250 new coaches (EMU/DMU)

[anthony263]

Here’s a proposal...

249 = 35x 7 car 222s (with fourcoaches spare).

Use the four coaches to extend the four “four car” EMT 222s to five coaches.

Give EMT thirteen of the Seven Car 222s to replace their thirteen HSTs to XC. XC now have eighteen HSTs, which should be a "critical mass".

Give the remaining 22 x 222s (all seven car) to TPE. This should be roughly enough to run the “Northern” TPE service (Liverpool/Manchester Airport – Leeds – Hull/ Scarborough/ Middlesbrough/ Newcastle). Bear in mind that no services would need doubling up any more, which should make the numbers match.

Give all fifty one TPE 185s to ATW (I appreciate that they don’t *all* run the Leeds route, but bear with me…). This then releases 27 x 175s and 24 x 158s (ATW gain 51 three car units and lose 51 two/three car units).

The 27 x 175s go to run the Manchester Airport – Blackpool/ Barrow/ Glasgow/ Edinburgh service in the short run (before electrification happens). This should allow all Scottish TPE services to be doubled up (splitting/joining at Carstairs, or portions for Windermere etc). 15 x 158s go (from ATW) to EMT to run the Manchester Airport – Cleethorpes service (four car west of Doncaster) and beef up the Liverpool - Norwich.

The remaining nine ATW 158s go to FGW to provide additional capacity on the Portsmouth service. The nine TPE 170s go to NXEA to release nine 156s to Northern (TPE won't need the 170s as they are losing the Cleethorpes service).

**

So, EMT: Gain long 222s (and extra coaches in the shortest 222s) to replace HSTs, giving a uniform fleet (with two "lengths" of 222 rather than “three lengths of 222 plus HST”) - should make allocations easier. EMT also gain 158s to use on the Manchester Airport – Cleethorpes route (which is a more natural fit since EMT already run to Manchester/ Sheffield/Doncaster/ Grimsby). Twenty three additional coaches.

XC gain thirteen HSTs, which should allow a lot of Voyagers to be doubled up. 91 additional coaches.

TPE gain seven coach 222s to replace three coach 185s on the “North” route. The “West” route goes to 175 operation, more suited to long distance work (doors at each end of the coach etc). The “South” route moves to EMT. Once the Lancashire electrification is completed the 175s are freed up. 64 additional coaches.

ATW gain a uniform fleet of long-distance units (rather than the mix of 158s, two car 175s, three car 175s they currently have). Thirty five additional coaches.

NXEA get a more standard fleet, with two car 170s replacing two car 156s (since they already run 170s)

Northern get more 156s (to add into existing diagrams). Not a massive increase, but there will be greater capacity on other routes in the area (e.g. four car EMT 158s on Sheffield – Doncaster, more XC HSTs, seven coach TPE 222s). I’d have suggested more for Northern, but you’d claim I was biased… Eighteen additional coaches.

FGW get more 158s (to add into existing diagrams). Eighteen additional coaches.

Overall, most TOCs see an increase in units/ coaches, and a simpler operating fleet too. Then, once this is resolved, start worrying about Pacer replacement.

Would the class 185's be cleared to work on the cambrian and be able to be fitted with ETRMS? besides another problem is that some of the class 175's work on the Pembroke dock branch which does have some tight curves and platforms (narbeth) would a class 185 fit along that line?

 

[MCR247]

Surely any stock could be fitted with ETRMS? Otherwise what is the point in spending loads in trialling a system which wouldn't work with our stock...?

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Would the class 185's be cleared to work on the cambrian and be able to be fitted with ETRMS? besides another problem is that some of the class 175's work on the Pembroke dock branch which does have some tight curves and platforms (narbeth) would a class 185 fit along that line?

No, too heavy.

 

[tbtc]

No, too heavy.

For Pembroke or the Cambrian (or both)?