Could TPE ditch the Mk5 sets?

[D365]

Some of us just want to enjoy having proper trains across the Pennines for the first time in ages.

Definitely an upgrade on the Class 185, but the Class 802 is surely just as "proper".

 

[Energy]

Definitely an upgrade on the Class 185, but the Class 802 is surely just as "proper".

A 'proper' train is for some reason loco-hauled for many people... the 802s are better trains than the mk5s, most notably because they actually work.

 

[DB]

Some of us just want to enjoy having proper trains across the Pennines for the first time in ages.

And haven't had the chance to do so since March.

It puzzles me why so many folk on the Forum appear to be desperate to get rid and have yet more units operating instead.

Not sure why they are 'proper' - they are nothing like Mk2,3,4 to travel on - ride isn't good, seats are crap. To be honest I'd put them on a par with IEPs in terms of travelling experience, and below 185s - and they clearly come well below both in terms of reliability. It's not even as if you can really hear the loco inside (which you can with Mk4s, and Chiltern Mk3s)

On a busy route like the Transpennine line, trains simply have to be reliable as a failure can cause delays for miles around pretty quickly.

 

[Watershed]

It's not even as if you can really hear the loco inside (which you can with Mk4s, and Chiltern Mk3s)

For the 99.9% of the travelling public that aren't enthusiasts, effective noise insulation is seen as a good thing.

 

[sjpowermac]

Me three. Am gagging to get on a train again for good reason (as opposed to for the fun of making a random journey by train).

You’ve made a mistake there to admit to being an enthusiast who actually enjoys going on trains, as opposed to just complaining on railway forums

I note, with interest, that nobody has taken a blind bit of notice of the posts I made about the complexities of the Nova 3 sets, or the fact that they simply haven’t been given the chance to accrue the in service mileages needed for faults and modifications to work their way through.

I can’t immediately think of any other fleet that is being introduced with so few daily diagrams.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==

On a busy route like the Transpennine line, trains simply have to be reliable as a failure can cause delays for miles around pretty quickly.

Perhaps you would care to quote for us the last time a Nova 3 set caused “delays for miles around”?

 

[DB]

Perhaps you would care to quote for us the last time a Nova 3 set caused “delays for miles around”?

When they are mostly only running on the Yotk to Scarborough line, with its low volume of traffic, they don't really have the opportunity to do so.

 

[sjpowermac]

When they are mostly only running on the Yotk to Scarborough line, with its low volume of traffic, they don't really have the opportunity to do so.

But pre-virus they were operating four diagrams a day on the Liverpool to Scarborough route and until last week three diagrams per day that involved visits to Liverpool.

So, I invite you again, can you name the last time that a Nova 3 set caused delays for “miles around”?

 

[DB]

You’ve made a mistake there to admit to being an enthusiast who actually enjoys going on trains, as opposed to just complaining on railway forums

Ah, I see - anyone who is a 'proper' enthusiast has no option but to like mk5 sets because they are 'proper' trains!

I was keen on the idea when they were announced, but they are disappointing. The main advantage of LHCS should be that they ride well, with no engine vibration. Unfortunately these do not ride particularly well, and this is coupled with poor seats - so as a passenger this makes them disappointing. They are also well soundproofed, which makes them disappointing from an enthusiast perspective.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==

But pre-virus they were operating four diagrams a day on the Liverpool to Scarborough route and until last week three diagrams per day that involved visits to Liverpool.

So, I invite you again, can you name the last time that a Nova 3 set caused delays for “miles around”?

Well funnily enough I've got better things to do than try to find all the incident data.

But why don't you give us a rundown of the few, unproblematic incidents whuch have occurred and demonstrate just how reliable they are - you make it clear that you have all the details to hand.

 

[CW2]

I think from a passenger comfort viewpoint the Mk 5 coach is inferior to the Mk 4 and Mk 3 which preceded it. Not all "progress" is improvement.

 

[DB]

I think from a passenger comfort viewpoint the Mk 5 coach is inferior to the Mk 4 and Mk 3 which preceded it. Not all "progress" is improvement.

Absolutely agree.

The mk4 is slightly worse than the mk3, but the difference between mk4 and mk5 is much more pronounced.

 

[sjpowermac]

Ah, I see - anyone who is a 'proper' enthusiast has no option but to like mk5 sets because they are 'proper' trains!

I was keen on the idea when they were announced, but they are disappointing. The main advantage of LHCS should be that they ride well, with no engine vibration. Unfortunately these do not ride particularly well, and this is coupled with poor seats - so as a passenger this makes them disappointing. They are also well soundproofed, which makes them disappointing from an enthusiast perspective.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==


Well funnily enough I've got better things to do than try to find all the incident data.

But why don't you give us a rundown of the few, unproblematic incidents whuch have occurred and demonstrate just how reliable they are - you make it clear that you have all the details to hand.

So in other words, you are very happy to opine without having any facts to hand...

To answer the question you pose we have to go right back to 24.12.2019 with 68023 plus TP07 operating 1F60 09:34 Scarborough to Liverpool Lime Street. The train was delayed at Diggle and arrived 92 late at Stalybridge. The train then ran to Manchester Piccadilly, where it terminated.

Since then, nothing that has caused the situation that you mentioned of causing “delays for miles around”. Over to you now to clarify your statement...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==

Absolutely agree.

The mk4 is slightly worse than the mk3, but the difference between mk4 and mk5 is much more pronounced.

This nonsense has been done to death earlier in the plethora of Mk5a threads. I’m just waiting now for someone to start on with the window/seat alignment, or how about another helping of ‘ooo those 68s are noisy’...yawn.

 

[DB]

So in other words, you are very happy to opine without having any facts to hand...

To answer the question you pose we have to go right back to 24.12.2019 with 68023 plus TP07 operating 1F60 09:34 Scarborough to Liverpool Lime Street. The train was delayed at Diggle and arrived 92 late at Stalybridge. The train then ran to Manchester Piccadilly, where it terminated.

Since then, nothing that has caused the situation that you mentioned of causing “delays for miles around”. Over to you now to clarify your statement...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==


This nonsense has been done to death earlier in the plethora of Mk5a threads. I’m just waiting now for someone to start on with the window/seat alignment, or how about another helping of ‘ooo those 68s are noisy’...yawn.

Thought you wouldn't miss that opportunity to have a good sneer!

But let's point out that with the reduced timetable overall on the Transpennine for a lot of this year, the opportunity for delays have been rather reduced. You might also want to compare reliability with the other Transpennine fleets.

As you are so hot on evidence, can you please explain why the bad ride of the mk5s is 'nonsense', given that it's been noticed and commented on by many people. Or is it just that they are all wrong because you don't agree?

 

[CBlue]

So in other words, you are very happy to opine without having any facts to hand...

To answer the question you pose we have to go right back to 24.12.2019 with 68023 plus TP07 operating 1F60 09:34 Scarborough to Liverpool Lime Street. The train was delayed at Diggle and arrived 92 late at Stalybridge. The train then ran to Manchester Piccadilly, where it terminated.

Since then, nothing that has caused the situation that you mentioned of causing “delays for miles around”. Over to you now to clarify your statement...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==


This nonsense has been done to death earlier in the plethora of Mk5a threads. I’m just waiting now for someone to start on with the window/seat alignment, or how about another helping of ‘ooo those 68s are noisy’...yawn.

I guess we were also due another thread about "proper trains", too.

I don't actually see where DavidB said the Mk5A's had caused delays due to any failure. He simply had the opinion that TPE can't afford failures due to the delays they would cause.

Part of the issue with said trains is that training isn't anywhere near schedule which in turn impacts on availability.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==

Thought you wouldn't miss that opportunity to have a good sneer!

But let's point out that with the reduced timetable overall on the Transpennine for a lot of this year, the opportunity for delays have been rather reduced. You might also want to compare reliability with the other Transpennine fleets.

As you are so hot on evidence, can you please explain why the bad ride of the mk5s is 'nonsense', given that it's been noticed and commented on by many people. Or is it just that they are all wrong because you don't agree?

Or perhaps they're wrong because it's a loco-hauled set, and therefore the best thing since sliced bread!

 

[sjpowermac]

I guess we were also due another thread about "proper trains", too.

I don't actually see where DavidB said the Mk5A's had caused delays due to any failure. He simply had the opinion that TPE can't afford failures due to the delays they would cause.

Part of the issue with said trains is that training isn't anywhere near schedule which in turn impacts on availability.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==


Or perhaps they're wrong because it's a loco-hauled set, and therefore the best thing since sliced bread!

He later asked for details, I told him.

Sadly the Mk5a thread lost many excellent and well informed posters (many of whom work in the industry and had direct involvement with the Nova 3 sets) due to this kind of tedium.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2020 ==

Thought you wouldn't miss that opportunity to have a good sneer!

But let's point out that with the reduced timetable overall on the Transpennine for a lot of this year, the opportunity for delays have been rather reduced. You might also want to compare reliability with the other Transpennine fleets.

As you are so hot on evidence, can you please explain why the bad ride of the mk5s is 'nonsense', given that it's been noticed and commented on by many people. Or is it just that they are all wrong because you don't agree?

Yawn. I must have just imagined all those Nova 3 trains running over the Pennines prior to 13.12.2020

Perhaps you would like to engage with my earlier posts about the sets not having the opportunity to accrue sufficient mileage in service to iron out problems, the ‘bathtub’ curve as Roger Ford calls it?

 

[Wolfie]

CAF were pretty good, their previous UK train (class 332/333) is pretty good although Siemens did a lot of the work.

They appear to have had serious corrosion issues.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be honest I'd put them on a par with IEPs in terms of travelling experience, and below 185s

Try First Class, it's something really special.

 

[Wolfie]

Some of us just want to enjoy having proper trains across the Pennines for the first time in ages.

And haven't had the chance to do so since March.

It puzzles me why so many folk on the Forum appear to be desperate to get rid and have yet more units operating instead.

Unreliable "proper trains" (one heck of an assertion incidentally) or reliable units. Most passengers, as opposed to enthusiasts, will take the latter every time.

 

[Philip]

Cheaper option could be to hand back the LHCS, truncate all cross-Pennine services so that none of these go further north than York, with 802s and 185s used.

TPE (or Northern) could then operate separate shuttles on the same paths as now from York to Scarborough, Redcar and Edinburgh via Newcastle. These services could be worked by 158s or 175s when they come off lease from TfW. Even ordering a new batch of 195s to work the shuttles would be cheaper and more reliable than continuing with the LHCS.

 

[Fokx]

Cheaper option could be to hand back the LHCS, truncate all cross-Pennine services so that none of these go further north than York, with 802s and 185s used.

TPE (or Northern) could then operate separate shuttles on the same paths as now from York to Scarborough, Redcar and Edinburgh via Newcastle. These services could be worked by 158s or 175s when they come off lease from TfW. Even ordering a new batch of 195s to work the shuttles would be cheaper and more reliable than continuing with the LHCS.

That basically defies the entire purpose of Northern Powerhouse Rail.

Passengers do not want to be constantly changing trains, particularly on TPE where the bulk of revenue income comes from leisure travellers and airport services

 

[Philip]

That basically defies the entire purpose of Northern Powerhouse Rail.

Passengers do not want to be constantly changing trains, particularly on TPE where the bulk of revenue income comes from leisure travellers and airport services

Airport travel is no longer a necessity, the drop off in the number of people using the train to catch the plane means cutting direct long distance services is justified. Newcastle to Manchester I would think has the biggest market for a direct link, but I can't see this being big. Edinburgh passengers will take the WCML service as it is quicker anyway.

 

[sjpowermac]

Cheaper option could be to hand back the LHCS, truncate all cross-Pennine services so that none of these go further north than York, with 802s and 185s used.

TPE (or Northern) could then operate separate shuttles on the same paths as now from York to Scarborough, Redcar and Edinburgh via Newcastle. These services could be worked by 158s or 175s when they come off lease from TfW. Even ordering a new batch of 195s to work the shuttles would be cheaper and more reliable than continuing with the LHCS.

Yes, let’s give the north a poorer service. One of the slogans used by ‘Transport for the North’ is ‘taking the north further’, but you want to take it shorter distances and change trains more frequently...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Dec 2020 ==

Try First Class, it's something really special.

Indeed. The ride quality of the sets has also improved, TP01/11/13 are all now excellent, whereas TP10 is somewhat less so. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are some mods in progress...

I seem to remember that when the Mk4 stock was first introduced the ride quality was poor for quite some time. Whilst the sets always felt more like a sports car than a family saloon, they did improve after the yaw damper modifications.

 

[daodao]

Cheaper option could be to hand back the LHCS, truncate all cross-Pennine services so that none of these go further north than York, with 802s and 185s used.

TPE (or Northern) could then operate separate shuttles on the same paths as now from York to Scarborough, Redcar and Edinburgh via Newcastle. These services could be worked by 158s or 175s when they come off lease from TfW. Even ordering a new batch of 195s to work the shuttles would be cheaper and more reliable than continuing with the LHCS.

That is too radical, but the number of services running from Leeds to York, and also from York to Edinburgh on the ECML not operated by the ECML franchise, should be pruned. XC should just run 1 tph via Doncaster and the Selby cut-off to Edinburgh and not beyond (with their other service terminating at Leeds).

Northern Connect should run 2 tph Liverpool-M/c Victoria-Huddersfield-York, with alternate trains calling at all stations to Newcastle or all stations to Middlesbrough, operated by bi-mode multiple units with at least 5 coaches. TPE's 19 five-car Class 802 sets should be sufficient for these services.

There should be 1 tph Blackpool-Bradford-York (calling at all stations between Leeds and York), and also (as Northern Connect) 1 tph (semi-fast) M/c Piccadilly-Leeds-York-Scarborough; the other 1 tph semi-fast M/c Piccadilly to Leeds should extend to Hull, as at present. Until more of these routes are wired, class 185 dmus should suffice.

With this pattern of services, could the Mk5 sets be ditched as surplus to requirements?

 

[sjpowermac]

That is too radical, but the number of services running from Leeds to York, and also from York to Edinburgh on the ECML not operated by the ECML franchise, should be pruned. XC should just run 1 tph via Doncaster and the Selby cut-off to Edinburgh and not beyond (with their other service terminating at Leeds).

Northern Connect should run 2 tph Liverpool-M/c Victoria-Huddersfield-York, with alternate trains calling at all stations to Newcastle or all stations to Middlesbrough, operated by bi-mode multiple units with at least 5 coaches. TPE's 19 five-car Class 802 sets should be sufficient for these services.

There should be 1 tph Blackpool-Bradford-York (calling at all stations between Leeds and York), and also (as Northern Connect) 1 tph (semi-fast) M/c Piccadilly-Leeds-York-Scarborough; the other 1 tph semi-fast M/c Piccadilly to Leeds should extend to Hull, as at present. Until more of these routes are wired, class 185 dmus should suffice.

With this pattern of services, could the Mk5 sets be ditched as surplus to requirements?

Where would you put the XC train that you propose to terminate at Leeds? It’s a very busy station.

 

[daodao]

Where would you put the XC train that you propose to terminate at Leeds? It’s a very busy station.

Leeds has a lot of platforms, but once the terminating XC train has unloaded, it could be sent to a siding and brought back to a platform 5 minutes before departure if platform occupation is an issue.

 

[sjpowermac]

Leeds has a lot of platforms, but once the terminating XC train has unloaded, it could be sent to a siding and brought back to a platform 5 minutes before departure if platform occupation is an issue.

Which ‘siding’ at Leeds are you referring to?

 

[daodao]

Which ‘siding’ at Leeds are you referring to?

Neville Hill Depot

 

[sjpowermac]

Neville Hill Depot

So you want to run fewer trains between Leeds and York but send an empty stock working out over the two track eastern approach to Leeds? How does that help anything?

 

[daodao]

So you want to run fewer trains between Leeds and York but send an empty stock working out over the two track eastern approach to Leeds? How does that help anything?

The paths into/out of Leeds from the east are already allocated to this service. There is no need to run 2 tph XC between York and Newcastle, and the detour via Leeds adds 20 minutes to the York-Sheffield journey time, so the train might as well terminate at Leeds, as used to be the case. It saves several train sets, and terminating at Leeds rather than York would save 1 train set that is likely to be carrying mostly fresh air between Leeds and York.

 

[sjpowermac]

The paths into/out of Leeds from the east are already allocated to this service. There is no need to run 2 tph XC between York and Newcastle, and the detour via Leeds adds 20 minutes to the York-Sheffield journey time, so the train might as well terminate at Leeds, as used to be the case. It saves several train sets, and terminating at Leeds rather than York would save 1 train set that is likely to be carrying mostly fresh air between Leeds and York.

Pre-virus, did you travel by train on any of the routes you mention? I didn’t see many empty trains on any of them and particularly not between Leeds and York...

Thank you for confirming that you want to replace a service train with an empty stock working over a notoriously busy stretch of track.

 

[IamTrainsYT]

Actually, you don't in the case of the Hitachi 80x. Pay a lot for a train with **** seats and appalling ride quality.

... and you get the same on CAF stock plus godawful reliability. At least with an 80x, they are much more reliable. They are also bi mode, so could be used on electric on the LIV-MCV & LDS-YRK sections. Surely even an 80x on diesel has to be more efficient than a 68?