Can TPE increase train lengths to avoid overcrowding when trains are cancelled?

[MML]

With TPE experiencing a significant number of cancellations due to sickness, industrial relations and training, why do they not maximize the train lengths on those services which still do run. Manchester-Cleethorpes is often reduced to a 2 hour interval service and then you find it's formed of a single 185 unit rather than 2.
Surely there must be sufficient 185 units available for a 6-car formation throughout the day?

To improve efficiency, you'd think they would replace the 68 and Mk5 coaches with a more standardised fleet of 802.
One less fleet would help reduce operating inefficiency and costs.
With 68 and Mk5 coaches redeployed to replace Castle HST sets in GWR or operated as 6 or 7 car sets for Chiltern express services to Oxford and Birmingham.

 

[Watershed]

With TPE experiencing a significant number of cancellations due to sickness, industrial relations and training, why do they not maximize the train lengths on those services which still do run. Manchester-Cleethorpes is often reduced to a 2 hour interval service and then you find it's formed of a single 185 unit rather than 2.
Surely there must be sufficient 185 units available for a 6-car formation throughout the day?

It's rarely down to a unit fault - the 185s are generally pretty reliable. It's much more likely to be part of the secondary impact of the crew shortages.

For instance if a train is uncovered between Sheffield and Manchester, it has to be shunted out of the way at Sheffield so as not to block the platform (in any event you can't turn back in passenger service from platform 6).

But if it's a double unit then this either requires two drivers (one at each end) or for the driver to be willing to uncouple the units and do two shunts. Odds of either happening... very slim. Similar sorts of issues also arise at Cleethorpes.

And so if the choice is run it as a 3 car or cancel it entirely, which option would you go for?

Unfortunately this demonstrates how even a small number of turns being uncovered can have a significant impact on the service.

To improve efficiency, you'd think they would replace the 68 and Mk5 coaches with a more standardised fleet of 802.
One less fleet would help reduce operating inefficiency and costs.

With hindsight that's of course what would have happened. However, hindsight won't change the fact that 802s are vastly more expensive to lease than 68s + Mk5s, and there is already a huge 'sunk cost' in the crew that have been trained on the 68s.

With 68 and Mk5 coaches redeployed to replace Castle HST sets in GWR or operated as 6 or 7 car sets for Chiltern express services to Oxford and Birmingham.

What benefit would this have? You would simply be replacing one set of more expensive than average loco hauled stock with another.

No, the Castle Class HSTs will likely be replaced by nothing, at least initially. In the longer term there might be a cascade of 165s etc. if an agreement can be reached with ASLEF over the 769s' cab working environment.

Similarly over at Chiltern. The 68+MK3 stock will likely just be withdrawn without replacement. People will just have to cram on even more than they already do, and Stourbridge etc. will just have to put up with losing their direct London service.

It's very sad but this is the reality of a post-Covid world in which the DfT and Treasury know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

 

[_toommm_]

For instance if a train is uncovered between Sheffield and Manchester, it has to be shunted out of the way at Sheffield so as not to block the platform (in any event you can't turn back in passenger service from platform 6)

A question or two please if possible:

(1) Can it not then terminate in platform eight if it’s going back to Cleethorpes as that has a main aspect, and one or two trains did that when the freight train derailed on the through line when that caused chaos.

(2) When a double unit is to be shunted to the lines between platforms five and six (the US1 and US2??), is there no safe walking route for a driver to transfer between the two units?

 

[Fokx]

It's rarely down to a unit fault - the 185s are generally pretty reliable. It's much more likely to be part of the secondary impact of the crew shortages.

For instance if a train is uncovered between Sheffield and Manchester, it has to be shunted out of the way at Sheffield so as not to block the platform (in any event you can't turn back in passenger service from platform 6).

But if it's a double unit then this either requires two drivers (one at each end) or for the driver to be willing to uncouple the units and do two shunts. Odds of either happening... very slim. Similar sorts of issues also arise at Cleethorpes.

And so if the choice is run it as a 3 car or cancel it entirely, which option would you go for?

Unfortunately this demonstrates how even a small number of turns being uncovered can have a significant impact on the service.

And the other issue with the South route is that there are daily turns where units couple/uncouple at termination points such as Manchester, or swap units with the Hull service to rotate them onto Ardwick depot eventually.

There are a few booked 3 carriage diagrams where a train travels from Cleethorpes to Manchester and then couples up with a train from Ardwick depot in the platforms.

You can then have situations such as If the train from cleethorpes is cancelled due to no crew or unit stabled at Cleethorpes, you then just have three carriages at Piccadilly (or 6 if you’re lucky and there’s spare at Ardwick) and if there is no driver to bring the unit from Ardwick, the train remains 3 carriages all day.

Additionally if you have trains in the wrong places such as in disruption or due to no crew, you can end up with 3 cars on 6 car diagrams and 6 car on 3 cars because the trains were at the wrong end of the country to begin with as TPE have several depots and sidings where the 185’s are stored, but they’re all part of a common fleet with heavy maintenance taking place at Ardwick primarily.