes available it seems to go to Chiltern.

 

[northwichcat]

They're spoken for in that whenever any DMU becomes available it seems to go to Chiltern.

So we can expect Chiltern to take on the 144s when Northern release them then?

 

[swt_passenger]

They're spoken for in that whenever any DMU becomes available it seems to go to Chiltern.

Except those that go to Southern, so you're exaggerating.

 

[t0ffeeman]

For the benefit of the uninitiated, GOBLIN = Gospel Oak to Barking Line

Isn't Google wonderful.

actually its Gospel oak Barking line improvement now!

 

[northwichcat]

Except those that go to Southern

Apparently they only swooped for the Scotrail 170s because Chiltern had already secured the TPE 170s, even though TPE thought the 170s were staying with them and the subsequent TPE operator until December 2018.

 

[D365]

Apparently they only swooped for the Scotrail 170s because Chiltern had already secured the TPE 170s, even though TPE thought the 170s were staying with them and the subsequent TPE operator until December 2018.

Are the TPE Class 170/3s in any better condition than the ex-Scotrail Class 170/4s?

 

[AM9]

So we can expect Chiltern to take on the 144s when Northern release them then?

I doubt that Chiltern will have any use for them in 10 years time so, No. Until then I expect them to be still required in the north.

 

[northwichcat]

I doubt that Chiltern will have any use for them in 10 years time so, No. Until then I expect them to be still required in the north.

They have to be released by Northern by December 2019 and the point is Chiltern are unlikely to want them just because they are off-lease DMUs.

If you're going to come up 'what if' scenarios which might change the franchise spec, what about if Northern actually sign leases for units which are expected to be released by FGW electrification and an electrification delay doesn't allow those units to be released on time? We could finish up with Northern taking the trains they've agreed deals for and other operators having to take on either Pacers or loco-hauled as replacement as nothing else is available.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Are the TPE Class 170/3s in any better condition than the ex-Scotrail Class 170/4s?

Probably because quite a bit was spent doing them up when they transferred from SWT/LM to TPE.

 

[AM9]

They have to be released by Northern by December 2019 and the point is Chiltern are unlikely to want them just because they are off-lease DMUs.

If you're going to come up 'what if' scenarios which might change the franchise spec, what about if Northern actually sign leases for units which are expected to be released by FGW electrification and an electrification delay doesn't allow those units to be released on time? We could finish up with Northern taking the trains they've agreed deals for and other operators having to take on either Pacers or loco-hauled as replacement as nothing else is available.

The biggest 'what if ' scenario is already with us, i.e. the General Election is over. The 'Northern Powerhouse' has served its purpose and won the Tories a few votes in the North. It was a soundbite given a veneer of credibility by gestures like naming 319 362.
Now the election is over, what was clearly known about cp5 projects' overruns/overspends, well before the election has suddenly been 'discovered' and guess what? The Trans Pennine electrification has been postponed and what's more, there's added value to be had in that by saying that a 'Northern Powerhouse' deserves better. So there will (justifyably) be a not inconsiderable delay deciding what it will be, a poor man's HS3, just a faster alignment with new tunnels; whatever is done, the project has been effectively kicked into the long grass, probably cp6, maybe even further. After all, the government doesn't want to start any more schemes now only to find that they will embarass them just before the next election.
Whatever has been promised for'Northern Powerhouse' is now likely to be scaled down with the reduced funds that cp5 overruns/overspends have caused. Consequently, there won't be sufficient to provide what each of the disparate sub-regions in 'The North' thinks they are entitled to. Then the bickering and squabbling will start and Rail North, or whatever it's new name is, won't have any authority to resolve. Not that this will bother the government as the 'Northern Powerhouse' stunt will have met its objective to woo voters at the election, - job done. In 4 years time, the Tories will need to return to nurturing their homeland electorates so being seen to spend significant sums on 'The North' would not do much for their chances.
The point of the wordy bit above is that like many other things involving large sums of public money, capital investment in railways is a political football and the promises only keep coming whilst there is a political payback. Putting the coded words in a tender document that Pacers must be replaced is just as disposable as cp5 projects, tax credits for lower paid workers, etc. especially when it comes to keeping the core vote happy.

 

[Zoidberg]

actually its Gospel oak Barking line improvement now!

Ah, Wiki has not caught up with that

 

[northwichcat]

Putting the coded words in a tender document that Pacers must be replaced

Ah but that was a code for electrification pause. Saying an order of at least 120 new self-powered vehicles is required was a change in DfT policy. They'd been going on about electrification and cascades replacing Pacers but in the Northern ITT they effectively admitted electrification wouldn't be enough to replace the Pacers in time. The cost of 120 new carriages will be a fraction of what TPE electrification will have costed and it will probably impress Northerners more.

The next clue was in the TPE ITT where it suggested TPE electrification would be at least 2 years behind schedule and bidders needed to plan for electrification not being completed until after the end of the next franchise.

 

[Emblematic]

I wouldn't hold your breath for these units, NR have got to get their act together and electrify the line first.

05.06.15
Perry confirms Barking to Gospel Oak electrification timeline
Rail minister Claire Perry MP has confirmed that enabling works start in October on the £115m Gospel Oak to Barking electrification programme.
Responding to a Parliamentary question on the start date and cost from Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn, MP for Islington North, Perry added that the DfT and TfL have allocated £90m and £25m respectively towards the electrification of the line (2013 prices).
Corbyn was also told that “major on-site works” are due to commence in June 2016, with passenger services on the route due to be available for use by passenger operators by June 2017.
GRIP 3 (option selection) was completed in March this year, work having begun on it in 2013, according to TfL Transport Commissioner Sir Peter Hendy.
Glenn Wallis, secretary of BGORUG, said: “Our expert rail industry advisers tell us that for Network Rail to have taken three years to complete GRIP 3 indicates that they have not exactly been throwing resources at the job. The likelihood of Network Rail completing electrification of the line by mid-2017 is now said to be improbable.”

 

[AM9]

I wouldn't hold your breath for these units, NR have got to get their act together and electrify the line first.

So whatever the Northern bid is it is likely that 172/0 trains won't be part of it. GW might be able to release some 150/1s though.
Chiltern can bide their time until they are available though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ah but that was a code for electrification pause. Saying an order of at least 120 new self-powered vehicles is required was a change in DfT policy. They'd been going on about electrification and cascades replacing Pacers but in the Northern ITT they effectively admitted electrification wouldn't be enough to replace the Pacers in time. The cost of 120 new carriages will be a fraction of what TPE electrification will have costed and it will probably impress Northerners more.

The next clue was in the TPE ITT where it suggested TPE electrification would be at least 2 years behind schedule and bidders needed to plan for electrification not being completed until after the end of the next franchise.

I say that everything has changed since the election and nothing is set in concrete with politicians, especially in a government that has just unexpectedly gained a clear majority.

 

[Emblematic]

Also that cost - £115 mn for about 37 single-track km, over £3mn /km. MML electrification was 1.3 bn for 639 single-track km, just over £2mn /km, including resignalling, remodelling and other upgrades. The new EMUs for the Goblin are a piffling £46 mn for comparison. How much does a DMU have to cost for this to look the better option?

 

[RobShipway]

Also that cost - £115 mn for about 37 single-track km, over £3mn /km. MML electrification was 1.3 bn for 639 single-track km, just over £2mn /km, including resignalling, remodelling and other upgrades. The new EMUs for the Goblin are a piffling £46 mn for comparison. How much does a DMU have to cost for this to look the better option?

The problem with having new DMU's, is that in recent years diesel fumes have been found to be almost as polluting to global warming as petrol engines and in fact some of the newer petrol engines in recent years give off less fumes than diesel engines plus do more miles than the nearest diesel engine.

For me any new trains need to be hybrid to be honest such that they can be powered by either diesel or if possible battery cells as much as possible away from any mains electrification, but can be powered to say 100mph at a third of the power drawn from the mains whether it is AC or DC than current electric trains.

 

[Emblematic]

The problem with having new DMU's, is that in recent years diesel fumes have been found to be almost as polluting to global warming as petrol engines and in fact some of the newer petrol engines in recent years give off less fumes than diesel engines plus do more miles than the nearest diesel engine.

For me any new trains need to be hybrid to be honest such that they can be powered by either diesel or if possible battery cells as much as possible away from any mains electrification, but can be powered to say 100mph at a third of the power drawn from the mains whether it is AC or DC than current electric trains.

I don't disagree, and my preference would be for no new diesels and a rolling electrification programme. There's also freight on the Goblin, but much of that will remain diesel-hauled due to logistics and lack of wires throughout, and there's alternative paths through Stratford for the electrics.
I'm unconvinced that hybrid/bi-mode is yet suited to commuter stock, it's fairly tricky to get an AC EMU into 3 cars and seemingly impossible for 2, so adding sufficient gensets for decent performance might need more than 4 cars. Battery or supercapacitor seems too costly and limited for whole-route use, but looks ideal for dealing with short gaps in wiring. Maybe that could reduce electrification costs? Must be some tricky spots on the route for it to be this expensive.

 

[jopsuk]

the high cost per km is because it consists almost entirely of tricky spots- little in the way of simple plain line

 

[AM9]

the high cost per km is because it consists almost entirely of tricky spots- little in the way of simple plain line

The benefits however, potentially far exceed those on more conventional routes as it will provide links and diversions for many other transfers between the major lines entering north London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't disagree, and my preference would be for no new diesels and a rolling electrification programme. There's also freight on the Goblin, but much of that will remain diesel-hauled due to logistics and lack of wires throughout, and there's alternative paths through Stratford for the electrics.

When this route is finished, I think that the rising pressure for Diesels to be removed from the railways through urban areas will result in a push for electric traction unless there are exceptional circumstances against it. Central London is already imposing restrictions on older diesel engines for road traffic. I expect that this will gradually extend outwards throughout the built-up area and cover more modern types. Soon the diesel locomotive may become part of this trend in the capital.
The trouble with the GoBLin and the NLL is that unlike the GWML and the Chiltern lines, there is little opportunity to coast quickly through the suburbs with a relatively light set of passenger rolling stock once the route has been set. The circular routes pass through some of the most heavily populated areas with frequent stops for conflicting movements at junctions and stopping passenger services so heavy freight trains will be continually accelerating and slowing with their heavy loads. If pricing is used as a means of persuading use of the appropriate traction, the railway in London can clean its act up and match many of Europe's other post industrial cities.

 

[subria]

Also that cost - £115 mn for about 37 single-track km, over £3mn /km. MML electrification was 1.3 bn for 639 single-track km, just over £2mn /km, including resignalling, remodelling and other upgrades. The new EMUs for the Goblin are a piffling £46 mn for comparison. How much does a DMU have to cost for this to look the better option?

My understanding was £115 m cost for the Gospel Oak-Barking line also included bridge replacements and track improvement works.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm unconvinced that hybrid/bi-mode is yet suited to commuter stock, it's fairly tricky to get an AC EMU into 3 cars

Not really; there are tons of 3-car AC EMUs about. Motors in the end cars, compressors, pantograph and transformer in the centre car. Basically the same as a 2-car DC EMU with a means of supplying the DC in the centre car.

 

[northwichcat]

I say that everything has changed since the election and nothing is set in concrete with politicians, especially in a government that has just unexpectedly gained a clear majority.

One thing to note in the ITT is it says Pacer withdrawal by December 2019. While this is the deadline for accessibility and retention toilets, it's also just before the Conservatives will want to start campaigning for the next general election. There's no reason why they couldn't have said December 2018 if they really wanted to give the North a good deal but saying December 2019 potentially allows franchise costs to be kept lower and allows them to boast about something they did which benefited the North close to an election.