250 new coaches (EMU/DMU)

[tbtc]

A bit of fantasy/ speculation here.

If you could build 250 identical* coaches of any EMU/DMU currently running in 2011, what would you build?

62 four car Turbostars?

31 eight car Meridians?

41 six car 350s?

250 x 153s?

Which would be the biggest priority?

Obviously any order like this would mean a cascade or two, but to keep things simple lets say no new electrification, no new lines built etc.

(* - I say "identical" - obviously there'd need to be cabs/ disabled toilets etc - but for the purposes of this thread, if one coach has 3/2 seating or 2/3rds doors then they all do - if one unit is three coaches then they all are etc)

 

[Kingfisher200262]

Like the 202 HLOS DMUs you mean?.... plus a bit. DfT decided it was not worthwhile, so it would probably never happen, but I reckon the need's still there, albeit with a simpler 20 metre, 150 like DMU rather than an all singing, all dancing, whistles and bells unit that no TOC could make a business case for.

 

[tbtc]

Like the 202 HLOS DMUs you mean?.... plus a bit. DfT decided it was not worthwhile, so it would probably never happen, but I reckon the need's still there, albeit with a simpler 20 metre, 150 like DMU rather than an all singing, all dancing, whistles and bells unit that no TOC could make a business case for.

Yeah, that's what I took as a starting point. I was thinking that a hundred 156s would have been fine - a good simple model, capable of working pretty much anywhere (diesel).

Whilst I appreciate there are different needs around the UK, I'd hope we could concentrate on one (or two) class (not having each TOC do its own flavour of the same thing)

 

[ainsworth74]

I would build 83 three car 172s (only 249 coaches total sorry ) with 2+2 seating, 2/3rds doors and corridor connectors, also would make them compatible with sprinters. I would then deploy 68 with Northern to replace 142s and the remainder to FGW to replace their 142s and 143s. Which according the numbers on wiki would mean an end to 142s with Northern and all pacers with FGW. The spare pacers would either be scrapped or could be cascaded away to ATW. Perhaps a 172 is overkill as a pacer replacement but it's a fairly bog standard DMU that's in production now so I say rather than re-inventing the wheel by developing a dedicated pacer replacement, lets just buy something off the shelf!

Meanwhile back in reality...

 

[Geezertronic]

31 eight car Meridians?

Haven't Bombardier already suggested a Pantograph coach for the 220/221/222 fleet to make them hybrids?

 

[jopsuk]

170 centre cars...

 

[Ivo]

In a similar vein to jopsuk, I would propose 50 new five-car Turbostar units - with the centre one of each "accidentally" being removed and added to the existing 170 fleet, thereby resulting in most 170s being 4-car, with the odd 3-car for the lesser routes such as Lowestoft.

 

[asylumxl]

250 153s please. Why? Cos you gave me the option! They do the job.

 

[90019]

250 of something along the lines of a 153, because they're more flexible, so can be used alone for lightly loaded services, or added onto other services that need them.

It's all very well wanting loads of 3 or 4 car units, but the capacity is wasted using them on services that only need 1 or 2 cars when it could be used more effectively elsewhere.

 

[MCR247]

In a similar vein to jopsuk, I would propose 50 new five-car Turbostar units - with the centre one of each "accidentally" being removed and added to the existing 170 fleet, thereby resulting in most 170s being 4-car, with the odd 3-car for the lesser routes such as Lowestoft.

Wouldn't be possible to add more coaches to 170s with the same engine though IIRC, so it'd be a bit awkward
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

250 of something along the lines of a 153, because they're more flexible, so can be used alone for lightly loaded services, or added onto other services that need them.

It's all very well wanting loads of 3 or 4 car units, but the capacity is wasted using them on services that only need 1 or 2 cars when it could be used more effectively elsewhere.

I agree, I'd do the same, but with some I'd remove the disabled toilet, and pair them up with others

 

[TomJ93]

35 7car 221s please. I prefer the seats to 222s. All with a pantograph coach and a buffet/shop.

Virgin would get 10 of these, releasing 10 5 car 221s to XC. XC would get a futher ten of these new builds to hopefully displace ten 170s which could either go to Northern or TPX. Then the remaining 15 could be well utilised by eith MML (displacing HSTs to XC in turn displacing more voyagers that will displace most of the remaining 170s) or NXEA to rid them of the LHCS.

 

[MCR247]

a) You want 7 car 221s to replace 170s? Even if it was 5 car 221s it would be pointless, 170s are fine where they are
b) You'd best off buying 222s for MML, not 221s

 

[jopsuk]

It's all very well wanting loads of 3 or 4 car units, but the capacity is wasted using them on services that only need 1 or 2 cars when it could be used more effectively elsewhere.

True- but 153s currently wind up running around all day attached to 170s, 156s, 155s and 150s.

Amongst the uses for the centre cars (ignoring the engine issue- wouldn't the same be true for those proposing 156s and 153s?)
Lengthen the whole XC fleet by 1 car. Same for TPE

Make six-car units for the Edinburgh-Glasgow express and the Central belt-Inverness/Aberdeen services.

 

[MCR247]

Amongst the uses for the centre cars (ignoring the engine issue- wouldn't the same be true for those proposing 156s and 153s?)

If you were building a new fleet of 153s, then you can have a new engine whatever, but it would be a bit awkward having a 170 with 3 original engines in and 2 new ones

 

[WatcherZero]

I doubt you would get very good bang for the buck building a 153 analogue, it would be very expensive and with a smaller capacity than alternatives.

I would go for 63 three car turbostars, possibly a mix of two/three cars as well, they would be used for strengthening pacers/sprinters services (almost all sprinter/pacers become doubles with single or double turbostars taking over some routes) pacers wouldnt be withdrawn yet simply because even after this there wouldnt be the spare capacity to do so without overcrowding.

 

[90019]

True- but 153s currently wind up running around all day attached to 170s, 156s, 155s and 150s.

Exactly, adding capacity where it's needed.
And if they're needed elsewhere, or a unit they're running with fails, they can be used elsewhere or with something else.

 

[TomJ93]

a) You want 7 car 221s to replace 170s? Even if it was 5 car 221s it would be pointless, 170s are fine where they are
b) You'd best off buying 222s for MML, not 221s

Oi. My railways my rules!

I want 7 cars to got to XC. 220s would replace the turbostars. The services the 220s ran (Bournemouth the Manc springs to mind) would have 221s with 5 cars on them and the 7 cars would take up the heavy loadings leaving the HSTs as they were.

The reason why I want rid of the 170s is I have never got to sit down on one on my journeys between New Street and Leicester.

 

[jopsuk]

My turbostar lengthening (could even go radical on XC and go for six-car across the fleet! could cause mild chaos at Stansted, of course) would probably help more than putting four car 220s on those journeys.

 

[route:oxford]

In two minds...

If I were to "test the market" and find that what was needed was inter-city trains...

I shall place an order for 35 "updated" 7 car class 180s.

DMF-MFmb-MS-MS-MS-MS-DMS

The update, if the OP considers acceptable, would be in order that they can be accommodated by the tunnels at Birmingham New Street. I would also choose a hybrid DEMU traction package with pantograph coach in place of the current diesel-hydraulic.

This would leave me 5 cars left over... So would order an additional DMF to hold as a spare in case of accidents - to be swapped around regularily of course.

This would leave me 4 cars left over, therefore if the OP would kindly permit - I'd like to order 4 PPMs to be leased out to community rail projects and "heritage lines" for the provision of commuter services.

If I were to "test the market" and find that what was needed was local trains...

I shall place an order for 83 3-car Class 156s

Built to meet updated standards, of course and perhaps with an uprated engine.

There will, of course, be a few posters frowning at the 3-car element of the order - but I believe it meets the spirit of the OP specifications in that a 156 can readily operate as a 3 car unit - this would just avoid the waste of a redunant centre cab.

It does leave me with a spare carriage, so once again, I shall use it to build a spare - this time a DMS.

 

[OMGitsDAVE]

As there's already a production line, I would build 83x 3 car 172's to ease overcrowding where pacers are currently in use, which will then allow a cascade - enabling some lines to be 4 car 142's if necessary, and the rest scrapped or cascaded.

 

[sprinterguy]

The reason why I want rid of the 170s is I have never got to sit down on one on my journeys between New Street and Leicester.

Well replacing 170s with 220s won’t always help you there: A popular fact bandied about on here with great regularity is that a four carriage 220 seats slightly less passengers than a three carriage 170. With the added disbenefits of offering less standing room and longer station dwell times. Though it would be an improvement in capacity terms over the two carriage 170s that often work the Leicester trains, the problem there being that the reason that two carriage 170s are used on some trains is because of the limited length of certain platforms.

I initially considered the idea of 35 seven carriage 221s as a good option: Virgin get twenty to replace all their 221s, the twenty 5 carriage and fifteen remaining 7 carriage 221s go to Crosscountry, which pretty much exactly replaces the thirty four 220 trains which then go on to replace Crosscountrys’ 29 Turbostars which can then be sent elsewhere. Unfortunately for the reasons stated above, such a move wouldn’t be as neat as it sounds on paper.

So I’m going for the idea of 83 three carriage 172s for local and regional services with the likes of Northern and FGW. Although what would make even better use of the numbers would be 50 three carriage 172s and 50 two carriage 172s, if I were to conveniently ignore one of the original requirements of the thread.

 

[tbtc]

the reason that two carriage 170s are used on some trains is because of the limited length of certain platforms

...which stations are too short for three car units? I've heard it before, but couldn't remember which stations.

I thought XC were getting centre-cars from LM, so would be all 3 car 170s?

 

[MCR247]

I don't think there is any. And apart from the /1s they all have SDO in use anyway

 

[sprinterguy]

...which stations are too short for three car units? I've heard it before, but couldn't remember which stations.

I can't remember the specific stations either. I've seen it mentioned on this forum in the past with relation to why some trains on the Leicester line are formed of two carriages, apart from fleet limitations. Maybe the idea was debunked.

 

[Peter Sarf]

153s No. There are not many places where we need single car units. Better to strengthen existing units that run around with a 153 added.

Like the idea to lenghthen existing 170 units especially where they dont have end unit gangway conections.

ELECTRIFICATION. Suffers from common sense I know. But if the last government cancelled the original project to order 202 (?) diesel coaches what chance the new government doing it ?.

1. I would electrify third rail (cos its cheap) the remaining diesel outposts on the Southern to cascade the 171s which are 170s with different couplings.
2. Electrify Basingstoke to Reading to free up some 165s for GW. Also means freights could use 92s from Southampton to the Midlands once the GW electrification spreads far enough.
3. I think the point of electrifying Liverpool/Manchester is that this releases a lot of diesel units.
4. Obviously the best routes to electrify are those that are heavily used already. It then follows that a large number of diesel units would become free for other diesel routes.

More voyagers - no. The first thing to do is replace the 221s that run ALL THE TIME under the wires with more 390s (possibly 9 car or shorter ones) or similar intercity design. Could use 90s (loads spare) + Mk3s (are there many left ? / HSTs cascaded from Cross Country that would gain the displaced 221s) could be used as cheap rolling stock to help justify electrification. Would electrfying Manchester to Preston free up many more 221s btw.

 

[sprinterguy]

Would electrfying Manchester to Preston free up many more 221s btw.

None at all, that section of the North West electrification scheme will free up 185s for Transpennine which are currently used on the Manchester-Scotland services.

 

[MCR247]

Could use 90s (loads spare) + Mk3s (are there many left ? / HSTs cascaded from Cross Country that would gain the displaced 221s) could be used as cheap rolling stock to help justify electrification. Would electrfying Manchester to Preston free up many more 221s btw.

Loads of 90s spare? Oh you mean the ones left to rot at Crewe that DB are trying to sell, or send to scrap? Getting them ready for front line use would be cheap (!)

 

[ainsworth74]

Could use 90s (loads spare) + Mk3s (are there many left ?)

Don't think there are all that many Mk3s spare. Some buffets and I think possibly some spare sleeper cars but I'm fairly sure there aren't that many TFOs or TSOs left spare.

 

[jopsuk]

Not exactly "spare", but how many mrk3s are in the hands of the charter companies?

 

[RobShipway]

The only spare Mk3's I know of are possibly the Irish MK3's with sliding doors which would be expensive as they would need new UK bogies.

I would personally go for a mixture of 3 car class 172's and 5 car class 222 trains with pantograph, plus a pantograph carriage for the class 220/221 trains in use with both Virgin and XC.

The class 172's would be given to Northern to replace the Class 142 pacers on services where the class 142 are used in multiple.

For the 5 car Class 222 trains, this would be given to XC so that services from Portsmouth and Brighton paths allowing could be reinstated to Manchester, Blackpool and Edingburgh.