Potential stock for future Nottingham to Liverpool services?

[QSK19]

Those TfW 158s should go to Northern to displace 150s and 156s and let the outgoing 175s operate Nottingham Liverpool for EMR to use. They will most likely use 170s and 158s though.

To be honest, moving the 175s over to EMR wouldn’t be as much of a gain as one might think. Firstly, it would mean having to train crew up on another type of rolling stock. And secondly, the 175s are only about 8-10 years younger than EMR’s 158s - i.e. the 175s, relatively speaking, are not that much younger than what they’d be replacing.

On balance, better to keep the existing 158s - staff already familiar with them and, being closer to life expiry than the 175s, it enables (much) new(er) stock to be brought in to replace them sooner.

 

[Chester1]

They will have to come up with a business case that stacks up to use any additional trains. Revenue and costs rather than overcrowding will dictate whether they use additional rolling stock. It is conceivable that CrossCountry don't get any other stock than whatever they need to eliminate the HSTs.

EMR would have to do the same to keep the Meridians rather than 158s. It would need to be a heck of a business case to justify replacing 90 mph high density fuel efficient units with 125 mph low density thirsty units. I don't understand the appeal of putting Meridians on services they are unsuited to. If it is decided the 158s are inadequate then there are suitable secondhand 100mph DMUs coming available. Alternatively the hybrid 195 model that Northern is looking into would also be suitable. New build units would have the advantage of a degree of tailoring for the services.

 

[QSK19]

Alternatively the hybrid 195 model that Northern is looking into would also be suitable. New build units would have the advantage of a degree of tailoring for the services.

I do think that the hybrid 195 would be EMR’s (or its successor’s) best chance at getting new regional stock for the East Midlands.

My gut feeling, though, is that the 158s will stay until such time as existing 19x operators have had enough of them and move across to a bi-mode replacement - without Mystic Meg’s crystal ball in front of me, I’d say that, come 10-15 years’ time, the West Midlands operator would receive new battery or hydrogen bi-modes and then 196s cascade across to the East Midlands. The 158s exit the fleet at that point.

 

[The Ham]

How many operators need 100mph+ diesel trains, bearing in mind the Avanti West Coast ones will be available too?
Plenty of homes for 158s elsewhere

GWR could (at least in theory) use a standard only version of 22x's to replace the HST Castles, whether that's practical or desirable is another matter.

Likewise, with only a small capacity change a 10 coach 22x could replace a 9 coach 159, it would likely have to be limited to the shoulder peaks, however having a mixed fleet is unlikely to be practical or desirable.

 

[Bevan Price]

Would it be feasible to down-rate the engines of 22x to, say, around 500 hp per coach, to make them more economical to run on services limited to around 90-100 mph maximum ? That might make them more suitable to replace HSTs in Scotland & Western England, and even Nottingham / Liverpool when 158s eventually become life-expired.

 

[liamf656]

The 222s are way too expensive to run as a replacement for the GWR castle sets or the Scotrail HSTs, even if they're made to be standard only or include downrated engines. the MPG is too high and the seating density is too low for this. More 158s would be perfect for GWR and hopefully in Scotland we'll see other types of fuel to replace 158/170s on various routes that cascade to replace the HSTs. As pure speculation, I'd extend electrification to Tweedbank to begin with

Back on topic, I would definitely put CAF Civitys with gangway connections on the Liverpool to Nottingham route, and a large fleet of them would make them perfect for the rest of the network. Either that or 172/3s which I think I mentioned before

 

[The Ham]

The 222s are way too expensive to run as a replacement for the GWR castle sets or the Scotrail HSTs, even if they're made to be standard only or include downrated engines. the MPG is too high and the seating density is too low for this. More 158s would be perfect for GWR and hopefully in Scotland we'll see other types of fuel to replace 158/170s on various routes that cascade to replace the HSTs. As pure speculation, I'd extend electrification to Tweedbank to begin with

Back on topic, I would definitely put CAF Civitys with gangway connections on the Liverpool to Nottingham route, and a large fleet of them would make them perfect for the rest of the network. Either that or 172/3s which I think I mentioned before

I find it a little hard to believe that a 22x would have a significantly higher fuel use than a HST derived unit. However even then some of that cost increase would be offset by the lower track access charges from not having two fairly costly locos (yes cheap for locos, but still quite a cost given there's two of them).

As for seating, without making any changes other than rejoicing first class a standard only 22x with 5 coaches would have 275 seats, compared to the 4 coach units (303 seats) that's not going to be too many less. If that wasn't enough there's always the option to go to a 6 coach 22x which would still be the same length as the 4 coach sets, but we have seating for 340 in standard only configuration.

Whilst not ideal, of it's the choice betweena 22x or not having enough rolling stock to run the services (which unless we start buying bimodal units and/or getting a lot more electrification) could be a real possibility in (say) 10 years time (the 158's would be over 40 by then).

 

[liamf656]

I find it a little hard to believe that a 22x would have a significantly higher fuel use than a HST derived unit. However even then some of that cost increase would be offset by the lower track access charges from not having two fairly costly locos (yes cheap for locos, but still quite a cost given there's two of them).

They might be marginally cheaper than HSTs however for now, there are cheaper alternatives. TfW will be releasing quite a lot of 158/175s within the next couple of years, I think these would be perfect for GWR as Castle replacements. Then in 10 to 20 years I would hope something brand new would roll into GWRs regional fleet. I would expect that by then we’ll be seeing our first Meridians to scrap, they’re a bit of an oddball fleet with no real home other than the Midland Mainline (and maybe XC for now)

 

[Nottingham59]

"Potential stock for future Nottingham to Liverpool services?"

Given that Northern already serve both ends of the route, give the service to Northern and let them run whatever stock they use on Nottingham-Leeds or around the North West. The benefits of shared route knowledge, flexibility in diagramming and common traction knowledge would outweigh the benefits of having yet another class of rolling stock on the line.

 

[fgwrich]

Discounting the idea of a number of 222s replacing the 158s (which was never going to happen anyway), would an indirect cascade of some 222s to XC to release their 170s to EMR work?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Discounting the idea of a number of 222s replacing the 158s (which was never going to happen anyway), would an indirect cascade of some 222s to XC to release their 170s to EMR work?

Probably not. The XC 170 services are regional expresses similar to the EMR Liverpool service, and would similarly not suit 222s. The whole lot used to be together as "Central Citylink" and before that Regional Railways Alphaline.

 

[Peterthegreat]

"Potential stock for future Nottingham to Liverpool services?"

Given that Northern already serve both ends of the route, give the service to Northern and let them run whatever stock they use on Nottingham-Leeds or around the North West. The benefits of shared route knowledge, flexibility in diagramming and common traction knowledge would outweigh the benefits of having yet another class of rolling stock on the line.

Apart from I wouldn't want to give anything to Northern at the moment that may make some sense (or give Leeds to Nottingham to TPE along with Nottingham to Liverpool).

 

[Whistler40145]

Apart from I wouldn't want to give anything to Northern at the moment that may make some sense (or give Leeds to Nottingham to TPE along with Nottingham to Liverpool).

Does THE have sufficient stock to operate Leeds to Nottingham and Nottingham to Liverpool Lime Street

 

[Nottingham59]

give Leeds to Nottingham to TPE along with Nottingham to Liverpool

Yeah, that would work. Though the Nottingham-Leeds route is an all shacks affair, so it's not a hugely good fit for TPE. (It would be better as slow NOT-SHF and then fast to LDS, following whatever route that XC take rather than trogging through Barnsley.)

 

[Peterthegreat]

Yeah, that would work. Though the Nottingham-Leeds route is an all shacks affair, so it's not a hugely good fit for TPE. (It would be better as slow NOT-SHF and then fast to LDS, following whatever route that XC take rather than trogging through Barnsley.)

I wouldn't call it all shacks. Meadowhall, Barnsley and Wakefield Kirkgate. In any case TPE work all stations Leeds to Huddersfield and serve hamlets like Barnetby and Habrough.....

 

[Fokx]

Does TPE have sufficient stock to operate Leeds to Nottingham and Nottingham to Liverpool Lime Street

No and yes.

No in the interests of capacity.
Yes if all services were single sets only

 

[Philip]

Apart from I wouldn't want to give anything to Northern at the moment that may make some sense (or give Leeds to Nottingham to TPE along with Nottingham to Liverpool).

I think that is a bit unfair on Northern who generally do the best they can with limited resources. Just look at the chaos TPE and EMR are in regarding Sundays/overtime; Northern aren't in this mess.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think that is a bit unfair on Northern who generally do the best they can with limited resources. Just look at the chaos TPE and EMR are in regarding Sundays/overtime; Northern aren't in this mess.

Northern have had disputes before. I don't think any TOC is better or worse at that, really. They all get their share.