Should Northern and 195s run all Hope Valley services?

[Bletchleyite]

WCML services from Manchester to Scotland can simply be binned off with passengers changing at Preston out of a 4tph Blackpool Airport to Manchester Airport / Hazel Grove service into the existing 2tph Avanti London to Scotland services. (I appreciate the comments previously made about the increase in custom between Manchester and Scotland as these services have developed but I think a lot of it would survive this split.)

I don't agree. The service should stay, run it from Victoria if it causes an issue on Castlefield. Manchester is England's second or third city (depends who you ask) and very much deserves a direct service to Scotland.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Apr 2021 ==

But if there's money for dozens of brand new DMU carriages for the North, then it's surely daft to replace 185s but leave Sprinters in service?

Exactly. Oldest first, including cascades (so 175s in to scrap however-many 150/153/155/156, as they're newer and won't have a home).

 

[tbtc]

But if there's money for dozens of brand new DMU carriages for the North, then it's surely daft to replace 185s but leave Sprinters in service?

I agree to a degree (although, obviously we're not going to see dozens of brand new DMU carriages, so none of this will happen)

However, we have to look at the routes that 185s could be cascaded onto. Some people are just looking at the age of trains and wanting to replace the oldest ones, but Northern has a lot of services that require nothing more than a 75mph DMU with reasonable acceleration (since the stopping nature means that station dwells are more important than top speeds). 195s can fill that role, but there aren't anywhere near enough 195s to replace 150s (and the OP seems to want to focus any additional 150s on longer distance stuff like Manchester - Cleethorpes)

There may well be 175s and 185s on the second hand market but will end door 175s be able to cope on services pathed for 150s? There's not going to be much need for 100mph operation on Northern services (in fact, about the only Northern services that could run at 100mph are the ECS between Heaton and Yorkshire, to rotate stock that is maintained on Tyneside but operates a large chunk of it's life in God's Country).

Personally, I find 150s pretty horrible - very basic BR stock, the "toaster rack" 3+2 seats have very low bases - I'd much rather have a 175 in theory, but would that 175 cope with the dwell times at some key stations?

185s are better than 150s too, but do you need the incredible thirsty/ heavy 100mph DMUs on many Northerns services? The 185s were designed to do one particular route, and would have done it well if the Government had allowed the fourth carriages, but where are they going to go on Northern's current network? The S&C is often discussed, but that's only about three units.

Look at how 170s struggled when trying to run stoppers like the Harrogate services - your top speed looks nice but if you can't get up to 30mph/ 50mph in reasonable time then you're going to struggle.

There's also the problem that Northern struggle with so many different DMU types (150/155/156/158/170/ 195 - including different subclasses/ types of some of those trains). Introducing a dribble of 175/185s into the fleet is going to complicate things further.

 

[py_megapixel]

I agree to a degree (although, obviously we're not going to see dozens of brand new DMU carriages, so none of this will happen)

However, we have to look at the routes that 185s could be cascaded onto. Some people are just looking at the age of trains and wanting to replace the oldest ones, but Northern has a lot of services that require nothing more than a 75mph DMU with reasonable acceleration (since the stopping nature means that station dwells are more important than top speeds). 195s can fill that role, but there aren't anywhere near enough 195s to replace 150s (and the OP seems to want to focus any additional 150s on longer distance stuff like Manchester - Cleethorpes)

There may well be 175s and 185s on the second hand market but will end door 175s be able to cope on services pathed for 150s? There's not going to be much need for 100mph operation on Northern services (in fact, about the only Northern services that could run at 100mph are the ECS between Heaton and Yorkshire, to rotate stock that is maintained on Tyneside but operates a large chunk of it's life in God's Country).

Personally, I find 150s pretty horrible - very basic BR stock, the "toaster rack" 3+2 seats have very low bases - I'd much rather have a 175 in theory, but would that 175 cope with the dwell times at some key stations?

185s are better than 150s too, but do you need the incredible thirsty/ heavy 100mph DMUs on many Northerns services? The 185s were designed to do one particular route, and would have done it well if the Government had allowed the fourth carriages, but where are they going to go on Northern's current network? The S&C is often discussed, but that's only about three units.

Look at how 170s struggled when trying to run stoppers like the Harrogate services - your top speed looks nice but if you can't get up to 30mph/ 50mph in reasonable time then you're going to struggle.

There's also the problem that Northern struggle with so many different DMU types (150/155/156/158/170/ 195 - including different subclasses/ types of some of those trains). Introducing a dribble of 175/185s into the fleet is going to complicate things further.

I don't necessarily think the higher-end services need newer stock. They just need a higher-spec interior, possibly with more frequent refurbishments, and that's already the case with the 185s.

What I'm saying is that, if a hypothetical X million pounds is available for new DMU carriages in the North, maybe we should be looking at building more 195s (or, if possible, a bimode version thereof) to go and directly replace Sprinters, rather than replacing 185s and attempting to cascade elsewhere.

Of course all of this is moot, because I highly doubt such funding is forthcoming - but you get the idea.

 

[yorksrob]

There's also the management issue.

It's be come apparent over recent years that for whatever reason, Northern just isn't up to running a train service in the way that TPE and EMR are, therefore why put all of your Hope valley eggs in that one basket.

 

[Llandudno]

I think it would be better to try and take routes off Northern rather than give them any more!

I would rather EMR run the Hope Valley stopper.

 

[randyrippley]

.............WCML services from Manchester to Scotland can simply be binned off with passengers changing at Preston out of a 4tph Blackpool Airport to Manchester Airport / Hazel Grove service into the existing 2tph Avanti London to Scotland services. ..................

Just how are you going to run 4tph out of Blackpool airport, and what purpose would it serve? The airport is closed

 

[Ianno87]

Just how are you going to run 4tph out of Blackpool airport, and what purpose would it serve? The airport is closed

I presume a typo for Blackpool North.

 

[Djgr]

I think it would be better to try and take routes off Northern rather than give them any more!

I would rather EMR run the Hope Valley stopper.

I really think that we should concentrate on working out how to reduce Northern's network by, say, 25% as they have a longstanding and ongoing inability to perform at a satisfactory level.

 

[Kite159]

Pairs of 150s on the Hope Valley line stoppers have a lot more space than a 3 coach 195, both for bikes/rucksacks. Also helpful for the guards as they can dispatch from the rear cab area rather than coming into the passenger area

Even if the 3+2 high density seating is horrible

 

[Philip]

I think it's nonsense the things some are saying about Northern not being fit to run express services, needing to have routes taken off them etc. Their running performance has been good and reliable for a while; new and refurbished trains; good service from on-the-ground staff and cheaper fares. It's a huge franchise and because of this there will always be some problems, but considering this I think they're doing a good job.

 

[Energy]

I think it's nonsense the things some are saying about Northern not being fit to run express services, needing to have routes taken off them etc. Their running performance has been good and reliable for a while; new and refurbished trains; good service from on-the-ground staff and cheaper fares. It's a huge franchise and because of this there will always be some problems, but considering this I think they're doing a good job.

They probably could run express services, but why would they? That is TPEs job, if money is going to more stock for Northern then it should be concentrated on replacing Sprinters not expanding Northern.

 

[RailWonderer]

I think it's nonsense the things some are saying about Northern not being fit to run express services, needing to have routes taken off them etc. Their running performance has been good and reliable for a while; new and refurbished trains; good service from on-the-ground staff and cheaper fares. It's a huge franchise and because of this there will always be some problems, but considering this I think they're doing a good job.

Agreed they have improved but the newer rolling stock with a relaxed covid timetable has helped them with less shortages and more punctuality. When the normal service does eventually return Northern will soon be deemed unfit for express services (Possibly under a 'Northern Express' sub brand and livery?).
You just said it yourself - it's a huge franchise - shouldn't they focus on their regional and local offerings instead of branching out into IC? They do some longer distance regionals like Manchester - Windermere and Barrow, the S&C and Sheffield - Hull/Scarborough which are enough for them to deal with already.

 

[Purple Orange]

Agreed they have improved but the newer rolling stock with a relaxed covid timetable has helped them with less shortages and more punctuality. When the normal service does eventually return Northern will soon be deemed unfit for express services (Possibly under a 'Northern Express' sub brand and livery?).
You just said it yourself - it's a huge franchise - shouldn't they focus on their regional and local offerings instead of branching out into IC? They do some longer distance regionals like Manchester - Windermere and Barrow, the S&C and Sheffield - Hull/Scarborough which are enough for them to deal with already.

Added to the fact that the franchise system is ending, I doubt we will see one organisation running all local services across the north. Manchester is establishing the Bee Network, which will cover walking, cycling, buses, trams AND trains. Which train services they are I don’t know, but that is as not relevant as the fact that considerations are going towards a different form of operation.

 

[py_megapixel]

I think it's nonsense the things some are saying about Northern not being fit to run express services, needing to have routes taken off them etc. Their running performance has been good and reliable for a while;

That might have something to do with the fact that until very recently there have been hardly any of these pesky things called "passengers".

new and refurbished trains; good service from on-the-ground staff and cheaper fares.

The refurb is rubbish compared it to the TPE one, even taking into account that TPE had newer stock to start with. And the fares haven't become any cheaper.
Can't argue that the staff are pretty good on Northern though.

It's a huge franchise and because of this there will always be some problems, but considering this I think they're doing a good job.

True - so why make the franchise even huger?

Nothing you're saying is absolutely incorrect - it just doesn't help me understand how this is anything but a solution in search of a problem.

 

[yorksrob]

I think it's nonsense the things some are saying about Northern not being fit to run express services, needing to have routes taken off them etc. Their running performance has been good and reliable for a while; new and refurbished trains; good service from on-the-ground staff and cheaper fares. It's a huge franchise and because of this there will always be some problems, but considering this I think they're doing a good job.

On the contrary, what makes you think that TPE and EMR aren't capable of running services on this route. They seem to be doing a pretty good job of it at the moment.

I'd also take issue with your rather rosy view of Northern, which seems to be rather too adept at finding reasons not to run its existing services, to my mind.

 

[Philip]

On the contrary, what makes you think that TPE and EMR aren't capable of running services on this route. They seem to be doing a pretty good job of it at the moment.

I'd also take issue with your rather rosy view of Northern, which seems to be rather too adept at finding reasons not to run its existing services, to my mind.

I believe that the current rolling stock would be better deployed elsewhere. Class 195s seem a better train for these routes for the reasons I said at the beginning, so it would make sense to also give the route to Northern as the staff know the units.

Should remember that Northern run a lot more services than the others normally; if TPE and EMR ran a similar number of services then they would probably have cut a similar percentage.

 

[Tomnick]

Class 195s seem a better train for these routes for the reasons I said at the beginning, so it would make sense to also give the route to Northern as the staff know the units.

Which staff? This would be a significant transfer of work between TOCs so it’s very likely that staff would be TUPE’d over - and if they weren’t, if the loss of work was countered by increases elsewhere for example, Northern would have to recruit significant numbers of additional drivers and guards to cover the additional work, so they’d still be no better off (and without the advantage of relevant route knowledge that those who currently work those routes obviously possess).

 

[yorksrob]

I believe that the current rolling stock would be better deployed elsewhere. Class 195s seem a better train for these routes for the reasons I said at the beginning, so it would make sense to also give the route to Northern as the staff know the units.

Should remember that Northern run a lot more services than the others normally; if TPE and EMR ran a similar number of services then they would probably have cut a similar percentage.

The other rolling stock provides a key city - city link and seems correctly specified for that purpose, to my mind. The 185's in particular were built for these sort of express trans pennine services, moreso than the 195's, so why get rid of them.

I disagree with your last point entirely. The size of a TOC should make no difference. It should have the resources and provision to run the service for its network. There is no excuse whatsoever for Northern passengers to be subjected to worse cutbacks than passengers on other networks.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I believe that the current rolling stock would be better deployed elsewhere. Class 195s seem a better train for these routes for the reasons I said at the beginning, so it would make sense to also give the route to Northern as the staff know the units.

195s have excellent EMU-like acceleration and thus would be best used on non-electrified local stopping services with a lot of close-placed stops - the Manchester suburban locals, the CLC stopping service etc. 158s and 170s work better on longer distance services where the lack of acceleration is less of an issue. So if the Hope Valley stopper is the extension of a Marple local (which it is) it makes sense to use them on that too.

London Midland got this right and ordered 172s to directly replace 150s. Northern got it wrong by proposing a cascade, putting unsuitable units (158s and 170s) onto stopping services.

Using them on semifasts and fasts is a waste of that unique ability (in Northern's fleet).

 

[Wolfie]

Well for example Northern advances on Manchester Piccadilly to Preston are cheaper than the TPE equivalent. TPE and Cross Country are known for pricing their tickets high, Northern the opposite.

That's because there is competition. Your idea would remove any chance of that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2021 ==

Really, it's only historical precedent that Manchester - Sheffield isn't an "InterCity" route. By any definition, Sheffield and Manchester are both core cities deserving of a high quality express passenger environment.

Really? So why not London to Southampton or Portsmouth?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2021 ==

EWR are after 3-car 100mph DMUs, which 185s are, so they would suit their purposes, and perhaps Northampton could maintain them, being a Siemens shop?

That's about the only positive to that particular suggestion.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2021 ==

But if there's money for dozens of brand new DMU carriages for the North, then it's surely daft to replace 185s but leave Sprinters in service?

Very true.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2021 ==

I think it's nonsense the things some are saying about Northern not being fit to run express services, needing to have routes taken off them etc. Their running performance has been good and reliable for a while; new and refurbished trains; good service from on-the-ground staff and cheaper fares. It's a huge franchise and because of this there will always be some problems, but considering this I think they're doing a good job.

The cheaper fares come courtesy of eye watering levels of subsidy. How sustainable that is in a post-COVID world...

 

[Purple Orange]

Really? So why not London to Southampton or Portsmouth?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2021 ==

Surely London to Southampton has a pretty high quality service, certainly compared to Manchester - Sheffield. The closest overlap would be the fact that the interior of a 185 would be suitable for any London Victoria/Waterloo/London Bridge service.

 

[Philip]

The Hope Valley line will probably become a semi-fast route anyway before long, with the Cleethorpes and Nottingham services sharing the extra calls at Hazel Grove, Dore, Edale and Chinley between them; Hazel Grove is already a service down on the initial plan and the latter three need a more frequent service to Sheffield and Manchester. The 195s would be more suited to this stopping pattern than 185s.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Hope Valley line will probably become a semi-fast route anyway before long, with the Cleethorpes and Nottingham services sharing the extra calls at Hazel Grove, Dore, Edale and Chinley between them; Hazel Grove is already a service down on the initial plan and the latter three need a more frequent service to Sheffield and Manchester. The 195s would be more suited to this stopping pattern than 185s.

I very much hope (!) not. Local journeys on the route are very useful for leisure purposes.

An hourly stopping service is very much needed, ideally fast from Manchester to Marple then all stations. Given the high leisure usage, dedicated, branded units would be good, with upgraded bicycle and luggage capacity. We don't market this sort of service anything like enough.

 

[py_megapixel]

a semi-fast route, with the Cleethorpes and Nottingham services sharing the extra calls at Hazel Grove, Dore, Edale and Chinley between them

Don't give them ideas!

 

[Killingworth]

It'll be no sooner than 2023/4 when Covid aftermath can be better assessed and we know that the construction work is finally complete when major changes should come!

Currently most TPE services are 6 carriage, Northern 4 and EMR should be 4. That was adequate on most trains pre-Covid. Obviously when any of the three are cancelled, short formed or badly delayed there'll be potential knock on crowding on the others.

The only crowding I've seen recently has been on Northern Saturday stoppers out of both Sheffield and Piccadilly. That's due to outdoor folk heading for the Peak District - and also through travellers attracted by Northern's cheaper tickets compared with the other two!

In late 2020 we had 2 out of 3 stopping services operated by 195s but are now seeing mostly 4 coach 150s. They may now be rostered until December. It was a surprise to encounter such a 4 car train with standees out of Sheffield on Saturday but that's confirmation of the changing market.

Conversely it was quite normal to stand all the way from Dore to Piccadilly on a 3 car 185 in 2019, but now they're 6 car there's masses of space. How long will that be allowed to continue? Will more commuters return this year, next year, ever? Back then first was also well loaded, but not now.

What's best, 195 185, 158, 150? Who should operate?

Either EMR or TPE with 6 car 185s for both fast routes would make sense for some allowing interchangeability and first accommodation. Lack of walk through between units is a disadvantage shared with 195s. 158s offer walk through, but no first and end doors are slower to load.

If 150/2s were used the stoppers could have walk through, but Northern seem determined to keep them apart! That has revenue implications on the stoppers that many may use to their advantage. When they were operating on the line the 195s were popular, but 2 car weren't enough at peak times, especially with distancing.

Which operator is best? To be fair all 3 are victims of the old infrastructure and each others delays, compounded by old franchise commitments and recycled old trains! Each is probably doing as well as it can with what's available. What the future holds nobody yet knows.

Maybe well seated walk through 196s with first might be a good bet, but that's not an option.

 

[Aictos]

What's best, 195 185, 158, 150? Who should operate?

If 150/2s were used the stoppers could have walk through, but Northern seem determined to keep them apart! That has revenue implications on the stoppers that many may use to their advantage.

With regards to the Northern Class 150 fleets, surely it wouldn't be beyond possible to break up a portion of the fleet and place one ex Class 150/1 vehicle with a ex Class 150/2 vehicle so when in pairs, the Class 150/2s face each other to provide the facility to walkthrough the entire 4 car train.

You even class the new units as Class 150/9s.

Of course the trains would have to be diagrammed to ensure this happens but nothing is insurmountable.

 

[CBlue]

With regards to the Northern Class 150 fleets, surely it wouldn't be beyond possible to break up a portion of the fleet and place one ex Class 150/1 vehicle with a ex Class 150/2 vehicle so when in pairs, the Class 150/2s face each other to provide the facility to walkthrough the entire 4 car train.

You even class the new units as Class 150/9s.

Of course the trains would have to be diagrammed to ensure this happens but nothing is insurmountable.

Diagramming trains to ensure they point the right way round? I think trying to timetable and diagram everything is tough enough as it is.

 

[Ianno87]

Diagramming trains to ensure they point the right way round? I think trying to timetable and diagram everything is tough enough as it is.

The proposal would, by definition, mean half of units facing one way and half the other. Which depot staff would love (some depots have facilities arranged for trains on the same orientation)

 

[Bletchleyite]

The proposal would, by definition, mean half of units facing one way and half the other. Which depot staff would love (some depots have facilities arranged for trains on the same orientation)

It does seem awkward. But it's been done before - the old TransPennine DMUs had a gangway at one end and a full width cab at the other.

 

[Ianno87]

It does seem awkward. But it's been done before - the old TransPennine DMUs had a gangway at one end and a full width cab at the other.

Anything can be done....at a price and reliability cost. I'd suggest maintenance methods and good practice has moved on a little bit since the days of TransPennine DMUs. They didn't have USB sockets to stick laptops in for fault diagnosis, for example.