Chiltern railways mk3 replacement.

[warwickshire]

Out of interest what in your opinion could replace the chiltern mk3s.
1. Possibly 175 direct from TFW.
2. Possibly 175 to Northern.
170 from Northern to Chiltern.
3. Possibly 170 From Cross Country to Chiltern railways so no issues there.
By cross country getting Super Voyagers from Avanti West Coast to enable. 170 to Chiltern railways.
Any other suggestions though.?

 

[The Planner]

3 won't happen.

 

[XAM2175]

The various Class 175 options have their own thread going at the moment:

Class 175 future speculation

I thought I'd make a thread to discuss/post ideas or rumours about where the 175 fleet will end up after they leave TfW. Will the fleet be split between operators? Will it be to one or more of the rumoured suspects (EWR, Northern, GWR, ScotRail, Chiltern, Cross Country), or any other TOC you...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

4, nothing.

 

[notadriver]

222s from EMR ?

 

[JonathanH]

5. 165s from GWR released by 769s instead of sending them west.

Just as unlikely as many of the other options except number 4.

 

[liamf656]

222s from EMR ?

The 222s would struggle hugely with the lower speeds unfortunately. This was discovered when they were frequently put on the Leicester to Lincoln stopper and the braking systems would develop faults

 

[Philip]

I went on one of these for the first time on Sunday, the 10:30 from Kidderminster to Birmingham (Marylebone service). There were 6 coaches including the DVT and I would say the train was half full at best, possibly less. The quiet coach and the one I was in were virtually empty. I got off the train at Snow Hill bur there didn't appear to be many more people joining there.

It's only one example and not a weekday rush hour, but on the other hand Sunday morning tends to be a busy time nowadays on a lot of routes, but this train was far from busy.

Is a like-for-like replacement in terms of the number of coaches really necessary here?

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Out of interest what in your opinion could replace the chiltern mk3s.
1. Possibly 175 direct from TFW.
2. Possibly 175 to Northern.
170 from Northern to Chiltern.
3. Possibly 170 From Cross Country to Chiltern railways so no issues there.
By cross country getting Super Voyagers from Avanti West Coast to enable. 170 to Chiltern railways.
Any other suggestions though.?

Number 1 would be the best option.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I went on one of these for the first time on Sunday, the 10:30 from Kidderminster to Birmingham (Marylebone service). There were 6 coaches including the DVT and I would say the train was half full at best, possibly less. The quiet coach and the one I was in were virtually empty. I got off the train at Snow Hill bur there didn't appear to be many more people joining there.

It's only one example and not a weekday rush hour, but on the other hand Sunday morning tends to be a busy time nowadays on a lot of routes, but this train was far from busy.

Based on my experience of travelling with Chiltern, I think it's very likely that several people boarded the train at each of Moor Street, Solihull, Warwick Parkway, Leamington and Banbury and the train by then was fairly well loaded. Off peak, most Chiltern trains between Marylebone and Birmingham are only three, sometimes four coaches long, so possibly a six coach train had surplus capacity.

 

[Jacob Porrett]

Any information/news regarding the future of the Chiltern 68s weather they are staying for the future or potentially will be leaving soon? I've had some conversations but I'm not really sure anymore. I would like some clarification if possible please.

 

[JonathanH]

I would like some clarification if possible please.

It is quite rare for someone to be in a position to give clarification on a public forum when a decision is known but not in the public domain, unless a) they have nothing to lose in leaking that information or b) the public announcement is very close.

We will just have to wait and see, as I dont think any information either way is yet in the public domain.

 

[Jacob Porrett]

It is quite rare for someone to be in a position to give clarification on a public forum when a decision is known but not in the public domain, unless a) they have nothing to lose in leaking that information or b) the public announcement is very close.

We will just have to wait and see, as I dont think any information either way is yet in the public domain.

I was wondering because I've heard many comments and I don't know which is right or wrong.

Like you said just have to wait and see. I have been told by a mate they could be leaving end of the year but no idea if that's true or not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

1 (175s from TfW) or nothing (ie service cuts or shorter trains).

I suspect prior to the cuts it was going to be the former but now
more likely the latter and the 175s being scrapped.

 

[Brubulus]

1 (175s from TfW) or nothing (ie service cuts or shorter trains).

I suspect prior to the cuts it was going to be the former but now
more likely the latter and the 175s being scrapped.

If Northern get the 175s, maybe Chiltern could get the 170s to replace loco hauled. New trains are going to need to be ordered for them in the next few years and having a consistent 168/170 fleet on mainline would be good as new units can be designed solely for outer suburban work.

 

[JonathanH]

New trains are going to need to be ordered for them in the next few years

Remember one option listed above to replace the Mark 3s is

4, nothing.

 

[Vanmanyo]

If Northern get the 175s, maybe Chiltern could get the 170s to replace loco hauled. New trains are going to need to be ordered for them in the next few years and having a consistent 168/170 fleet on mainline would be good as new units can be designed solely for outer suburban work.

The thing about this is that the 68 sets are 6 carriages, usually full and standing when used in peak services. A 3/4 car 170 would struggle with demand.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

The thing about this is that the 68 sets are 6 carriages, usually full and standing when used in peak services. A 3/4 car 170 would struggle with demand.

Isn't the 18:18 from Marylebone to Oxford now a 3-car 165?

 

[Romsey]

Are options 1 & 2 using 175's really viable?
Other threads on here and another forum plus BBC news suggest they are having considerable maintenance problems with the TfW resulting in a number of fires and considerable delays.
The last thing that Chiltern will want or need is introducing unreliable rolling stock and the customer backlash which will surely follow.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Not that 175s have much chance of going anywhere after TfW nowadays…

 

[popeter45]

Would a battery bi mode flirt be an option?
Cant see much use for a full class 756 tri mode but also battery would be useful in Marylebone so maybe a mix between that and the class 231?

 

[Trainbike46]

Would a battery bi mode flirt be an option?
Cant see much use for a full class 756 tri mode but also battery would be useful in Marylebone so maybe a mix between that and the class 231?

that depends

The 756s (single engine) have fewer engines than the 755s (4 engines) or 231s (4 engines), but have batteries instead. So it would only work if you can charge them at sensible places

Potentially, you could use the LU 4th rail where it is already present, but you would definitely have to install something to charge the batteries while in Marylebone, and probably in a few other places as well.

Now of course you could put in more engines, but then you would have to reduce the number of batteries to make space, as the battteries and engines are all in the same thrash cupboard

My personal preference would simply be to electrify the chiltern routes

 

[Vanmanyo]

that depends

The 756s (single engine) have fewer engines than the 755s (4 engines) or 231s (4 engines), but have batteries instead. So it would only work if you can charge them at sensible places

Potentially, you could use the LU 4th rail where it is already present, but you would definitely have to install something to charge the batteries while in Marylebone, and probably in a few other places as well.

Now of course you could put in more engines, but then you would have to reduce the number of batteries to make space, as the battteries and engines are all in the same thrash cupboard

My personal preference would simply be to electrify the chiltern routes

The thing about;
a) getting new trains; Chiltern don't have an incentive to, they've fulfilled contract requirements so unless there is the money available (which I doubt there is), I can't see Chiltern getting brand new stock.
b) Electrification; no money for it, Network Rail has plans in place for 2040 at the earliest :/

 

[Energy]

The thing about;
a) getting new trains; Chiltern don't have an incentive to, they've fulfilled contract requirements so unless there is the money available (which I doubt there is), I can't see Chiltern getting brand new stock.

Yes and no, Chiltern can make a proposal to the DfT for new rolling stock to replace existing stock. If it comes out cheaper (likely, the 165s are getting hard to get parts for and the 68s aren't cheap to run) than carrying on with existing stock it'll get approved.

 

[JonathanH]

Yes and no, Chiltern can make a proposal to the DfT for new rolling stock to replace existing stock. If it comes out cheaper (likely, the 165s are getting hard to get parts for and the 68s aren't cheap to run) than carrying on with existing stock it'll get approved.

Does the 'new' railway work like that? Is it up to Chiltern to put forward rolling stock ideas, or for the DfT to lead any renewal plan, asking Chiltern to enter into negotiations about possible rolling stock plans when the DfT decide that is the plan?

Chiltern have no revenue interest in the 'new' railway as the Treasury gets all the money, with the DfT paying the costs.

I don't see any proposal for new rolling stock for Chiltern being made or getting approved any time soon.

 

[DM352]

If money was no object, get push pull stock like Trans Pennine with exisiting 68's for Intercity and Stadler with 4 engines for stoppers/semi fast.

Like the 150s, the 165 have been run pretty hard whereas similar age electric stock is being scrapped.

 

[Vanmanyo]

165 have been run pretty hard whereas similar age electric stock is being scrapped.

Yes, I believe there's at least one out for spares and repairs and others that haven't moved for months but aren't classed as spares and repairs.. yet. Going on these units regularly they are showing their age (and have done so since 2010) and have frequent reliability issues (although so do the 168s), so a replacement is overdue definitely. Although I would assume the Dft would prioritise GWRs 165s just because they are a larger operator and serve larger areas.

 

[popeter45]

Yes, I believe there's at least one out for spares and repairs and others that haven't moved for months but aren't classed as spares and repairs.. yet. Going on these units regularly they are showing their age (and have done so since 2010) and have frequent reliability issues (although so do the 168s), so a replacement is overdue definitely. Although I would assume the Dft would prioritise GWRs 165s just because they are a larger operator and serve larger areas.

as the chiltern and great western have used the same stock over the years maybe a shared order would help with economy of scale?

 

[Vanmanyo]

as the chiltern and great western have used the same stock over the years maybe a shared order would help with economy of scale?

Would make sense, depends if GWR would want a bi mode or tri mode train versus chiltern who would want battery

 

[Brubulus]

Would make sense, depends if GWR would want a bi mode or tri mode train versus chiltern who would want battery

I feel there should be a national modular design for a new unit with a battery EMU that can be charged from OLE and/or an onboard generator. This could be ordered by Northern, GWR and Chiltern, along with the possibility of being ordered by ScotRail.