Are Northern missing a trick by not ordering more CAFs?

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I’ve been wondering. A lot of the TOCs, such as Greater Anglia and South Western Railway are attempting to replace their mixed fleets with a large, standardised fleet of homogeneous trains. This is good for reliability and crew knowledge.

My question is - Northern currently have about 300x DMUs and roughly 75x EMUs. Yet only roughly 60x 195s and about 40-45x 331s have been ordered. Why?!

I’m aware that they are receiving more Sprinters and Turbostars, but these won’t have many more years ahead of them. Plus, the passengers of Northern haven’t seen a high quality, standardised fleet- well, ever, surely? The amount of new trains is going to be tiny alongside all of their practically ancient mass of 15x/17x.

Surely it would have been easier to order about 300 odd new Civity trains to completely replace their ancient fleet with a new, convenient homogeneous fleet. This would surely be more popular with passengers and improve driver training/reliability?

 

[hexagon789]

My question is - Northern currently have about 300x DMUs and roughly 75x EMUs. Yet only roughly 60x 195s and about 40-45x 331s have been ordered. Why?!

I make it a net gain of 4 DMUs, once the Pacers are withdrawn and a gain of 28 EMUs if Wikipedia has the figures right. I believe Northern said that they will be considering what to do with their Sprinter-type DMUs (150, 153, 155, 156) in the coming years - either full refurbishment or replacement by 2025.

Surely it would have been easier to order about 300 odd new Civity trains to completely replace their ancient fleet with a new, convenient homogeneous fleet. This would surely be more popular with passengers and improve driver training/reliability?

Presumably the leasing company decided that it was preferable to cascade existing units from elsewhere rather than replace everything. While I agree a homogenous fleet is ideal, perhaps they've decided a partial replacement is better value for money, at least presently?

 

[30907]

Presumably the leasing company decided that it was preferable to cascade existing units from elsewhere rather than replace everything. While I agree a homogenous fleet is ideal, perhaps they've decided a partial replacement is better value for money, at least presently?

The leasing company has no choice in the matter - it's what was in the winning bid, and presumably the DfT didn't weight new rolling stock heavily (remember the Minister had to overrule his civil servants to specify no Pacers!).
Remember that neither Scotland nor Wales are getting all-new fleets.

 

[tbtc]

I’ve been wondering. A lot of the TOCs, such as Greater Anglia and South Western Railway are attempting to replace their mixed fleets with a large, standardised fleet of homogeneous trains

To a degree, but the SWR plan involves patching up old 442s - it's not all brand new!

The leasing company has no choice in the matter - it's what was in the winning bid, and presumably the DfT didn't weight new rolling stock heavily (remember the Minister had to overrule his civil servants to specify no Pacers!).
Remember that neither Scotland nor Wales are getting all-new fleets.

True - Northern were relatively lucky to get the winning bid that they got (not just the 195/331s but also the 170s and potentially 185s in future), when you consider the alternatives.

ScotRail have recently taken on some 321s and will shortly have dozens of 1970s trains (HSTs).

Wales & Wales will be getting some tarted up London Underground stock to go with their reconditioned 319s. Grass isn't always greener.

I'm sure some people would love Northern to have a brand new fleet but when the franchise requires a subsidy of forty pence per passenger mile, some rural lines are lucky to be open (even if that means accepting a Sprinter instead of a brand new train).

I make it a net gain of 4 DMUs, once the Pacers are withdrawn and a gain of 28 EMUs if Wikipedia has the figures right

I'm not disputing your maths, but worth reminding some on here that most of the DMUs leaving the fleet will be 23m (153s) and 30m (142/144s), and some DMUs directly replaced by EMUs, so even if there was no net gain of DMUs, it still means significantly more seats available to unelectrified lines.

 

[hexagon789]

The leasing company has no choice in the matter

Fair enough, I think I've misunderstood how it works.

I'm not disputing your maths, but worth reminding some on here that most of the DMUs leaving the fleet will be 23m (153s) and 30m (142/144s), and some DMUs directly replaced by EMUs, so even if there was no net gain of DMUs, it still means significantly more seats available to unelectrified lines.

That's true, I forgot that the newer ones will have greater capacity.

 

[sprinterguy]

My question is - Northern currently have about 300x DMUs and roughly 75x EMUs. Yet only roughly 60x 195s and about 40-45x 331s have been ordered. Why?!

Rightly or wrongly, the diesel units are being targeted solely at the Northern Connect services. It's a bit different with the electric units, as they've been procured for capacity enhancement in West Yorkshire, and primarily as a 323 replacement in the North West.

Personally I think another ''top end' injection of units, echoing the replacement of 158s by 185s by Transpennine Express, onto what pass for Northern's 'premier' routes, in the form of the Northern Connect network, is the wrong way to go. Personally I think that the 195s, with rapid acceleration and doors at thirds, would have been ideal replacements for the Pacers and 150s on commuter and suburban services, much as the 172s proved transformational when they replaced the 150s (Which are now with Northern, largely unchanged) on the Snow Hill lines.

There's various ways you could go about it, but at it's simplest, replace each Pacer with a 2-car unit, so around 100 trains, and each 150 by a 3-car unit, around 70 trains, for real capacity gains. This would also allow the 153s to go off lease, and class 170s and 158s, the latter refurbished to a standard equivalent to that undertaken by EMT and ATW rather than the piecemeal approach undertaken by Northern, would be appropriate for the Northern Connect services, though it's worth noting that by replacing all the 142s and 150s with 195s, that 195s would still cover many of the 'Northern Connect' routes radiating out from Manchester, including Calderdale. Class 156s would cover those 'intermediate' services that fall between the two camps, including North East England, the Cumbrian coast, the Hope Valley and the Buxton line.

Plus, the passengers of Northern haven’t seen a high quality, standardised fleet- well, ever, surely?

Well, for those with long memories they did once: They were called Pacers and Sprinters.

Less the "high quality" when it comes to the Pacers, but in 1985 a 150 would seem top of the range compared to Newton Heath's old 104s, though less so admittedly compared to a loco hauled rake on some of the long distance services they were initially deployed on (And I do have a soft spot for Buxton's old 108s).

 

[sprinterguy]

ScotRail have recently taken on some 321s and will shortly have dozens of 1970s trains (HSTs).

Wales & Wales will be getting some tarted up London Underground stock to go with their reconditioned 319s. Grass isn't always greener.

Scotrail's 321s are small fry compared to the massive new fleet of 385s that are currently being delivered, not so many years after receiving a large new fleet of 380s, themselves not so many years after the 334s entered service.

Similarly TfWs' planned microfleets of 230s and 769s are a drop in the ocean compared to the large numbers of Stadler Citylink tram-trains, tri-mode Flirts and CAF Civity DMUs that are being ordered (The 769s in particular are just a stop gap measure). TfW is the latest example, following in the footsteps of Greater Anglia, of a comprehensive fleet renewal. Though admittedly everyone will have to wait a few years yet before we see all those new fleets in service.

 

[tbtc]

Rightly or wrongly, the diesel units are being targeted solely at the Northern Connect services. It's a bit different with the electric units, as they've been procured for capacity enhancement in West Yorkshire, and primarily as a 323 replacement in the North West.

Personally I think another ''top end' injection of units, echoing the replacement of 158s by 185s by Transpennine Express, onto what pass for Northern's 'premier' routes, in the form of the Northern Connect network, is the wrong way to go. Personally I think that the 195s, with rapid acceleration and doors at thirds, would have been ideal replacements for the Pacers and 150s on commuter and suburban services, much as the 172s proved transformational when they replaced the 150s (Which are now with Northern, largely unchanged) on the Snow Hill lines

Agreed - we seem obsessed with ordering fancy new trains for the "flagship"s services and then cascading unsuitable trains onto secondary routes - look at how the 170s are struggling on the Harrogate Line (which averages about 30mph from Knaresborough to Leeds IIRC), because they can't stretch their legs - 170s would have been fine for routes like Nottingham - Bradford but instead we must have brand new trains for the fancy services, even if that means a surplus of 100mph DMUs that end up being used on routes where a common-or-garden 75mph train would be fine.

We are going to have lots of 170/175/185s on the transfer list whilst the scrapping of the 142/143/144/153s means there's a shortage of basic bog-standard DMUs for low speed services.

Scotrail's 321s are small fry compared to the massive new fleet of 385s that are currently being delivered, not so many years after receiving a large new fleet of 380s, themselves not so many years after the 334s entered service.

Similarly TfWs' planned microfleets of 230s and 769s are a drop in the ocean compared to the large numbers of Stadler Citylink tram-trains, tri-mode Flirts and CAF Civity DMUs that are being ordered (The 769s in particular are just a stop gap measure). TfW is the latest example, following in the footsteps of Greater Anglia, of a comprehensive fleet renewal. Though admittedly everyone will have to wait a few years yet before we see all those new fleets in service.

I agree that the numbers of older trains are only a small part of the other TOCs, but I felt it worth pointing out about the 321s and 442s and 230s (and forty year old HSTs) when the OP's premise is that other franchises are getting "a large, standardised fleet of homogeneous trains" whilst Northern are stuck with a "practically ancient mass of 15x/17x" - the grass is always greener!

 

[cactustwirly]

I’ve been wondering. A lot of the TOCs, such as Greater Anglia and South Western Railway are attempting to replace their mixed fleets with a large, standardised fleet of homogeneous trains. This is good for reliability and crew knowledge.

My question is - Northern currently have about 300x DMUs and roughly 75x EMUs. Yet only roughly 60x 195s and about 40-45x 331s have been ordered. Why?!

I’m aware that they are receiving more Sprinters and Turbostars, but these won’t have many more years ahead of them. Plus, the passengers of Northern haven’t seen a high quality, standardised fleet- well, ever, surely? The amount of new trains is going to be tiny alongside all of their practically ancient mass of 15x/17x.

Surely it would have been easier to order about 300 odd new Civity trains to completely replace their ancient fleet with a new, convenient homogeneous fleet. This would surely be more popular with passengers and improve driver training/reliability?

Because Northern is a financial basket case, a totally new fleet would massively increase the government subisidies required!
It's a huge improvement over the old Northern 'no growth' franchise which got jack all in terms of new stock!

 

[43074]

Because Northern is a financial basket case, a totally new fleet would massively increase the government subisidies required!
It's a huge improvement over the old Northern 'no growth' franchise which got jack all in terms of new stock!

Why should it "massively" increase the subsidies required though? Obviously Northern will always require a subsidy, but if they were sensible about it (e.g. replacing four pacer vehicles with three 23m new ones, maybe keep a refurbished 158 fleet) there's no reason it should increase massively: maybe it could be combined with introducing DOO on some of the urban routes (e.g. Leeds/Bradford to Skipton or Manchester to Hadfield/Glossop) and more widespread electrification to reduce operating costs, plus new trains would probably stimulate surpressed demand which would result in an overall reduction in subsidy in the long term.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I make it a net gain of 4 DMUs, once the Pacers are withdrawn and a gain of 28 EMUs if Wikipedia has the figures right.

Though remember that quite a lot of the DMUs being replaced will be 48m of train replacing 32m of train. Though probably, given 2+2 vs 3+2, not many more seats.

 

[cactustwirly]

Why should it "massively" increase the subsidies required though? Obviously Northern will always require a subsidy, but if they were sensible about it (e.g. replacing four pacer vehicles with three 23m new ones, maybe keep a refurbished 158 fleet) there's no reason it should increase massively: maybe it could be combined with introducing DOO on some of the urban routes (e.g. Leeds/Bradford to Skipton or Manchester to Hadfield/Glossop) and more widespread electrification to reduce operating costs, plus new trains would probably stimulate surpressed demand which would result in an overall reduction in subsidy in the long term.

Because clapped out sprinters are a lot cheaper to lease than brand new CAF DMUs

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed - we seem obsessed with ordering fancy new trains for the "flagship"s services and then cascading unsuitable trains onto secondary routes - look at how the 170s are struggling on the Harrogate Line (which averages about 30mph from Knaresborough to Leeds IIRC), because they can't stretch their legs - 170s would have been fine for routes like Nottingham - Bradford but instead we must have brand new trains for the fancy services, even if that means a surplus of 100mph DMUs that end up being used on routes where a common-or-garden 75mph train would be fine.!

Quite. I'd put 170s on Northern Connect and 195s on local services.

 

[hexagon789]

Though remember that quite a lot of the DMUs being replaced will be 48m of train replacing 32m of train. Though probably, given 2+2 vs 3+2, not many more seats.

True, I forgot about the length thing. Regarding 2+2 against 2+3 seating if I remember rightly a 150 with 2+3 seats roughly the same per car as a 156 (at least originally) so based on that a 20m vehicle with 2+3 has similar capacity to a 23m vehicle with 2+2.

Assuming I've got everything right there!

 

[43074]

Because clapped out sprinters are a lot cheaper to lease than brand new CAF DMUs

Yes but if you can offset the extra cost through making savings and generating more revenue elsewhere it doesn't necessarily have to translate to a massive increase in subsidy.

 

[158756]

Yes but if you can offset the extra cost through making savings and generating more revenue elsewhere it doesn't necessarily have to translate to a massive increase in subsidy.

The amount of additional revenue you can generate is limited though - fares are regulated and unable to cover existing costs, commuter demand is inelastic and not necessarily responsive to age or quality of rolling stock at all, on the busier routes you would need more expensive new carriages to physically be able to carry more people.

The Northern franchise did assume that new (DOO capable) trains would reduce some costs, but if that doesn't happen the only possible savings are maintenance, which might not be very much with the step change in complexity from a Pacer to modern units.

 

[sprinterguy]

I agree that the numbers of older trains are only a small part of the other TOCs, but I felt it worth pointing out about the 321s and 442s and 230s (and forty year old HSTs) when the OP's premise is that other franchises are getting "a large, standardised fleet of homogeneous trains" whilst Northern are stuck with a "practically ancient mass of 15x/17x" - the grass is always greener!

The Scotrail fleet is more of a mixed bag, but I cannot recall many franchises other than Northern that have witnessed such a mediocre, piecemeal approach to refurbishment of their existing fleet and to their rolling stock policy more generally.

 

[LOL The Irony]

It's a huge improvement over the old Northern 'no growth' franchise which got jack all in terms of new stock!

Well they were, just the 172 order was cancelled because GENERAL ELECTION SPEND MONEY BAD or something.

The Scotrail fleet is more of a mixed bag, but I cannot recall many franchises other than Northern that have witnessed such a mediocre, piecemeal approach to refurbishment of their existing fleet and to their rolling stock policy more generally.

Agreed. I could do a better job blindfolded.

 

[Clip]

Agreed. I could do a better job blindfolded.

With hindsight most people would too however without knowing the capex available in their bid you dont know the restraints they would be under when considering rolling stock

 

[Bevan Price]

I think the mistake is including any 2 coach 195s in the order; they still fail to learn the lesson that virtually all of the longer distance services need at least 3 coaches. (And there will still be plenty of other 2 coach units to cover some of the less busy duties.)

 

[158756]

I think the mistake is including any 2 coach 195s in the order; they still fail to learn the lesson that virtually all of the longer distance services need at least 3 coaches. (And there will still be plenty of other 2 coach units to cover some of the less busy duties.)

That would have cost more though, so the DfT would likely have taken another bid offering fewer coaches - the 195s as ordered are perfectly satisfactory for the capacity requirements the DfT set.

 

[Bevan Price]

That would have cost more though, so the DfT would likely have taken another bid offering fewer coaches - the 195s as ordered are perfectly satisfactory for the capacity requirements the DfT set.

Yes - but we all know how "competent" DfT is when it comes to railways.....

 

[ryan125hst]

When the Sprinters are ready for renewal in, say, 10 years time, do you think the plan is to cascade the Class 195's onto the stopping routes and order new trains for the longer distance work? As much as I'm looking forward to the new trains, I can't help but think they're a bit of a downgrade from the Class 158's that have recently appeared on the Sheffield to Lincoln line. While their acceleration will be better thanks to the 6 speed ZF mechanical transmission, I believe I'm correct in saying that even the three car sets only have one toilet in them - not a major issue for the Sheffield Lincoln but a bit of an under provision for the York to Blackpool route that currently sees three toilets on a three coach train on journeys of three hours. Also, I personally prefer the end door arrangement to the 1/3 and 2/3 arrangement that the 195's have.

If a new train was to be introduced eventually that has a layout similar to the 158 and 175 and one toilet per coach, then the 195's could be cascaded down to the stopping services which they'd be ideal on.

 

[Bevan Price]

When the Sprinters are ready for renewal in, say, 10 years time, do you think the plan is to cascade the Class 195's onto the stopping routes and order new trains for the longer distance work? As much as I'm looking forward to the new trains, I can't help but think they're a bit of a downgrade from the Class 158's that have recently appeared on the Sheffield to Lincoln line. While their acceleration will be better thanks to the 6 speed ZF mechanical transmission, I believe I'm correct in saying that even the three car sets only have one toilet in them - not a major issue for the Sheffield Lincoln but a bit of an under provision for the York to Blackpool route that currently sees three toilets on a three coach train on journeys of three hours. Also, I personally prefer the end door arrangement to the 1/3 and 2/3 arrangement that the 195's have.

If a new train was to be introduced eventually that has a layout similar to the 158 and 175 and one toilet per coach, then the 195's could be cascaded down to the stopping services which they'd be ideal on.

I doubt that we will ever see any more "end door " layouts other than for long distance express services. Like it or not. the door arrangement on 195s, 170s, etc. allows faster boarding / alighting, and shorter dwell times at stations.

 

[Deerfold]

When the Sprinters are ready for renewal in, say, 10 years time, do you think the plan is to cascade the Class 195's onto the stopping routes and order new trains for the longer distance work?

Why do you think there are any plans that go that far ahead?

 

[sprinterguy]

Why do you think there are any plans that go that far ahead?

Indeed, it's somewhat outside of the remit of the current Northern franchise!

 

[hexagon789]

When the Sprinters are ready for renewal in, say, 10 years time, do you think the plan is to cascade the Class 195's onto the stopping routes and order new trains for the longer distance work?

I had understood that they were supposed to effectively replace the Pacers, presumably then they are now going on longer-distance routes with the 15x Sprinter-types going on the former Pacer services then?

I believe I'm correct in saying that even the three car sets only have one toilet in them

I think so, but then that's hardly unusual these days.

 

[LOL The Irony]

I had understood that they were supposed to effectively replace the Pacers, presumably then they are now going on longer-distance routes with the 15x Sprinter-types going on

Replacing pacers was a myth. The latter part of your post is the true part. They are replacing Sprinters which are being joined by other Sprinters (mainly from ScotRail) to replace pacers.

 

[hexagon789]

Replacing pacers was a myth. The latter part of your post is the true part. They are replacing Sprinters which are being joined by other Sprinters (mainly from ScotRail) to replace pacers.

Fair enough, they seem more the sort of unit which should be replacing Sprinters really.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Fair enough, they seem more the sort of unit which should be replacing Sprinters really.

Yes, I agree - logic would have been to use these to directly replace Pacers and to put refurbished 158s and 170s on Northern Connect.