Future of 22x Units

[gingertom]

HST's are so great that there's no problems with using them on XC...

other than the oft-reported toilets, doors and interiors.

 

[NoOnesFool]

As an enthusiast I'd love that, but practically speaking it's never going to happen, especially given the previously-mentioned EMT timetable change is based on the superior performance of the 222s. I'm content to just enjoy the VP185s while they're still knocking around - it feels like a swansong every time I see one now.

(It also conveniently glosses over the fact that Transpennine are getting a brand-new, state of the art fleet, some of which is already being tested for introduction. They don't need 22x units.)

Agreed that the 22X fleet are not appropriate for Transpennine. They are very well suited to the mainline services they operate on. Their reliability is great, and they have all of the mod-cons an d accessibility that customers want, it is important to remember that the railway isn't run for enthusiasts.

HSTs are becoming increasingly un-reliable, several morning services have been cancelled recently, due to them failing on the depot, and the slow acceleration means that thwy could never keep to the timings of a Meridian or Voyager.

With new trains on the EMT/XC not even close, it seems sensible that these operators keep the 22Xs for the forseeable. I'd go as far as to say that a new build updated version of them (that meets 2018 safety standards) would be a good idea to replace the remaining HSTs.

 

[The Ham]

other than the oft-reported toilets, doors and interiors.

Don't get me started on the Romans...

P.S. I was being sarcastic with my last post.

 

[Mollman]

The 221s have their downsides but they are all at least 5 coaches, have a shop and decent seat layouts.

No shop on an XC version anymore unfortunaly. Though I feel sorry for those who work in the Virgin shop, at least a 390 has some windows near by.

The voyagers/meridians need to be downgraded to long-distance services (transpennine would be about right), while hsts could return fully to xc and emt work

Arriva did propose a new build batch of 222s for the first TPEx franchise

 

[Bevan Price]

HST's are so great that there's no problems with using them on XC...

By historical standard on railways, at 40+ years old, HSTs would be regarded as ancient, and overdue for replacement. Age usually means increased maintenance costs, and sadly, despite how much many of us like them, even the best trains eventually need to be replaced.

The problem in recent years has been that much of the new stock has been inferior to what it has replaced when it comes to the size and quality of the passenger areas.

 

[43096]

Agreed that the 22X fleet are not appropriate for Transpennine. They are very well suited to the mainline services they operate on.

Unless you want to travel beyond Exeter when there's a bit of a breeze and/or high tide expected. They are not fit for purpose, at least on XC.

 

[_toommm_]

Saying of that my friend's Gran likes them as she travels on them to Glasgow from York in first class.

Talking to non-enthusiast friends when using HSTs at Sheffield, they're instantly off putted by them because of the slam doors - it exudes archaic-ness. But the same train, albeit with power doors, and they suddenly like the bright interior and quiet carriages.

It's amazing how a simple modification such as that can help massively. The XC livery does wonders for the MK3 coaches aswell IMO

 

[Bletchleyite]

The things should, like the 442s and the Irish ones, have been built with swing-plug doors in the first place. Not doing so was one of BR's most stupid acts of conservatism.

 

[Railperf]

Agreed that the 22X fleet are not appropriate for Transpennine. They are very well suited to the mainline services they operate on. Their reliability is great, and they have all of the mod-cons an d accessibility that customers want, it is important to remember that the railway isn't run for enthusiasts.

HSTs are becoming increasingly un-reliable, several morning services have been cancelled recently, due to them failing on the depot, and the slow acceleration means that thwy could never keep to the timings of a Meridian or Voyager.

With new trains on the EMT/XC not even close, it seems sensible that these operators keep the 22Xs for the forseeable. I'd go as far as to say that a new build updated version of them (that meets 2018 safety standards) would be a good idea to replace the remaining HSTs.

A 2+6 HST can easily keep Voyager and Meridian timings - while providing more seats than a 5 or 4-car Voyager / Meridian too!
Some have suggested that the GWR HST's may becoming more unreliable due to them not spending money on too much maintenance due to their imminent replacement by 800's. But otherwise i am not aware of EMT or LNER's HST's reliability falling through the floor yet. Based on the likely build / test and commissioning time for any new rolling stock - and all the manufacturers have suffered delays, probably a few shorter HST sets - suitably maintained will provide a stopgap - until something else is specified and ordered. I for one would rather spend time on a longer 8 or 9 coach HST than be crammed - standing room only - into a 5 or 4 car 22X.

 

[Mikey C]

A 2+6 HST can easily keep Voyager and Meridian timings - while providing more seats than a 5 or 4-car Voyager / Meridian too!
Some have suggested that the GWR HST's may becoming more unreliable due to them not spending money on too much maintenance due to their imminent replacement by 800's. But otherwise i am not aware of EMT or LNER's HST's reliability falling through the floor yet. Based on the likely build / test and commissioning time for any new rolling stock - and all the manufacturers have suffered delays, probably a few shorter HST sets - suitably maintained will provide a stopgap - until something else is specified and ordered. I for one would rather spend time on a longer 8 or 9 coach HST than be crammed - standing room only - into a 5 or 4 car 22X.

Some 222s are 7 cars, while they can run shorter 22X in multiples

 

[MarkyT]

The things should, like the 442s and the Irish ones, have been built with swing-plug doors in the first place. Not doing so was one of BR's most stupid acts of conservatism.

Perhaps not that surprising given the politico-economic climate of the period, when the treasury was always demanding cuts in budgets. Although Mk3s were remarkably good value coaches at the time, if BR could save 10% by leaving out retention toilets and power doors, even central locking, then that's what the DoT would insist on, or a cut in the fleet size. A similar thing happened with infrastructure schemes of the period, fairly arbitrary insistence on (say) cutting the number of points in a remodelling scheme (like Exeter resignalling for example) by 50%, or a length of single tracking that would be a source of unreliability for decades to come. I saw the original scheme plans proposed for Newton Abbot and Taunton resignalling in the early 1980s. What was built a few years later was but a shadow, and operators have struggled with the meagre facilities ever since, especially once traffic started to grow strongly again less than a decade later.

 

[Railperf]

Some 222s are 7 cars, while they can run shorter 22X in multiples

You could theoretically run a pair of buffer fitted HST;'s in multiple!! Does anyone know if this is possible. If not, what would be needed to make this workable? Maybe the overall length of 2 x 2+4 HST's is too long fr most stations (12 vehicles) Even the standard power cars can be coupled head to head - for emergencies - but i guess they are normally restricted to a lower speed!

 

[43096]

You could theoretically run a pair of buffer fitted HST;'s in multiple!! Does anyone know if this is possible. If not, what would be needed to make this workable? Maybe the overall length of 2 x 2+4 HST's is too long fr most stations (12 vehicles) Even the standard power cars can be coupled head to head - for emergencies - but i guess they are normally restricted to a lower speed!

You need more than eight buffer fitted power cars to do this in quantity (i.e. more than one diagram). Power cars do not have multi-working sockets on the front, nor do they have CDL jumpers on them. That’s just for starters...

 

[Railperf]

You need more than eight buffer fitted power cars to do this in quantity (i.e. more than one diagram). Power cars do not have multi-working sockets on the front, nor do they have CDL jumpers on them. That’s just for starters...

I would suggest it could be a job for Wabtec...but understand they are struggling to push through with all the other HST mods on their plate at the moment lol.

 

[The Ham]

A 2+6 HST can easily keep Voyager and Meridian timings - while providing more seats than a 5 or 4-car Voyager / Meridian too!
Some have suggested that the GWR HST's may becoming more unreliable due to them not spending money on too much maintenance due to their imminent replacement by 800's. But otherwise i am not aware of EMT or LNER's HST's reliability falling through the floor yet. Based on the likely build / test and commissioning time for any new rolling stock - and all the manufacturers have suffered delays, probably a few shorter HST sets - suitably maintained will provide a stopgap - until something else is specified and ordered. I for one would rather spend time on a longer 8 or 9 coach HST than be crammed - standing room only - into a 5 or 4 car 22X.

Now you maybe on to something. First up, how many services run by XC's HST's actually need to be the full length that they are (8 coaches IIRC)?

If none, then why not shorten them to be 6 coaches (gives you a fleet of 6, nearly 7). You could then sift through those units coming off lease to find the best of the rest for conversion. 2 extra coaches would give you a fleet of 7, 8 extra coaches a fleet of 8, etc.

For those services where a 6 coach HST was too short (circa 375 seats as a guess) you could use a pair of 221's (5 coaches) with circa 500 seats (which is within a few dozen of a HST).

By having less coaches to convert it reduces the costs and spreads the benefits around more.

For instance to be able to run every HST diagram with a pair of 221's you would need a total of 10 trains (20 extra coaches to convert and 10 extra power cars). However at circa 375 seats the 6+2 trains could be used to replace many of the services run by 4+4 22x's. Freeing up those units (in pairs) to increase capacity on services currently run by single units.

At the other end of the likely range, if you had a total of up to 20 6+2 trains (<80 extra coaches) then every diagram starting/ending at Manchester could be run using those trains, whilst about 1/3 of other services which currently are single units could then be run as a pair of units. With scope to increase that further if the pairing of units happens over the core and not on the full length of routes.

 

[sprinterguy]

Now you maybe on to something. First up, how many services run by XC's HST's actually need to be the full length that they are (8 coaches IIRC)?

The XC HSTs are 7 carriages, and in my experience ALL the services they run need that capacity at some stage during their journey. That's why they run them on those services! The small fleet is targeted at the busiest trains.

Though if with some jiggery-pokery you can substitute 9 or 10-car Voyager formations onto the current HST diagrams as you've described, then fair enough. A 2+6 HST would certainly present a fair increase in capacity over a 4 or 5-car Voyager, which a number of services need, and ten such trains would directly benefit around half the NE-SW diagrams, as well as freeing up units to strengthen other services.

However at circa 375 seats the 6+2 trains could be used to replace many of the services run by 4+4 22x's. Freeing up those units (in pairs) to increase capacity on services currently run by single units.

Many? In normal service, I don't think there's more than four services per day that run as a pair of Voyagers. That's individual services, not diagrams. The numbers are bumped up a bit at this time of year as there's one Manchester - Bournemouth diagram strengthened to 8-cars all day.

The concept of around ten 2+6 HSTs to increase capacity is a good one though, IMO.

 

[tbtc]

I for one would rather spend time on a longer 8 or 9 coach HST than be crammed - standing room only - into a 5 or 4 car 22X.

Sure - I think a lot of people feel like that.

But (and I'm sorry for sounding boring/ repetitive here), XC don't have that luxury of padding the timetable out with a few minutes here or there.

ScotRail can amend the times when they replace 170s with HSTs because there are only a handful of non-ScotRail services a day that run north of Edinburgh/ Glasgow.

XC can't - I've mentioned the Aldwarke situation a few times on here (in short, if the XC service from Plymouth to Edinburgh doesn't get to the junction north of Rotherham in time then it'll be stuck behind the Dearne Valley stopper that is scheduled to get to Leeds half an hour later than the XC service).

XC timetables are generally built around the fast acceleration of Voyagers - however much nicer a nine coach HST would be for passengers currently standing on a Voyager might be (and, I say this as someone who used to commute by XC daily to Leeds and would have welcomed more seats, but I'm still realistic about how difficult it'd be to replace them)

Perhaps not that surprising given the politico-economic climate of the period, when the treasury was always demanding cuts in budgets. Although Mk3s were remarkably good value coaches at the time, if BR could save 10% by leaving out retention toilets and power doors, even central locking, then that's what the DoT would insist on, or a cut in the fleet size

That's the great thing about BR - everything positive is because BR were brilliant but any shortfalls or corner-cutting was the fault of the Government.

Which is why BR get the credit for all the Nice Things but we can dump all of the negative bits at the door of the Government.

This is why it's impossible to have a proper debate about BR, since all the bad things are never their fault!

 

[43096]

I would suggest it could be a job for Wabtec...but understand they are struggling to push through with all the other HST mods on their plate at the moment lol.

I would suggest it is a job for nobody.

 

[Wolfie]

I would suggest it is a job for nobody.

Except Booths...

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

If I'm honest, I love and enjoy the Voyagers in their own way (have done since July 2014) even though I'll always prefer an HST to one!

However if there's one route that should retain them then it's the routes to and from Southampton, Reading and Newcastle (+ the odd train to and from Edinburgh). Neither involves running through Dawlish throughout the day unless there's a set swap in the day.

I guess around 20 Voyagers are required on the Newcastle terminator services - if so, get rid of the 4-car sets and run 5-cars entirely on this route and you'll have good capacity. The unreserved coach is very handy for finding an alternative seat due to the reversals at Birmingham New Street - I'd do backwards on the shorter bit and forwards on the longer bit!

 

[sprinterguy]

I guess around 20 Voyagers are required on the Newcastle terminator services - if so, get rid of the 4-car sets and run 5-cars entirely on this route and you'll have good capacity. The unreserved coach is very handy for finding an alternative seat due to the reversals at Birmingham New Street - I'd do backwards on the shorter bit and forwards on the longer bit!

It's 12 diagrams, all 4 cars if they run as booked (Or was last time I checked). I agree that, as these are typically the most lightly loaded of Crosscountry's inter-city services, that generally 5 cars would be a good fit for the route if other services gained longer trains.

 

[MarkyT]

That's the great thing about BR - everything positive is because BR were brilliant but any shortfalls or corner-cutting was the fault of the Government. Which is why BR get the credit for all the Nice Things but we can dump all of the negative bits at the door of the Government. This is why it's impossible to have a proper debate about BR, since all the bad things are never their fault!

Such an organisation is bound to become institutionalised to only ask for what it expects to be able to get from a government. Hence it will always be aggressively trying to demonstrate how much it is trying to cut costs in the case of a high spending entity such as the railways, or toeing the ruling party line for instance in the case of a state broadcaster. I agree it's impossible to be very objective but overall the IC125 project was very innovative bringing with it much detail attention to design, branding and marketing activity. At the time some people were complaining about that. Why did the railway need to waste money on TV advertising for example. The whole train concept itself was a triumph of pragmatic, cost-effective engineering and there's always a complexity argument about introducing yet more systems. They'd need very high reliability under the rigours of daily operations and there was as yet not no proven off-the-shelf design for either toilet or power door. Could such refinements have been added quickly enough to the prexisting Mk3 prototype design without delaying the project? Remember IC125 was a rush job anyway because of the interminably late APT project, which by then had resolved itself into an electric-only train anyway, so couldn't help ECML or GWML at the time.

 

[Mikey C]

The XC HSTs are 7 carriages, and in my experience ALL the services they run need that capacity at some stage during their journey. That's why they run them on those services! The small fleet is targeted at the busiest trains.

Though if with some jiggery-pokery you can substitute 9 or 10-car Voyager formations onto the current HST diagrams as you've described, then fair enough. A 2+6 HST would certainly present a fair increase in capacity over a 4 or 5-car Voyager, which a number of services need, and ten such trains would directly benefit around half the NE-SW diagrams, as well as freeing up units to strengthen other services.

Many? In normal service, I don't think there's more than four services per day that run as a pair of Voyagers. That's individual services, not diagrams. The numbers are bumped up a bit at this time of year as there's one Manchester - Bournemouth diagram strengthened to 8-cars all day.

The concept of around ten 2+6 HSTs to increase capacity is a good one though, IMO.

I assume that's either because they don't have enough of them OR that their franchise doesn't require them to run longer trains

Either way, that's not a reason why HSTs are better or worse then them. If for example, all the 222s were replaced by Bimodes and given to Cross Country, I imagine lots of services could be strengthened, either by running pairs of units or reconfiguring existing units to be longer.

 

[sprinterguy]

I assume that's either because they don't have enough of them OR that their franchise doesn't require them to run longer trains

Not enough of them - The Crosscountry Voyager fleet is stretched to the max as it is.

Either way, that's not a reason why HSTs are better or worse then them. If for example, all the 222s were replaced by Bimodes and given to Cross Country, I imagine lots of services could be strengthened, either by running pairs of units or reconfiguring existing units to be longer.

Indeed, come up with c.20 longer trains of any description and it releases sufficient units to allow all Crosscountry services to be formed of 5 carriages as a minimum. It'd be possible to do that using the class 222 fleet in their current formations. HSTs just happen to be what's available in the near future, for better or worse.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

That's why I prefer, when travelling to and from Oxford and Birmingham New Street, to catch the services that run via the Solihull line, especially the ones that start and terminate at Reading!

In May last year with my Disabled Persons Railcard, I fancied a trip via Basingstoke to London Waterloo - both the 09:43 from Oxford to Basingstoke and the 15:48 or 16:18 back both in the same day each cost me only like £2.65! The 09:43 was quietly loaded after Reading.

 

[NoOnesFool]

Not enough of them - The Crosscountry Voyager fleet is stretched to the max as it is.

Indeed, come up with c.20 longer trains of any description and it releases sufficient units to allow all Crosscountry services to be formed of 5 carriages as a minimum. It'd be possible to do that using the class 222 fleet in their current formations. HSTs just happen to be what's available in the near future, for better or worse.

The thing is, the Class 222s are very much wanted and needed at EMT. I know many on this forum mention cascading thwm to XC, but I reckon EMT would fight tooth and nail to keep them.

 

[43096]

The XC HSTs are 7 carriages, and in my experience ALL the services they run need that capacity at some stage during their journey. That's why they run them on those services! The small fleet is targeted at the busiest trains.

Though if with some jiggery-pokery you can substitute 9 or 10-car Voyager formations onto the current HST diagrams as you've described, then fair enough. A 2+6 HST would certainly present a fair increase in capacity over a 4 or 5-car Voyager, which a number of services need, and ten such trains would directly benefit around half the NE-SW diagrams, as well as freeing up units to strengthen other services.

Many? In normal service, I don't think there's more than four services per day that run as a pair of Voyagers. That's individual services, not diagrams. The numbers are bumped up a bit at this time of year as there's one Manchester - Bournemouth diagram strengthened to 8-cars all day.

The concept of around ten 2+6 HSTs to increase capacity is a good one though, IMO.

I'm not sure where this idea that 2+7 HSTs cannot maintain 22x timings on XC has come from.

As an example, a quick look at the timetable shows:
1125 Plymouth - Dundee arr Edinburgh 2008 - 22x timings
1225 Plymouth - Glasgow arr Edinburgh 2108 - HST timings

There may be slight variations in stopping patterns, but broadly they are comparable.

As the present incumbent of the White House would say "Fake news!"

 

[sprinterguy]

The thing is, the Class 222s are very much wanted and needed at EMT. I know many on this forum mention cascading thwm to XC, but I reckon EMT would fight tooth and nail to keep them.

Yes but they may have no need of them post 2023 - What EMT think will be irrelevant in 12 months time. Which is looking somewhat into the future but many do love speculation on this forum.

I'm not sure where this idea that 2+7 HSTs cannot maintain 22x timings on XC has come from.

As an example, a quick look at the timetable shows:
1125 Plymouth - Dundee arr Edinburgh 2008 - 22x timings
1225 Plymouth - Glasgow arr Edinburgh 2108 - HST timings

There may be slight variations in stopping patterns, but broadly they are comparable.

As the present incumbent of the White House would say "Fake news!"

Hear hear. As I understand it, you can slip a 2+7 HST into any of the current Scotland - South West hourly paths, but they may eat into the engineering allowances and dwell times en route to keep time.

 

[krus_aragon]

As I understand it, you can slip a 2+7 HST into any of the current Scotland - South West hourly paths, but they may eat into the engineering allowances and dwell times en route to keep time.

Post-2019, with the fitting of power doors, they should eat less out of the dwell times.

 

[Wychwood93]

Yes but they may have no need of them post 2023 - What EMT think will be irrelevant in 12 months time. Which is looking somewhat into the future but many do love speculation on this forum.

Hear hear. As I understand it, you can slip a 2+7 HST into any of the current Scotland - South West hourly paths, but they may eat into the engineering allowances and dwell times en route to keep time.

A pity that they are no longer with us on Bournemouth/Southampton services. A previous post - railperf? - suggested 2+6 sets. Such an idea would be excellent from this neck of the woods - certainly the Southampton/NE services. Bomo-MAN seems fairly fixed (and crowded OXF north) - long gone are 'The Wessex Scot' etc. As mentioned many times on assorted threads, XC ends up with too much short-haul stuff - down here there are the 'schools out' fills at Winchester and Brockenhurst. For the former they are off at Parkway or Soton, for the latter at Bomo (hard to go beyond!).