29 new trains for Transpennine Express ?

[Bletchleyite]

I have, several times. I’ll take a 397 over an 802 any day.

I'd probably see them equal, both have their flaws and benefits, neither is perfect.

 

[dorsetdesiro]

The 185s, if not all, may get cascaded to other TOCs to replace their ageing Sprinters like the Liverpool-Norwich route with EMR

 

[YorkRailFan]

The 185s, if not all, may get cascaded to other TOCs to replace their ageing Sprinters like the Liverpool-Norwich route with EMR

Not anytime soon, TPE needs them on top of the 29 trains as part of this order and their 802s and 397s.

 

[Trainbike46]

The 185s, if not all, may get cascaded to other TOCs to replace their ageing Sprinters like the Liverpool-Norwich route with EMR

While this is true in principle, 185s won't get cascaded to Liverpool-Norwich and other routes that require sprinter differentials

 

[61653 HTAFC]

185s are also very expensive to operate compared to 15x, due to their weight and power. Ever since the last franchise began there was much speculation on here about where would be a suitable home for the 185s released from TPE, the consensus seemed to be that anything would be a compromise to some extent.

 

[The exile]

As you state, not without a suitable locomotive! Realistically, it would require procuring new, 125mph electric (passenger) locos - not really a realistic proposition, and even if it was selected it would still involve getting new stock, the locomotive!

You’re only going to need 125-capability if you’re looking at using them on the ECML north of York. Neither Cleethorpes nor Scarborough wouldn’t need it and given the fact that at one point 68s were going to work Middlesborough line services, there is clearly space for 100mph on the ECML as well. 93s?

 

[Snow1964]

Just for reference (because I hadn't realised the first 8 trains of French Oxygène trains were being built by CAF at Beasain) the 190m long regional intercity trains are described in this article.

The DfT letter earlier in the year said length upto 195m for the Transpennine order (might be coincidence).

Question is could version of this be built with UK gauge bodyshell ?

The trains will operate as a common fleet, with 12 sets required for the Paris – Clermont-Ferrand route and 16 for Paris – Limoges – Toulouse services.

Each articulated trainset will be 188 m long with three first class coaches with 2+1 seating, a low-floor accessible coach, a coach for bikes and services, and five second class coaches with 2+2 seating. The total capacity will be 420 passengers, equivalent to seven Corail coaches. Each aluminium-bodied car will have one door per side. All seats will have USB and power sockets, and there will be air-conditioning, wi-fi and CCTV throughout.

They will be equipped with ETCS and the national KVB train control system, and for operation under 1·5 kV DC and 25 kV 50 Hz electrification. The trainsets will have distributed traction, with both end cars and the two centre cars each having two axles driven by asynchronous traction motors, giving a continuous power rating of 4 MW. There is natural ventilation of the electrical equipment.

SNCF has options to order 75 more trainsets, including 20 for the Bordeaux – Marseille route. A firm order is expected to be placed next year, possibly for longer trainsets as the Bordeaux – Marseille services currently operate with nine Corail coaches.

Oxygène next-generation French inter-city train unveiled

FRANCE: National passenger operator SNCF Voyageurs and manufacturer CAF have unveiled the first of the Z26700 Oxygène inter-city trainsets which will replace Corail locomotive-hauled coaches on 200 km/h inter-city serves on conventional lines. The Oxygène trainsets are designed to be 'the...

www.railwaygazette.com

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Just for reference (because I hadn't realised the first 8 trains of French Oxygène trains were being built by CAF at Beasain) the 190m long regional intercity trains are described in this article.

Absolute missed opportunity if the jingle isn’t C-G-Eb-G-C.

 

[ZakCreaser2003]

The loigical step for TPE will be to order additional Hitachi Class 802 units. The 802's will be perfect fit for TPE as it would promote fleet commonality, saves time providing crew training and ultimately leads to a better streamlined service. Under current configuration the Class 185 holds 169 seats while the Class 802 holds 342 seats. Replacing 185's with 802's will provide much needed capacity on the core routes that TPE operate.

 

[JonathanH]

The loigical step for TPE will be to order additional Hitachi Class 802 units.

Depends if they can find a depot for them, and whether Hitachi are willing to offer a palatable price, as noted back up the thread.

 

[ZakCreaser2003]

Depends if they can find a depot for them, and whether Hitachi are willing to offer a palatable price, as noted back up the thread.

Personally I do believe Hitachi does need a new depot in the north, Manchester would be ideal. Doncaster Carr IEP depot is at nearly full capacity so probably won't be able to fully support additional AT300's based there.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Personally I do believe Hitachi does need a new depot in the north, Manchester would be ideal. Doncaster Carr IEP depot is at nearly full capacity so probably won't be able to fully support additional AT300's based there.

Surely the most sensible location would be on the otherside at York although I do appreciate that it is surplus to requirements as deemed by Network Rail.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The loigical step for TPE will be to order additional Hitachi Class 802 units. The 802's will be perfect fit for TPE as it would promote fleet commonality, saves time providing crew training and ultimately leads to a better streamlined service. Under current configuration the Class 185 holds 169 seats while the Class 802 holds 342 seats. Replacing 185's with 802's will provide much needed capacity on the core routes that TPE operate.

That was equally true of the recent LNER order to replace their IC225s, but they went with CAF.

 

[800001]

That was equally true of the recent LNER order to replace their IC225s, but they went with CAF.

Hitachi don’t help them selves. Especially when the 810s for EMR are roughly 2 years late.
Let’s see if CAF deliver the 897 for LNER to time.

 

[cslusarc]

Personally, I don't think TPE should be getting its new trains until after the TPE North route is fully electrified to York and Hull from Stalybridge.

 

[Trainbike46]

Depending on electrification progress, TPE could also get more 397s and still have the fleet commonality advantages.

And something like the CAF units for LNER isn't out of the question either.

 

[43096]

The loigical step for TPE will be to order additional Hitachi Class 802 units. The 802's will be perfect fit for TPE as it would promote fleet commonality, saves time providing crew training and ultimately leads to a better streamlined service. Under current configuration the Class 185 holds 169 seats while the Class 802 holds 342 seats. Replacing 185's with 802's will provide much needed capacity on the core routes that TPE operate.

Whatever the question is, the answer is not Hitachi. They are appalling.

 

[Snow1964]

Hitachi don’t help them selves. Especially when the 810s for EMR are roughly 2 years late.
Let’s see if CAF deliver the 897 for LNER to time.

I suspect Hitachi doesn't really want to build more bi modes, doesn't really fit in with their latest corporate ESG (environment, social, governance) policy. (linking policy report but not quoting as 144 pages).

Japan thinking about climate and environment is rather ahead of UK thinking which seems to be a simple blunt CO2 in UK (regardless if we increase it in other countries and import), as prime determinant of climate policy.

I suspect the Japanese parent would probably happily build more electric or battery electric versions. But not those with diesels which is why they are apparently priced not to sell.

https://www.hitachirail.com/media/k5nf0qcg/hitachi-rail-2024-esg-report-fy23.pdf

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suspect Hitachi doesn't really want to build more bi modes, doesn't really fit in with their latest corporate ESG (environment, social, governance) policy. (linking policy report but not quoting as 144 pages).

Of course Bombardier (now Alstom) did that, and the result was that they failed to tender for a load of bi-mode orders and so came very close to collapse.

Hitachi as a business is unlikely to collapse, of course, it's huge. But it could mean their foray into UK trainbuilding ends up having been brief.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Personally, I don't think TPE should be getting its new trains until after the TPE North route is fully electrified to York and Hull from Stalybridge.

I don't think TP should be procuring brand new trains either before or after electrification.

Rolling stock procurement should be a holistic approach.

Rather than procuring new stock, how about we procure new stock for LNER (preferably longer) and cascade existing units to TPE ?

Some are 5 car, some are bi-mode and all I believe are either fitted with ETCS or are ready to fit ETCS which is the main reason for procuring brand new trains.

FYI I may have said this before although I can't remember and it was probably in another thread anyway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think TP should be procuring brand new trains either before or after electrification.

Rolling stock procurement should be a holistic approach.

Rather than procuring new stock, how about we procure new stock for LNER (preferably longer) and cascade existing units to TPE ?

Some are 5 car, some are bi-mode and all I believe are either fitted with ETCS or are ready to fit ETCS which is the main reason for procuring brand new trains.

FYI I may have said this before although I can't remember and it was probably in another thread anyway.

I'm inclined to agree. The 5-car 80x are a problem at all of the InterCity operations that have them, but for many TPE services they are about the right length (though for some some 7-cars might be better). InterCity services really need long trains - the mix at Avanti of 9 and 11-car is OK, but 5-car is a nuisance as it's almost never long enough on its own yet if you double up you need to double up crews so it's costly.

One thing I'd do is order a dedicated long train fleet for GBR InterCity's very long services where people often do the full journey - the Penzance services, the Chieftain and the Aberdonian being the main ones, but possibly also some XC services e.g. the Aberdeen to Penzance. These would have a lower density of seating, more luggage space, perhaps three classes and a sit down restaurant car (European style rather than posh style). Then cascade 5-car 80x from LNER/GWR to TPE.

 

[Snow1964]

I'm inclined to agree. The 5-car 80x are a problem at all of the InterCity operations that have them, but for many TPE services they are about the right length (though for some some 7-cars might be better). InterCity services really need long trains - the mix at Avanti of 9 and 11-car is OK, but 5-car is a nuisance as it's almost never long enough on its own yet if you double up you need to double up crews so it's costly.

One thing I'd do is order a dedicated long train fleet for GBR InterCity's very long services where people often do the full journey - the Penzance services, the Chieftain and the Aberdonian being the main ones, but possibly also some XC services e.g. the Aberdeen to Penzance. These would have a lower density of seating, more luggage space, perhaps three classes and a sit down restaurant car (European style rather than posh style). Then cascade 5-car 80x from LNER/GWR to TPE.

Very much agree, the 5car sets don't work well on intercity type services. Too short or if doubled often run with customer services in only one unit. Yes, they are ideal on some regional express services (but that isn't the way most are used). Instead have too many 3+ hour regional services with short 165 or 170s

Have got to treat the services taking 4+ hours going to corners of system as ones where people are going to be on them for long while (otherwise why run them as through trains).

I too think we need a few long distance sets, which assume people want comfort, luggage space, and proper food. If want a quick but painful journey from one end of country to another, there are budget airlines. Rail needs to be part of the vacation experience to be enjoyed on these long services. I would add the services timed to connect with cruise ships at Southampton to your list of trains.

 

[Krokodil]

Rather than procuring new stock, how about we procure new stock for LNER (preferably longer) and cascade existing units to TPE ?

Anything ordered as part of the IEP procurement is basically untouchable. The 800s and 801s operated by LNER and GWR have very strict contracts governing their use for 27 years (or however long is left of that). Any changes to this will involve bunging Agility a fortune (changing the GWR 801s to 800/3s did, for example).

So much as we'd like to see the 5 cars lengthened to 9 car sets, or the 5 cars sent elsewhere and replaced by new 9 car sets, LNER and GWR are stuck with the wretched things.

God knows what Avanti were thinking when they ordered the 805s. They should have ordered 7 car sets (assuming that 9 cars aren't justified) for almost the same capacity as a 10 car Voyager. Running double sets might add extra capacity on paper but in practice the loss of the ability to balance passengers between carriages is lost because the units are non-gangwayed.

For XC, in a few years time there will be the opportunity to avoid repeating the mistakes first made by Op Pumpkin. 7 car sets minimum please! I am not optimistic however.

Somehow I've never been on a TPE 802, all my travels have been on Mk5s, 185s and possibly the odd 397. How crowded do they tend to get?

 

[Bletchleyite]

God knows what Avanti were thinking when they ordered the 805s. They should have ordered 7 car sets (assuming that 9 cars aren't justified) for almost the same capacity as a 10 car Voyager. Running double sets might add extra capacity on paper but in practice the loss of the ability to balance passengers between carriages is lost because the units are non-gangwayed.

The 7s will be about right for the second Liverpool and the Birmingham semifast. Few on flexible tickets are likely to choose the latter - it's mostly for Rugby/MKC/Watford passengers - so other passengers will just be those who are priced onto it by cheap Advances, which should be fairly controllable.

 

[Mgameing123]

Very much agree, the 5car sets don't work well on intercity type services. Too short or if doubled often run with customer services in only one unit. Yes, they are ideal on some regional express services (but that isn't the way most are used). Instead have too many 3+ hour regional services with short 165 or 170s

Have got to treat the services taking 4+ hours going to corners of system as ones where people are going to be on them for long while (otherwise why run them as through trains).

I too think we need a few long distance sets, which assume people want comfort, luggage space, and proper food. If want a quick but painful journey from one end of country to another, there are budget airlines. Rail needs to be part of the vacation experience to be enjoyed on these long services. I would add the services timed to connect with cruise ships at Southampton to your list of trains.

The issue isn’t 5 car sets. The idea on paper when Virgin bought the Voyagers was amazing. Their operation princess failed because it was too successful. Cross Country attracted so many riders that trains got overcrowded. The worst part is that Virgin asked the DFT (or whoever was the regulator) to buy additional stock but they got rejected.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The issue isn’t 5 car sets. The idea on paper when Virgin bought the Voyagers was amazing.

It wasn't, it was terrible. Why on earth would you significantly improve a service but then provide it with reduced capacity* from before and expect it to work?

The gross incompetence of this is still hurting the railway thirty years later. Then it was repeated with the Class 185.

* A double 4-car Voyager has significantly fewer seats than a 7 car HST.

 

[Mgameing123]

It wasn't, it was terrible. Why on earth would you significantly improve a service but then provide it with reduced capacity* from before and expect it to work?

The gross incompetence of this is still hurting the railway thirty years later. Then it was repeated with the Class 185.

* A double 4-car Voyager has significantly fewer seats than a 7 car HST.

Well how many seats per hour did they provide before and after?

 

[Krokodil]

The 7s will be about right for the second Liverpool and the Birmingham semifast. Few on flexible tickets are likely to choose the latter - it's mostly for Rugby/MKC/Watford passengers - so other passengers will just be those who are priced onto it by cheap Advances, which should be fairly controllable.

Would be great on the Chesters too. Most of those are currently formed of double sets which is incredibly inefficient. Seven car sets worked singly would have provided much better value for money, even if the price is the loss of that one portion-worked train.

The issue isn’t 5 car sets. The idea on paper when Virgin bought the Voyagers was amazing. Their operation princess failed because it was too successful. Cross Country attracted so many riders that trains got overcrowded. The worst part is that Virgin asked the DFT (or whoever was the regulator) to buy additional stock but they got rejected.

I think that it was the SRA which vetoed it.

* A double 4-car Voyager has significantly fewer seats than a 7 car HST.

Probably costs more to run too, as it has eight engines instead of two.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Oct 2024 ==

Well how many seats per hour did they provide before and after?

As I recall there wasn't much of an uplift. What you gained in frequency you lost in train length. So no room for growth at all. Seven or eight car voyagers would have been a game changer however, and XC would probably be less of a money pit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well how many seats per hour did they provide before and after?

I don't have figures but I'm near-certain it was fewer after than before.

Anyway, we've gone OT so best leave it there.

 

[Mgameing123]

Would be great on the Chesters too. Most of those are currently formed of double sets which is incredibly inefficient. Seven car sets worked singly would have provided much better value for money, even if the price is the loss of that one portion-worked train.


I think that it was the SRA which vetoed it.


Probably costs more to run too, as it has eight engines instead of two.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Oct 2024 ==


As I recall there wasn't much of an uplift. What you gained in frequency you lost in train length. So no room for growth at all. Seven or eight car voyagers would have been a game changer however, and XC would probably be less of a money pit.

Yeah I think Virgin underestimated how many people these new services would attract.