• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

222 on Derby Crewe route

Status
Not open for further replies.

bunnahabhain

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,277
You've got a misconception between the route availability and the total tonnage the route can take. A 222 can certainly operate up to Matlock, that's what your Route Availability tells you, the total tonnage capacity of the route will tell you how regularly you can do that.

*Edit* PS Would you like some proof of that?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
You've got a misconception between the route availability and the total tonnage the route can take. A 222 can certainly operate up to Matlock, that's what your Route Availability tells you, the total tonnage capacity of the route will tell you how regularly you can do that.

*Edit* PS Would you like some proof of that?

Proof of what? Regardless, a 222 is still considered a fairly light and will be well under the total tonnage capacity of the route. Each coach only weighs a couple more tonne than a turbo or even a sprinter. Hardly going to wear down the track in a hurry!

Again, as previously mentioned. We were talking about the possibility of ONE direct service in each direction say Monday to Friday. That is not excessive either.

MML ran services with trains 5 tonne less, day in, day out. And this was before any strengthening work took place.
 

Moonshark

Member
Joined
6 Oct 2014
Messages
22
I work this route very regularly and 153's long term are simply not sufficient. Even middle of day services can carry 40+ passengers which yes a 153 is sufficient

You've just contradicted your self. That is the ultimate sign of weakness. :roll:
 

bunnahabhain

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,277
Proof of what? Regardless, a 222 is still considered a fairly light and will be well under the total tonnage capacity of the route. Each coach only weighs a couple more tonne than a turbo or even a sprinter. Hardly going to wear down the track in a hurry!

Again, as previously mentioned. We were talking about the possibility of ONE direct service in each direction say Monday to Friday. That is not excessive either.

MML ran services with trains 5 tonne less, day in, day out. And this was before any strengthening work took place.
There is no requirement for a through service, if there was, one would operate, MML operated it partly to fill in the gaps in the 90-120min service Central Trains provided. If it did operate with 222s then it would be worked by a Train Manager, not a Senior Conductor. :)
 

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
You've just contradicted your self. That is the ultimate sign of weakness. :roll:

I don't see what's weak or contradictory about anything. If you actually read the whole discussion you would see that we've established that 153's are simply not suitable during peak hours and given that the way the diagrams are, i am saying that yes they are fine for middle of day services, even though they do regularly carry 40+ passengers. In response and agreement with another post about increasing passengers, it is not sustainable to carry on using 153's. When this time comes, I'm guessing they'll all be out of service anyway.

There is no requirement for a through service, if there was, one would operate, MML operated it partly to fill in the gaps in the 90-120min service Central Trains provided. If it did operate with 222s then it would be worked by a Train Manager, not a Senior Conductor. :)

No there is no requirement, not saying there is or should. MML and Central were both owned by the same parent company anyway so it wasn't a case of filling gaps. Had the parent company wanted all services to run to Matlock as Central services then they would have done so. They chose to operate direct trains because there was a market and because they could. And why would it have to be worked by a TM? A SC is just as qualified and already signs the route and seeing as they will be signing the traction very soon it is more cost effective to do it that way. The cost of training all Derby TM's up to be released to do route knowledge for Matlock would be an unnecessary extortionate cost that I'm 90% certain the company wouldn't be prepared to pay for at the prospect of 1 through train a day.
 

bunnahabhain

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,277
In much the same way as the one a day Lincoln service is worked by a TM. Because its a Mainline service, not a Connect service.
 

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
In much the same way as the one a day Lincoln service is worked by a TM. Because its a Mainline service, not a Connect service.

It's more to do with the fact the train comes from Derby and no guards currently sign 222's, also the fact that Derby guards don't officially sign Lincoln either (with the exception of 2 or 3 who have retained their knowledge after transfer).

With Derby guards being trained up and already signing Matlock it would make the most sense economically and be the most viable option with a simple crew change at Derby to take it forward.

I don't see any legitimate reason why someone's job title should make a difference to their competency to work such a train.
 

Qwerty133

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2012
Messages
2,622
Location
Leicester/Sheffield
In much the same way as the one a day Lincoln service is worked by a TM. Because its a Mainline service, not a Connect service.

It's no longer 2007, which is when them terms were used.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It's more to do with the fact the train comes from Derby and no guards currently sign 222's, also the fact that Derby guards don't officially sign Lincoln either (with the exception of 2 or 3 who have retained their knowledge after transfer).

With Derby guards being trained up and already signing Matlock it would make the most sense economically and be the most viable option with a simple crew change at Derby to take it forward.

I don't see any legitimate reason why someone's job title should make a difference to their competency to work such a train.

No, but the union would claim that it's a London service so must be worked by a TM, or at the very least SCs pay being increased to that of a TM.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
As I have said I can't see Matlock being allocated 222s in the near future until way after the Crewe to Derby line is allocated them.

I am trying to think what the timetables were like in 2001 for Crewe to Derby, Monday to Saturdays all trains ran from Manchester Airport to Skegness/Lincoln Central or Cleethorpes and there was the odd system where all trains stopped at Wimslow except the slow Central Trains. On Sundays trains started at Crewe although some were extended to Liverpool Lime Street for a short while. The extensions were "better" although punctuality was appalling for that route and the line closed at 21:00 which was far too early.
 

trentside

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2010
Messages
3,391
Location
Messroom
Well i could guarantee that a full run from Matlock to London would be more more well used than the Lincoln one (0704). Complete waste of time that one. I know it was a franchise agreement and they have to see it through but it is such a waste when other areas would benefit much more. There are better alternatives to getting to London from Lincolnshire via the East Coast.

I wouldn't call it a "waste of time". The train is more about capacity from Lincoln to Nottingham in the morning peak, not about a through service to London - the train is very well used on the journey towards Nottingham. I accept that the return service in the evening doesn't really need the capacity - it would be better placed in the path of the 1717 or 1750, but no doubt this wouldn't fit with diagramming.
 

Welshman

Established Member
Joined
11 Mar 2010
Messages
3,068
I am trying to think what the timetables were like in 2001 for Crewe to Derby, Monday to Saturdays all trains ran from Manchester Airport to Skegness/Lincoln Central or Cleethorpes and there was the odd system where all trains stopped at Wimslow except the slow Central Trains. On Sundays trains started at Crewe although some were extended to Liverpool Lime Street for a short while. The extensions were "better" although punctuality was appalling for that route and the line closed at 21:00 which was far too early.

I travelled on the Crewe-Derby line quite a bit in the early 2000s, and I seem to remember the times for that section were very similar to now - ie approx. x07 from Crewe[staring back from the Airport about x35], arriving Derby approx. x21, departing x25, forming the x55 from Nottingham to Skegness. On the return, they arrived into Nottingham from Skegness approx. x55, departing x58 to Derby, arriving there about x25 to form an x30 or so to Crewe.

That was the problem when the service was broken-up into Skegness-Nottingham; Nottingham-Derby and Derby-Crewe sections - the times of all sections remained roughly the same, but there was not sufficient time to connect at Nottingham and Derby, so through journeys from, say, Grantham to Crewe took up to 2 hours longer.

There was also a period with Central Trains when shortage of crews meant bustitution between Crewe and Nottingham for several Saturday evenings. Then, ironically, the journey was quicker using the A50 and A52, and stopping only at Stoke and Derby. In particular, the 1807 train was replaced with a bus at 1830 from the Horse Bay, calling at Stoke approx. 1905-1910, Derby about 2015, and arriving Nottingham at 2045, a few minutes ahead of when the train would have arrived!
 
Last edited:

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
Just seen this from the 14th of this month, I can't see electrification happening along the Crewe to Derby line for a long time although it would be nice if they did.

I can't see half hourly Derby to Stoke-on-Trent working although Half Hourly Uttoxeter-Stoke might work in peak times as most people at Uttoxeter seem to travel to Stoke.

http://www.uttoxeter-news.co.uk/RAI...ys-Uttoxeter/story-24532597-detail/story.html

On the subject of this service the other day I was on a train on the route from Stoke and while I was boarding the guard stopped any more passengers from boarding as the train was getting crammed, in the end there was enough space for me and the other passengers on the platform to get on but it was touch and go whether we were going to.
 

Class 170101

On Moderation
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
8,662
More capacity may have to be provided by 2020 if the 153s cannot be made PRM-TSI compliant as single units, being reformed back into Class 155s.

On the subject of electrification how many miles are is it between North Stafford Jn and Stoke? Would it need its own feeder station or could it be fed with sufficient power from an existing West Coast feeder Station and assuming that Birmingham to Derby is wired from a new feed on this route then the Derby to Stoke route may be easy to wire as part of this scheme.

It could also depend on where the 25kV feeder station is located and whether or not there would be a suitable location between Derby and Birmingham. If there isn't a suitable location on that route but there is on North Staffs to Stoke route it may be wired to feed for Birmingham to Derby and wiring to Stoke would surely become easy?
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
The line will become a bit of an island when the Midland Mainline is electrified, the main obstacle along the Crewe to Derby line to stop it being electrified would be the Meir Tunnel but I don't think that would be a major issue.

I would think Stoke-on-Trent would need to be remodelled with an extra through platform if any more trains were going to stop there.
 

Class 170101

On Moderation
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
8,662
I think one of the tunnels has been mentioned as being singled for W10 freight route clearance elsewhere on this board.
 

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
I wouldn't say most passengers from Uttoxeter travel to Stoke, from my experience i sell as many tickets to Derby and Nottingham. In fact it is surprising how many passengers travel on to Nottingham although the direct route has not existed for many years.

Again, from experience, the Derby - Stoke section is definitely busier at all times of day and could justify a half hourly service. The Stoke - Crewe section not so much partly due to overlap with LM at Kidsgrove and Alsager. What I'd like to see is a 2 per hour service, 1 service calling at all stations as now and the other call Derby - Uttoxeter - Stoke only. (Btw, funny how early on in this thread people were saying the route is not very busy and now we have established it is!)

As you've mentioned, Meir Tunnel is a problem and it is suggested to single the line through it to allow for electrification.
 
Last edited:

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
You have probably sold me a ticket many times tocguard.

A fair few people on the line travel on to Leicester as well as Derby and Nottingham, I have seen and a very small travel on to Birmingham from stations along the line and an even smaller number travel on to Manchester.
 

bunnahabhain

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,277
The route only seems busy because it has around 70 seats, each train needs to be at least 2 cars before it even goes half hourly.
 

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
And Liverpool and Chester. Yeah but 90 odd passengers at many times of day i would consider a busy line. Yes maybe it's not time for 2 services per hour yet but time for 2 coaches is way overdue. Passengers are hardly likely to want to return and use the service to help grow it if they are always struggling to get a seat.
 

thenorthern

Established Member
Joined
27 May 2013
Messages
4,714
There may have been a Class 222 along the Crewe to Derby line today, I noticed that Liverpool to Norwich was down to 2 coaches for some trains and the Crewe to Derby Trains were operating as single 153s which is unusual for a Friday as there is normally a Class 158, 2x153 and a single 153 operating the line on Fridays. I spoke to a man as well who said earlier there was a 5 coach train that looked like a "proper train" operating because East Midlands Trains told him they were short of stock but he didn't know what type of train it was.

During the week if I remember correctly the 06:04 departure from Crewe the 17:42 departure from Derby, the 19:04 departure from Crewe and the 20:42 departure from Derby are booked to be run by a Class 158.
 

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
Yes you are both correct. It was a 222 out again yesterday and those 158 diagrams are right. It forms the additional peak services between Derby - Nottingham. 0604 continues to Nottingham and 1742 comes through from Nottingham (1645).

One of the Liverpool services encountered a sander pipe detachment which then caused an oil leak. Train was cancelled and other units had to be split to cover all diagrams for the rest of the day.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
For anyone interested, photo opportunities etc, 222's on Crewe route between Christmas and New Year while Watford engineering works take place on WCML. The route is being used as alternative travel to London for passengers changing at Crewe and Stoke.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
9,213
Yes you are both correct. It was a 222 out again yesterday and those 158 diagrams are right. It forms the additional peak services between Derby - Nottingham. 0604 continues to Nottingham and 1742 comes through from Nottingham (1645).

One of the Liverpool services encountered a sander pipe detachment which then caused an oil leak. Train was cancelled and other units had to be split to cover all diagrams for the rest of the day.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
For anyone interested, photo opportunities etc, 222's on Crewe route between Christmas and New Year while Watford engineering works take place on WCML. The route is being used as alternative travel to London for passengers changing at Crewe and Stoke.

Any details yet on which services they'll be working? Would love to do a Meridian out of Crewe!
 

tocguard

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2014
Messages
124
Location
Derbyshire
Any details yet on which services they'll be working? Would love to do a Meridian out of Crewe!

Not as yet although a lot of planning has gone into it. TM's have been released for route knowledge as well as lots of announcements and publication that the route will be very busy. Either way there will be either a 222 and 2 set formations of a string of sprinters or maybe more than one 222 working. If i hear of any diagrams I'll let you know.
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
9,213
Not as yet although a lot of planning has gone into it. TM's have been released for route knowledge as well as lots of announcements and publication that the route will be very busy. Either way there will be either a 222 and 2 set formations of a string of sprinters or maybe more than one 222 working. If i hear of any diagrams I'll let you know.

Thanks.

Looking forward to it, especially if more than one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
any news yet re meridians to crewe today?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
222010 today; worked 1407 Crewe - Derby (etc)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top