TPE may keep 185s and send the Mk 5s to TfW

[BoroAndy]

What is worrying is total stock. Even now with 68s in use, plus 802 and 397s, most 185s I see are just 3 cars.

 

[Jacob Porrett]

What is worrying is total stock. Even now with 68s in use, plus 802 and 397s, most 185s I see are just 3 cars.

Spread the stock around to cover more diagrams than doubling them up like they did during covid times.

 

[Fokx]

Spread the stock around to cover more diagrams than doubling them up like they did during covid times.

That isn’t what happened during covid times, instead there was a large service reduction.

The south route ran 2 hourly and between Piccadilly and Cleethorpes only saving over half the required diagrams of the current hourly service and Liverpool extension.

The Stopping services were merged into the Hull and Redcar express service saving a further 4 units.

There was also no Saltburn extension saving up to 2 units.

Scarborough services terminated at York requiring only 3 diagrams (largely 68 operated) saving units from the now largely all 185 operated Piccadilly to Scarborough two hourly service.

Everything was a 6 car largely, but at the same time the service was slashed as were passenger numbers

 

[JonathanH]

Word is some of them are going chiltern now they've been given the green light for loco hauled till 2028.

Splitting the Mark 5 fleet doesn't seem like the most sensible solution, and the current formations would represent a reduction in capacity on Chiltern.

 

[Wolfie]

Splitting the Mark 5 fleet doesn't seem like the most sensible solution, and the current formations would represent a reduction in capacity on Chiltern.

Not to mention that if TPE can't get the damned things to work reliably why would Chiltern even entertain them?

 

[Chester1]

Not to mention that if TPE can't get the damned things to work reliably why would Chiltern even entertain them?

I think the only ToC that is likely going to be desperate enough to take them is Scot Rail if ASLEF go ahead with blacklisting the mini HSTS. Chiltern and TfW would be mad to take them. The Mark IV sets are high quality, are owned by TfW and still have several years of use left. If they want better in 2030s they could order new stock.

 

[Wolfie]

I think the only ToC that is likely going to be desperate enough to take them is Scot Rail if ASLEF go ahead with blacklisting the mini HSTS. Chiltern and TfW would be mad to take them. The Mark IV sets are high quality, are owned by TfW and still have several years of use left. If they want better in 2030s they could order new stock.

I'm inclined to agree your first sentence (well, the first two really).

 

[Fokx]

Not to mention that if TPE can't get the damned things to work reliably why would Chiltern even entertain them?

The crew training plan is the biggest issue rather than the trains themselves

 

[Bletchleyite]

What is worrying is total stock. Even now with 68s in use, plus 802 and 397s, most 185s I see are just 3 cars.

TPE has loads of stock. Previously they just had (ignoring the WCML) enough 185s for one on each diagram. Now they have 185s AND 802s. This being the case, they do have enough to double up most services, so if they aren't doing they're either being cheap or planning badly.

 

[sjpowermac]

TPE has loads of stock. Previously they just had (ignoring the WCML) enough 185s for one on each diagram. Now they have 185s AND 802s. This being the case, they do have enough to double up most services, so if they aren't doing they're either being cheap or planning badly.

It’s worth bearing in mind how horrendously overcrowded the 3-car 185s were back in 2018 (pre-Nova fleet) and there were many services at the time that were booked 3-car.

In addition, there have been additions to the TPE network since then that have further stretched the fleets:

Manchester Airport-Middlesbrough
is now
Manchester Airport-Saltburn

and

Manchester Airport-Cleethorpes
is now
Liverpool Lime Street-Cleethorpes.

Many of the diagrams in 2018 were ‘heroic’ to say the least and hence the timetable meltdown that year.

I’d say that if you bin off the Class 68/Mk5A sets then realistically you are looking at reverting to the May 2022 timetable, with one train an hour fewer over the Pennines, which in itself was already a reduction by one compared with pre-pandemic. So, compared with pre-pandemic 2 trains an hour fewer over the Pennines and Scarborough as a shuttle to York.

Once that capacity in the fleet is lost, how do you put it back prior to any future TransPennine Route Upgrade stock being delivered? No other operator has Class 185s so that leaves you with Class 802. Even if you could make a case for mor Class 802s, that’s an expensive way to solve the problem.

If you feel TPE are planning their Class 185 diagrams poorly then try the following link where you will find a copy of the current diagrams. Perhaps after a quick browse you could write to TPE and point out all the slack you find?

Unit diagrams. - a Freedom of Information request to TransPennine Trains Limited

I would like to ask under the Freedom Of Information Act 2000 law may i have copy of all of your current unit diagrams and for all days of the week please. Yours faithfully, Harold Wilson

www.whatdotheyknow.com

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jul 2023 ==

What is worrying is total stock. Even now with 68s in use, plus 802 and 397s, most 185s I see are just 3 cars.

Is a very real concern.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It’s worth bearing in mind how horrendously overcrowded the 3-car 185s were back in 2018 (pre-Nova fleet) and there were many services at the time that were booked 3-car.

In addition, there have been additions to the TPE network since then that have further stretched the fleets:

Manchester Airport-Middlesbrough
is now
Manchester Airport-Saltburn

and

Manchester Airport-Cleethorpes
is now
Liverpool Lime Street-Cleethorpes.

Many of the diagrams in 2018 were ‘heroic’ to say the least and hence the timetable meltdown that year.

I’d say that if you bin off the Class 68/Mk5A sets then realistically you are looking at reverting to the May 2022 timetable, with one train an hour fewer over the Pennines, which in itself was already a reduction by one compared with pre-pandemic. So, compared with pre-pandemic 2 trains an hour fewer over the Pennines and Scarborough as a shuttle to York.

Once that capacity in the fleet is lost, how do you put it back prior to any future TransPennine Route Upgrade stock being delivered? No other operator has Class 185s so that leaves you with Class 802. Even if you could make a case for mor Class 802s, that’s an expensive way to solve the problem.

If you feel TPE are planning their Class 185 diagrams poorly then try the following link where you will find a copy of the current diagrams. Perhaps after a quick browse you could write to TPE and point out all the slack you find?

Unit diagrams. - a Freedom of Information request to TransPennine Trains Limited

I would like to ask under the Freedom Of Information Act 2000 law may i have copy of all of your current unit diagrams and for all days of the week please. Yours faithfully, Harold Wilson

www.whatdotheyknow.com

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jul 2023 ==


Is a very real concern.

From what you say it seems the 68 + Mk5 are very necessary but staff to operate them are in short supply.

Also worth remembering the 68 + Mk5 fleet is not that unreliable. It would seem that the services taken on from around 2018 have been too much bitten off. That is probably as a result of Covid19 ruining training plans. But it just depends how much demand is still missing due to Covid19 and the appetite to expand ready for any more recovery

 

[sjpowermac]

From what you say it seems the 68 + Mk5 are very necessary but staff to operate them are in short supply.

Also worth remembering the 68 + Mk5 fleet is not that unreliable. It would seem that the services taken on from around 2018 have been too much bitten off. That is probably as a result of Covid19 ruining training plans. But it just depends how much demand is still missing due to Covid19 and the appetite to expand ready for any more recovery

I don’t really buy the idea that the staff to operate the Class 68/Mk5A sets are in such short supply, especially when there are fully trained staff with very little work on the sets.

 

[Fokx]

I don’t really buy the idea that the staff to operate the Class 68/Mk5A sets are in such short supply, especially when there are fully trained staff with very little work on the sets.

You might not buy it but it is the main problem. I’m not saying the Nova 3’s are faultless, but they’re not as mechanically unreliable as enthusiasts like to make them out to be either.

The ‘very little work’ and trained staff is one of the causes. You can train as many staff as you like but if they’re not meeting the minimal competency thresholds of working one in service, then they lose competency and have to be retrained all over again, which is exactly what has happened on the South route.

 

[sjpowermac]

You might not buy it but it is the main problem. I’m not saying the Nova 3’s are faultless, but they’re not as mechanically unreliable as enthusiasts like to make them out to be either.

The ‘very little work’ and trained staff is one of the causes. You can train as many staff as you like but if they’re not meeting the minimal competency thresholds of working one in service, then they lose competency and have to be retrained all over again, which is exactly what has happened on the South route.

Well yes, that’s my point entirely, regarding the North Route.

“Not enough trained staff” becomes a self fulfilling prophecy when you train staff and then run so few sets/organise rosters so poorly that staff go out of competency.

 

[BoroAndy]

Could a situation exist where crews trained on Nova3s put pressure on planners to get 6 Nova3 diagrams daily ( as originally planned) on the Northern routes, and say they want to be out and about in them?

 

[CAF397]

In addition, there have been additions to the TPE network since then that have further stretched the fleets:

Manchester Airport-Middlesbrough
is now
Manchester Airport-Saltburn

and

Manchester Airport-Cleethorpes
is now
Liverpool Lime Street-Cleethorpes.

Many of the diagrams in 2018 were ‘heroic’ to say the least and hence the timetable meltdown that year.

Did some very basic back of the envelope calculations, based on Real Time Trains and unit allocations.

Liverpool-Hull 5h36 round trip (6 units)
Liverpool-Cleethorpes 7h41 r/t (8)
Airport-Saltburn 7h24 r/t (8)
Man Picc-Scarborough* 5h43 r/t (3)
Man Picc-Huddersfield (2)
Leeds-Huddersfield (2)

*difficult to predict, as its 2 hourly Manchester-Scarborough with a shuttle York-Scarborough, and currently 68s are also diagramed. The 3 diagrams assume a 2-hourly service operated by 185s.

If all these were single units, that's 29 units.

If all were double sets, apart from the 4 'stoppers', that would be 50 units.

Very crude estimates, but shows the Mk5s have a place in the fleet, and to remove them will cause capacity issues or clever diagramming.

Might we see portion working Airport-York, or Liverpool-Sheffield as 6-cars, to ensure the busiest sections have the most seats available?

 

[Chester1]

Did some very basic back of the envelope calculations, based on Real Time Trains and unit allocations.

Liverpool-Hull 5h36 round trip (6 units)
Liverpool-Cleethorpes 7h41 r/t (8)
Airport-Saltburn 7h24 r/t (8)
Man Picc-Scarborough* 5h43 r/t (3)
Man Picc-Huddersfield (2)
Leeds-Huddersfield (2)

*difficult to predict, as its 2 hourly Manchester-Scarborough with a shuttle York-Scarborough, and currently 68s are also diagramed. The 3 diagrams assume a 2-hourly service operated by 185s.

If all these were single units, that's 29 units.

If all were double sets, apart from the 4 'stoppers', that would be 50 units.

Very crude estimates, but shows the Mk5s have a place in the fleet, and to remove them will cause capacity issues or clever diagramming.

Might we see portion working Airport-York, or Liverpool-Sheffield as 6-cars, to ensure the busiest sections have the most seats available?

Do TPE need all 19 x 802s for the Newcastle services?

Transfering the stoppers to Northern would reduce the number of 185s needed by four, giving five spare before shortforming would be needed.

Getting rid of Mark IVs could be made to work otherwise the lease would have been renewed longer than until May next year. It may get renewed again but DfT seem to want to keep their options open.

 

[JonathanH]

Transfering the stoppers to Northern would reduce the number of 185s needed by four, giving five spare before shortforming would be needed.

Do Northern have staff, units and route knowledge to simply take these services back?

 

[Whistler40145]

Do Northern have staff, units and route knowledge to simply take these services back?

Wouldn't the TPE staff be transferred to Northern along with the service?

 

[Fokx]

Wouldn't the TPE staff be transferred to Northern along with the service?

No as one depot doesn’t run the services, its crewed by:

- Sheffield
- York
- Liverpool
- Hull
- Man Pic
- Man Airport

 

[sjpowermac]

Did some very basic back of the envelope calculations, based on Real Time Trains and unit allocations.

Liverpool-Hull 5h36 round trip (6 units)
Liverpool-Cleethorpes 7h41 r/t (8)
Airport-Saltburn 7h24 r/t (8)
Man Picc-Scarborough* 5h43 r/t (3)
Man Picc-Huddersfield (2)
Leeds-Huddersfield (2)

*difficult to predict, as its 2 hourly Manchester-Scarborough with a shuttle York-Scarborough, and currently 68s are also diagramed. The 3 diagrams assume a 2-hourly service operated by 185s.

If all these were single units, that's 29 units.

If all were double sets, apart from the 4 'stoppers', that would be 50 units.

Very crude estimates, but shows the Mk5s have a place in the fleet, and to remove them will cause capacity issues or clever diagramming.

Might we see portion working Airport-York, or Liverpool-Sheffield as 6-cars, to ensure the busiest sections have the most seats available?

Hard to pick fault with anything you’ve written there.

By the way, I enjoyed your suggestion of evening fuelling of Class 68/Mk5A sets at Scarborough and then stabling them in York station ready for the early morning Saltburn diagrams.

The ‘insider’ response was interesting; it always seems that things that are perfectly normal for other operators are dismissed as impossible by TPE. I’d certainly be interested to read the documentation to support the claim that you couldn’t start the sets up in, say, platform 11, before some undisclosed time.

 

[Signal_Box]

Send the 68 Mk5a to Chiltern replace the 67 Mk3s.

The borough council are already unhappy about diesel traction, there’s little to no chance of replacement with anything other than battery traction if OLE is a never never land fantasy.

 

[MML]

If the Manchester Piccadilly Platform 1 to Scarborough service became hourly and was solely operated by 68s and Mark V coaching stock, surely the close proximity to Longsight and Scarborough depots would aid maintenance support and train staff resourcing.
It would then help release class 185 units from all bar the first and last services to allow strengthening to 6-car on other routes.

And could the Mark V coaches operate in 6-car formations with the 68? It would help reduce cost per seat given platforms at all the primary stations have adequate lengths.

 

[Fokx]

If the Manchester Piccadilly Platform 1 to Scarborough service became hourly and was solely operated by 68s and Mark V coaching stock, surely the close proximity to Longsight and Scarborough depots would aid maintenance support and train staff resourcing.

You’d run into the issue of having 68’ trained staff pulled off other services leaving to crewing problems as it’s a bit of a balancing act with finite crew numbers.

For example: If you replaced the Newcastle services with 68’s to Scarborough, That means the only depots that would run the service would be York (driver and guards), Piccadilly (drivers) and Airport (guards). No one else signs both the route and traction.

At the same time you’d also be reducing the number of 802 services that run to/from Manchester. Drivers at York sign either an 802 or 68 but not both. Liverpool depot would have no work from Piccadilly without taking work from Manchester Piccadilly crews on the local stopper.

If you ran the theoretical Scarborough service with a larger number of Airport staff (The only western depot that sign the 68’s) for example. You’d need to recruit and train more crews at Sheffield or Cleethropes to operate the Sheffield to Manchester section of the south route or Preston crews on Preston to Airport because you’re taking the staff from the existing services to run the Scarborough.

 

[MML]

You’d run into the issue of having 68’ trained staff pulled off other services leaving to crewing problems as it’s a bit of a balancing act with finite crew numbers.

For example: If you replaced the Newcastle services with 68’s to Scarborough, That means the only depots that would run the service would be York (driver and guards), Piccadilly (drivers) and Airport (guards). No one else signs both the route and traction.

At the same time you’d also be reducing the number of 802 services that run to/from Manchester. Drivers at York sign either an 802 or 68 but not both. Liverpool depot would have no work from Piccadilly without taking work from Manchester Piccadilly crews on the local stopper.

If you ran the theoretical Scarborough service with a larger number of Airport staff (The only western depot that sign the 68’s) for example. You’d need to recruit and train more crews at Sheffield or Cleethropes to operate the Sheffield to Manchester section of the south route or Preston crews on Preston to Airport because you’re taking the staff from the existing services to run the Scarborough.

Thanks for your informative reply. Oh my, what a mess. Too many different types of traction, spread across a variety of depots which doesn't necessarily match the service required. It must be a nightmare, particularly with insufficient staff.

Do you have a breakdown of what routes and traction specific crew depots and maintenance depots serve?
For example, I would imagine Cleethorpes only sign the Southern route, but maybe with a mix of class 185 and 68 traction?

 

[BoroAndy]

Maybe ALL drivers at ALL depots should be signing 2 fractions, which would sort it all. Plus guards too. After all, on Northern they must all be signing most of 153/155/156/158/170/195.

 

[sjpowermac]

Maybe ALL drivers at ALL depots should be signing 2 fractions, which would sort it all. Plus guards too. After all, on Northern they must all be signing most of 153/155/156/158/170/195.

You seem to have forgotten that what’s looked upon as normal at other TOCs will send the TPE apologists into a big long explanation as to why it could never happen.

In all of this it’s worth remembering that the current timetable between York and Manchester is still one train an hour down compared with the December 2019 timetable.

On the original plans there was to be an hourly Liverpool to Scarborough service, so it’s surprising that an hourly Manchester to Scarborough service seems to be off the table.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2023 ==

You’d run into the issue of having 68’ trained staff pulled off other services leaving to crewing problems as it’s a bit of a balancing act with finite crew numbers.

For example: If you replaced the Newcastle services with 68’s to Scarborough, That means the only depots that would run the service would be York (driver and guards), Piccadilly (drivers) and Airport (guards). No one else signs both the route and traction.

At the same time you’d also be reducing the number of 802 services that run to/from Manchester. Drivers at York sign either an 802 or 68 but not both. Liverpool depot would have no work from Piccadilly without taking work from Manchester Piccadilly crews on the local stopper.

If you ran the theoretical Scarborough service with a larger number of Airport staff (The only western depot that sign the 68’s) for example. You’d need to recruit and train more crews at Sheffield or Cleethropes to operate the Sheffield to Manchester section of the south route or Preston crews on Preston to Airport because you’re taking the staff from the existing services to run the Scarborough.

I think you forgot Scarborough drivers and guards from your list of crews who would operate a Scarborough to Manchester service. As far as I’m aware, the Scarborough drivers still sign Class 68/Mk5A stock and the route between Scarborough and Leeds (including the diversion via Castleford).

Apologies in advance if I misunderstood your post.

 

[Fokx]

I think you forgot Scarborough drivers and guards from your list of crews who would operate a Scarborough to Manchester service. As far as I’m aware, the Scarborough drivers still sign Class 68/Mk5A stock and the route between Scarborough and Leeds (including the diversion via Castleford).

Apologies in advance if I misunderstood your post.

You are correct in that is what they sign, but I left them out intentionally from the above as they don’t sign Manchester which is where crewing becomes a larger problem (if you were to increase the current 2 hourly service to hourly with 68’s) as only one driver and guard depot signs the traction in the West compared to two in the East

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2023 ==

Do you have a breakdown of what routes and traction specific crew depots and maintenance depots serve?
For example, I would imagine Cleethorpes only sign the Southern route, but maybe with a mix of class 185 and 68 traction?

The maintenance depots are the following:
Longsight - 397 and 68
Ardwick - 185
York - 185
Heaton - 802

Hull depot only sign 185’s
Liverpool sign 185 and 802
Newcastle only sign 802
Scarborough sign 68 and 185
York sign a combination of 185, 802 and 68 (drivers sign one Nova out of the two, guards sign all 3)
Airport sign 68, 397 and 185
Piccadilly guards only sign 185. Drivers either just 185 (Hull link) or 185 and 68 (Scarb/Shef link). WCML link drivers sign 185 (for depot shunts) and 397
Cleethorpes and Sheffield sign 185 with a limited number of crews signing 68’s.

 

[Peter Sarf]

You are correct in that is what they sign, but I left them out intentionally from the above as they don’t sign Manchester which is where crewing becomes a larger problem (if you were to increase the current 2 hourly service to hourly with 68’s) as only one driver and guard depot signs the traction in the West compared to two in the East

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jul 2023 ==


The maintenance depots are the following:
Longsight - 397 and 68
Ardwick - 185
York - 185
Heaton - 802

Hull depot only sign 185’s
Liverpool sign 185 and 802
Newcastle only sign 802
Scarborough sign 68 and 185
York sign a combination of 185, 802 and 68 (drivers sign one Nova out of the two, guards sign all 3)
Airport sign 68, 397 and 185
Piccadilly guards only sign 185. Drivers either just 185 (Hull link) or 185 and 68 (Scarb/Shef link). WCML link drivers sign 185 (for depot shunts) and 397
Cleethorpes and Sheffield sign 185 with a limited number of crews signing 68’s.

From what you say about staffing it seems simpler to concentrate the 68+Mk5s on Manchester to/from York/Scarborough. The only reason to persevere with the use the 68+Mk5s on Cleethorpes would be to retain staff knowledge and grow the number of staff able to operate them on that route. If TPE are soon to be avoiding use on the Cleethrpes route then that suggests short term at least TPE don' t have an aspiration and/or need to use anywhere near all the 68+Mk5s. That could be short term or long term. And current lease on the Mk5s expires in 2024 iirc ?.

 

[sjpowermac]

You are correct in that is what they sign, but I left them out intentionally from the above as they don’t sign Manchester which is where crewing becomes a larger problem (if you were to increase the current 2 hourly service to hourly with 68’s) as only one driver and guard depot signs the traction in the West compared to two in the East

Again, I’m afraid you’ve lost me with your logic.

Surely the Scarborough drivers and guards are relevant, since without them the Manchester crews wouldn’t stretch as far in that they would end up working through to Scarborough more of the time, as opposed to some diagrams being just to Leeds/York.

Again, apologies in advance if I’ve misunderstood your line of thought.