333s to Manchester

[northwichcat]

The 319 cascade has now reached the stage where Liverpool-Manchester via Newton-le-Willows could be electrified 2-3 years before the cascade starts. At a Northern stakeholder meeting it was suggested that if the London Midland 323s get cascaded to Northern then they will replace all EMUs in the West Yorkshire area with the 333s going to Manchester for Liverpool-Manchester and the 321s going to National Express East Anglia.

 

[GNERman]

that's not going to happen, someone from siemens told me that the 323's would supplement the 333's on the Airedale lines, the 321's going down south and the 323's to work Leeds-Doncaster which means more 6 car trains on all of these routes...

 

[43167]

No thanks. As someone who lives on the route that the 333's work, I would rather hope they keep the 333's in West Yorkshire. 323's are unsuitable for West Yorkshire, been only 3-cars the main reason. Pairing them up would make them too long for some platforms. Plus from a passenger point, why would we want older trains to replace newer ones.

 

[bluenoxid]

The 319 cascade has now reached the stage where Liverpool-Manchester via Newton-le-Willows could be electrified 2-3 years before the cascade starts. At a Northern stakeholder meeting it was suggested that if the London Midland 323s get cascaded to Northern then they will replace all EMUs in the West Yorkshire area with the 333s going to Manchester for Liverpool-Manchester and the 321s going to National Express East Anglia.

Platform extensions are the main issue.

One of the things that might happen though is that the Triangle receives an allocation of 323's to help it boost capacity on certain stretches.

Leeds-Bradford and Ilkley-Bradford/Leeds could all be made into self contained diagrams with 3/6car units, whilst the Skipton-Leeds/Bradford could have to remain 4 car to combat the issues with Shipley P2 (Skipton bound) and P5 (Bradford - Skipton) not really being long enough (and very little space to give anything more than an extra carriage at best

There are plans to install a Keighley turnback and run longer services in the peak to Skipton. By bringing West Yorkshire this allocation, the 321/9's could be sent somewhere to help with another TOC because some 333's could be allocated to Donny services

One possibility is that Manchester could receive a small fleet of Dustybins from Scotland and West Yorkshire but that idea has not raised its head yet. This would be post Olympics so the 322's may actually come back up from East Anglia.

Of course nothing stops a larger 323 fleet being allocated alongside an 8 or so strong 321 fleet on Leeds - Keighley and Skipton - Bradford turns and 323's operating to Donny and Leeds - Skipton semi fasts.

The fleet could be made even smaller if the Carlisle services were made hourly (highly unlikely according to NR).

It will require even more money to extend platforms (with Saltaire, Crossflatts and the Doncaster route requiring money to extend platforms).

The other issue is what will boost the Manchester EMU fleet? 16 4 car units for 17 3 car units doesn't really work too well.

I have discussed it in great details with colleagues and we are currently with the belief that although there are many great ideas, the status quo will remain with the 333's and it will be the 321 fleet that will move.

 

[northwichcat]

Plus from a passenger point, why would we want older trains to replace newer ones.

The fact is passengers have to ride on whatever a TOC provides.


The west side of the Northern franchise is used to that. We've had 142s and 150s replacing 158s. While 158s have replaced 170s on Liverpool-Norwich and HSTs have replaced 180s in FGW land.

 

[bluenoxid]

Oh and I have had another thought, Platform 1 at Skipton is not right long either and extending that will be a pig.

 

[northwichcat]

The other issue is what will boost the Manchester EMU fleet? 16 4 car units for 17 3 car units doesn't really work too well.

It's the LM Birmingham based 323s that would go to Yorkshire not the Manchester based 323s, so Manchester would gain 16 EMUs and switch up to 3 services per hour in each direction on through St Helens Junction to electric traction.

Maybe you're thinking of a different proposal where all the North West electric services are to be 319 operated and then the Manchester based 323s could be cascaded to Yorkshire.

 

[43167]

Spot on with the platform issues. P5 at shipley could be extended if you look at where the old platform goes to, but then there is the issue of it been blind for the conductor when doing the doors.

Nothing they can do with P2.

 

[tbtc]

Seems daft if the relatively small number of EMUs in the north of England will consist of 319s, 321s, 323s and 333s (plus 350s for TPE's Scottish services?).

Much simpler to have one or two classes

They should have built enough 333s (as four car units) to cover the Donny diagrams too, would have saved a lot of hassle.

I think the 323s are going to be the units nobody wants - too old for London Midland (which is one of those favoured TOCs that seems to be getting new DMUs *and* new EMUs), but they're too short to exchange for Northern's 321s or 333s (unless all platforms are extended to six cars)

 

[bluenoxid]

Hmmmm

26 3 car units. 78 vehicles gained. 76 Lost. Interesting but there will be a gain in operational flexibility. I just don't think it will deliver that much extra capacity and services will suffer if a 3 car arrives when a 6 car should.

P2 at Shipley could be cantilevered out over the road bridge but it would give one extra carriage at best and it would be intersting to see the overlap.

Northern wants the 323's but they are likely to be split into two fleets or allocated fully to Manchester

The "350/3 order" (or the LM 323 replacement) has still not been placed as far as I know despite being tendered last year.

 

[43167]

Oh and I have had another thought, Platform 1 at Skipton is not right long either and extending that will be a pig.

It will. Its just long enough to take a 333.

 

[Pumbaa]

The "350/3 order" (or the LM 323 replacement) has still not been placed as far as I know despite being tendered last year.

That's because they're still buggering about with it - the plan keeps changing. It is certainly an order to replace the 323s, but it may also be an order to replace the 350/1s as well, as they're wanted elsewhere depending on what gets given the go-ahead. Bloody politics..

 

[GNERman]

Oh and I have had another thought, Platform 1 at Skipton is not right long either and extending that will be a pig.

it will be a pain to extend but it can fit a 333, just...

 

[DescendingSadly]

It will be interesting to hear what WYPTE think on the matter...

 

[GNERman]

it will be a pain to extend but it can fit a 333, just...

actually, look at google maps here and it shows that a 333 can fit just as one's in the platform in the photo...

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=skipton&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=16.261859,39.331055&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Skipton,+North+Yorkshire,+United+Kingdom&ll=53.958233,-2.02437&spn=0.000986,0.002401&t=h&z=19

 

[Crossforth]

Can't they just move the 323s onto the transpennine routes? (once electrified of course)

 

[the sniper]

I think the 323s are going to be the units nobody wants - too old for London Midland (which is one of those favoured TOCs that seems to be getting new DMUs *and* new EMUs)

I still don't understand why us Midlander's are 'the chosen ones' for all the new stock.

The "350/3 order" (or the LM 323 replacement) has still not been placed as far as I know despite being tendered last year.

That's because they're still buggering about with it - the plan keeps changing. It is certainly an order to replace the 323s, but it may also be an order to replace the 350/1s as well, as they're wanted elsewhere depending on what gets given the go-ahead. Bloody politics..

Interesting, I'd heard nothing of this. Presumably the Siemens Desiro City would be the logical 323 replacement?

 

[Waverley125]

5 322s in Scotland coming off lease when the 380s come into Service. So send those Manchester way along with the 3 321s from Doncaster services. Then paired 323s on Doncaster services & single 323s on Leeds-Bradford services with 333s operating the rest.

 

[royaloak]

So all the platforms between Leeds and Doncaster can take 6x23m long coaches then!

 

[tbtc]

I still don't understand why us Midlander's are 'the chosen ones' for all the new stock.

It confuses me too!

I could understand if they said LM are getting 350s and the 323 replacement, so we'll give ATW/ FGW/ Northern some new 172s (and ATW/ FGW/ Northern can cascade any 150s freed up to LM), but to get two new train sets is a bit strange

Don't get me wrong, I'm turning this into a conspiracy theory (or bitter "Northern" rant), I'm just confused why LM are "the chosen ones" (since older DMUs and EMUs exist elsewhere on the network)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

5 322s in Scotland coming off lease when the 380s come into Service

...isn't there a danger ScotRail will keep them (like they are keeping the Northern 158s even when Bathgate is wired, when they won't need them any more)...

 

[royaloak]

I still don't understand why us Midlander's are 'the chosen ones' for all the new stock.

Dont worry they will all be re-directed to a South East TOC

That was a joke by the way, I hope nobody is offended!

 

[43167]

It will be interesting to hear what WYPTE think on the matter...

It would. Pretty sure its them who actually own the 333's & 321/9s and not one of the usual rolling stock leasing companies.

 

[bluenoxid]

I still don't understand why us Midlander's are 'the chosen ones' for all the new stock.



Interesting, I'd heard nothing of this. Presumably the Siemens Desiro City would be the logical 323 replacement?

Tendered for last year at the same as the SWT stock. The SWT tender has appeared to gone to a ROSCO for supplying 456's.

5 322s in Scotland coming off lease when the 380s come into Service. So send those Manchester way along with the 3 321s from Doncaster services. Then paired 323s on Doncaster services & single 323s on Leeds-Bradford services with 333s operating the rest.

What??? With two new stations between Leeds and Shipley, there will be more not less demand.

So all the platforms between Leeds and Doncaster can take 6x23m long coaches then!

No. In fact, they may need longer platforms allocated at Leeds and Doncaster as the ones they currently use are not that long. The service will suffer a lot during the peak although in my limited personal experience a 3 car unit would be OK. I would prefer a 4 car unit though. There is a good reason why every station is CCTV fitted and it is not because they're flush with cash down that way.

...isn't there a danger ScotRail will keep them (like they are keeping the Northern 158s even when Bathgate is wired, when they won't need them any more)...

No. They have more than enough 380's with GARL not being delivered. The fleet is likely to be not wanted when the Falkirk route is electrified because the extra units will be addons for the 314 replacement due at around the same time (2015). It's a small non standard fleet for the Scots (320's excluded) so might as well ditch.

It would. Pretty sure its them who actually own the 333's & 321/9s and not one of the usual rolling stock leasing companies.

Nope. Both owned by ROSCO's. HSBC and Angel respectively.

 

[tbtc]

No. They have more than enough 380's

True, but they have more than enough 158s too, yet are keeping the Northern ones

 

[northwichcat]

Can't they just move the 323s onto the transpennine routes? (once electrified of course)

TPE routes aren't currently on the list of routes to be electrified and if they are added then they'll be a lot of other routes to electrify first.

 

[tbtc]

If I was travelling Transpennine (say York to Manchester, or Leeds to Liverpool), I'd want something a little better than a twenty year old commuter EMU. If Transpennine is wired, I'd expect something with a bit of power (maybe the same class could run Birmingham/ Manchester - Carlisle - Glasgow/ Edinburgh?)

 

[northwichcat]

I assumed 323s on trans pennine meant routes local routes on those lines like Huddersfield-Man Vic and Huddersfield-Leeds post electrification.

A 185 is bad enough on Newcastle-Manchester never mind a 323.

 

[Vulcan]

It would. Pretty sure its them who actually own the 333's & 321/9s and not one of the usual rolling stock leasing companies.

I'm pretty sure the 333s are owned by one of the leasing companies. I'm sure I saw them included in one of the leasing company adverts in Rail magazine. However, I think Metro paid a fair chunk of money towards them.

The only plus side I can think of for having 323s around here would be that we'd have Hunslet built trains running into their home city.

However, I can't really see it happening, and I still much prefer the air conditioned 333s any day of the week. People wanting to ride on a Hunslet in Leeds will just have to come for a ride on the Abbey Light Railway instead [/shameless plug]

 

[northwichcat]

I think I've found an answer re: 333 funding.

are therefore unfunded from 2007 onwards. The implication is that if the DfT continues to refuse to include funding for them, they will be removed from the fleet.

http://www.wyita.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyre...AB9C-6D4C7C798679/0/RWG6DECEMBER2005ITEM7.pdf

 

[Aictos]

I wouldn't think of putting 323s on TPE routes rather I would go for the 350/1s and use them on the routes ie Manchester to Scotland, Newcastle to Birmingham and keep the 185s on the Cleethorpes to Manchester route.

Still, if Blackpool North and South got electrified then could we see the Pacers on the Blackpool South to Colne route replaced by 323s?