Grand Central apply for Newcastle - Brighton direct

[driverd]

Well, Arriva aren't well known for providing modern, reliable, and comfortable transport for their customers.

You just have to look at Chiltern's class 165 units to see this. I don't think they have ever had any refurb during Arriva's lifetime holding the franchise.

Honestly, totally unfair criticism. Its a bit of an irrelevant point given franchises have refurbs agreed/not specified at the bid stage but...

Northern:
Full fleet refurbishment
Introduction of 195/331
Introduction & refurb of 170s (compare to EMR)

ATW:
Extensive, comprehensive and very high quality fleet refurb - especially when you compare with some of the contemporary refurbs.

GC:
Arriva signed off on extensive 180 refurb

Chiltern:
Full fleet seems to get refurbished once every few weeks (...yes this is facetious, but I dont live in the area and my only exposure is these forums, where, seemingly every other thread is about the 168s or 165s getting a refurb/repaint, I've never known one brand to carry so many different iterations of a similar livery).

XC:
Full ongoing fleet refurb (yes its been a while but I refer back to the initial point that its down to the DfT, rendering this list quite pointless).

And just to bring this back on topic... I'm pretty sure this is all moot anyway as its already been announced they're shaking the 180/221 tree for units on this run...

 

[357]

And just to bring this back on topic... I'm pretty sure this is all moot anyway as its already been announced they're shaking the 180/221 tree for units on this run...

The impression I have is it would only be a stopgap until the new units arrive. There is an option for further Hitachi units on top of those already on order.

 

[Russel]

XC:
Full ongoing fleet refurb (yes its been a while but I refer back to the initial point that its down to the DfT, rendering this list quite pointless).

Hmm... Wake me up if/when the Voyager refurb eventually starts!

 

[tfw756rider]

After how many years in service?

Mostly about 25 for the "original" Voyagers (and still 18 for their 2007 retrimming of the first class seats and the shop removal etc).

And still 17 for the 170s (they were refurbished in 2008), except the centre cars of 170618-623 which were refurbished only 4-5 years ago in 2020-2021, but only out of neccesity to match the driving cars they were inserted between).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jul 2025 ==

ATW:
Extensive, comprehensive and very high quality fleet refurb - especially when you compare with some of the contemporary refurbs.

They never fully refurbished the 175s (there were still bits of First North Western light purple parts and signage), but they weren't funded by the Welsh Government for a full "strip out and replace everything" refurbishment like the 158s were of course.

Chiltern:
Full fleet seems to get refurbished once every few weeks (...yes this is facetious, but I dont live in the area and my only exposure is these forums, where, seemingly every other thread is about the 168s or 165s getting a refurb/repaint, I've never known one brand to carry so many different iterations of a similar livery).

The Chiltern 165s (and West Midlands Railway 172/1s) are still going around with the pre-2013 blue-and-red Chiltern interior. The 168s are only just now going from their first 2013 (2016 in the case of the ex-170 168/3s) first interior refurbishments to new second interior refurbishments (but yes, I think repaints / livery changes have been more frequent).

 

[317 forever]

Given that Newcastle and Brighton were the first areas served by Go-Ahead buses, it might have been more topical for a Go-Ahead rail company to apply to operate such a service, rather than an Arriva company. Admittedly Arriva do have buses in Newcastle too.

 

[357]

Given that Newcastle and Brighton were the first areas served by Go-Ahead buses, it might have been more topical for a Go-Ahead rail company to apply to operate such a service, rather than an Arriva company. Admittedly Arriva do have buses in Newcastle too.

I can assure you that this didn't even factor into the imagination of anyone involved in making this proposal.

 

[GoneSouth]

Direct reading to Gatwick train
But no train from Oxford to Gatwick or Reading to Brighton

I have wondered if extending the Gatwick - Reading to Oxford might work, or would it have to continue on to Bicester as it would be replacing most of that route.

Anyway, as for the rest of it, who in their right mind is going to do Sheffield to Gatwick via Oxford and Birmingham.

Sound like a money grab to me when they lose control of XC (yay, I can’t wait, been hoping for that for 15 years!)

 

[357]

(yay, I can’t wait, been hoping for that for 15 years!)

GBR is gonna be so much different. They've got hundreds of extra 22X carriages waiting in sidings ready to be inserted into the sets.

They've got buildings full of drivers and train managers too, all ready to go.

Sadly my experience tells me that the above will not be the case.

 

[ainsworth74]

Might I propose that the woes of XC and whether a change of ownership would actually fix them overnight might be better suited either to a new thread or, I suspect, one of the very many that already exist?

 

[GoneSouth]

I doubt it would make a difference by itself, but I think dropping planned Durham and Darlington calls and maybe going for Thirsk (depending on how difficult moving onto the slow lines would be) would make it less likely to be declined on abstraction grounds. Or they could keep playing speculative bingo and apply to run a Middlesbrough – Birmingham – Brighton service.

How about Scarborough-Hull-Leeds-Bradford-Halifax-Huddersfield-Barnsley-Sheffield-Worksop-chesterfield-Nottingham-Loughborough-Leicester-Peterborough (reverse, because all long journeys should have one)-Leicester- Birmingham-Kidderminster-Worcester-Oxford-Swindon (another reverse, because the driver needs a vape)-Reading-Guildford-Reigate-Horley-Gatwick then all stops to Brighton.

You could spice it up a bit by swapping the Oxford and Worcesterr order to enable calls at Ashchurch, Cheltenham, Gloucester, Stroud and Kemble between Worcester and Swindon.

I’d take a day out to do that route!

 

[Topological]

How about Scarborough-Hull-Leeds-Bradford-Halifax-Huddersfield-Barnsley-Sheffield-Worksop-chesterfield-Nottingham-Loughborough-Leicester-Peterborough (reverse, because all long journeys should have one)-Leicester- Birmingham-Kidderminster-Worcester-Oxford-Swindon (another reverse, because the driver needs a vape)-Reading-Guildford-Reigate-Horley-Gatwick then all stops to Brighton.

You could spice it up a bit by swapping the Oxford and Worcesterr order to enable calls at Ashchurch, Cheltenham, Gloucester, Stroud and Kemble between Worcester and Swindon.

I’d take a day out to do that route!

Surely you already had a reverse at Hull?

Not that I am arguing against any of the other reverses that have been incorporated.

Would the stock fit in the bay at Swindon?

* Since this is speculative, hopefully there is scope for such discussion of proposals which are as equally outlandish as the proposed Grand Central service

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Surely you already had a reverse at Hull?

As well as Bradford, Sheffield, and Worksop

 

[GoneSouth]

As well as Bradford, Sheffield, and Worksop

True, I just hadn’t thought to include them in the itinerary until later on.

Would the stock fit in the bay at Swindon?

* Since this is speculative, hopefully there is scope for such discussion of proposals which are as equally outlandish as the proposed Grand Central service

Surely it wouldn’t need to, Swindon has 3 very long platforms to accommodate the 3 car 170 covering the route.

Isn’t there only a west facing bay anyway? We wouldn’t want to send it back that way otherwise it would have to go to Shrub Hill to reverse for Oxford. That’s silly!

Also forgot to mention the other alternative to go via Lincoln, then back to Nottingham and continue as above. The grand tour of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire!

 

[Topological]

True, I just hadn’t thought to include them in the itinerary until later on.

Surely it wouldn’t need to, Swindon has 3 very long platforms to accommodate the 3 car 170 covering the route.

Isn’t there only a west facing bay anyway? We wouldn’t want to send it back that way otherwise it would have to go to Shrub Hill to reverse for Oxford. That’s silly!

Also forgot to mention the other alternative to go via Lincoln, then back to Nottingham and continue as above. The grand tour of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire!

Very good point. The bay only works for the "spice it up" option of reaching Swindon via Gloucester and then only if you go to Reading via Westbury. Presumably, reversal at Bath would just be silly.

Of course you then miss Oxford, so maybe reverse at Swindon for Bristol Parkway then back via Bath and up to Oxford to reverse to Reading. No reversals on the Bristol Parkway to Bath section as calling at Bristol Temple Meads to reverse would tip the proposed service over the abstractive test threshold.

 

[The Ham]

Given that the ECML OAO have had a decision and some of those didn't get all they wanted due to capacity, does that make a decision on this proposal more likely?

Thread discussing the ECML OAO:

ORR Approves More Open Access Services on the ECML

The Office of Rail and Road has just announced the approval of all the open access passenger train service applications for the East Coast Mainline for December 2025 except the the Hull Trains application for new services between London King’s Cross and Sheffield which the ORR rejected. This is...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

Given that the ECML OAO have had a decision and some of those didn't get all they wanted due to capacity, does that make a decision on this proposal more likely?

Thread discussing the ECML OAO:

ORR Approves More Open Access Services on the ECML

The Office of Rail and Road has just announced the approval of all the open access passenger train service applications for the East Coast Mainline for December 2025 except the the Hull Trains application for new services between London King’s Cross and Sheffield which the ORR rejected. This is...

www.railforums.co.uk

It’s not changed the likelihood of a decision, that was 100% certain.

How yesterday’s announcement by the ORR has affected the outcome of the decision is a different question! To which answers can only be opinion, at this stage.

 

[The Ham]

It’s not changed the likelihood of a decision, that was 100% certain.

Of course.

How yesterday’s announcement by the ORR has affected the outcome of the decision is a different question! To which answers can only be opinion, at this stage.

I suspected as much, factors such as does the approved services then impact the possibility of these services due to using the paths which could have otherwise been used, or conversely by using capacity south of these services on the ECML mean that the paths then become useless to anyone else wanting to run services to London and so makes running such a service the only viable use for the paths.

 

[mike57]

Surely you already had a reverse at Hull?

No go via the curve by the stadium, and call at Hessle instead

 

[Brubulus]

This application is highly unlikely do be successful since it uses the currently unused Newcastle-Reading paths. The DfT has shown a clear desire to use said paths and therefore it is highly unlikely that the ORR will allow another operator to use them. However the recently approved applications have little bearing on this application, beyond showing that the ORR are taking a reasonable and pragmatic approach on the East Coast, in contrast to their absolute opposition to OA on the West Coast.

 

[djox]

currently unused Newcastle-Reading paths. The DfT has shown a clear desire to use said paths

Have you got any details what DFT plans for these paths?

 

[Bald Rick]

beyond showing that the ORR are taking a reasonable and pragmatic approach on the East Coast, in contrast to their absolute opposition to OA on the West Coast.

The ORR have maintained exactly the same approach for the West Coast and East Coast applications. The applications were assessed by the same people, and the letter written by the same person (albeit not who signed it, I suspect!)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2025 ==

Have you got any details what DFT plans for these paths?

Newcastle - Reading trains!

 

[djox]

The ORR have maintained exactly the same approach for the West Coast and East Coast applications. The applications were assessed by the same people, and the letter written by the same person (albeit not who signed it, I suspect!)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2025 ==



Newcastle - Reading trains!

There's already 4 Newcastle - Reading trains a day, what other plans you mentioned from DFT are on the table?

 

[ainsworth74]

There's already 4 Newcastle - Reading trains a day, what other plans you mentioned from DFT are on the table?

Presumably reintroducing the rest of the hourly service that used to run between Newcastle and Reading I would think!

 

[djox]

Presumably reintroducing the rest of the hourly service that used to run between Newcastle and Reading I would think!

That would be nice, especially to help with the Oxford/Reading to Birmingham corridor, but unlikely with XC around.

 

[devon_belle]

I have wondered if extending the Gatwick - Reading to Oxford might work

I think this is an ambition as mentioned in the NR route studies. I believe it requires the Oxford rebuild before it's plausible, but it would eat away a small part of the target audience for the Newcastle-Brighton service.

Important to note that extension of the Gatwick-Reading southwards, towards Brighton, isn't entertained by that study because there's lack of capacity. Not sure how Grand Central intend to overcome that.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Hi all. Sorry to ask, do we know yet what stock will be used on this route?

 

[Driver068]

Hi all. Sorry to ask, do we know yet what stock will be used on this route?

Initially it will be more than likely 180s. I have heard 222s mentioned but now looking unlikely. GC have not confirmed if the 221s will be extended beyond next year for the long term so its all up in the air.

Long term will obviously be the new Hitachi when ever the decide to make an appearance.

 

[The Planner]

Initially it will be more than likely 180s. I have heard 222s mentioned but now looking unlikely. GC have not confirmed if the 221s will be extended beyond next year for the long term so its all up in the air.

Long term will obviously be the new Hitachi when ever the decide to make an appearance.

That assumes they get the rights to XCs unused paths. That is far from certain.

 

[DJ_K666]

They propose going the long way round:

From Newcastle, serving Durham, Darlington, Northallerton, York, Doncaster, Sheffield, Derby, Burton-on-Trent, Birmingham New Street, Warwick Parkway, Banbury, Oxford, Reading, Wokingham, Guildford, Redhill, London Gatwick, Haywards Heath then Brighton

Nah just obtain some mk5 coaches, stick a 92 on the front and shove (or drag in this case) it through Snow Hill tunnel.
Or if it can't stay on the juice, Brighton - Haywards Heath- Gatwick Airport - East Croydon - Clapham Junction - Kenny O - GWML - Didcot - Oxford etc

That said I do remember the Sussex Scot used to start getting really full after Clspham junction. When I used it it was often crowded by the time you reached Reading

I'd love to see the timings of such a service. And no stop at Leamington Spa?

 

[vuzzeho]

Nah just obtain some mk5 coaches, stick a 92 on the front and shove (or drag in this case) it through Snow Hill tunnel.

What - the Thameslink Snow Hill Tunnel?