Assuming Northern and TPE are merged.

[northwichcat]

What would you include in a 10-15 year franchise specification starting towards the end of 2013?

Let's also assume North TPE electrification gets the go ahead and the 319s are split between the North West and Thames Valley.

I'd include:
* Full class 319 refurbishment. To include 2+2 seating, fold down tables, air conditioning and full DDA compliance.
* Either 153s to be reformed as 155s or 155s to be spilt and 153s and 155s to form additional centre carriages of 156s. Refurbishment to same standard as 319s, by the end of 2019.
* Ex-FNW 150s to be made fully DDA compliant by the end of 2019. Ex-ATN and LM 150s to be withdrawn in 2019 together with any Pacers not replaced directly/indirectly by EMUs.
* Any issues with DDA compliance on units not already mentioned (excluding Pacers) to be addressed.
* Order of new 6 car EMUs for North TPE to include intercity style interiors.
* Additional EMUs for newly electrified routes - may be in the form of a new order or receiving a cascade of additional 319/321/321s to be worked out in conjuction with other franchise specs. A new order may also replace an existing class e.g. 321s or 323s allowing a cascade of those units to another operator.
* New order of 3 car commuter DMUs in service by 2019 as Pacer/non-DDA compliant 150 replacement and for extra capacity. (Note: some will be replaced by EMUs or DMUs cascaded down as a result of electrification.)
* Follow on order to replace ex-FNW 150s post-2019.
* All stations to which at least 250,000 journeys are made per annum to have both LED platform displays and PA announcements. Ones with under 250,000 journeys to have remote PA announcements.
* All stations with at least 250,000 journeys per annum to have either ticket office with at least 2 members of staff at peak times or to have ticket office with 1 member of staff plus TVM(s).

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

* Full class 319 refurbishment. To include 2+2 seating, fold down tables, air conditioning and full DDA compliance.
* Any issues with DDA compliance on units not already mentioned to be addressed.
* Order of new 6 car EMUs for North TPE to include intercity style interiors.
* New order of 3 car commuter DMUs in service by 2019 as Pacer/non-DDA compliant 150 replacement and for extra capacity. (Note: some will be replaced by EMUs or DMUs cascaded down as a result of electrification.)
* All stations to which at least 250,000 journeys are made per annum to have both LED platform displays and PA announcements. Ones with under 250,000 journeys to have remote PA announcements.

Rather than write all these out again, I see these specific selections from your posting as totally in agreement with my thoughts on the matter.

 

[IanXC]

Putting my belief that a return to separate East and West franchises would be better to one side.

Services wise:
- upgrading North TPE to a flagship shuttle service in the core, add all 6+ car operation to the current frequency.
- bring all main routes above 2tph, eg can it be right that there are twice as many direct trains from Hull to Bridlington than there are to Leeds?!

Thinking cap now on.

Having said all that, I expect that what is included will be left to the bidders, so its likely to be more of a choice between options proposed than choices to include in a specification.

 

[northwichcat]

Putting my belief that a return to separate East and West franchises would be better to one side.

To be honest my suggestions apply equally to either scenario but assuming one franchise keeps it simpler as you don't have to refer to possible cascades of units between the West and East franchises.

Other suggestions in the government's review of franchises is that long term TPE is joined with XC or that North TPE goes with EC and South TPE goes to EMT.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

All stations with at least 250,000 journeys per annum to have either ticket office with at least 2 members of staff at peak times or to have ticket office with 1 member of staff plus TVM(s).

With all the recent discussion on Category "E" stations and the anomalies contained within that published list of these stations in mind, your clarification as shown above would be the correct one, if it were to be adhered to. I did not enter this response in my original posting, as I wished to give fuller information.

I brought this matter up at a meeting of the Cheadle and District Rail User Group, to which I had been invited to hear a presentation by Paul Sumner of National Rail, chaired by the local Member of Parliament, Mark Hunter. It was admitted that the list of Category "E" stations that was recently put into the public domain was "somewhat flawed"...to use the exact words that were stated.

 

[Ivo]

I would mostly agree with your list, but would suggest that the 250,000 rule is extended to any station which sees a substantial percentage of its use as peak traffic, even if it fails to meet that figure. (Those Categories are useless; last I knew, a certain 1M station close to hom was in Category F.) In addition, extend the LED displays to all stations that meet this. However, I don't think there is much point in introducing the announcements everywhere; does Denton really need them...?

Also, there has to be a growth requirement! None of this 0% rubbish on NT's franchise.

Otherwise, I think you've got it pretty much spot on

 

[anthony263]

I agree about getting rid of no growth franchises.

As with northern it has caused problems down at ATW, hopefully in 2018 (Which some in the WAG are looking forward to) a much better franchise will be offered either that or the WAG brings the wales franchise in house so to speak (Might be a good experiment , I suspect those in scotland will be watching to see what happens if it does)

I also think that franchises should be longer, ie 15-20 years or perhaps longer to encourage operators to invest more, and hopefully stop some of the meddling by the DFT

 

[northwichcat]

However, I don't think there is much point in introducing the announcements everywhere; does Denton really need them...?

Well yes ignore stations which have no service or only a parliamentary service.

 

[bluenoxid]

What would you include in a 10-15 year franchise specification starting towards the end of 2013?

Let's also assume North TPE electrification gets the go ahead and the 319s are split between the North West and Thames Valley.

I'd include:
* Full class 319 refurbishment. To include 2+2 seating, fold down tables, air conditioning and full DDA compliance.
* Either 153s to be reformed as 155s or 155s to be spilt and 153s and 155s to form additional centre carriages of 156s. Refurbishment to same standard as 319s, by the end of 2019.
* Ex-FNW 150s to be made fully DDA compliant by the end of 2019. Ex-ATN and LM 150s to be withdrawn in 2019 together with any Pacers not replaced directly/indirectly by EMUs.
* Any issues with DDA compliance on units not already mentioned (excluding Pacers) to be addressed.
* Order of new 6 car EMUs for North TPE to include intercity style interiors.
* Additional EMUs for newly electrified routes - may be in the form of a new order or receiving a cascade of additional 319/321/321s to be worked out in conjuction with other franchise specs. A new order may also replace an existing class e.g. 321s or 323s allowing a cascade of those units to another operator.
* New order of 3 car commuter DMUs in service by 2019 as Pacer/non-DDA compliant 150 replacement and for extra capacity. (Note: some will be replaced by EMUs or DMUs cascaded down as a result of electrification.)
* Follow on order to replace ex-FNW 150s post-2019.
* All stations to which at least 250,000 journeys are made per annum to have both LED platform displays and PA announcements. Ones with under 250,000 journeys to have remote PA announcements.
* All stations with at least 250,000 journeys per annum to have either ticket office with at least 2 members of staff at peak times or to have ticket office with 1 member of staff plus TVM(s).

I would encourage a three yearly review programme of the franchise ala Chiltern and Evergreen. No point putting in place a cumbersome set of requirements for a railway whose future beyond 2015 has not been set in stone yet. Lets have some flexibility and local stakeholder influence in the development of this franchise and penalties for those that fail.

 

[sprinterguy]

I'd include:
* Full class 319 refurbishment. To include 2+2 seating, fold down tables, air conditioning and full DDA compliance.

This I definitely like the sound of.

* Either 153s to be reformed as 155s or 155s to be spilt and 153s and 155s to form additional centre carriages of 156s. Refurbishment to same standard as 319s, by the end of 2019.

Wouldn't it be easier to add the 153 onto one end of a 156 (with the larger, original cab facing outwards), rather than inserting it into the middle?

* Order of new 6 car EMUs for North TPE to include intercity style interiors.

Six car units wouldn't fit into the bay platforms at Newcastle. Five carriages would be the top whack.

* All stations to which at least 250,000 journeys are made per annum to have both LED platform displays and PA announcements. Ones with under 250,000 journeys to have remote PA announcements.
* All stations with at least 250,000 journeys per annum to have either ticket office with at least 2 members of staff at peak times or to have ticket office with 1 member of staff plus TVM(s).

Excellent ideas. There needs to be a better focus on providing improved facilities at stations in the Northern franchise.

 

[northwichcat]

I think with passenger growth it should say something like a minimum of x additional carriages introduced by year y assuming z% growth. Then if z is higher than expected x is increased proportionally, if it's lower then decrease proportionally.

While I suggested replacing existing 2 car units with 3 car units I do agree with the people saying there should be flexibility for the franchisee. So if there are 40 x 2 car DMUs needing replacement then instead of ordering 40 x 3 car DMUs they could opt for 15 x 2 car DMUs and 30 x 3 car DMUs instead if they provided reasons for that being a better option.

 

[sprinterguy]

This isn't hugely realistic in terms of the amount of funding that would be required to carry out this programme of works, but in my view:
I'd imagine that Northern could benefit greatly from Transpennine North and Midland Main Line electrification, with MML electrification stretching through to Doncaster, Wakefield and York, and TPE electrification (to Hull) filling in many of the local links radiating primarily from Wakefield Kirkgate.

A Phase 2 North West electrification should start the ball rolling. This would cover:
Barrow in Furness
Kirkby and Southport
Liverpool-Manchester via Warrington Central (Or whichever of the Manchester-Liverpool lines isn't already intended to be electrified)
New Mills Central and possibly Chinley (The Rose Hill Marple branch would go over to Metrolink operation via Reddish North, with the heavy rail service to New Mills and Chinley routed via Guide Bridge in combination with four tracking of the route from Guide Bridge into Manchester).
Buxton (With the frequency increased to half hourly throughout the day)

To operate these routes, the forty-odd GWML 319s would be replaced by 365s cascaded from the Great Northern, and the 319s moved to the North West. These would also replace Northerns' seventeen 323s as well as operating the newly electrified routes. I think that all this would just about allow Newton Heaths' 142 fleet to be withdrawn.

The seventeen 323s would move across to Northerns' east side as part of the Midland Mainline electrification, to work diagrams over the routes radiating from Sheffield to Doncaster, Wakefield Westgate and York (I think that the Sherburn-in-Elmet route should have a more frequent service). I have tried to work out Northerns' diagrams for its' various routes, but have found it to be far too complex, but I think that this should allow the twelve Yorkshire diagrams for Heaton 142s to be replaced: Either directly through electrification, or by cascade of 144s, 156s or perhaps 150s, which I'd like to see more of on Northerns' east side.

Transpennine North electrification would then infill many of the remaining gaps in Yorkshires' electrified rail network. It would cover:
Guide Bridge/Manchester Victoria-Leeds
Leeds-Colton Junction
Leeds-Selby-Hull
Northallerton-Middlesborough
Mirfield to Halifax and Bradford Interchange
Mirfield-Wakefield Kirkgate-Castleford-Woodlesford-Leeds
Wakefield Kirkgate-Knottingley-Goole-Gilberdyke

To operate the local routes, LMs' twenty six 323s would be replaced by new build stock (Presumably 350/3s or something similar), and the 323s moved to Yorkshire. A new depot could be built on the site of Healey Mills to maintain the forty three 323s. The resulting diagrams being taken over by electric operation by 323s should allow the twenty three 144s to be withdrawn.

Transpennine North would be merged into the Northern franchise, and a 5-car AC electric variant of the 444 ordered to operate Transpennine North services. Transpennine South would be taken over by EMT, and the fifty one 185s would go to ATW to release twenty three 158s to EMT and twenty seven 175s to Northern for use on the likes of the Caldervale services. That would allow some 156s, or perhaps 150s, to move to Heaton to replace the twelve 142 diagrams in the North East.

I'd also like to see a cascade effected that would see Northern lose its' seven 155s and eighteen (Nineteen including the LM unit) 153s to EMT, consolidating the Leyland Sprinter fleet in one place, in return for gaining the twenty (24 now that EMT have gained four from Northern) 156s operated by East Anglia and EMT (The NXEA 156s would be replaced by the nine 170/3s released from TPE South).

Northern would then have a fleet of 150s, 156s, 158s, 319s, 323s and 333s (and potentially a small number of 321s), that should all be made fully DDA compliant.

 

[Nym]

Still no electrification from Wigan to Lostock though?

Personally I wouldn't add any more metrolink by converting heavy rail lines though, we've done enough!

And if we're electrifying to New Mills Central, I'd push it all the way to Chinley, with wires extending from Hazel Grove too, and making this a kind of interchange SE of Manchester. Where the hope valley services would only call here (Possibly Stockport / Guide Bridge), then all stations to Sheffeild.

 

[sprinterguy]

Still no electrification from Wigan to Lostock though?

Personally I wouldn't add any more metrolink by converting heavy rail lines though, we've done enough!

And if we're electrifying to New Mills Central, I'd push it all the way to Chinley, with wires extending from Hazel Grove too, and making this a kind of interchange SE of Manchester. Where the hope valley services would only call here (Possibly Stockport / Guide Bridge), then all stations to Sheffeild.

Ah, yes, I would electrify Wigan to Lostock. I haven't gone to the trouble of naming each link between lines to be electrified: F'rinstance, I've also not mentioned Castleford-Pontefract Monkhill. Just assume that where there is a short link between two electrified lines, this would also be electrified.

I think that conversion to Metrolink is feasible where there is duplication of routes to an extent. I think that this is perfectly acceptable for the route to Rochdale via Oldham that is currently being converted, and in the case of Rose Hill Marple, then Romiley could act as a light rail/heavy rail interchange.

If you reckon that electrifying all the way through to Chinley would be a good idea, then that's good enough for me. The "dark side" of Northern (the west bit) gets a little bit vague for me sometimes, even though I'm familiar with Chinley itself.

 

[PR1Berske]

Convert Wallgate to Salford/Victoria to Metrolink, add a new line to Leigh.

 

[northwichcat]

Wouldn't it be easier to add the 153 onto one end of a 156 (with the larger, original cab facing outwards), rather than inserting it into the middle?

I'm not sure what'd be easiest from a technical and crew signing prospective. The 156 units may well be taken apart as part of the refurb anyway.

From a passenger point of view you'd certainly prefer to have one toilet in the front 1.5 carriages and one toilet in the rear half, opposed to two toilets in 1.5 carriages and none in the other 1.5 carriages.

Six car units wouldn't fit into the bay platforms at Newcastle. Five carriages would be the top whack.

Could they change which platform they call at or extend the platforms?

 

[sprinterguy]

Could they change which platform they call at or extend the platforms?

I don't think that there'd be much opportunity for extending the platforms: I'm not entirely sure, but I think that trains much longer than five carriages would also end up fouling the points allowing access to the adjacent platform road, and of course, it would also require re-siting of the signals.

Nym and I have discussed this issue before, and it was concluded that if use was made of Forth sidings to stable the unit between arrival and departure, as used to regularly be the case for the terminating Crosscountry services in the days pre-Operation Process, then it might be possible to find the capacity in one of the through platforms for the hourly TPE service. BUT Forth Sidings would have to be electrified to allow this to happen.

 

[northwichcat]

I don't think that there'd be much opportunity for extending the platforms: I'm not entirely sure, but I think that trains much longer than five carriages would also end up fouling the points allowing access to the adjacent platform road, and of course, it would also require re-siting of the signals.

Nym and I have discussed this issue before, and it was concluded that if use was made of Forth sidings to stable the unit between arrival and departure, as used to regularly be the case for the terminating Crosscountry services in the days pre-Operation Process, then it might be possible to find the capacity in one of the through platforms for the hourly TPE service. BUT Forth Sidings would have to be electrified to allow this to happen.

Would it make any difference if the South West to Edinburgh trains started/terminated at Newcastle and the Manchester Airport-Newcastle services continued to Edinburgh? Obviously a bigger order would be required for TPE but it could help with XC overcrowding issues by running less services to Edinburgh. It would also mean less diesels under the wires between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

Transpennine South would be taken over by EMT, and the fifty one 185s would go to ATW to release twenty three 158s to EMT and twenty seven 175s to Northern for use on the likes of the Caldervale services. That would allow some 156s, or perhaps 150s, to move to Heaton to replace the twelve 142 diagrams in the North East.

Which routes would you propose using the 185s on? Remember they are very powerful units designed for steep routes so they are a bit overpowered for Manchester to Llandudno. While they are too big for most HOW services assuming they could be cleared for that route.

Given by the time North TPE is electrified that 185s would have around half way through their lives you could really consider a full scale refurb. I think there are two options for that:
1. Remove FC and some tables to give a higher capacity of standard class seats. This would make them ideal for routes like Calder Vale and Buxton-Manchester.
2. Refurb to similar standard at present but with seating more suitable for long journeys. This could make them suitable for Liverpool-Norwich and Blackpool-Scarbrorough (as it would be after North TPE electrfication.) Maybe Leeds-Lancashire/Cumbria routes would be another option.

 

[sprinterguy]

Which routes would you propose using the 185s on? Remember they are very powerful units designed for steep routes so they are a bit overpowered for Manchester to Llandudno. While they are too big for most HOW services assuming they could be cleared for that route.

Given by the time North TPE is electrified that 185s would have around half way through their lives you could really consider a full scale refurb. I think there are two options for that:
1. Remove FC and some tables to give a higher capacity of standard class seats. This would make them ideal for routes like Calder Vale and Buxton-Manchester.
2. Refurb to similar standard at present but with seating more suitable for long journeys. This could make them suitable for Liverpool-Norwich and Blackpool-Scarbrorough (as it would be after North TPE electrfication.) Maybe Leeds-Lancashire/Cumbria routes would be another option.

They'd be covering all of the ATW routes currently covered by 158s and 175s. It's a long way from perfect, but I'd be keen to keep the 185s together as a single fleet, even though this is basically choosing operational convenience over matching the most appropriate trains to routes.

Admittedly, the axle weights might be quite high for operation on the Cambrian line without causing a few infrastructure related headaches, and I'm not sure that all the platforms they would call at would be able to handle six carriage trains where the current diagrams call for 158s working in pairs.

However, on many of ATWs' longer distance routes, three car trains are very much needed to match passenger demand where currently many trains are only two.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Would it make any difference if the South West to Edinburgh trains started/terminated at Newcastle and the Manchester Airport-Newcastle services continued to Edinburgh? Obviously a bigger order would be required for TPE but it could help with XC overcrowding issues by running less services to Edinburgh. It would also mean less diesels under the wires between Newcastle and Edinburgh.

It'd be bad news for direct links from Scotland to and from South Yorkshire and the East Midlands (Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby), but it'd be a good idea for reducing the number of diesels running under the wires north of Newcastle.

 

[northwichcat]

They'd be covering all of the ATW routes currently covered by 158s and 175s. It's a long way from perfect, but I'd be keen to keep the 185s together as a single fleet, even though this is basically choosing operational convenience over matching the most appropriate trains to routes.

Admittedly, the axle weights might be quite high for operation on the Cambrian line without causing a few infrastructure related headaches, and I'm not sure that all the platforms they would call at would be able to handle six carriage trains where the current diagrams call for 158s working in pairs.

However, on many of ATWs' longer distance routes, three car trains are very much needed to match passenger demand where currently many trains are only two

The ATW routes are a bit like Liverpool-Norwich in that at one end they can be a busy 4 car unit and at the other end they couldn't even fill a 153, so would a consistent fleet of corridor linked 158s not work better than 185s?

You also mentioned Calder Vale for 175 usage. Calder Vale has a lot of busy 2, 3 and 4 car Sprinter combinations running on it and 175 carriages have less seats than most types of Sprinter carriages, so I don't see how the 2 car 175s would be useful on Calder Vale unless they were semi-permanently attached to 3 car 175s to give 5 car combinations.

There is also the issue of Chester having an Altsom depot and Manchester having a Siemens depot. There is a work around by using the two Manchester-Chester line services as a way of moving stock but again not the best solution from that point of view.

It'd be bad news for direct links from Scotland to and from South Yorkshire and the East Midlands (Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby), but it'd be a good idea for reducing the number of diesels running under the wires north of Newcastle.

They would still be the occasional Reading service from Edinburgh. It could also mean all Manchester Airport-Preston-Scotland services could go to Glasgow meaning that both Glasgow and Edinburgh could have hourly Manchester services (the suggestion is the Manchester Airport-Preston-Scotland service would go hourly in the next few years) as well as giving Huddersfield a direct link to Scotland. Therefore, there would be advantages for some passengers travelling to and from Scotland.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I would also keep the 185s together. Or at most split into 2 areas not too far from each other. How many diagrams would be need for the hourly bridlington sheffield semi fast? (i would make it hourly to scarbrough rather than 2 hourly) and the hourle scarbrough blackpool? add in the leeds -morcambe/carlisle on maybe a more regularly basis (split join at skipton or . carlisle newcastle services?

now that is spread out quite a bit but with the york depot and maybe a small depot near carlisle you could allocate all units. Manchester siemens depot becoming an EMU depot.

I did think that up quite quickly so feel free to pick holes as and where!

I think TPE north and the little infills around it could be one of the most beneficial electrifcation projects ever. Combine with MML and youve got s substantial electric network in the north, finally.

 

[Waverley125]

1) Plan for electrification of all of North TP, ordering a new set of 444s with pantos (344s?) to include a buffet car and an entire first class section.

2) Timetable for TPE as a two-tier service with places like Widnes, Birchwood, Dewsbury, Garforth & Stalybridge on 'regional' level services, with an hourly Liverpool-Newcastle calling [stn]LPY[/stn], Warrington, Manchester Vic, Huddersfield, Leeds, York, Darlington only.

3) Up services Leeds-Liverpool and Leeds-Hull to 2tph. New Leeds-Hull service to be non-stop. Work on improving lin espeeds Leeds-Hull.

4) Plan to cascade southern area EMUs to West Yorks, including all 31Xs before replacement with 321/333 compatible EMUs

5) Order new 3-car DMUs (172s preferably) for working non-electrified lines.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Convert Wallgate to Salford/Victoria to Metrolink, add a new line to Leigh.

No, just no.

 

[Nym]

My thoughts exactly...

1) How would you link it into Metrolink, it faces the wrong way out of Victoria
2) Why.... just why?
3) You'd need a lot of grade seperation to acceive it
4) You loose a perfectly good diversionary route
5) you'd need new track between Hindley and Wigan, for the metrolink lines
6) For the amount that would cost you could just build an electrified line into Leigh from Walkden with a station at Tyldley, and at a push, get all the way to the WCML too... (From Tyldsley) then with a bit of extra junction theres an extra no-reversals route into Liverpool via St Helens Central...

 

[HSTEd]

with regards to the electrification north of Newcastle and all the diesels running under it, doesn't the East Coast Route Plan mention that the capacity north of Newcastle is constrained in Peak times by the capacity of the traction supply?

Has anything been done to ameriolate this problem in advance of the entry into service of Electrodiesel Voyagers/350s?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My thoughts exactly... For the amount that would cost you could just build an electrified line into Leigh from Walkden with a station at Tyldesley, and at a push, get all the way to the WCML too... (From Tyldesley) then with a bit of extra junction theres an extra no-reversals route into Liverpool via St Helens Central...

Has there been any time estimations for the funding of the upgrading of the existing Manchester Victoria-Walkden-Daisy Hill route to Wigan Wallgate as part of the future rail network emanating from Greater Manchester central core or would this route still be classified as an unelectrified link route ?

 

[Nym]

Personally, I'd base the cost on at least the cost of the Oldham Loop, only to convert the route to Hindley, extending it to Wigan Wallgate and building a new line to Leigh would cost significantly more, IIRC the Oldham Loop came in at £70mil, add on going to Wigan and you can get upto £110mil, then Leigh makes it near enough £190mil.

You could build a super duper route to Leigh for £140mil with heavy rail, electrification, and pay for the extra rolling stock and two stations...

 

[Prodigy]

Sorry to be the stupid one here but has a Northern and TPE merger actually been suggested by the companies or is it just speculation on herE?

 

[Nym]

Its in the Northern RUS

 

[ainsworth74]

Sorry to be the stupid one here but has a Northern and TPE merger actually been suggested by the companies or is it just speculation on herE?

There has been an adjustment in TPE's franchise that would enable the two to be merged easily. Basically TPE will now run until sometime between April 2014 and March 2015 whilst there remains another optional extension in Northern's franchise that could seem them run until April 2014.

You can read about it here (last bullet point).