TPE franchise awarded to First

[krus_aragon]

Here here. (Or is it hear hear)

It's "hear, hear", as the phrase was originally "hear him, hear him". (i.e. "listen to this person, I agree with what they're saying")

 

[Senex]

It feels like that for some reason, but is it really the case? Doors in those positions make it easier to board and find your seat with luggage, while the layout is very low density with plenty of tables, and the large overhead racks take even the largest of trolley cases with ease. And because of few stops, there isn't much of a chance for the cold to get in, though that could be solved by adding vestibule doors.

The issues I have with the 185 are the position of First Class (at one end either side of a door would be better) and that they are a coach too short and not often enough doubled up. And the ride can be a little poor at times.

That's an interesting question. Doors in those positions do indeed make boarding and alighting easier for large numbers of passengers, which is why we've seen that sort of layout on mass-transit rail vehicles for many years, but they do use up space which could otherwise be used for seating, which is more necessary on a longer-distance train. With good vestibule doors they can indeed form three pleasant saloons rather than one massive aircraft-type interior. In terms of interior layout the 185s are pretty good, as you say, and it is good to have properly useful overhead racks, given that people really do need to keep their luggage close to them these days.

You're so right about with your issues with the 185s. They are surely a coach, if not two coaches, too short. If the Voyagers for cross-country work were built as 4- or 5-coach units, then nothing shorter was really going to be suitable for TransPennine (and we know that the Voyagers are in fact inadequate). And the position of First is very poor. Although it's the best location for ride, it gets a constant stream of standard-class passengers moving to and from to get to the toilet at the end or to and from the utility area, detracting very much from the ambience the design is otherwise trying to create (and I personally don't like the way the table-legs are exactly where I want to put my feet!).

PS Do you remember DR's "Lange Halberstädter" 23-metre long-distance coaches with the doors in the 1/3, 2/3 positions?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm looking forward to the new Intercity trains for the Scottish routes. The 185/350s are commuter trains and not suitable for the long distance routes to Scotland. Intercity trains should have doors at the ends of the coach with an internal door to get into the saloon. Nobody wants to be stuck next to a door on a 3hr journey, especially when it's cold outside. Intercity trains should have bigger comfier seats ideally aligned with windows (185/350s have horrible hard thin seats). Carpet should be full width and possibly extending up as far as the windows. Ideally armrests should be soft. The lack of soft furnishings gives the 350s a cold 'commuter train' feel to them. Ideally all windows should have curtains or blinds. All seats should have power sockets. Hopefully they will put first class exclusively in an end coach and NOT have standard class either side, this is annoying for both standard and first class passengers. A small kitchen, even a voyager style microwave, would be a huge inprovement! When travelling to Manchester airport from Scotland I find the 350s so bad that I now travel with Virgin and change at either Warrington or Preston. I know I'm not the only person who does this. It's about time these routes had proper intercity trains to compete with Virgin.

If only! What hope of truly comfortable long-distance rail travel, even just in terms of proper leg-room, whilst the present DfT/TOC régime is in place?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can't help thinking the 185's with there 750hp engines big windows and wide foors would be ideal on the S and C.
K

There's the future -- the S&C back up to 80-mph speeds (or more) and a new Nottingham to Glasgow service calling at Chesterfield, Sheffield, Leeds, Skipton, Settle, Appleby, Carlisle, Lockerbie (taking this wretched stop from the Manchester trains), and Motherwell -- using to the full the 185s' power and offering the good views from those big windows. One can but dream!

 

[bradders1983]

There's the future -- the S&C back up to 80-mph speeds (or more) and a new Nottingham to Glasgow service calling at Chesterfield, Sheffield, Leeds, Skipton, Settle, Appleby, Carlisle, Lockerbie (taking this wretched stop from the Manchester trains), and Motherwell -- using to the full the 185s' power and offering the good views from those big windows. One can but dream!

I think this forum needs a "Nottingham to Glasgow Klaxon" every time it gets mentioned, the forum seems obsessed with that particular route

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not come across those DR coaches. I have used the regular ones, which are nicer than the DB version as they have 5 rather than 6 bays in the centre section and correspondingly better legroom. Aren't they all 26m though?

 

[DaiGog]

As one who commutes on 185s every day for over an hour each way, my biggest issue with them is that the seats are worn out. Most seats are now no more comfortable than a park bench.

As for the design, they are basically a well-laid out unit, with most seats lining up with the windows. I don't much like the layout of the First Class coach either, but can see why it is like it is (the one disabled toilet can serve First and Standard, as I believe each class has to have one). The small toilet is in the wrong place - the seating area is not the place for a toilet, as when it smells it isn't pleasant if you're sitting outside it, especially when passengers leave the door open. On the odd occasion I have done Manchester-Edinburgh on one, I've been ready to get off by Carlisle - but that said, Manchester to Stoke on a Voyager is more than enough!

 

[northwichcat]

Note that the new hourly service Piccadilly-Greenbank will only call at Altrincham, Hale, Knutsford, Northwich so that should be a shorter journey for you. And hopefully won't involve Pacers!

The Chairman of MCRUA is saying the new service will be the semi-fast, opposed to removing stops from the existing service. However, I'm not convinced it'll be that way around, as that way around it'll likely mean one service will be more crowded than the other. (The Chairman lives in Mobberley so doesn't want his village to lose it's Chester service even though most people boarding at Mobberley going in the Chester direction go to Knutsford, Northwich and Greenbank.)

Either way it will become possible to get to Manchester a few minutes quicker but if a journey involves changing to go somewhere beyond Stockport/Manchester it may work better to get the all-stops depending on the times of services.

 

[Senex]

Not come across those DR coaches. I have used the regular ones, which are nicer than the DB version as they have 5 rather than 6 bays in the centre section and correspondingly better legroom. Aren't they all 26m though?

Sorry, I meant 26 m, of course -- standard UIC. They were built in part for use on the DDR/BRD traffic. (I must have had MkIII on the brain as I was writing!)

 

[XC90]

I have said from the beginning, 185's and 350's are not suitable trains for an intercity Anglo scottish service. It is a joke that the DfT think it is acceptable.

TPE should have been allocated the 180's when they were available. They seem to perform well on Hull trains, an intercity service.

Hopefully the route will get proper intercity trains with the new franchise.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I have said from the beginning, 185's and 350's are not suitable trains for an intercity Anglo scottish service. It is a joke that the DfT think it is acceptable.

TPE should have been allocated the 180's when they were available. They seem to perform well on Hull trains, an intercity service.

Leaving aside the bone-headedness of running a 125mph diesel train on lines which are electrified throughout and don't have 125mph line speeds, the 180s were not available. The only "spare" 180s only became spare because East Coast decided to cancel their Lincoln trains, and they were moved to First Great Western which did desperately need them for their services to the Cotswolds.

For all the wibble about the 185s being too small (which they are) they have only a handful fewer seats than the 220s they replaced (it's about 8 standard class and 12 first class seats, if you're interested). The 350s are absolutely fine for the work they are asked to do. As for the complaints about 1/3 and 2/3 doors, they really really don't let the cold in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As for the design, they are basically a well-laid out unit, with most seats lining up with the windows. I don't much like the layout of the First Class coach either, but can see why it is like it is (the one disabled toilet can serve First and Standard, as I believe each class has to have one).

This seems silly as there is no First Class wheelchair space. There isn't on LM 350s either, and on those the accessible bog is in a Standard only vehicle.

The small toilet is in the wrong place - the seating area is not the place for a toilet, as when it smells it isn't pleasant if you're sitting outside it, especially when passengers leave the door open. On the odd occasion I have done Manchester-Edinburgh on one, I've been ready to get off by Carlisle - but that said, Manchester to Stoke on a Voyager is more than enough!

Funny thing, I enjoyed a Voyager ride from MKC to EDB via BHM on Sunday evening. They really aren't *that* bad. You can barely hear the engines, it's more of a low down rumble like track noise, the windows are very large, and the interior is otherwise broadly identical to a Pendolino. And I even don't mind the purple lights (very confused by those who complain they can't read - they aren't the reading lights, which are provided separately at each seat).

Whereas I didn't really enjoy a 350 ride from Edinburgh to Carlisle the previous week, as it was overcrowded and the legroom in the airline seating is a bit tight unless you can get a priority seat.

 

[sprinterguy]

Leaving aside the bone-headedness of running a 125mph diesel train on lines which are electrified throughout and don't have 125mph line speeds, the 180s were not available. The only "spare" 180s only became spare because East Coast decided to cancel their Lincoln trains, and they were moved to First Great Western which did desperately need them for their services to the Cotswolds.

The route wasn't electrified throughout until pretty recently.

Was the lease to FGW of the five 180s formerly designated for East Coast a deal done purely between TOC and ROSCO, or was it stipulated by the DfT? If the former, then it is possible that TPE could have put in an offer for them if they had so desired, and 5 x 5-car trains would have gone some way towards relieving the demands being placed on TPEs' 185 fleet prior to the arrival of the 350s.

 

[po8crg]

It's "hear, hear", as the phrase was originally "hear him, hear him". (i.e. "listen to this person, I agree with what they're saying")

On parts of the internet, it's "read, read" since that's what you're actually doing online.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think this forum needs a "Nottingham to Glasgow Klaxon" every time it gets mentioned, the forum seems obsessed with that particular route

I don't think it is as popular as it once was, but for a long time from about the mid 200os one could look up the website of Renaissance Trains, which ticked along nicely promising a Nottingham to Glasgow open access service within a few months.

As you can see here: http://www.renaissancetrains.com/glasgow-trains.html

...services should start in 2009! Shouldn't they be updating their info by now?

There are some parallels with the irregular bursts of enthusiasm for the GO-OP (or whatever they are called this week) Yeovil Jn to Birmingham service, another OA service that I doubt will ever happen...

 

[XC90]

Leaving aside the bone-headedness of running a 125mph diesel train on lines which are electrified throughout.....

Wasn't when the 180's were available and would have released 185's for the job they are most suited to. How you can say 350's are suited to an intercity route when they are essentially commuter trains is just beyond comprehension. Do you work for the DfT?

As for the 125mph on lines which don't allow that speed,they may do 125mph but its also about the power they produce for getting over tough gradients. I'm not sure your correct about 125mph not being achieved on the route but just in case you are, some sections must come pretty close to it surely?

 

[northwichcat]

Wasn't when the 180's were available and would have released 185's for the job they are most suited to. How you can say 350's are suited to an intercity route when they are essentially commuter trains is just beyond comprehension.

Yep that was what was being referred to earlier on. TPE cut back Windermere services to free up 185s to use on Scottish services (which had previously been operated by Virgin Voyagers.) Then Northern acquired 3 x 180s to be able to run extra Manchester-Preston services to fill the void left by the TPE cutback until the 150s were released by the delivery of 172s.

The 350/1s were designed as commuter trains for SWT and apart from putting 2+2 seating in and fitting a pantograph they are still the same as 450s.

 

[Tetchytyke]

How you can say 350's are suited to an intercity route when they are essentially commuter trains is just beyond comprehension. Do you work for the DfT?

Arguing about whether something is a "commuter" train or an "intercity" is probably pointless, as everyone has a different definition. I'd say a train with air-conditioning, first class, tables and a 110mph top speed goes far beyond what you'd expect from a "commuter" train.

The only nod to "commuter" traffic is the door layout, which was deliberately specified on the 185s to help with dwell times on the Leeds-Manchester and Lancaster-Manchester core.

I'm not sure your correct about 125mph not being achieved on the route

The whole of the northern WCML has speed differentials between tilting and non-tilting stock. IIRC the maximum speed that any non-tilting trains can reach is 100mph, and then only in a few places. Even the 350s can't get to their top speed.

Northern acquired 3 x 180s to be able to run extra Manchester-Preston services to fill the void left by the TPE cutback until the 150s were released by the delivery of 172s.

IIRC the 180s were hired by Northern to increase capacity elsewhere on the network, it was the same time that the 5x142s came out of warm storage at Blackpool. They weren't used on new or additional services, they were used on the existing Preston-Manchester/Hazel Grove services to displace units elsewhere. And, as you say, they went when the extra capacity was delivered with the 150s from London Midland.

The TPE cutback was really limited to the Barrow and Windermere branches, there were no fewer trains from Preston to Manchester.

 

[DaiGog]

Funny thing, I enjoyed a Voyager ride from MKC to EDB via BHM on Sunday evening. They really aren't *that* bad. You can barely hear the engines, it's more of a low down rumble like track noise, the windows are very large, and the interior is otherwise broadly identical to a Pendolino.

I'm sure the debate has been done to death many times over on these forums, but I really don't like Voyagers or Pendolinos. The Voyager isn't *that* bad if you get the right seat, and it isn't wedged, or too stuffy, or too rattly, or too smelly. To get all of the above on the same journey is a rare thing in my experience (which admittedly is much more from the XC ones than the VT examples; I'm aware of the latter's revised seat layout and so on).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Wasn't when the 180's were available and would have released 185's for the job they are most suited to. How you can say 350's are suited to an intercity route when they are essentially commuter trains is just beyond comprehension. Do you work for the DfT?
As for the 125mph on lines which don't allow that speed,they may do 125mph but its also about the power they produce for getting over tough gradients. I'm not sure your correct about 125mph not being achieved on the route but just in case you are, some sections must come pretty close to it surely?

The Voyagers and 180s were originally bought for services which did not wholly run under the wires (out of Paddington and on VXC, including Birmingham-Manchester/Scotland.
When the DfT authorised North West electrification in 2009, the first desired benefit was to run Manchester-Scotland with EMUs.
The DfT opted to utilise an option in an LM order for 350s for this (350s being on the WCML in the first place because of SWT ordering too many 450s).
There was no money to buy a small (10 unit) fancy fleet of new intercity EMUs, and deploying 180s would have been daft with new wires up lying unused.

In any case the non-tilt speed limit on the WCML is 110mph.
I would expect the 350s to beat the 180s up Greyrigg, Shap and Beattock (221s can use EPS speeds).
350s can give 390s a run for their money, even with the 100/110mph max.
The 14x180s were never available to redeploy as a full fleet, and their unreliability is legendary (despite being nice units internally).
It's about railway economics (and politics of course), which have changed very considerably for TPE and Northern only in the last couple of years from famine to feast.
Hence new trains are on the horizon. Would you be happy with 6-car Pendolinos?

 

[northwichcat]

IIRC the 180s were hired by Northern to increase capacity elsewhere on the network, it was the same time that the 5x142s came out of warm storage at Blackpool. They weren't used on new or additional services, they were used on the existing Preston-Manchester/Hazel Grove services to displace units elsewhere. And, as you say, they went when the extra capacity was delivered with the 150s from London Midland.

The TPE cutback was really limited to the Barrow and Windermere branches, there were no fewer trains from Preston to Manchester.

You remember incorrectly.

Prior to TPE taking over the Scottish services the service pattern over a 2 hour period between Manchester and Preston was:
Buxton to Blackpool x 2 (150s and 156s)
Manchester Airport to Blackpool x 2 (185s)
Manchester Airport to Windermere x 1 (185s)
Manchester Airport to Barrow x 1 (185s)
Manchester Piccadilly to Scotland x 1 (4 car Voyagers)

When TPE got the Scottish services to run they diverted the Windemere service to Scotland, so Scotland gained a direct Airport service but Manchester to Preston lost 4 carriages over a 2 hour period.

That was why the Buxton to Blackpool was withdrawn and hourly Hazel Grove to Preston and Manchester Victoria to Blackpool services replaced it and extra rolling stock was required and the only thing available was 180s due to the 172 delivery being delayed, originally Northern had been promised 6 of the LO 150s.

I'm not sure which 5 x 142s you are thinking off. 12 x 142s went in to warm storage at Blackpool sidings before going to FGW (as a result of extra 158s being introduced.) FGW returned 5 of them before the other 7, the 5 that came back first didn't get an internal repaint or new seat covers. There were also 5 x 142s which fell out of franchise agreement as a result of the Oldham Loop converting to Metrolink, they were going to go in to warm storage but as a lot of the Oldham Loop passengers transferred to Calder Vale services instead of the replacement bus service (which was running while the conversion was carried out) TfGM paid to keep them in service strengthening Calder Vale services.

 

[Senex]

350s can give 390s a run for their money, even with the 100/110mph max.

A 350 appears to be about 6 minutes slower than a 390 between Preston and Carlisle and about 5 minutes slower between Carlisle and Edinburgh -- quite a significant amount.

 

[DarloRich]

Whilst not as much "bang for your buck" as the Northern announcement i am cautiously optimistic this franchise will go some way to addressing the chronic over crowding on much of the TPE route through the provision of new trains and develop new services to compliment existing routes.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Whilst not as much "bang for your buck" as the Northern announcement i am cautiously optimistic this franchise will go some way to addressing the chronic over crowding on much of the TPE route through the provision of new trains and develop new services to compliment existing routes.

With both, the headlines are good... Even looking at my regular route (Batley to Huddersfield) the headline is 1tph on Northern replaced with 2tph on TPE. The reality is that all I'll save is a change at Dewsbury, as the Brighouse service provides a second tph anyway. However whereas I currently have the option to change at Dewsbury (sacrificing a seat for a faster journey) I will now have to stand all the way to Huddersfield regardless. As with so many of the proposed changes, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating.

 

[WatcherZero]

A 350 appears to be about 6 minutes slower than a 390 between Preston and Carlisle and about 5 minutes slower between Carlisle and Edinburgh -- quite a significant amount.

That presumably is where the 10 minute faster journey time with new stock in the next franchise First is claiming comes from.

 

[notadriver]

The Voyagers and 180s were originally bought for services which did not wholly run under the wires (out of Paddington and on VXC, including Birmingham-Manchester/Scotland.
When the DfT authorised North West electrification in 2009, the first desired benefit was to run Manchester-Scotland with EMUs.
The DfT opted to utilise an option in an LM order for 350s for this (350s being on the WCML in the first place because of SWT ordering too many 450s).
There was no money to buy a small (10 unit) fancy fleet of new intercity EMUs, and deploying 180s would have been daft with new wires up lying unused.

In any case the non-tilt speed limit on the WCML is 110mph.
I would expect the 350s to beat the 180s up Greyrigg, Shap and Beattock (221s can use EPS speeds).
350s can give 390s a run for their money, even with the 100/110mph max.
The 14x180s were never available to redeploy as a full fleet, and their unreliability is legendary (despite being nice units internally).
It's about railway economics (and politics of course), which have changed very considerably for TPE and Northern only in the last couple of years from famine to feast.
Hence new trains are on the horizon. Would you be happy with 6-car Pendolinos?

As far as I'm aware TPEs class 350/4s are still restricted to 100 mph. Because 350s are essentially a suburban unit I've noticed they don't accelerate well in the higher speed ranges especially past 100 mph where 390s, 180s etc are in their element as they were designed to cruise at 125 mph for long periods.

 

[Topgun333]

For those who might be interested I have written a Linked In post about how the Northern and TPE franchise awards might contribute towards the Northern Powerhouse project.

I realise it is early days and many routing and fleet details are yet to be finalised. I also recognise that there will probably be many changes that could fundamentally alter the general announcements made by Arriva and First Group.

Feel free to add constructive criticism here or on the link response comments.

Thanks.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rail-...spock-articles

 

[IrishDave]

For those who might be interested I have written a Linked In post about how the Northern and TPE franchise awards might contribute towards the Northern Powerhouse project.

I realise it is early days and many routing and fleet details are yet to be finalised. I also recognise that there will probably be many changes that could fundamentally alter the general announcements made by Arriva and First Group.

Feel free to add constructive criticism here or on the link response comments.

Thanks.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rail-...spock-articles

Unfortunately that link is broken.

 

[talltim]

Easy solution to the door position issue, have them at the ends and at 1/3 and 2/3

 

[northwichcat]

Easy solution to the door position issue, have them at the ends and at 1/3 and 2/3

Or go for the Renfe Regional solution and have one set of big wide double doors in the middle of each carriage.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Or:

(Mk1 coach showing centre door)

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Or:

(Mk1 coach showing centre door)

Corridor compartments too- luxury!

The issue with end doors isn't just the width, it's that as they're at the end of each coach you get two crowds on the platform right next to each other, and that boarding passengers can only turn in one direction. As we're getting new stock though, perhaps it's time to think out of the box in terms of door arrangements. The 444s aren't symmetrical after all...