London Midland/Northern EMU changes speculation

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed. I doubt many people in the North would commute that far because it would take significantly longer to travel the same distance. On top of that with salaries being much lower than in London very few people could afford a £4.5k annual commute.

And with housing nearer the jobs being comparatively cheaper, they have much less of a need to do so. Few would do a 2-hour commute (yes, that's the extreme end, but many do) if they could get the same quality of life for the same cost much closer as they can in the North.

 

[A0]

The 319s are better, because most of them (particularly the 319/2s) have a far better 2+2 (or mostly 2+2) seating layout.

You're seriously saying that a 30 year old, non-plug door, non air-con unit is better than a 5 year old, air conditioned, plug door unit simply because the old one is 2+2 seated rather than 3+2 seated?

The 350s are quicker, quieter, better riding, much nicer inside and, even in 3+2 guise, more comfortable than any 319 or 321 I've yet traveled on.

 

[northwichcat]

And with housing nearer the jobs being comparatively cheaper, they have much less of a need to do so. Few would do a 2-hour commute (yes, that's the extreme end, but many do) if they could get the same quality of life for the same cost much closer as they can in the North.

While George Osborne and Cheshire East council's leader are keen on painting the picture that everything is great where I am there are concerns from smaller employers that they can't get the right people in.

Barclays who have their Radbrooke Hall site around 2.5 miles from the nearest station have no issues attracting employers from further afield due to them offering relatively high salaries, offering flexible hours and regular connecting free shuttle buses to and from multiple nearby stations as well as large employer car parks.

However, smaller employers who can't be as flexible or offer the higher salaries can struggle to find the right person. Offering a salary like £18k when you're 1.5 miles from the station which has an hourly all-stops service from Manchester in the morning peak and to Manchester in the evening peak attracts very few people from Manchester, despite being well within a commutable distance on paper and a comparable salary to what a Manchester business advertising the same role would offer. Also younger people, especially, aren't keen on relocating to more expensive housing closer to work when there's much less nightlife than in the cities.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You're seriously saying that a 30 year old, non-plug door, non air-con unit is better than a 5 year old, air conditioned, plug door unit simply because the old one is 2+2 seated rather than 3+2 seated?

The 350s are quicker, quieter, better riding, much nicer inside and, even in 3+2 guise, more comfortable than any 319 or 321 I've yet traveled on.

Nice skewed stats there. The 319s have been in service for 25-28 years currently. The 350/2s have been in service for 6-7 years currently, so the difference is closer to 20 years than 25 years.

 

[A0]

TPE had some trains suitable for their needs. However they were if you remember pinched by someone else. As a result TPE passengers on that route have now to put up with older inferior trains but are still paying the same for their journey.

You're referring to the Manchester - Blackpool service, which is a tad disingenuous, because that service is about to be transferred to the Northern franchise - so it's unlikely it would have retained the 185s as the Northern franchise holder probably wouldn't have wanted a small sub-fleet for one specific route AND it's about to be electrified i.e. in the next 36 months, so all the DMUs on that route will be rendered redundant.

The 170s are being sent to Chiltern simply because they are directly compatible with other units they have. Sending Chiltern 15xs would have been an operational nightmare because they wouldn't have been compatible with the rest of their fleet.

 

[northwichcat]

You're referring to the Manchester - Blackpool service, which is a tad disingenuous, because that service is about to be transferred to the Northern franchise - so it's unlikely it would have retained the 185s as the Northern franchise holder probably wouldn't have wanted a small sub-fleet for one specific route AND it's about to be electrified i.e. in the next 36 months, so all the DMUs on that route will be rendered redundant.

The Northern/TPE franchise spec refers Northern loaning 185s off TPE until they acquire their own 'Regional Express' standard stock. The 185s replaced the 175s which First North Western ordered for Regional Express routes they operated (including the North Wales Coast.)

The 170s are being sent to Chiltern simply because they are directly compatible with other units they have. Sending Chiltern 15xs would have been an operational nightmare because they wouldn't have been compatible with the rest of their fleet.

The 170s which are going/have gone to Chiltern because Porterbrook had no long term guarantee they would be needed in the North (once Manchester-York was electrified.) The lease was expiring imminently and DfT weren't rushing to get a Direct Award signed meant Chiltern swooped for the units still required by TPE. If DfT/Network Rail had admitted Manchester-York electrification wouldn't happen anytime soon and DfT hadn't made a mess of the franchising system a new TPE franchise would likely have signed at least a 7 year lease for the 170/3s before Chiltern started looking for more DMUs.

It would have made more sense for LM to have taken on 156s and released 170s, given they operate some 170+153 combinations, limiting the service to 75mph.

 

[DarloRich]

Are you comparing like with like. I suspect not. If your season is purely MK to Euston then apart from anything else MK to Euston is about 4 times the distance from Bolton to Manchester.

TPE had some trains suitable for their needs. However they were if you remember pinched by someone else. As a result TPE passengers on that route have now to put up with older inferior trains but are still paying the same for their journey.

I do know where Bolton and Manchester are thanks! I gave the figures in response to the quoted post as illustrative of the PTE differentials.

none of that hides the fact that the season tickets in the north are substantially less than I now pay here in the south. You pay the same as me for the a similar journey and you can have similar trains.

Some examples:

Leeds - Manchester (c.45 miles ) is £2980 any permitted

Milton Keynes - MKC (c.46 miles) is £4888 (to Euston) or £5,812 (Z1-6) or £5k via Bedford or Tring or £5960 (z1-6 via Tring or Bedford)

Leeds - York (c.31 miles) is £2172

Milton Keynes - Rugby (c.32 miles) is £2700

A local journey:

Woodlesford - Leeds £580 (c.5 miles)

Fenny Stratford - MKC £688 (c.4 miles)

I was just using Bolton as an example, they currently get some modern trains despite low subsided fares, yet other places outside GM don't get any modern trains and pay proportionally much higher prices. However, to solve that problem it isn't as simple as switching trains

Buxton to Manchester is a much shorter distance than Milton Keynes to Manchester, you'd need to use Buxton to Chorley for a similar distance which by some strange coincide is also £4.5k per annum!

How many people commute Buxton to Chorley? How many season tickets will be sold. I suspect few. How many Milton Keynes (or anywhere south on WCML) do you think are sold?

As above the costs for similar, realistic, commuter journeys are much less in the north. I wish i was still able to enjoy them!

BTW an MKC - Piccadilly season is £8548 as we have people working here who do this journey
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed. I doubt many people in the North would commute that far because it would take significantly longer to travel the same distance. On top of that with salaries being much lower than in London very few people could afford a £4.5k annual commute.

my salary is marginally more than I earned in Darlington

 

[158722]

You're referring to the Manchester - Blackpool service, which is a tad disingenuous, because that service is about to be transferred to the Northern franchise - so it's unlikely it would have retained the 185s as the Northern franchise holder probably wouldn't have wanted a small sub-fleet for one specific route AND it's about to be electrified i.e. in the next 36 months, so all the DMUs on that route will be rendered redundant.

The 170s are being sent to Chiltern simply because they are directly compatible with other units they have. Sending Chiltern 15xs would have been an operational nightmare because they wouldn't have been compatible with the rest of their fleet.

It is expected that some 185s will indeed transfer to Northern from TPE for their Regional Express services.

The 170s are not 'being sent' to Chiltern - they are being obtained in a pro-active move by Chiltern. A small difference in wording... If you mean compatible in terms of coupling, I don't see why any 156 or 158 can't have the wiring mods done to make them compatible with the 168s as per the ex-TPE 170s, but you are right in saying they wouldn't be compativle with Chilterns needs for more 100mph units.

 

[northwichcat]

How many people commute Buxton to Chorley? How many season tickets will be sold. I suspect few. How many Milton Keynes (or anywhere south on WCML) do you think are sold?

Like I said in previous posts I gave that example because it's a comparable distance to Milton Keynes to London. People paying less because they get off the train sooner doesn't mean they pay less proportionally.

Your argument was because you pay more you deserve better. If you buy a whole meat pie for £2 and someone else buys half a meat pie for £1, does it mean the person who pays £1 for the half pie deserves to get a poorer quality filling?

 

[DarloRich]

The DFT caused the Chiltern 170 issue by faffing about with TPE meaning the ROSCO, quite rightly, took the firm offer on the table and leased their assets to someone else.

As i have said Northern and TPE should be allowed (and funded) to procure suitable stock for their needs now with 319 as a stop gap until they can be cascaded to other routes within the franchise and replaced in turn

 

[A0]

Nice skewed stats there. The 319s have been in service for 25-28 years currently. The 350/2s have been in service for 6-7 years currently, so the difference is closer to 20 years than 25 years.

Oh, come off it - I overstated the 319s by two years and the 350/2s by a year.

I genuinely thought the 350/2 only arrived in 2010. I knew the 319s arrived in the mid-late 80s because I remember my local line at the time (GN) received the Bedpan cast off's in place of 312s.

The fact still remains the 319s are at least 1 generation older than the 350s and offer a far less attractive passenger environment - however they're seated - than the 350s, by virtue of the 350s have air-con, plug doors and being generally much quieter and better riding.

 

[DarloRich]

Like I said in previous posts I gave that example because it's a comparable distance to Milton Keynes to London. People paying less because they get off the train sooner doesn't mean they pay less proportionally.

Your argument was because you pay more you deserve better. If you buy a whole meat pie for £2 and someone else buys half a meat pie for £1, does it mean the person who pays £1 for the half pie deserves to get a poorer quality filling?

See above post with realistic examples of commuter distances.

As for your pies example if i pay for a Waitorse pie i expect better quality than a tesco value pie!

 

[northwichcat]

Oh, come off it - I overstated the 319s by two years and the 350/2s by a year.

By picking the oldest 319s and the youngest 350/2s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As for your pies example if i pay for a Waitorse pie i expect better quality than a tesco value pie!

Agreed. However, then you may get a whole Tesco value pie for half the price of the Waitrose pie. I think in railway terms it's like comparing a journey on a regional train with a faster journey (of the same length) on an Intercity train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Neither of those are facts. They aren't subleased, the contract for the 350/4 was novated (legally transferred) to TPE once they were ordered, hence they aren't LM's to be returned.

It might be logical to have them go to LM, but it is still speculation.

This might be the only verified fact about the 350/4's future at present in the TPE ITT

The Department requires a Franchisee who will:
Lease the current franchisee’s fleet of 10 4-car Class 350 EMUs from the Start Date until at least 19 September 2018;

That allows them to transfer to another operator in time for the December 18 timetable change and effectively confirms they are currently leased directly not sub-leased.

 

[Class377/5]

If the class 700 were to be used as you suggest, they'd need to order quite a few more, say 9 or 10 x 8 car, (as the GN is known to be keeping 19 x 365 as someone else has replied), and the intended routes would have to be suitable for at least a minimum of 8 car services.

The 365s will be used in 12 car formations to Peterborough so you'd have to order 12 cars unless you want to cut capacity on the route by about 16% in peak.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You're seriously saying that a 30 year old, non-plug door, non air-con unit is better than a 5 year old, air conditioned, plug door unit simply because the old one is 2+2 seated rather than 3+2 seated?

Yes. To me seat comfort is the primary priority, and the extra seat is of no relevance in 3+2 because I can't fit in it.

I want (a) a seat, and (b) a seat that is wide enough for my backside and shoulders, and has enough legroom for my (rather long) legs. Everything else is a nice to have.

 

[northwichcat]

the extra seat is of no relevance in 3+2 because I can't fit in it.

I'm sure you could fit in between two slim ladies if you tried.

 

[DarloRich]

Agreed. However, then you may get a whole Tesco value pie for half the price of the Waitrose pie. I think in railway terms it's like comparing a journey on a regional train with a faster journey (of the same length) on an Intercity train.

Agreed - although I would point out both the fast and slow LM services are run with the same train. Perhaps we can agree on an Asda service provision for Waitrose price

I'm sure you could fit in between two slim ladies if you tried.

i would fit in between two fat ladies if required

 

[Tetchytyke]

Are you comparing like with like. I suspect not. If your season is purely MK to Euston then apart from anything elese MK to Euston is about 4 times the distance from Bolton to Manchester.

Hemel Hempstead to London Euston is 26 miles, and costs £3492pa, and to Z1-6 (which most people go for) this shoots up to £4412.

Halifax to Manchester is 32 miles and costs £2012pa.

Preston to Manchester is 31 miles and costs £2744pa.

Rail fares in the north are significantly cheaper than in the south- that's another reason why I'm moving back to Newcastle next week. It's only fair to say that with the Harrods prices should come a Harrods service. Sending the 350s to Manchester so the OAPs can have a ride around on their PTE passes whilst we pay top dollar for some knackered old 319s isn't going to go down well.

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if LM would like to palm off their slight, er, miscalculation on 350/2 mileage costs to someone else. GoVia's directors have to afford their yachts somehow.

 

[northwichcat]

Rail fares in the north are significantly cheaper than in the south- that's another reason why I'm moving back to Newcastle next week.

For non-Advance tickets:

• Fares in to London are proportionally expensive.
• Fares for journeys fully within PTE areas are proportionally cheap.
• For other routes any difference is very small.

It's only fair to say that with the Harrods prices should come a Harrods service. Sending the 350s to Manchester so the OAPs can have a ride around on their PTE passes whilst we pay top dollar for some knackered old 319s isn't going to go down well.

So you don't object to losing your 350/2s given they don't exactly provide a 'Harrods service.'

I don't see how the £1.70 single fare paid by Oyster card holders for Wembley Central to Watford Junction is a 'Harrods price', more like an 'Aldi reduced to clear' price. If I want a single ticket for Knutsford to Delamere (an equivalent distance) I'd have to pay £7.10 and if I'm lucky I'll get a class 150, if I'm unlucky I'll get a Pacer!

 

[Tetchytyke]

Yes. To me seat comfort is the primary priority, and the extra seat is of no relevance in 3+2 because I can't fit in it.

I don't know how big you are, but I'm 6'0 and 16 stone and I can fit in the middle seat. I prefer not to as it isn't comfortable, of course, but that's not the same thing as being unable to fit into it.

The big problem with the 3+2 is the lack of standing room, the worst place to sit on a busy 350/2 is on the aisle seat as you just get someone's groin rubbing in your face (and not in a fun way). But it is swings and roundabouts. My morning train is usually 3x350/2 and it is very busy; when even one of those units changes to a 350/1 or a 350/3 there are no seats.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Fares for journeys fully within PTE areas are proportionally cheap.
For other routes any difference is very small.

None of the fares I listed are within PTE areas, they all cross the boundary. The Halifax-Manchester fare is the same distance and the same type of inter-urban journey, yet the northern fare is £1500 cheaper than the southern one. Even the Preston-Manchester fare (which is more intercity than Hemel) is over £700 cheaper.

 

[northwichcat]

None of the fares I listed are within PTE areas, they all cross the boundary. The Halifax-Manchester fare is the same distance and the same type of inter-urban journey, yet the northern fare is £1500 cheaper than the southern one. Even the Preston-Manchester fare (which is more intercity than Hemel) is over £700 cheaper.

But you gave the usual argument because it's expensive in to London, it always costs more in the South which is one of the misconceptions that's posted time and time again.

I found a shocking comparison when I tried to compare a non-London journey on the Tring stopper with a similar length journey on my local line in Cheshire, which I added to my previous post. I should add the Cheshire fare is unusual because the single fare is more than 10p cheaper than the Off-Peak Day return price of £9.10, normally you'd expect it to be £9 or just under.

 

[Tetchytyke]

But you gave the usual argument because it's expensive in to London, it always costs more in the South which is one of the misconceptions that's posted time and time again.

Non-zone1 TfL Oyster fares are cheap, yes, but the cash fare from Watford Junction to Wembley Central is £5.80 single or £11.60 return.

 

[158722]

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if LM would like to palm off their slight, er, miscalculation on 350/2 mileage costs to someone else. GoVia's directors have to afford their yachts somehow.

This point was highlighted by another poster and IMHO, this is probably the driver behind any move by LM and/or DfT to reduce costs within the LM franchise - irrespective of the impact on passenger comfort or value for money for season ticket holders. It has been commented that LM's financial performance isn't positive, hence this could be a potential cost cutting exercise at LM whilst solving a train provision issue elsewhere (Northern).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't know how big you are, but I'm 6'0 and 16 stone and I can fit in the middle seat. I prefer not to as it isn't comfortable, of course, but that's not the same thing as being unable to fit into it.

6' 4", 18.5 stone. My shoulders and backside are slightly wider than a seat in 3+2 seating on Desiros (though do fit the slightly wider seats in 165s and 166s).

As for busier trains, using 2+2 but with seats that are narrower than the 350/1 seats (but wider than the 350/2 ones) seems the best approach, thus giving more standing room. I think this is roughly what SWT have done on the 455s and what will be the case on the Thameslink stock.

I think really for 3+2 a train needs to be 2.82m wide (350s are 2.7 something) but that said I think more standing room is more important than adding about 9 seats per vehicle.

 

[northwichcat]

I think really for 3+2 a train needs to be 2.82m wide (350s are 2.7 something) but that said I think more standing room is more important than adding about 9 seats per vehicle.

They are only a few millimeters short of 2.8m, so are as wide as a 150 or a 323. (I imagine they are the same width but Siemens have given a more precise measurement.) The Networkers have slightly over 1cm of extra width.

Personally I don't think 3+2 seating works with the British gauge and the average size of British person. It's not just about weight - I'm 5 ft 11 and between 10 and 11 stone and I find with 3+2 seating there's no where for my arms to go, unless they go in front of me and then I get someone else's elbows in my ribs.

 

[DarloRich]

For non-Advance tickets:

• Fares in to London are proportionally expensive.
• Fares for journeys fully within PTE areas are proportionally cheap.
• For other routes any difference is very small.

Leeds - Manchester (c.45 miles) is £2980 any permitted

Milton Keynes - MKC (c.46 miles) is £4888 (to Euston) or £5,812 (Z1-6) or £5k via Bedford or Tring or £5960 (z1-6 via Tring or Bedford)

Leeds - York (c.31 miles) is £2172

Milton Keynes - Rugby (c.32 miles) is £2700

Woodlesford - Leeds £580 (c.5 miles)

Fenny Stratford - MKC £688 (c.4 miles)

those are not minimal differences on similar commuter routes. Even removing the London journey and comparing the Leeds/ York & MK/Rugby journeys the prices are much less in the north for what is, essentially, the same train (350/185)

The local journey has a substantially less frequent service offering in the south and the same train (150/153)

 

[RobShipway]

They are only a few millimeters short of 2.8m, so are as wide as a 150 or a 323. (I imagine they are the same width but Siemens have given a more precise measurement.) The Networkers have slightly over 1cm of extra width.

Personally I don't think 3+2 seating works with the British gauge and the average size of British person. It's not just about weight - I'm 5 ft 11 and between 10 and 11 stone and I find with 3+2 seating there's no where for my arms to go, unless they go in front of me and then I get someone else's elbows in my ribs.

I have to agree there as I am 5 ft 8.5, but with a weight of about 15 stone, I find on the 458/0's that the only seat that I can sit on, within the three seater seats is the corner seat.

 

[FordFocus]

, I don't see why any 156 or 158 can't have the wiring mods done to make them compatible with the 168s as per the ex-TPE 170s, but you are right in saying they wouldn't be compativle with Chilterns needs for more 100mph units.

15x would be more than wiring mods.

Training for staff including drivers, guards, fitters
New parts required as the current parts pool don't cater for 15x
Not route cleared
Not suitable for DOO as they aren't compatible with equipment having a large corridor in the middle

How Chiltern got the 170 fleet was a bit clever as it can simply bypass the DfT. Chiltern approach the ROSCOs (independent and a private company) to see what DMUs are available soon, one ROSCO comes back and says 170s lease is expiring, we'll talk money. The current TOC TPE can't guarantee the ROSCO anything beyond 2016 as they don't have the franchise after this date. DfT are too busy messing stuff up as per usual, Chiltern make an acceptable offer for the 170s until 2021 and it all gets accepted.

The ROSCO didn't keep it a secret, TPE and the DfT knew but couldn't do anything about it. This is an effect of privatisation.

Let's bring this back to LM and Northern, ignore TPE... The LM franchise as it stands finishes at a similar time to Northern. So LM can't do a deal like Chiltern did above. So what sense does it make for

a) LM to suddenly fund another SEVENTEEN Class 323 trains with no extra stabling available. Govia a tight arsed company at times to foot the bill with little reward because of lack of remaining time on the franchise.

b) LM to then return 350/2s which are extremely suited for their franchise services out of Euston

It doesn't add up and all this is rumour. "I've heard"... "According to"...."Apparently"

I love how the suggestion of 350/2s going to Northern. One poster in particular is a favourite of mine with previous suggestions of 377s coming to Northern. Now that idea died a death I did like the humour that people didn't appreciate the 350s going up North as Bolton - Manchester fares weren't high enough

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It doesn't add up and all this is rumour. "I've heard"... "According to"...."Apparently"

I agree with your thinking.
What's more, DfT now have the bids for TPE and Northern and can relate them to its plans for the LM direct award/rebid, over which it has total control.
They therefore have a very big midlands/north trainset to play with, and will be trying to secure the most cost-effective deals over the 3 franchises.
It might look quite different when the dominos fall at the end of the year.
But usually, the status quo prevails, because it's too risky to do anything else.

 

[Bevan Price]

I disagree. Quite apart from the retrograde change from quietish electric trains to noisier diesels, they will note a big reduction in seating capacity. Class 319 have nearly 300 seats, entirely unreserved. Class 185 has about 160 standard class seats, many of which will carry reservation labels.

(Yes, I know some labels will specify they are not reserved between Liverpool & Manchester, but trying to find these on busy trains makes life unnecessarily difficult for passengers. Indeed, on services with a high proportion of short distance travel, I would suggest that it should be a requirement to provide at least 100 unreserved seats.)

 

[Qwerty133]

No just the mention of LM securing more 319s and the follow up suggestion that the numbers would add up for LM releasing 350/2s, which follows on what was already being discussed in the thread. I think it's posted by the same person who first posted about LM getting 319s as class 321 replacements.

But it wouldn't because 321s couldn't go into Euston, or to Liverpool, and are needed to strengthen the XCity, as well as to provide units for forthcoming electrification projects.