• 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!

Adelantes for FGW (again?)

Status
Not open for further replies.

87015

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Messages
5,078
Location
GEML/WCML/SR
Except they don't fit through Birmingham!

Has that ever been established as a gauging issue fact rather than paperwork and that there has never been any reason for anyone to clear them over the routes?

175s are as good as identical and they work/worked everywhere around Birmingham without crashing into tunnel sides.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
10,291
Yes, it isn't just because they aren't cleared for that route as Virgin wanted to run 2x 180 in place of 033, they were going to hire them, but they decided to go for WB64 because the 180s couldn't fit
 

whhistle

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
2,636
What about clearance down to Plymouth?

Maybe they could put the middle cars into the Grand Central/Hull Trains sets so have a bunch of 2-car trains, then put them on the local services in the south west. Yes, over powerful, but like the current situation, probably more useful.

Then those 150's can be released to Northern? Hmm, maybe the tunnels are rubbish.

Then again, where were they originally, and what stock is providing that service now? Why can't they just go back to what they were doing before?
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
10,291
What about clearance down to Plymouth?

Maybe they could put the middle cars into the Grand Central/Hull Trains sets so have a bunch of 2-car trains, then put them on the local services in the south west. Yes, over powerful, but like the current situation, probably more useful.

Then those 150's can be released to Northern?

You realise a 2 car 180 will have the worse capacity going? Sorry, but its a rubbish idea
 

northwichcat

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
32,692
Location
Northwich
What about clearance down to Plymouth?

Maybe they could put the middle cars into the Grand Central/Hull Trains sets so have a bunch of 2-car trains, then put them on the local services in the south west. Yes, over powerful, but like the current situation, probably more useful.

Explain. You'd have something like an 80 seater train with more power and higher top speed than a 185, which has double that capacity and people say are over-powered even for cross-Pennine use.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,085
Location
Redcar
Maybe they could put the middle cars into the Grand Central/Hull Trains sets so have a bunch of 2-car trains, then put them on the local services in the south west. Yes, over powerful, but like the current situation, probably more useful.

Couple of problems:

1) HT and GC don't need that much extra capacity (GC could probably do with a bit more but not that much).

2) A two car 180 made up of a pair of DMSOs would only have roughly 80 seats that's less than any other 2-car unit I can think of. Even a 30m 143 has more seats (106)!

So on the whole I have to say this is a bad idea.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
The way some people talk about Northern's 180 use makes it sound like Northern chose to take on 180s over other stock.

I totally agree, they had to take them. The 5-car capacity is really needed between Preston - Manchester in the peaks, it's a major route for them in the area. The speed in irrelevant, pacers/150s just can't meet demand on the stoppers and 3-car 185s on TPE "fasts" are packed already.

SWT have 158s on local routes and a shuttle, when EMT are running sardine cans on long-distance services. However, you CAN'T blame SWT really, they deal with what they have. It's the same with Northern.

It's the DfT who are, as ever, to blame. Electrification needs to hurry up and more 172s built!

Grand Central's 180s trundle slowly around West Yorkshire on a grand tour, with very often not so many passengers. Ok, they run full speed on the ECML, where they also have more passengers.
 
Last edited:

Drsatan

Established Member
Joined
24 Aug 2009
Messages
1,887
Location
Land of the Sprinters
SWT have 158s on local routes and a shuttle, when EMT are running sardine cans on long-distance services. However, you CAN'T blame SWT really, they deal with what they have. It's the same with Northern.

SWT 158s sometimes work in multiple with 159s on London Waterloo - Salisbury stopping services. On a couple of occasions I've even noticed an SWT 158 in the carriage sidings outside Exeter St Davids.

Back on topic, SWT really have no option but to keep the 158s, since it wouldn't be a fantastic idea if the 158s were swapped for, say, 150s, given that none of SWT's drivers are trained for 150 operation. I've also heard that the ex SE 508s should be cascaded to SWT for use on the Lymington branch and for use on 455 operated routes but then SWT would be left with a small class of units incapable of working in multiple with their 455s (apparently 508s have a different type of Tightlock coupler than the 455s). I accept that using a 158 on the Lymington branch isn't ideal but it's the best option available for the time being.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
Yes, I know some of the SWT 158s appear on longer-distance services, however that is besides the point of this thead.

All this talk of small sub-fleets with SWT (or having 150s due to lack of driver training), does make a lot of sense in an ideal railway environment, where stock shortages weren't quite so prevalent in some areas. However, Northern have been forced to take on a small sub-fleet in the 3 x 180s and 3 x 321s, which required training for staff, plus other operators have taken on single bubble cars for shuttles.

SWT shouldn't be given special treatment over this and I appreciate a single (or couple of) units is not desireable in any way, it's not an unusual thing to do in order to have a positive influence on the network.
 

thefab444

Established Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
3,688
Location
The New Forest
However, Northern have been forced to take on a small sub-fleet in the 3 x 180s and 3 x 321s, which required training for staff, plus other operators have taken on single bubble cars for shuttles.

Surely the 321/9s have been there for years?

SWT shouldn't be given special treatment over this and I appreciate a single (or couple of) units is not desireable in any way, it's not an unusual thing to do in order to have a positive influence on the network.

SWT are given the same treatment when it comes to stock as any other ex-NSE TOC (possibly with the exception of FGW Thames).

Isn't it time WYPTE or someone funded another fleet of units as with the 155s?
 

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,611
SWT shouldn't be given special treatment over this and I appreciate a single (or couple of) units is not desireable in any way, it's not an unusual thing to do in order to have a positive influence on the network.

Would the extra 140 vehicles planned for SWT allow this to happen? If the extra 6 sets created from the 458/460 plan were in place would this allow SWT to give up some of its 158 fleet?

Ultimately I think that the SWT franchise should be in a position to order "commuter IEP" as per Kings Lynn and cascade all of its 158/159 fleets.

Presumably this could be a 3rd rail Bimode commuter IEP :s

How epicly off topic are we now!
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
SWT are given the same treatment when it comes to stock as any other ex-NSE TOC (possibly with the exception of FGW Thames).

They probably are, but that's not the issue here. It's about a 1 or 2 train sub-fleet for the shuttle, which quite rightly people have major pratical concerns about. I'm just pointing out that this has indeed occured other operators to release stock/cover demand - Class 139s on the Stourbridge shuttles (completely non-standard for LM), bubble cars on Cardiff Bay (now gone though) and Intercity class 180s for Northern. Sometimes it has to be done.

I think the best solution is for infill electrification to take place in the "Southern Region", to cascade 158s/171s to Northern/FGW/EMT ASAP.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,262
Would the extra 140 vehicles planned for SWT allow this to happen? If the extra 6 sets created from the 458/460 plan were in place would this allow SWT to give up some of its 158 fleet?

The SWT 140 vehicles was intended to be 140 EXTRAs, and all EMU carriages. The HLOS proposal was for all inner suburban services to be 10 car, and for all outer suburban services to run at maximum length, ie bring some 8 car servcies up to 12 car. None was intended to allow DMUs to be cascaded.

Just expanding the 455 fleet somehow so that all could be diagrammed as 10 car would be 90 odd carriages. Another 30 would cover making the HC 450s into 5 cars, with about 20 cars left over, say 4 or 5 extra EMUs.

The size of the 158 fleet was determined by the need to increase more Salisbury - Waterloo services from 9 to 10 car, and more 6 cars up to 9 car. 10 car DMUs would run as 2.159+2.158 - there is one such service each morning already, if there were three such trains that would need 9 of the 11 158s in service, including the 3 on the Salisbury - Romsey service.

As we've determined in the past, if a few more EMUs became available, a few 158s or 159s might theoretically no longer be needed on Hants locals over the third rail, or on the Lymington branch but maybe they'd just get used to strengthen services on the Exeter line, not necessarily be cascaded elsewhere.

Using 2 x 5 car bimode IEP to Salisbury with half continuing to Exeter would be a probable solution once the 159s are retired, I guesss that could be 15 - 20 years time? Alternately if IEPs were ordered soon the DMU fleet could be cascaded for about a 10-15 year life on regional routes. Would this be economical? But IEP, (just like 180s), may be over-speccedfor the route - it isn't exactly a fast line.

Whatever, it certainly wouldn't be a decision for SWT to make.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
They probably are, but that's not the issue here. It's about a 1 or 2 train sub-fleet for the shuttle, which quite rightly people have major pratical concerns about. I'm just pointing out that this has indeed occured other operators to release stock/cover demand - Class 139s on the Stourbridge shuttles (completely non-standard for LM), bubble cars on Cardiff Bay (now gone though)

.

ATW's class 121 is now back in service, it was reported on here by myself and a few others a couple of weeks ago.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
Isn't it time WYPTE or someone funded another fleet of units as with the 155s?

Perhaps, but it seems the only PTE who would even think about doing that is WYPTE. The others seem opposed to spending money on something that will help an area outside of their own and have more priorities it seems: TfGM have trams to focus on, Merseytravel look after their own self-contained network, NEXUS looks after the Metro, Centro has the trams e.t.c e.t.c.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
ATW's class 121 is now back in service, it was reported on here by myself and a few others a couple of weeks ago.

Good news, didn't spot that!

Anyway, this thread has indeed gone very off-topic. But it's easy to understand why, since the 180s have had such a strange life (who would have thought they would be doing ECML Open-Access, and Northern stoppers!) and have been in a very unique position as unwanted stock!
 
Last edited:

150222

Member
Joined
9 Jul 2011
Messages
1,002
They have indeed proving it's possible for an operator to successfully run a small fleet of trains, provided their reliable units.



Which the 321/9's certainly are not.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I thought 139's were just run under the lm brand and are staffed by ppm staff. Is this true?
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
As far as I know the PPM operation is contracted out to Parry. It's hardly been a roaring success either.

That's a good thing, had it been a roaring success, then I fear the DfT would have made them the preferred choice as a Pacer replacement! :lol:
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
Class 180's are much like the class 442's where before Southern took them on to do the Brighton - Victoria fast services and the Gatwick Express services.

The class 442's okay are a bigger fleet than the Class 180's, but they will find a home just as the class 442's did.
 

Class 33

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2009
Messages
2,362
Always thought the original 12(?) Adelantes would have been perfect for an Intercity style service between Swansea - Bristol Temple Meads and Portsmouth Harbour.

Indeed that would be brilliant if they were put on such services. And more of a limited stop express service than the normal Cardiff-Portsmouth's. But I think we're in dreamland here!
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
Indeed that would be brilliant if they were put on such services. And more of a limited stop express service than the normal Cardiff-Portsmouth's. But I think we're in dreamland here!

We can all have dreams, mine would be the Class 180's doing a service like Cleethorpes to Holyhead or Norwich to Fishguard or Swansea. ;)

Or even a train from Brighton to Holyhead, going through on the line via Guildford to Reading, then on to Oxford, Worcestor, Hereford, Shrewsbury, Chester and then on to the North Wales Coast line.
 
Last edited:

IanXC

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
6,611
Do i detect this thread going way off topic?

You certainly do!

Although to be fair on this thread we have already discussed the Lymington Shuttle, the location of the North/South border, the LM 150 cascade, TP North West diagramming, stock orders by PTEs, Cl139 operations and Flybe's fleet utilisation, amongst other things...
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
31,085
Location
Redcar
Although to be fair on this thread we have already discussed the Lymington Shuttle, the location of the North/South border, the LM 150 cascade, TP North West diagramming, stock orders by PTEs, Cl139 operations and Flybe's fleet utilisation, amongst other things...

That was my personal favorite off topic moment as not only was it off topic for the thread but it was off topic for the entire forum!! :lol:

As for 180s on random new services my personal choice would be Sheffield - Glasgow calling Leeds, Shipley, Skipton, Carlisle and Motherwell (with summer only stops at some other stations on the S&C).
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
Although to be fair on this thread we have already discussed the Lymington Shuttle, the location of the North/South border, the LM 150 cascade, TP North West diagramming, stock orders by PTEs, Cl139 operations and Flybe's fleet utilisation, amongst other things...

Add to that: vandalism of units and where this happens most, whether TOCs should repair damage to units which are on hire from another TOC, the status of ATW's Class 121 and Ryanair/easyJet's one fleet-type strategy (which is a parallel drawn from SWTs use of 158s/159s).:lol:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As for 180s on random new services my personal choice would be Sheffield - Glasgow calling Leeds, Shipley, Skipton, Carlisle and Motherwell (with summer only stops at some other stations on the S&C).

I know it's a bit of a joke, but the 180s have the potential to ease TPEs problems with the Scotland route or FGWs overcrowding on intercity services. I'd rather give them priority, although it's a shame that didn't happen with the OAOs, but anyway that's an issue that has already been debated...
 
Last edited:

schwa

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2009
Messages
97
Location
Somewhere only we know
My life long dream for the Class 180s would be an exclusive shuttle between Nailsea and Yatton.. just so I can get there an extra 10 seconds faster. Of course they would need 1st Class, a buffet car and perhaps a 1st Class lounge at Yatton.
 

thefab444

Established Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
3,688
Location
The New Forest
You certainly do!

Although to be fair on this thread we have already discussed the Lymington Shuttle, the location of the North/South border, the LM 150 cascade, TP North West diagramming, stock orders by PTEs, Cl139 operations and Flybe's fleet utilisation, amongst other things...

Well there's a limit to the amount of speculation we can generate about the 180s. :P
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top