Chiltern electrification alternatives being studied...

[Energy]

I always said that electrification of the Chiltern route should have taken priority over HS2

HS2 affects a lot more of the country, and provides a lot more capacity. Electrification of the Chiltern route is good but giving it priority over HS2 or the other electrification projects at the time would be mad.

 

[12LDA28C]

giving some money to London underground for track and power upgrades on the route to amersham

As I understand it a power upgrade was done on the Met line a few years ago anyway as the S-stock draws more current and is more power-hungry than the previous D-stock due to the more advanced electrical systems on board.

 

[Philip]

So are 175s planned to replace the 165s following conversion to a hybrid train, or is this just speculative?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

So are 175s planned to replace the 165s following conversion to a hybrid train, or is this just speculative?

Speculative.

 

[12LDA28C]

So are 175s planned to replace the 165s following conversion to a hybrid train, or is this just speculative?

Huh? Not sure what you're referring to there.

The 165s are going to be replaced by a brand new train. If Chiltern get any 175s they will be to replace the 68s and LHCS. Where does a hybrid train come into it?

 

[Philip]

Huh? Not sure what you're referring to there.

The 165s are going to be replaced by a brand new train. If Chiltern get any 175s they will be to replace the 68s and LHCS. Where does a hybrid train come into it?

Having 175s replace 168s without conversion to hybrid isn't progress, it's a regression if anything as the 175s have reliability problems which the 168s don't, they're boh of a similar age and the 168 has been good enough for the route for years. It wouldn't be acceptable spending the money on training, maintenance and route clearing costs if the 175 was still running into Marylebone and Snow Hill under diesel power. If the 175 was replacing the 165s (rather than a new type of train) then it'd make a bit more sense aa they're a lot older and difficult for parts.

 

[12LDA28C]

Having 175s replace 168s without conversion to hybrid isn't progress, it's a regression if anything as the 175s have reliability problems which the 168s don't, they're boh of a similar age and the 168 has been good enough for the route for years. It wouldn't be acceptable spending the money on training, maintenance and route clearing costs if the 175 was still running into Marylebone and Snow Hill under diesel power. If the 175 was replacing the 165s (rather than a new type of train) then it'd make a bit more sense aa they're a lot older and difficult for parts.

Where has it been mentioned by anyone that 175s are replacing 168s?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Where has it been mentioned by anyone that 175s are replacing 168s?

There is speculation with reasonable grounds (the mention of 175s in Chiltern's National Rail Contract) that 175s may transfer into the franchise. But it is possible that that has been superceded by the new-build proposal.

 

[12LDA28C]

There is speculation with reasonable grounds (the mention of 175s in Chiltern's National Rail Contract) that 175s may transfer into the franchise. But it is possible that that has been superceded by the new-build proposal.

Indeed, I think most people are aware of that. But only to replace the 68s and LHCS as I posted earlier in #245, not to replace the 168s. That has never been proposed.

 

[Wolfie]

They're having trouble getting parts to keep the 165s going (electronic ones I believe; anything mechanical you could just fabricate) so new to replace those would always have been on the cards. The 168s could potentially receive the modifications. On the other hand, perhaps they'll propose a full replacement if a single fleet is more cost-effective, I'd be surprised if the tender didn't include priced options for doing exactly that.

Alternatively they could replace the whole fleet and the 168s (which for all intents and purposes are 170s) go elsewhere to replace Sprinters.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, I think most people are aware of that. But only to replace the 68s and LHCS as I posted earlier in #245, not to replace the 168s. That has never been proposed.

I doubt they'd bring in a microfleet of 175s to replace the small number of LHCS diagrams per day. They might, but I doubt it. Possibly short term.

More likely would have been all the 175s come in to replace the LHCS and a number of 165s (by cascade), allowing a few of the remaining ones to be cannibalised for spares to keep the others going.

I suspect what'll happen now is that the new-build order will either be a full fleet replacement with a 2+2 interior (I'd be surprised if it didn't include a priced option for that, and if you, as I, consider that Chiltern is basically diesel LNR without Avanti then a 350 style unit for everything would be just fine), or it'll be enough units to replace the 165s AND the LHCS, with a cascade of 168s onto the long distance services that were being run with LHCS, as 168s are sometimes used on local services including Aylesbury. Some of the LHCS services such as the peak time Risborough fast don't need to be long distance stock and the new units would be fine.

 

[Philip]

Where has it been mentioned by anyone that 175s are replacing 168s?

I misread 68s as 168s, although nonetheless, the numbers don't match to replace only the 68 stock - well less than half of the 175 fleet would replace the 68 LHCS sets, hence the question about whether they replace 168s as well.

 

[MrJeeves]

HS2 will basically remove Chiltern's role as a Birmingham to London service

Sorry if this was addressed in future pages, but I don't think that's really the case...

I always use Chiltern as the cheap, budget option from the South up to Birmingham and Coventry and for the benefit I'm almost always granted the huge benefit of a seat, and I don't get the impression tickets on HS2 will be particularly cheap!

In terms of high speed travel, sure, HS2 will win, but then again Avanti is already winning in most cases against Chiltern anyway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Sorry if this was addressed in future pages, but I don't think that's really the case...

I always use Chiltern as the cheap, budget option from the South up to Birmingham and Coventry and for the benefit I'm almost always granted the huge benefit of a seat, and I don't get the impression tickets on HS2 will be particularly cheap!

In terms of high speed travel, sure, HS2 will win, but then again Avanti is already winning in most cases against Chiltern anyway.

Presently you've got 3 levels - Avanti most expensive and quickest, Chiltern middle price and speed, LNR cheapest but slowest.

When HS2 comes along it'll do one of two things - take the Chiltern slot on price due to the massive capacity, or take the premium price. It's unlikely to take the LNR very-budget price.

If it does take the middle price point, only an enthusiast would still use Chiltern for a through journey, as HS2 will be the same price and faster.

If it takes the premium price, the classic WCML fast services, which will remain primarily to serve Coventry and Milton Keynes, are likely to take that middle price point. If they do, only an enthusiast would use slower Chiltern at a similar price point, because the WCML fast service will be the same price and faster.

Either way Chiltern reverts to a South East commuter line and LNR stays as it is.

 

[zwk500]

Presently you've got 3 levels - Avanti most expensive and quickest, Chiltern middle price and speed, LNR cheapest but slowest.

When HS2 comes along it'll do one of two things - take the Chiltern slot on price due to the massive capacity, or take the premium price. It's unlikely to take the LNR very-budget price.

If it does take the middle price point, only an enthusiast would still use Chiltern for a through journey.

If it takes the premium price, the classic WCML fast services, which will remain primarily to serve Coventry and Milton Keynes, are likely to take that middle price point. If they do, only an enthusiast would use slower Chiltern at a similar price point.

Either way Chiltern reverts to a South East commuter line.

Chiltern will still have large appeal as it is generally the quieter line and serves several tourist spots such as Stratford, Oxford, Bicester and Warwick. It won't be a pure commuter line, there will be reasonable end-to-end travel on it. Some Snow Hill Line traffic to London may also choose to interchange to Chiltern for ease instead of hopping across to Curzon Street.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Chiltern will still have large appeal as it is generally the quieter line

?

I've experienced excessive loadings on Chiltern far more often than I have on LNR or Avanti. Their irritating tendency to send out 2-car units at busy times is mostly the cause but I'd certainly not choose Chiltern for quietness unless boarding at the origin.

and serves several tourist spots such as Stratford, Oxford, Bicester and Warwick.

Yes, there'll be intermediate traffic, just like there is on LNR. It might be that they price down Oxford to attract end to end traffic to that, as few in their right mind would choose it otherwise as it takes a lot longer than from Paddington.

It won't be a pure commuter line, there will be reasonable end-to-end travel on it. Some Snow Hill Line traffic to London may also choose to interchange to Chiltern for ease instead of hopping across to Curzon Street.

Very much doubt it. Snow Hill Lines services all call at Moor St, and that's basically de-facto the same station as Curzon St, some argue it should be set up as a single complex and take one name.

 

[MrJeeves]

Presently you've got 3 levels - Avanti most expensive and quickest, Chiltern middle price and speed, LNR cheapest but slowest.

When HS2 comes along it'll do one of two things - take the Chiltern slot on price due to the massive capacity, or take the premium price. It's unlikely to take the LNR very-budget price.

If it does take the middle price point, only an enthusiast would still use Chiltern for a through journey, as HS2 will be the same price and faster.

If it takes the premium price, the classic WCML fast services, which will remain primarily to serve Coventry and Milton Keynes, are likely to take that middle price point. If they do, only an enthusiast would use slower Chiltern at a similar price point, because the WCML fast service will be the same price and faster.

Either way Chiltern reverts to a South East commuter line and LNR stays as it is.

This makes sense in some cases, but not all through tickets have these three levels. If you look for through tickets onto south-of-London Thameslink, for example, you'll only get two levels of ticket: Any Permitted, or via High Wycombe (or avoiding central London via Kensington Olympia to Watford Junction which I'd argue isn't really LNR-focused either).

For me, the price difference between off-peak Any Permitted £59.40 via Avanti, or Chiltern's Super Off-peak at £37.80 (which Avanti doesn't have an alternative to), I know which one I'll always choose, unless it's time-sensitive.

In my experience, Chiltern is a far more premium service than Avanti in terms of the journey experience. Avanti feels claustrophobic to me even in the rare case there are seats available simply due to the train interior. Obviously, this is just my opinion, but I don't really use Avanti except when work is paying!

 

[Bletchleyite]

In my experience, Chiltern is a far more premium service than Avanti in terms of the journey experience. Avanti feels claustrophobic to me even in the rare case there are seats available simply due to the train interior. Obviously, this is just my opinion, but I don't really use Avanti except when work is paying!

Whereas to me 168s are just DMUs (nice ones, but I'd rather a Desiro) and Mk3s with IC70 seating are old tat long overdue the bin.

Opinions are like a certain piece of the anatomy, as they say

 

[MrJeeves]

Mk3s with IC70 seating are old tat long overdue the bin.

What?? They're my favourite of the lot! Scurry up to the front and claim your set of 4 seats to spread across in "Business Zone" at no extra cost. Only one other person in that coach last time I travelled back from Birmingham!

 

[zwk500]

I've experienced excessive loadings on Chiltern far more often than I have on LNR or Avanti. Their irritating tendency to send out 2-car units at busy times is mostly the cause but I'd certainly not choose Chiltern for quietness unless boarding at the origin.

In terms of raw passenger numbers, Chiltern is quieter. Sending out short trains doesn't help but really they're a symptom of the wider lack of capacity which HS2 will provide. Avoiding the Euston Scrum would also be a bonus.

Yes, there'll be intermediate traffic, just like there is on LNR. It might be that they price down Oxford to attract end to end traffic to that, as few in their right mind would choose it otherwise as it takes a lot longer than from Paddington.

People I know (a rather small sample) like having the second option, especially as Marylebone is sometimes more convenient for onwards travel being just down the road from Baker Street (although with the Elizabeth Line I expect this no longer applies)

Very much doubt it. Snow Hill Lines services all call at Moor St, and that's basically de-facto the same station as Curzon St, some argue it should be set up as a single complex and take one name.

Yes but you will have to exit Moor St, walk down the road, and then wait for your train at Curzon Street, while the Chiltern train is sitting quite happily in the bay when you arrive at Moor Street. It partly will depend if there's a check-in call on HS2.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Either way Chiltern reverts to a South East commuter line and LNR stays as it is.

It's notable that this is already happening on the Oxford services.

At launch, there were several fast services from Oxford to Marylebone with journey times of around an hour. Now they're 1hr20-1hr30 throughout the day, with one or two achieving the heady heights of 1hr14. The standard stopping pattern includes Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield, High Wycombe and Princes Risborough.

Chiltern describe this as "Oxford: More direct trains throughout the day to and from other key Heartland stations." Which I guess is true. Still, I'm not sure the publicity would have been quite so great had they gone with the line "A new semi-fast service between Oxford and Gerrards Cross" rather than the "first new rail link between a major British city* and London in more than 100 years".

* poor old Canterbury

 

[cle]

It's notable that this is already happening on the Oxford services.

At launch, there were several fast services from Oxford to Marylebone with journey times of around an hour. Now they're 1hr20-1hr30 throughout the day, with one or two achieving the heady heights of 1hr14. The standard stopping pattern includes Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield, High Wycombe and Princes Risborough.

Chiltern describe this as "Oxford: More direct trains throughout the day to and from other key Heartland stations." Which I guess is true. Still, I'm not sure the publicity would have been quite so great had they gone with the line "A new semi-fast service between Oxford and Gerrards Cross" rather than the "first new rail link between a major British city* and London in more than 100 years".

* poor old Canterbury

the 80x-s came out in the interim, and blew the joourney time out of the water. I liked the fast pattern, but I think they are right to have a semi-fast service, calling at the main places where folks might also now commute into Oxford, or go for leisure, as well as the other way.

This is the whole beauty of the Chiltern route and the existential conversation about its role after HS2. It's very secure. It was never intended to be a London-Birmingham inter city route, but with franchising, that became another purpose. It serves a bunch of affluent places on their main London services, and a few medium sized settlements heading both to London and to Birmingham. For folks in Warwick, Leamington, Banbury, it goes both ways. There is tourism/leisure with Bicester, and then Oxford, Stratford and Warwick to a degree. If it was wired, with new trains and a bit quicker, I think it would fill far greater train lengths. It's car country still, and the train has to compete with the nippy M40.

But if you want to use if for London-Brum for a change, avoid Euston, cheaper fare or to get to/from Solihull perhaps, it's perfect. And that ability will remain - but also, many of the same 'seats' may get sold twice, which of course won't happen on HS2's initial over-supply of shuttles.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

the 80x-s came out in the interim, and blew the joourney time out of the water. I liked the fast pattern, but I think they are right to have a semi-fast service, calling at the main places where folks might also now commute into Oxford, or go for leisure, as well as the other way.

Yes, I'd tend to agree. I liked the more forgiving evening peak restrictions on Chiltern, and used it for that a few times, but that's hardly a business model in itself (and increasingly irrelevant now everything's under the thumb of the DfT anyway).

Arguably Chiltern's biggest service failing right now is Stratford-upon-Avon <-> London (or, rather, not).

 

[12LDA28C]

I doubt they'd bring in a microfleet of 175s to replace the small number of LHCS diagrams per day. They might, but I doubt it. Possibly short term.

Maybe so when the time comes but I can only say what the plan is currently, which is to source a replacement for the 68s and LHCS and there has been no mention whatsoever of replacing the 168s. Of course anyone can speculate whatever they like, I'm just sticking to the facts as they are at present.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jun 2023 ==

I misread 68s as 168s, although nonetheless, the numbers don't match to replace only the 68 stock - well less than half of the 175 fleet would replace the 68 LHCS sets, hence the question about whether they replace 168s as well.

That has certainly not been mentioned thus far to my knowledge. It is entirely possible to take just a handful of units and restrict traction knowledge of those units to certain depots to save on training costs.

 

[Wolfie]

Presently you've got 3 levels - Avanti most expensive and quickest, Chiltern middle price and speed, LNR cheapest but slowest.

When HS2 comes along it'll do one of two things - take the Chiltern slot on price due to the massive capacity, or take the premium price. It's unlikely to take the LNR very-budget price.

If it does take the middle price point, only an enthusiast would still use Chiltern for a through journey, as HS2 will be the same price and faster.

If it takes the premium price, the classic WCML fast services, which will remain primarily to serve Coventry and Milton Keynes, are likely to take that middle price point. If they do, only an enthusiast would use slower Chiltern at a similar price point, because the WCML fast service will be the same price and faster.

Either way Chiltern reverts to a South East commuter line and LNR stays as it is.

You are, though, assuming that the classic WMCL fast services will continue as is which is far from a given.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You are, though, assuming that the classic WMCL fast services will continue as is which is far from a given.

It pretty much is, even if they looked a bit more like LNR services in some cases there will definitely remain WCML fasts.

The plan is:
2tph Euston-Birmingham (WFJ-MKC-RUG-COV-BHI-BHM)
1tph Euston-Manchester (MKC plus some selected Trent Valley stations)
1tph North Wales (as Manchester)

Coventry, MK*, Rugby and the Trent Valley stations justify them alone.

It could change, but the WCML won't revert to a slow service alone.

* MK is likely to have a population in excess of 500K by the time HS2 opens in full (i.e. Phases 1 to 2B), depending on delays it may be even bigger than that. This might mean it justifies them alone.

 

[cle]

Yes, I'd tend to agree. I liked the more forgiving evening peak restrictions on Chiltern, and used it for that a few times, but that's hardly a business model in itself (and increasingly irrelevant now everything's under the thumb of the DfT anyway).

Arguably Chiltern's biggest service failing right now is Stratford-upon-Avon <-> London (or, rather, not).

Definitely. Feels like they surrendered that before really giving it a good time (when it had an ok service) - it was always a very slow pattern too, about 2h15m.

I would have:
1tph Marylebone-Banbury (as today, but every 2 hours extended to Stratford)
1tph Oxford-Leamington - then alternating to Moor St and Stratford every other hour (Stratford other hour as the Banbury/London)

to begin with, knowing there is also the Moor St-Oxford hourly chat, and I'd love to see Chiltern 'owning' the region more, and growing services out of a bigger Oxford hub, especially as they likely have a good shot at taking up the EWR also.

It pretty much is, even if they looked a bit more like LNR services in some cases there will definitely remain WCML fasts.

The plan is:
2tph Euston-Birmingham (WFJ-MKC-RUG-COV-BHI-BHM)
1tph Euston-Manchester (MKC plus some selected Trent Valley stations)
1tph North Wales (as Manchester)

Coventry, MK*, Rugby and the Trent Valley stations justify them alone.

It could change, but the WCML won't revert to a slow service alone.

* MK is likely to have a population in excess of 500K by the time HS2 opens in full (i.e. Phases 1 to 2B), depending on delays it may be even bigger than that. This might mean it justifies them alone.

There was a write-up of these.... but I think there were more. The Manchester called at Watford, I remember - reinstating an important link which VHF had to kill off. Lots of fast line to LB and to Northampton

ahh - found it - no doubt replaced since...
not sure about a Lichfield TV terminator and how that works. In-platform return, and crossovers?

 

[zwk500]

not sure about a Lichfield TV terminator and how that works. In-platform return, and crossovers?

No bi-di on the slows, would terminate in Down platform, boot everybody off, draw forward clear of Lichfield North Jn then shunt all the way across into the Up platform (unless there's a remodelling as part of HS2 of course).

 

[SynthD]

If they replace the 68 micro fleet with enough 175s to lengthen trains and add that Oxford-Leamington service, it won’t be a micro fleet any more.

 

[The Planner]

Definitely. Feels like they surrendered that before really giving it a good time (when it had an ok service) - it was always a very slow pattern too, about 2h15m.

I would have:
1tph Marylebone-Banbury (as today, but every 2 hours extended to Stratford)
1tph Oxford-Leamington - then alternating to Moor St and Stratford every other hour (Stratford other hour as the Banbury/London)

to begin with, knowing there is also the Moor St-Oxford hourly chat, and I'd love to see Chiltern 'owning' the region more, and growing services out of a bigger Oxford hub, especially as they likely have a good shot at taking up the EWR also.


There was a write-up of these.... but I think there were more. The Manchester called at Watford, I remember - reinstating an important link which VHF had to kill off. Lots of fast line to LB and to Northampton

ahh - found it - no doubt replaced since...
not sure about a Lichfield TV terminator and how that works. In-platform return, and crossovers?

I would genuinely take that with a significant pinch of salt now.