Should Grand Central order the new Hitachi Trains?

[Neptune]

Other than the pantograph well, do you know if there are any differences between the class 195 and class 331 bodyshells?

No difference. Physically identical above the solebar in every other way. That was the reason they were chosen by Arriva for ease of crew training and conversion.

 

[James90012]

For fleet commonality on the East Coast, yes GC should order 80X. Going for something bespoke when almost every other intercity train is on the 80X platform seems odd when the line is only going to get busier and busier in the coming years.

With a new 125mph diesel-electric loco though, perhaps the MK5s offer a lower cost option (if the MK5s are indeed cleared for 125mph running!).

 

[Rhydgaled]

No difference. Physically identical above the solebar in every other way. That was the reason they were chosen by Arriva for ease of crew training and conversion.

Good - me trying to encourage energy efficiency here - so they (along with 196s and 197s) could in theroy (if the government would get it's act together on electrification) be sent (back) to Llanwern and stripped back to the bare bodyshells allowing the latter to be reused in new batches of EMUs (either with a pantograph well being cut into the roof on one coach or an extra vehicle with a pantograph well being built to lengthen the unit at the same time).

For fleet commonality on the East Coast, yes GC should order 80X. Going for something bespoke when almost every other intercity train is on the 80X platform seems odd when the line is only going to get busier and busier in the coming years.

Yes, if GC want bi-modes they should choose 80x. However, they should not order new 80x - there should be electrification elsewhere and cascades of existing bi-modes to GC. If they meerly want something approaching a like-for-like replacement for their current class 180s (due to poor reliability) then class 222s could be used if XC don't want/need them.

 

[mike57]

Yes, the Durham Coast line is a way down the list but there are plenty of other places which aren't. For example, Hull could be fairly high up the list which would free up the Hull Trains 802s (and maybe some of TPE's 802s) for a cascade to Grand Central. Since GC has a larger fleet than Hull Trains, diesel gensets out of 801s could be used to make up the numbers.

by which time the 180s would have probably all fallen to pieces.

But what are likely timescales even for Hull electrification, TPE electrification progress is glacial, and I assume that this would need to be finished before any other schemes get the go ahead. Optimisticallly 15 years to switch on, probably nearer to 25. 180s will have been converted to razor blades or tin cans by that time, and 22x's will be end of life.

Would GC need the full 802 installed horsepower on diesel, I dont believe there is any running in excess of 70-75mph on any of the non electrified bits of their routes, so could they work with less gen sets?

GC being an open access operator will go with what ever provides the best business case, so unless there are changes to a new track access agreement which rule out diesel under wires nothing will change

 

[Fisherman80]

I wonder if Grand Central are looking at the soon to be withdrawn Mk5 stock as a medium term replacement for the 180s.
The Mks are 125mph coaches so you would need a 125mph diesel locomotive.
The only locomotive I can think of that is 125mph capable is the class 67.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wonder if Grand Central are looking at the soon to be withdrawn Mk5 stock as a medium term replacement for the 180s.
The Mks are 125mph coaches so you would need a 125mph diesel locomotive.
The only locomotive I can think of that is 125mph capable is the class 67.

They're looking at 221s, aren't they, with one already in service? Much more reliable. And reliable is what they need.

 

[Fisherman80]

They're looking at 221s, aren't they, with one already in service? Much more reliable. And reliable is what they need.

Your right about the reliability of the 221s. If Grand Central do indeed replace the 180s with 221s then hopefully they will do a massive marketing campaign with rock bottom prices because their reputation has hit rock bottom this year.

 

[JonathanH]

The only locomotive I can think of that is 125mph capable is the class 67.

67s have never really been proven at 125mph, and certainly wouldn't have the acceleration of a 180 or 221.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Just to be clear, electrification to Hull wouldn’t release the 802 sets. The need to have full diesel capability on all HT diversionary routes rules out going full electric.

LHCS for GC would be too slow. They really need to get into 22x or 80x levels of acceleration for class 1 paths on the ECML.

 

[skyhigh]

If Grand Central do indeed replace the 180s with 221s then hopefully they will do a massive marketing campaign with rock bottom prices because their reputation has hit rock bottom this year.

I'm not totally convinced they need to do much. Every GC I've been on over the last 6 months has been very well loaded between York/Doncaster and London.

The vast majority of passengers will just choose the time/price that suits from a journey planner and not care who they're traveling with.

 

[Fisherman80]

I cannot comment on the routes you mention,but I know the Bradford end of the route has been absolutely shocking.

 

[RobShipway]

As has been mentioned in the Class 221 for Grand Central thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-221-for-grand-central.249024/, the class 221 unit is only hired 12 months. It does not mean to say that GC are looking to totally replace their class 180 fleet with class 221 units or are not thinking about obtaining new stock. But even if GC ordered new stock today of an existing train unit in production, it possibly would be 2025 before production could begin depending on what the manufacturer is currently building from prior requests.

 

[dk1]

Your right about the reliability of the 221s. If Grand Central do indeed replace the 180s with 221s then hopefully they will do a massive marketing campaign with rock bottom prices because their reputation has hit rock bottom this year.

Don’t hold your breath. Loadings seem healthy from what I have seen. People still need to travel even those that have a hissy fit on X saying they’ll never travel with GC again.

 

[greyman42]

Don’t hold your breath. Loadings seem healthy from what I have seen. People still need to travel even those that have a hissy fit on X saying they’ll never travel with GC again.

Yes, people have short memories when they see the cheaper priced tickets.

 

[dk1]

Yes, people have short memories when they see the cheaper priced tickets.

Exactly. All is forgotten

 

[gc4946]

The only way Grand Central could receive Hitachi trains would be by tagging onto a larger order and getting another 5 to 10 year track access agreement to justify investment.
If GC want replacements sooner for their 180s they could obtain some of the Transpennine Express Mk5s expected to be coming off lease at the end of this year, plus 68s, however unsure if the 88s or 93s can cope running off the wires

 

[Energy]

The only way Grand Central could receive Hitachi trains would be by tagging onto a larger order and getting another 5 to 10 year track access agreement to justify investment.

It doesn't need to be a tag on order. If it's standard 802s (even derated to 750hp) they can easily do a small order, the same way that Siemens will be happy to offer an off-the-shelf Vectron for a good price and lead time.

 

[mike57]

If GC want replacements sooner for their 180s they could obtain some of the Transpennine Express Mk5s expected to be coming off lease at the end of this year, plus 68s

100mph running on the ECML wont work, given they run non stop to Doncaster or York they will need 125mph, I think even 110mph wouldnt work.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Just to be clear, electrification to Hull wouldn’t release the 802 sets. The need to have full diesel capability on all HT diversionary routes rules out going full electric.

Do Hull Trains really need diversionary capability? Aren't Hull Trains and Lumo both First Group owned? If so, they don't appear to mind not having diversionary capability at Lumo, so presumably the diversionary capability at Hull Trains is just a helpful side effect to them having bi-modes anyway due to the last bit still waiting for wires.

LHCS for GC would be too slow. They really need to get into 22x or 80x levels of acceleration for class 1 paths on the ECML.

LHCS already runs on the ECML in the form of LNER's IC225 sets (although they are sadly now confined to services south of Leeds/York, but I understand this was due to avoiding having to keep doing traction refreshers for Scottish crews rather than LHCS being slower - with a shorter rake they probably wouldn't even be noticably slower).

 

[skyhigh]

It doesn't need to be a tag on order. If it's standard 802s (even derated to 750hp) they can easily do a small order, the same way that Siemens will be happy to offer an off-the-shelf Vectron for a good price and lead time.

From what @Clarence Yard has said the price of 80x has risen so much it's likely there won't be any further orders. With that in mind a small order is likely to simply be unaffordable, given smaller orders tend to cost more per unit too.

 

[43096]

It doesn't need to be a tag on order. If it's standard 802s (even derated to 750hp) they can easily do a small order, the same way that Siemens will be happy to offer an off-the-shelf Vectron for a good price and lead time.

80x production is very different to Vectron production. We’re now at the back end of 80x orders with little prospect of more substantial orders. In contrast, Siemens has a big order book for Vectrons which guarantees production for several years. GC ordering 80x is a completely different scenario to a small Vectron order.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Do Hull Trains really need diversionary capability? Aren't Hull Trains and Lumo both First Group owned? If so, they don't appear to mind not having diversionary capability at Lumo, so presumably the diversionary capability at Hull Trains is just a helpful side effect to them having bi-modes anyway due to the last bit still waiting for wires.

LHCS already runs on the ECML in the form of LNER's IC225 sets (although they are sadly now confined to services south of Leeds/York, but I understand this was due to avoiding having to keep doing traction refreshers for Scottish crews rather than LHCS being slower - with a shorter rake they probably wouldn't even be noticably slower).

No, diversionary capability is a fundamental part of the Hull Trains business plan, always has been. It’s not a side effect and is quite deliberate, I can assure you of that. Hull doesn’t get Type 1 and 2 Schedule 4 money so it needs to divert when there is engineering work and it also helps when you have those all too frequent wires down incidents on the ECML. Being able to go via the GN/GE Joint line (or via Goole) is fairly fundamental.

Lumo was not developed by the same team at FG and has a different business model. If I had been involved, they would have had full diesel capability.

The class 91 situation is a world away from class whatever and mark v’s. If you can’t meet 22x/80x timings, you won’t easily run your services - you need to fit on the ECML, not get the ECML to fit around you. That was one of the reasons HT went for 80x - they needed to be able to match the LNER 80x units, especially with an ECML recast on the cards.

With interest rates starting to fall, it remains to be seen if Hitachi unit prices get competitive. We in the industry will shortly find out if they are starting to move towards acceptable levels.

 

[Neptune]

Lest we forget that on top of diversionary capability 2 x HT services per day go to/from Beverley and the chances of electrification up the Wolds Coast are very low.

 

[trainswitheddy]

As has been mentioned in the Class 221 for Grand Central thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/class-221-for-grand-central.249024/, the class 221 unit is only hired 12 months. It does not mean to say that GC are looking to totally replace their class 180 fleet with class 221 units or are not thinking about obtaining new stock. But even if GC ordered new stock today of an existing train unit in production, it possibly would be 2025 before production could begin depending on what the manufacturer is currently building from prior requests.

We don't know this for definite, two people who have connections stated 10 would be coming over with a "soft touch" refurb...so make of that what you will

 

[hdennis13]

As LNER have ordered CAF tri modes, it I possible that GC would also? Or XC? Would batteries be sufficient for non wired sections?

As the 221s are being refurbished for probable use by GC and XC, I suspect this is unlikely.

 

[dk1]

As LNER have ordered CAF tri modes, it I possible that GC would also? Or XC? Would batteries be sufficient for non wired sections?

As the 221s are being refurbished for probable use by GC and XC, I suspect this is unlikely.

Batteries would probably not be great for the length of off wire on their routes. They would however be perfect for diesel operation here then battery mode in and around stations and also whilst idling.

 

[cslusarc]

I would like to see some of GWR's 5-car class 802/0s cascade to GC when more electrification to Oxford, Swansea and Taunton (via both Bristol and Bedwyn) is completed in the Western Region.

 

[skyhigh]

As LNER have ordered CAF tri modes, it I possible that GC would also?

GC could, but do they have the money?

 

[TheWalrus]

Can’t see wires going West of Newbury to be honest, I don’t think it’s worth it unless there’s enough freight and passenger services combined to justify it.

 

[paul1609]

I would like to see some of GWR's 5-car class 802/0s cascade to GC when more electrification to Oxford, Swansea and Taunton (via both Bristol and Bedwyn) is completed in the Western Region.

Id like to see them cascaded to GWRs own Portsmouth to Cardiff route rather than an open access operator operating revenue abstraction services on the ECML.