22 class 185 units being released by TPE - Where could they go?

[Haydn1971]

They would be ideal for the Liverpool-Nottingham portion of EMT but wouldn't there be issues East of Nottingham so would require the Liverpool-Norwich service to be split at Nottingham which was unpopular.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but given the reliability issues that are starting to creep into the 158 fleet, missing units in a morning, occasional replacement 156s, broken heating/aircon units, plus further passenger growth, plus the cost of getting the units up to standard with accessible toilets, passenger information systems and so on, the wishes of the passengers and local authorities may take a second place behind the necessity to replace the four carriage 158s with six carriage 185s - I like EMTs 158s for comfort, much more comfy than TPEs 185s, but recognise the 158s days are numbered and don't really see much else being obviously able to replace them at the next franchise award other than new stock.

 

[Clansman]

How about on Glasgow Central to Stranraer/Dumfries/Carlisle/Newcastle duties for Scotrail? The route suits what the Class 185s were designed for and I'm sure a little more capacity and First Class travel would be very welcomed on the route - especially on the Stranraer leg where there are a good share of tourists. Can't see any reason why they couldn't work the route? Would also speed up journey times with the utilisation of the quick acceleration.
The 156s aren't really suitable for the route comfort and capacity wise (not that a 3 car 185 offers that much larger capacity) and a fleet of 22 units over the route could allow Scotrail to run more frequent diagrams and boost capacity on non-electrified routes (using the redundant 156s).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The 156s aren't really suitable for the route comfort and capacity wise (not that a 3 car 185 offers that much larger capacity) and a fleet of 22 units over the route could allow Scotrail to run more frequent diagrams and boost capacity on non-electrified routes (using the redundant 156s).

Are you saying that there is the demand for more frequent diagrams on the Stranraer route?

 

[Clansman]

Are you saying that there is the demand for more frequent diagrams on the Stranraer route?

No. Hoowever, capacity can prove an issue, especially in the Summer, where maritime passengers normally peak. All I'm saying is that the 185s would definatly be a step up in service as opposed to the 156s, not just to Stranraer, but to Carlisle and Newcastle as well. Also, I'm sure it would be a welcoming sight to those on the Carlisle to Newcastle stretch of the line - Scotrail could make a few bob off first class fares as well, which would probably prove popular on both Scottish and English stretches of the route. I can't see any negatives apart from staff having to learn on the trains and I'd of thought Polmaddie would be able to cope due to the similarity between the 185s and 380s.

 

[43074]

Yes, I'm aware of that, but given the reliability issues that are starting to creep into the 158 fleet, missing units in a morning, occasional replacement 156s, broken heating/aircon units, plus further passenger growth, plus the cost of getting the units up to standard with accessible toilets, passenger information systems and so on, the wishes of the passengers and local authorities may take a second place behind the necessity to replace the four carriage 158s with six carriage 185s - I like EMTs 158s for comfort, much more comfy than TPEs 185s, but recognise the 158s days are numbered and don't really see much else being obviously able to replace them at the next franchise award other than new stock.

... there are 22 185s available and 19 trains are required to run the service, the numbers work but it depends on whether or not anything is done about the severe speed restrictions between Peterborough & Norwich - they aren't insurmountable but will be costly to resolve - if nothing is done about them I doubt 185s will be used on this section.

Personally I could see the route being split at Nottingham, if nothing else to satisfy the demands of Rail North/TPE, who have openly said they want the service run by TPE. If nothing else it would probably give us better local stock in the East Midlands (i.e. more 158 operated services, fewer 153s) and whilst they are being displaced from Express Passenger work by newer stock, there are still plenty of regional services for which 158s are certainly suitable and will be long into the future.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It was a shame the new Northern franchise wasn't bid till after the TPE franchise had been awarded. The Nothern bidders could have then taken on the 185's instead of the Scotrail 170's

Er, the two franchises were tendered and awarded simultaneously.

 

[Haydn1971]

... there are 22 185s available and 19 trains are required to run the service, the numbers work but it depends on whether or not anything is done about the severe speed restrictions between Peterborough & Norwich - they aren't insurmountable but will be costly to resolve - if nothing is done about them I doubt 185s will be used on this section.

Absolutely, whilst history has provided a Norwich-Liverpool service, things change.

Personally I could see the route being split at Nottingham, if nothing else to satisfy the demands of Rail North/TPE, who have openly said they want the service run by TPE. If nothing else it would probably give us better local stock in the East Midlands (i.e. more 158 operated services, fewer 153s) and whilst they are being displaced from Express Passenger work by newer stock, there are still plenty of regional services for which 158s are certainly suitable and will be long into the future.

Agreed, it will be interesting to see what the proposed Stadler and CAF regional units are like and if these would work on the Norwich-Nottingham service to provide similar performance to the current 158 units - the market has got much more interesting now that CAF and Stadler have arrived

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Er, the two franchises were tendered and awarded simultaneously.

I know, I am saying it was a shame the TPE franchise wasn't awarded first with the new Northern franchise following a couple of months later. The Northern franchise could have taken on the released 185's once the Northern bidders where aware that they were being released but because the franchises where awarded at the same time the Northern bidders proposed using the ex Scotrail 170's which are more versatile than the 185's and could have been used elsewhere.

 

[The Ham]

Yes, and it does seem to be a bit of a Forum obsession (see also "Shoehorning 222s into the SWT franchise" etc).

158/159s are perfect for the SWT franchise for the time being though - given the need to fill platform space at Waterloo, the need for portion working, the need for flexibility. Keep them there until they are life expired and can be replaced by a new generation of 100mph bi-modes.

Keep the 185s somewhere that doesn't involve splitting them into more than two fleets.

Unless someone can give a good case for routes near where they are currently based, then the ROSCO will move them to where they can lease them. At circa £330,000 per unit per year in lease costs (or £6.9 million per year for the spare 21 units) then they are unlikely to be left idle if a suitable, even if it costs something to move them, alternative can be found.

 

[LowLevel]

Yes, I'm aware of that, but given the reliability issues that are starting to creep into the 158 fleet, missing units in a morning, occasional replacement 156s, broken heating/aircon units, plus further passenger growth, plus the cost of getting the units up to standard with accessible toilets, passenger information systems and so on, the wishes of the passengers and local authorities may take a second place behind the necessity to replace the four carriage 158s with six carriage 185s - I like EMTs 158s for comfort, much more comfy than TPEs 185s, but recognise the 158s days are numbered and don't really see much else being obviously able to replace them at the next franchise award other than new stock.

The first of the class 158s to receive the mods you've mentioned (783) has been at Brush in Loughborough since July and is also being fitted with power sockets (in addition to new wheelchair spaces, toilet, PIS, door mods, I assume you'll have to keep being stuck with the rubbish air con as it has been for 25 years though).

I don't see the route being split personally - the amount of through journeys seems to be ever increasing rather than decreasing and a bit of extra capacity combined with some more reasonable fares at the Eastern end would see it rocket. The Anglia franchise spec reckoned the EMT paths were in until 'at least 2025' so that half sounds safe. There's several rolling stock options coming up and with a new pay deal involving Sundays for drivers (guards already done) trickling in I would expect the route to remain as is - it's all gone very quiet on the splitting front and I know even some Northern councils were against it with the Eastern ones being dead set. Whereas before it was being talked about openly I've now heard nothing for a long while.

I suppose the answer will come with the new East Midlands franchise spec.

 

[43096]

The first of the class 158s to receive the mods you've mentioned (783) has been at Brush in Loughborough since July and is also being fitted with power sockets (in addition to new wheelchair spaces, toilet, PIS, door mods, I assume you'll have to keep being stuck with the rubbish air con as it has been for 25 years though).

Except that the aircon hasn't been like that for 25 years: all the EMT sets have had new Liebherr equipment. As I have said more than once, if the kit is looked after and the staff aren't muppets (opening the windows) then it works fine.

 

[Haydn1971]

I suppose the answer will come with the new East Midlands franchise spec.

Cheers, when is that due ?

Plus, when is the update scheduled to be complete on the 158s - will passengers notice anything significant like new seat covers etc ? Also, if you have any input, please let's have seat number ranges visible on the outside of the carriages
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Except that the aircon hasn't been like that for 25 years: all the EMT sets have had new Liebherr equipment. As I have said more than once, if the kit is looked after and the staff aren't muppets (opening the windows) then it works fine.

I make a maximum of six trips a week on a EMT 158, there isn't a week go by when the evening train has a non functioning air con - the failure rate must be very high.

How long have the Liebherr units been fitted ?

 

[43096]

I make a maximum of six trips a week on a EMT 158, there isn't a week go by when the evening train has a non functioning air con - the failure rate must be very high.

How long have the Liebherr units been fitted ?

It depends which unit! The ex-Central Trains sets had it fitted when with Central. The others had it fitted when given the refurb (Porterbrook sets) or slightly later (Angel units).

As I said, if it ain't maintained then it will fail, although there are two systems per vehicle for redundancy. The bigger issue is that it obviously takes time to be effective after switching on, but guards who open the hoppers just after it is switched on defeat e object of the system.

Open hoppers does not necessarily mean failed aircon, might just mean failed guard!

 

[LowLevel]

I don't know whether the problem lies with them needing to be regassed more often or something but different units behave in significantly different ways - the ex TPE ones tend to be the best in most respects with the ex Wales & West/green ex Central/Wales and Central again handmearounds being the worst.

Some vehicles will produce near fridgelike conditions, with a full load, some on the other hand will feel fine empty (and therefore when checked on depot) but as soon as more than 20 or so people board the temperature skyrockets and it overloads.

The green lights may be on but a temperature of over 30 degrees on the micropak with everything in default 'windows/doors closed, ACIS on' mode on a unit that's been in traffic for over 6 hours with 3 hours at least since the engine shutdown suggests it's either not working or worth having in the first place!

As far as the upgrade is concerned the fleet is so tight it's going to take at least 2 years to get them all done as only one at a time can be released. I don't believe any cosmetic changes are due but you'll certainly notice things like the new passenger information system.

For what it's worth Haydn you've spoken to me at least once about the aircon and I tip my hat to you for always being polite about it - spending 6 hours at a time on them myself when they're not working I fully understand your frustration as a regular traveller. I am afraid as a humble guard I have little influence over the refurb programme though!

 

[hibtastic]

I'd give them to XC to run in double formation to allow other XC services to be doubled up. As to where the best place to run them on XC would be, I have no idea.

 

[380101]

Are you saying that there is the demand for more frequent diagrams on the Stranraer route?

definitely not the demand for more frequent diagrams. No ferry traffic now and they get 2 hourly service which is not really busy.

Glasgow to Carlisle/Newcastle service is ideal for the 185 as it could utilise the line speeds unlike the 156.

 

[sprinterguy]

I'd give them to XC to run in double formation to allow other XC services to be doubled up. As to where the best place to run them on XC would be, I have no idea.

If Crosscountry were to use 185s, then Cardiff - Nottingham would seem to be the best route: Seven diagrams can cover the hourly Nottingham - Cardiff service, and the hourly Nottingham - Birmingham requires another three: If all services were doubled up, that would require 20 units out of a fleet of 22 (one or two quieter diagrams could run as single units if a larger maintenance contingent was required). This would release 170 units for the Birmingham - Leicester/Stansted workings.

I can't see it happening though, and personally I would rather see the Crosscountry franchise taking on Greater Anglia's 170 units when they are ousted from that franchise in 2020, which would be a matter of rolling stock policy for the operator of the next Crosscountry franchise, and more likely to happen IMO than any sort of gain in rolling stock during the imminent direct award period, assuming that it is granted. I'm not sure what maintenance arrangements could be made for the 185 fleet at Crosscountry (Central Rivers depot on that route already maintains the same 750hp engines under XC and VT Voyagers, but would a Bombardier facility manage Siemens stock? Is there a precedent with Bombardier managed Crofton maintaining both XC Voyagers and Alstom built 180s?); while the advantages of additional 170 units would be to retain full fleet flexibility between the Cardiff - Nottingham and Birmingham - Leicester/Stansted corridors, Tyseley depot already have extensive experience of maintaining 170 units and the smaller total number of additional carriages would probably be more palatable in terms of leasing and maintenance costs.

 

[hibtastic]

If Crosscountry were to use 185s, then Cardiff - Nottingham would seem to be the best route: Seven diagrams can cover the hourly Nottingham - Cardiff service, and the hourly Nottingham - Birmingham requires another three: If all services were doubled up, that would require 20 units out of a fleet of 22 (one or two quieter diagrams could run as single units if a larger maintenance contingent was required). This would release 170 units for the Birmingham - Leicester/Stansted workings.

I can't see it happening though, and personally I would rather see the Crosscountry franchise taking on Greater Anglia's 170 units when they are ousted from that franchise in 2020, which would be a matter of rolling stock policy for the operator of the next Crosscountry franchise, and more likely to happen IMO than any sort of gain in rolling stock during the imminent direct award period, assuming that it is granted. I'm not sure what maintenance arrangements could be made for the 185 fleet at Crosscountry (Central Rivers depot on that route already maintains the same 750hp engines under XC and VT Voyagers, but would a Bombardier facility manage Siemens stock? Is there a precedent with Bombardier managed Crofton maintaining both XC Voyagers and Alstom built 180s?); while the advantages of additional 170 units would be to retain full fleet flexibility between the Cardiff - Nottingham and Birmingham - Leicester/Stansted corridors, Tyseley depot already have extensive experience of maintaining 170 units and the smaller total number of additional carriages would probably be more palatable in terms of leasing and maintenance costs.

What about multiple working on the XC route between Manchester Piccadilly and Bristol TM then on to the South. That way the units could still be maintained in Manchester? This would free up Voyagers to strengthen other XC services.

 

[D6975]

What about multiple working on the XC route between Manchester Piccadilly and Bristol TM then on to the South. That way the units could still be maintained in Manchester? This would free up Voyagers to strengthen other XC services.

Or a new Liverpool/Manchester-Bristol (or even beyond) via Crewe, Salop, Hereford. 3 car from each joining up at Crewe. There used to be similar services back in Reggie Rail days. Which franchise such a service would come under is anyone's guess.

 

[sprinterguy]

What about multiple working on the XC route between Manchester Piccadilly and Bristol TM then on to the South. That way the units could still be maintained in Manchester? This would free up Voyagers to strengthen other XC services.

There's sections of greater than 100mph running on that route though, which the 185s would not be able to achieve. Whether it would be sufficient to affect timings I don't know, but it seems like a non-starter to me.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Or a new Liverpool/Manchester-Bristol (or even beyond) via Crewe, Salop, Hereford. 3 car from each joining up at Crewe. There used to be similar services back in Reggie Rail days. Which franchise such a service would come under is anyone's guess.

Assuming the next franchise covers largely the same area as the current one, the obvious choice would be Wales and Borders as the predecessor franchise (Wales and West) ran the Manchester to Waterloo service back in the day. Running beyond Bristol would probably be a non-starter in that case though, and most services would probably need to reverse at Newport rather than using the avoiding curve as the Northbound Waterloo service did.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

A growth move (a la Chiltern snaffling the 170s) is always possible, but I can't shake the suspicion that these will go to ATW's successor to enable a cascade and junk the Pacers.

 

[northwichcat]

A growth move (a la Chiltern snaffling the 170s) is always possible, but I can't shake the suspicion that these will go to ATW's successor to enable a cascade and junk the Pacers.

The availability of surplus DMUs should prevent the need for a Chiltern style move. Another Chiltern style move would be something like someone taking on the current LM 172s at the end of the current LM franchise, opposed to taking on something that is actually available.

If LM and EMT manage to replace their 153s as a result of the released 156s and Turbostars then they'll be 60 x 153s available and ATW have 30 x 14xs so possibly reformed 153s for ATW with ATW having a much more consistent fleet in the process?

 

[Mordac]

A growth move (a la Chiltern snaffling the 170s) is always possible, but I can't shake the suspicion that these will go to ATW's successor to enable a cascade and junk the Pacers.

They'd be really nice for the Marshes line, which I did for the first time this weekend! The 175s are pretty good, but then they could be cascaded elsewhere or used to strengthen services.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

They'd be really nice for the Marshes line, which I did for the first time this weekend! The 175s are pretty good, but then they could be cascaded elsewhere or used to strengthen services.

Exactly that. Total seating capacity of 22 x 3-coach 185s is remarkably similar to ATW's current tally of 15 142s and 15 143s. Put the 185s on the Marches, cascade the 175s downwards to Sprinter-operated routes, and cascade the Sprinters onto the Valleys. You can even keep the 185s at Ardwick by ensuring that enough Marches diagrams end up at Manchester each night.

There may be clearance work to be done, and I suspect DfT would try a bit of their usual micromanagement to shuffle a few Sprinters between franchises to better reflect service patterns. But it's a remarkably straightforward way to solve Wales's looming DMU problem.

(Still, jcollins' 153 idea works too...)

 

[northwichcat]

Exactly that. Total seating capacity of 22 x 3-coach 185s is remarkably similar to ATW's current tally of 15 142s and 15 143s. Put the 185s on the Marches, cascade the 175s downwards to Sprinter-operated routes, and cascade the Sprinters onto the Valleys.

What are you proposing will run the Conwy and Borderlands line? Network Rail refused ATW permission to use 158s on those routes while using 175s on short routes which don't serve any major cities would seem a waste.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I suspect issues like that are where DfT micromanagement would come into play. You know, "here, Wales, you give these five 158s to GWR and they'll give you five 150s in return", or something like that. The sort of rolling stock crayonista stuff they seem to delight in doing. In a world where Northern services can be worked by Grand Central's 180s then who knows what might happen...

 

[Bletchleyite]

What are you proposing will run the Conwy and Borderlands line? Network Rail refused ATW permission to use 158s on those routes while using 175s on short routes which don't serve any major cities would seem a waste.

A 150 like before - nobody is proposing moving those out, are they?

 

[northwichcat]

I suspect issues like that are where DfT micromanagement would come into play. You know, "here, Wales, you give these five 158s to GWR and they'll give you five 150s in return", or something like that. The sort of rolling stock crayonista stuff they seem to delight in doing.

ATW put in a track access application asking if 158s could be cleared so that they could cover for 150s if needed and Network Rail rejected the application and came up with reasons why 158s can't be used on those routes.

A 150 like before - nobody is proposing moving those out, are they?

I was responding to Doctor Fegg who was proposing to cascade existing Sprinters to the Valley Lines to replace the Pacers. The 150s can't stay where they are and be used to replace Pacers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Conwy Valley only requires one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk