A New Civity Trains for EMR

[DB]

To release 170s from Northern it'd be best to order some new bi-modes for the most obvious bi-mode routes (e.g. Barrow/Windermere) and swap the 195s in for 170s.

Another small non-standard fleet then!

 

[py_megapixel]

Or why don't EMR just keep some/all of their curre t 158s? Perfectly decent trains - proper repaint and new seat covers, etc, and they'd be fine. Crews alreay work them, so no training needed...

I'm not saying that wouldn't work - I just think that sending the 158s to Northern in exchange for 170s would be a bit more sensible because it consolidates all the relevant 170s with EMR and all of the relevant 158s with Northern, rather than splitting them between. They would still require a repaint and new seat covers and carpets regardless of who they are going to.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Another small non-standard fleet then!

A non-standard fleet, but one dedicated to a set of routes that are absolutely textbook-perfectly suited to bi-mode (or even battery) operation. Probably no more of an issue than the TPE 397s.

Alternative: give Barrow/Windermere back to TPE and have them order a few more 5-car 80x for those routes. That would avoid microfleets and give those routes a nice upgrade (F*insa S*phias aside), though it'd require either SDO or some platform lengthenings.

 

[py_megapixel]

Another small non-standard fleet then!

A non-standard fleet, but one dedicated to a set of routes that are absolutely textbook-perfectly suited to bi-mode (or even battery) operation.

<crayons>
If I'd been in charge of Northern's fleet orders, it would have been lots of 3-car end-gangwayed bi-modes, enough to allow for a healthy number of 6-car workings.
The unelectrified lines that can't benefit from bi-mode operation at all could have retained the nicer of the existing diesel fleet (i.e. 158s, and 185s if they could be leased) while all-electric routes such as Manchester to Crewe and Stoke could have refurbished 323s and 333s along with one of the many classes of perfectly good EMU displaced by other fleet replacements (379s, 350s or 365s).
</crayons>

That could have left the displaced Scotrail 170s to go to EMR.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If I'd been in charge of Northern's fleet orders, it would have been lots of 3-car end-gangwayed bi-modes, enough to allow for a healthy number of 6-car workings.

Agreed. Or I'd have considered 4-section FLIRTs.

 

[py_megapixel]

Agreed. Or I'd have considered 4-section FLIRTs.

Are you including or not including the engine compartment in the number of sections?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Are you including or not including the engine compartment in the number of sections?

Sorry, that's 4 "coaches" plus the engine (the vehicles are short, so a 3-section one is really equivalent to a 2x24m conventional DMU).

 

[py_megapixel]

Sorry, that's 4 "coaches" plus the engine (the vehicles are short, so a 3-section one is really equivalent to a 2x24m conventional DMU).

Fair enough.

 

[43096]

Another small non-standard fleet then!

I'm not sure what the issue is here, as you'd been replacing one small fleet (170s) with another.

 

[Wolfie]

I really don't think anyone's going to order a new DMU that can't easily be converted to a bi-mode or EMU.

Absolutely.

 

[43096]

Sorry, that's 4 "coaches" plus the engine (the vehicles are short, so a 3-section one is really equivalent to a 2x24m conventional DMU).

If they'd ordered the 195s as "755s" and the 331s as a straight EMU version of the 755 (like a short 745) then you could have them work together if needed. As it is a 195 won't work with a 331.

 

[Wolfie]

So it’s ok to take TfW’s units so long as they are replaced with brand new units but Northern must have them replaced with 3rd hand scrap.

The Welsh Govt likely wouldn't release 170s for Sprinters given that they plan to get rid of most of the latter. EMRs 156s and 158s aren't scrap either.

 

[tbtc]

The subject of Northern’s 170’s keeps cropping up and again people seem to have decided that they too should be heading to EMR because they are all working on unsuitable routes (untrue, in reality only the Harrogate line is unsuitable for high speed low accelerating units, Sheffield - Hull/Scarborough and Halifax - Hull is fine for them).

The problem with Northern’s 170’s actually stems from the 195 order. 25 of the 195’s were ordered as 2 cars meaning the 3 car units are too thinly spread out across the network to work the Harrogate line diagrams that the 170’s work. The 195’s should have been ordered as 3 and 4 car units as per the 331’s which would have allowed 3 car 195’s to work the Harrogate line and release the 170’s to move on to Leeds - Nottingham/Lincoln services alongside 3 car 195’s thus focusing the 170’s on the Leeds/Sheffield/Hull triangle of services. Of course if 4 car units had been ordered too then it would have prevented the requirement to double up 2 car sets on the Calder Valley therefore actually creating extra units for service as very few if any 195 services would need to be doubled up

Agreed re both the 170s and 195s - it seems daft for Northern to have 158s, 170s and 195s without the rumours about them getting 175s or 185s - but Arriva presumably scored well in the franchise bid for being seen to be ordering lots of new DMUs (when, actually, a smaller number of longer units would have been better - even more so if they were a bi-mode fleet!), so the franchise has a larger number of (non-corridor) DMUs than it needs.

Regrettable, but I guess that that was the kind of thing that helped with the franchise box ticking exercise (along with spreading them as thinly as possible, so that all the "stakeholders" got to see a token amount of brand new trains in their towns, instead of allocating them to one particular area).

What about EMR Sprinters as replacements?

Northern could get twenty-six 158s and eight 156s in exchange for sixteen 170s, which would allow a modest capacity boost on Northern (single 3-car Turbostars replaced with pairs of 15x) whilst allieviating EMR's shortages and allowing them to have a homogeneous regional fleet. It's a win-win

Why? Yet again why is EMR’s problem of having a homogenous fleet of 170’s Northern’s problem. This suggestion means pushing Northern’s average age up just as it is finally coming down. Imagine the outrage (including on this forum) if Northern replaced 2005 built class 170’s for 1988 built 156’s and 1991 built 158’s. What is wrong with EMR retaining some of their current 158 fleet until the planned 170’s can be released from Southern which doesn’t look like anytime soon.

I'd prefer Northern to have 8x156 + 26x158 instead of 16x170s (even though the 170s are three carriages, so equivalent to 24 two carriage DMUs) - the small fleet of Turbostars is more like a hinderance, given the need to keep staff trained on small fleets, the maintenance etc. Especially as the 156/158s can be turned into three/four/five coach trains (with corridor connections).

EMR would be better with a bigger fleet of 170s, Northern would be better with a bigger fleet of 156/158s - having a relatively small number (compared to the size of the franchise) of 170s doesn't help much (they are younger than the 158s, sure, but they don't do anything that can't be done by existing Northern units)

Ok shall we flip this? Instead why don’t Northern take on EMR’s 170’s in exchange for some 156’s & 158’s. It’s no different but would no doubt be rebuffed.

Or how about EMR taking on TfW’s even smaller fleet of 170’s (12 units) working on stopping services. How ridiculous that must be if it’s ridiculous Northern having 16 units.

The TfW fleet of 170s is daft - I really don't understand the way that the Welsh have tried to organise the fleet (a sprinkling of loco hauled/ 170s/ 230s/ 769s etc) - other than the tokenistic "achievement" of being seen to get rid of all of the units that ran under Arriva so that they can point to a "new" fleet - this strange combination of brand new and ancient - why get rid of the two/three coach 100mph 175s and bring in two/three coach 100mph 170s instead? But that's their problem - they'll have to try to accommodate all of the problems of having various non-compatible fleets.

No reason for EMR/ Northern to also have tiny micro fleets (and the problems that they bring).

 

[LowLevel]

What about EMR Sprinters as replacements?

Northern could get twenty-six 158s and eight 156s in exchange for sixteen 170s, which would allow a modest capacity boost on Northern (single 3-car Turbostars replaced with pairs of 15x) whilst allieviating EMR's shortages and allowing them to have a homogeneous regional fleet. It's a win-win.

It wouldn't take much work to get them to the same spec as the rest of Northern's 15x; they already have TrainFX and seating of equal or greater quality to what's already on the fleet, so all that would presumably be needed would be new seating covers, carpets and paintwork.


But the end-gangwayed units are not compatible with each other for multiple working purposes, so that doesn't make sense either.

TOPS numbers were created for operational purposes, and not to make things look neat to enthusiasts - something which I accept even as an enthusiast who has never worked on the railways.

As it happens Northern have already signed up for a large chunk of EMR's 156 fleet (I believe the original EMT units which have had recent bodywork/corrosion repairs as well as repaint, new door steps and runners, LED lighting fitted throughout etc) so they're not available to swap anyway Lease moves to Northern in the near future and they'll be subleased to EMR until displaced by the WMR 170/5s, whenever that is.

Next to go is 156/9 then 158 according to the original plan, with the last 15x planned to be the 4 Angel 156 ex Northern sets which I believe are intended to be used on Barton.

Of course post COVID that is all entirely up in the air.

 

[raetiamann]

The issue really seems to be that too many TOCs have small fleets of 170s and posters on here don't want their local TOC to release them. This is apparent across other threads also, which I suppose speaks volumes for the regard the class is held.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The issue really seems to be that too many TOCs have small fleets of 170s and posters on here don't want their local TOC to release them. This is apparent across other threads also, which I suppose speaks volumes for the regard the class is held.

I guess the 170 is basically a modern-day (ish) 150 - a solid workhorse that does most regional jobs pretty well, give or take being a bit sluggish off the mark.

There's one TOC of course that has loads of them (albeit numbered 168xxx instead) - getting the wires up would release those.

 

[Energy]

Absolutely. There should be no pure diesel units ordered from here on in. However the suggestions on here as with other previous threads is with EMR taking on 15 year old units from Northern in return for 30 year old units which bemuses me. That suggestion I note is not being made for Wales.

How about EMR get your 170s and the North finally gets some electrification? New diesel trains are very unlikely.

 

[Bletchleyite]

How about EMR get your 170s and the North finally gets some electrification? New diesel trains are very unlikely.

New bi-modes, particularly battery ones, are a distinct possibility, and there are quite a few Northern routes that would suit them well.

 

[Bevan Price]

The issue really seems to be that too many TOCs have small fleets of 170s and posters on here don't want their local TOC to release them. This is apparent across other threads also, which I suppose speaks volumes for the regard the class is held.

The real issue is that there are too many TOCs, each with their own ideas about fleet content. What would have been best is a single national operator with a handful of standardised designs, one for locals, one for medium distance semi-fasts, and one for long distance / high speed services. (Or diesel & electric versions of each).

 

[DB]

The real issue is that there are too many TOCs, each with their own ideas about fleet content. What would have been best is a single national operator with a handful of standardised designs, one for locals, one for medium distance semi-fasts, and one for long distance / high speed services. (Or diesel & electric versions of each).

And diesel and electric versions should have been compatible - not like Northern's CAF units which look very similar but are completely incompatible with each other.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And diesel and electric versions should have been compatible - not like Northern's CAF units which look very similar but are completely incompatible with each other.

Interestingly, they managed to achieve that with 80x - a bi-mode unit can and often does haul (or shove) an EMU off the wires, though the EMU does have one engine for the hotel power.

 

[DB]

Interestingly, they managed to achieve that with 80x - a bi-mode unit can and often does haul (or shove) an EMU off the wires, though the EMU does have one engine for the hotel power.

Yes, that was certainly something they got right with those!

 

[Anonymous10]

I really don't think anyone's going to order a new DMU that can't easily be converted to a bi-mode or EMU.

yet Wales did

 

[Bletchleyite]

yet Wales did

Wales has next to no electrification, so is different from most of the rest of the UK.

 

[JonathanH]

The real issue is that there are too many TOCs, each with their own ideas about fleet content. What would have been best is a single national operator with a handful of standardised designs, one for locals, one for medium distance semi-fasts, and one for long distance / high speed services. (Or diesel & electric versions of each).

Even British Rail had multiple sourcing of rolling stock - admittedly more of it could work together and there were some large fleets but we there has been some standardisation of fleets between different TOCs. The fact that 450s and 350s don't work together is no more an issue than Scotrail's 158s don't work with GWRs 158s.

 

[AM9]

Wales has next to no electrification, so is different from most of the rest of the UK.

But the decision not to perpetuate diesel operations by buying yet more new diesel-only stock, thereby commiting the railway to another 30-40 years of their use is not about Wales, (or anywhere else in the former BR network), because rolling stock will mostly be moved around the whole network according to it's suitability and availability.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But the decision not to perpetuate diesel operations by buying yet more new diesel-only stock, thereby commiting the railway to another 30-40 years of their use is not about Wales, (or anywhere else in the former BR network), because rolling stock will mostly be moved around the whole network according to it's suitability and availability.

There's no reason to expect these units to be cascaded away from Wales prior to any alternative power or electrification being put in place, really.

The one that I do find bizarre is that they have saved 50p by specifying the FLIRTs without a pantograph and transformer. Those could indeed end up elsewhere.

 

[edwin_m]

yet Wales did

Wasn't that before the commitments to phase out diesel operation?

 

[Anonymous10]

Wales has next to no electrification, so is different from most of the rest of the UK.

yet imo they still should have procured bi modes the point is is that nothing is garuanteed

 

[edwin_m]

The Wales and Borders franchise bids went in either very end of 2017 or very early 2018, which was before Jo Johnson's commitment to phase out diesel trains made on 12 February. The rolling stock orders were all wrapped up in the franchise bid so could not have been changed after submission. The winning bidders did order some bi-modes for use in South Wales, alongside the diesel-only fleet for routes in the west of the country. Changing the latter order for more bi-modes would have cost more or delayed delivery or both.