Class 185 future replacements

[Class172]

And the Snow Hill lines will be likely to need at least 9 car services soon. I'd like to see it quadrupled from Smethwick Galton Bridge to Stourbridge

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Somewhere in the semi-distant future, Uckfield will need more stock for 10-car trains, so I thought a total replacement of 171s with 185s...

Radical, I know, but...

More likely to inherit TpE 170s if anything.

Who says there is a North/South divide? Two examples of terminal stations shown below.

Uckfield = 10-car trains:as stated above.

Manchester Airport = 3-car trains (....let them eat cake):cry::cry:

Mind you, Uckfield is a thriving hub covering a wide number of stockbroking communes, with the Bluebell Railway on its doorstep, as a bonus. Maybe they will lend you some of theirs if you ask them nicely.

Sorry about this...I am finding it hard to understand 10-car trains as this will mean 5 x Class 142 Pacers joined together....but that is what we have been accustomed to up North!! Just off to touch my forelock and listen to the weather forecaster as she says".....and here in the South-East

 

[tbtc]

I said mainly 144s and 158s, which do make up the majority of stock of Yorkshire services. There's also 155s, 153s, 142s and 150s thrown in but in much smaller numbers

As I pointed out, 158s aren't doing the "local" work, they are doing the longer distance Northern services (the examples I gave are generally limited stop for at least part of their routes).

There's not a lot of equivalent Northern services in Lancashire (probably only the Manchester Airport - Liverpool and Liverpool - Blackpool services), apart from the Blackpool - York service which clearly gets 158s.

The "local" DMU routes Northern operates in Yorkshire get a similar max of Pacers/ Sprinters that equivalent Lancashire DMU routes get (with the exception of a couple of 180s)

That's like saying Buxton-Blackpool. There's a few services but the majority are Sheffield-Hull and Hull-Scarborough as two shorter services with Hull-Scarborough exclusively 158s

Its Sheffield - Bridlington every hour, continuing on to Scarborough every two hours, the kind of route that a 158 seems fairly suitable for

Crewe station gets among the highest level of interchanges in the country and is actually a bigger busier station than Sheffield. I've been to both on a few occasions.

Many stations in the North West Midlands have had their Virgin express service removed or cut and instead get a slow 350 service

Regardless, you were giving the impression that the Crewe - London service was 350s, when there's faster Voyagers and Pendolini running more often.

Most of the services in the "North West Midlands" (have we moved the definition of the argument?) that lost "express" services to London only tended to have a train every few hours at a fairly random timetable, but now get a clockface hourly service (e.g. Tamworth, Lichfield TV)

You seem to be in a false illusion that Yorkshire gets a poor deal to the North West when in fact overall it's the other way around.

Yorkshire:

• No new DMUs for local services since privatisation
• No electrification since privatisation
• No new light rail/tram routes since privatisation (Leeds tram rejected, Sheffield extensions rejected)

Lancashire

• 175s and 180s have been used on local "stopper" routes
• Electrification agreed between Liverpool/ Manchester/ Blackpoool
• Massive expansion of Manchester Metrolink

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

.I am finding it hard to understand 10-car trains as this will mean 5 x Class 142 Pacers joined together....

To be pedantic, the equivalent of a ten coach DMU/EMU would need about seven Pacers (given the shorter carriage length of Pacers)

 

[OxtedL]

Who says there is a North/South divide?

As usual, I will mention chronic overcrowding on current 8-car services which already run half hourly, with no paths for frequency increase and Thameslink programme looking to cause mayhem... There's just too much demand to get into London even with £2000+ season tickets down here.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

As usual, I will mention chronic overcrowding on current 8-car services which already run half hourly, with no paths for frequency increase and Thameslink programme looking to cause mayhem... There's just too much demand to get into London even with £2000+ season tickets down here.

Forgive my weird sense of humour. Yes, I do know of the particular problems that you have on your area transport links to London. I can imagine how much money is generated from the sale of season tickets from your area. When I was on secondment down Basildon way in the 1980's, I used to have a monthly season ticket to Fenchurch Street which was exorbitant in those days.

It is just that you don't have to enjoy the "Class 142 Pacer Experiance" down your way. An experiance never to be fogotten....Remember the saying from the film..."Be afraid, be very afraid".

 

[WatcherZero]

Yorkshire:

• No new DMUs for local services since privatisation
• No electrification since privatisation
• No new light rail/tram routes since privatisation (Leeds tram rejected, Sheffield extensions rejected)

Lancashire

• 175s and 180s have been used on local "stopper" routes
• Electrification agreed between Liverpool/ Manchester/ Blackpoool
• Massive expansion of Manchester Metrolink

Metrolink extension is funded primarily through local council tax and borrowing along with the North West regional transport grant (In fact Greater Manchester's full allocation of the grant from 2011-2016), Yorkshire gets the same money the only difference is where local leaders choose to spend it.

Leeds station has been expanded twice in the last 10 years along with other local network capacity enhancements while the only NR investment on this side of the pennines is replacing decayed station roofs.

Sheffield is getting 4 more trams for existing services and the tram-train trial line and Northern has just recieved more rolling stock for Yorkshire services.

175/180's are used on the long distance routes, how often their stopping is irrelevent compared with the journey length.

 

[Bevan Price]

As others suggest, Class 185 is likely to be with us for many years (2035 or later), being replaced only on lines which get electrified. As the North West electrification proceeds, 185s will probably displace all the TPE 170's.

In the long term, if there are any more 185's spare, I suspect their future will include replacement of their engines with lower-powered versions, possibly with the centre car unpowered. In current format, their running costs would be too high for most regional services on lines limited to 75 mph or less.

If major electrification of cross-Pennine TPE routes ever proceeds, I think that on most routes they would need an emu design with at least 4 to 5 standard class coaches, to cater for the likely traffic growth.

Bevan

 

[WestCoast]

Yorkshire:

• No new DMUs for local services since privatisation
• No electrification since privatisation
• No new light rail/tram routes since privatisation (Leeds tram rejected, Sheffield extensions rejected)

Lancashire

• 175s and 180s have been used on local "stopper" routes
• Electrification agreed between Liverpool/ Manchester/ Blackpoool
• Massive expansion of Manchester Metrolink

Sorry to be pedantic, but Manchester Metrolink isn't a Lancashire NR issue as such, it concerns Greater Manchester strictly.

West Yorkshire in particular seems to do better than Lancashire, with WYPTE's cosy relationship with Northern. Firstly, the 144s are more suitable than the 142s, especially the 3-car versions compared to battered bus-seated 142s. The shiny 333s on the Airedale and Wharfedale Lines are still impressive, despite 10 years service, and further (albeit older) units are coming to ease overcrowding. Plus, there is West Yorks fares, which are set so much lower than the equivalents in Lancashire itself (excluding GMPTE and Merseytravel, although I feel they are still a bit dearer).

The 180s are used out of pure necessity and remember how few of them there are - they run on a select few services and there is none at weekends. The Man Vic - Blackpool North can also be anything from a pacer to a 158 (mainly 150/156).

 

[YorkshireBear]

Metrolink extension is funded primarily through local council tax and borrowing along with the North West regional transport grant (In fact Greater Manchester's full allocation of the grant from 2011-2016), Yorkshire gets the same money the only difference is where local leaders choose to spend it.

Leeds station has been expanded twice in the last 10 years along with other local network capacity enhancements while the only NR investment on this side of the pennines is replacing decayed station roofs.

Sheffield is getting 4 more trams for existing services and the tram-train trial line and Northern has just recieved more rolling stock for Yorkshire services.

relatively true, but sheffields bid for extra trams was rejected completely. the tram train trial is still in process though

 

[WatcherZero]

They changed their mind and approved it, though I think the Dft added the caveat they had to be compatible with the tram-train line. Its still technically an increase as their not considered part of the trial itself where the property/infrastructure reverts back to the Dft after it ends (3 years I think it was) so they would keep the trams even if the tram-train line closed.

 

[tbtc]

Sorry to be pedantic, but Manchester Metrolink isn't a Lancashire NR issue as such, it concerns Greater Manchester strictly.

West Yorkshire in particular seems to do better than Lancashire, with WYPTE's cosy relationship with Northern. Firstly, the 144s are more suitable than the 142s, especially the 3-car versions compared to battered bus-seated 142s. The shiny 333s on the Airedale and Wharfedale Lines are still impressive, despite 10 years service, and further (albeit older) units are coming to ease overcrowding. Plus, there is West Yorks fares, which are set so much lower than the equivalents in Lancashire itself (excluding GMPTE and Merseytravel, although I feel they are still a bit dearer).

The 180s are used out of pure necessity and remember how few of them there are - they run on a select few services and there is none at weekends. The Man Vic - Blackpool North can also be anything from a pacer to a 158 (mainly 150/156).

I'm using "Lancashire" and "Yorkshire" in terms of "west of the Pennines" and "east of the Pennines", rather than getting into an argument about unitary authorities, whether Merseyside/Humberside count etc.

However you look at it, the west side of the Pennines is getting getting new electrification, new tram lines etc whilst the east side of the Pennines has had no such thing since privatisation.

 

[WestCoast]

I'm using "Lancashire" and "Yorkshire" in terms of "west of the Pennines" and "east of the Pennines", rather than getting into an argument about unitary authorities, whether Merseyside/Humberside count etc.

However you look at it, the west side of the Pennines is getting getting new electrification, new tram lines etc whilst the east side of the Pennines has had no such thing since privatisation.

I still maintain than I think West Yorkshire in particular still gets a relatively good deal. When, electrification finally arrives "the West" will have hand-me-down class 319s, which may be approaching 30 years old by then. Not great compared to whats happened with the Airedale and Wharfedale.

 

[tbtc]

I still maintain than I think West Yorkshire in particular still gets a relatively good deal. When, electrification finally arrives "the West" will have hand-me-down class 319s, which may be approaching 30 years old by then. Not great compared to whats happened with the Airedale and Wharfedale.

...but, as I've said the Shipley lines got 1960s 308s when they were electrified (unwanted in the South East, and with a coach removed), its not that dissimilar to Lancashire getting cascaded 319s from Thameslink (even Airdrie - Bathgate is getting cascaded EMUs at first).

The Shipley lines then got new three-coach EMUs around a decade after electrification, which were later extended to four coach as demand grew. There's no reason to think this wouldn't be the case west of the Pennines or think that you'd be stuck with 319s forever.

I remain convinced that there's a good business case for wiring other lines in Yorkshire (particularly Leeds - Harrogate - York), but there's nothing agreed. With the GWML being electrified this will leave Sheffield as surely the biggest place in England without electrified trains? But, hey, that's just my view...

 

[Nym]

As others suggest, Class 185 is likely to be with us for many years (2035 or later), being replaced only on lines which get electrified. As the North West electrification proceeds, 185s will probably displace all the TPE 170's.

In the long term, if there are any more 185's spare, I suspect their future will include replacement of their engines with lower-powered versions, possibly with the centre car unpowered. In current format, their running costs would be too high for most regional services on lines limited to 75 mph or less.
Bevan

Exactly, in the short term, any displaced stock on TPE will simply be needed for strengthening other services.

Considering the growth on TPE currently, especially across the pennines. It will be needed soon for all services between Manchester and Leeds to be 6 carrages long, potentially 9 carrages on some services.

If electrification does come for Victoria - Hull & Middlesbrough then the 185s will still be needed for double length servcices through the hope valley, to Barrow in Furness, Windermere, Chester - Scarbrough etc etc. With any new trains for TPE being either Desiro City (380) or Desiro (350).

I did read somwhere in the NW RUS that the plan was to speed up the TPE services by having all of them calling at Vic - Huddersfeild - Leeds only, and having 2tph semi fast on this route, calling Victoria - Ashton U Lyne - Stalybridge - Huddersfeild - Dewsbury - Leeds. I think that was after adding some 4track to the route though. It was also mentioned having a Bradford - Huddersfeild - Victoria route IIRC.

 

[lm321412]

Anyway, more seriously: Cascades,

• Thameslink 319s go to London Midland
• LM 321s and 323s (if possible) go to Northern
• Class 365s go to FGW
• FGW 165/166 services replace 158 services
• FGW 158s to EMT/Northern

I think 319s would be brillaint for Cross City and I think there is definately a case for them coming here!

The 323s could then join a larger Northern fleet, with 321901 - 321903 also moving over to the North West and moving 321411 - 321417 up their too. You would then have absolutely loads of EMUs in the North West to provide adequate capacity and to meet all the electrification.

Remember, their are 86x 319s and considering Crossrail won't displace 317/321/365s for a good while, there will also be a large number of them moving to FGW.

165/166s will have to be checked due to guage issues, however their will still be some operating Great Malvern - London Paddington.

From there, I would look at withdrawing Great Westerns 143s and transferring a large bulk of the 150s over to Arriva Trains Wales and withdrawing 142s and 143s (unless they are electrified) then I would displace the 150s to Northern and start withdrawing 142s.

 

[IanXC]

The 323s could then join a larger Northern fleet, with 321901 - 321903 also moving over to the North West and moving 321411 - 321417 up their too. You would then have absolutely loads of EMUs in the North West to provide adequate capacity and to meet all the electrification.

What stock is going to replace he 321/9s for Leeds-Doncaster? Or are you thinking of the 322s which would mean still not tackling the diesel under the wires services, and hence not allowing multiple working on Leeds-Bradford-Manchester?

 

[tbtc]

I think 319s would be brillaint for Cross City and I think there is definately a case for them coming here!

When I suggested this before (allowing all 323s to go to Lancashire) there was some negative reaction because it would mean an end to the doubled up service on some trips.

But then this is the problem with talk of cascades, someone always comes up with one example of one rush hour doubled-up DMU that would end up being replaced by a smaller EMU (or whatever). Got to go with the greater good.

 

[Class172]

I think 319s would be brillaint for Cross City and I think there is definately a case for them coming here!

The 323s could then join a larger Northern fleet, with 321901 - 321903 also moving over to the North West and moving 321411 - 321417 up their too. You would then have absolutely loads of EMUs in the North West to provide adequate capacity and to meet all the electrification.

With the 319s going to the Cross-City line, there would be greater capacity: 4 cars compared to a 3 car 323. This will help when the Bromsgrove electrification is complete. It would also mean all 323s would be with northern if the Walsall/Wolverhampton 323s were replaced by larger 319s.

It would also mean that most class 321s would be with Northern, this would give them a gigantic electric fleet in stead of a gigantic diesel fleet - Northern would be happy because they'd be getting 20 year old 323s as opposed to 30 year old 319s

 

[LE Greys]

With the 319s going to the Cross-City line, there would be greater capacity: 4 cars compared to a 3 car 323. This will help when the Bromsgrove electrification is complete. It would also mean all 323s would be with northern if the Walsall/Wolverhampton 323s were replaced by larger 319s.

It would also mean that most class 321s would be with Northern, this would give them a gigantic electric fleet in stead of a gigantic diesel fleet - Northern would be happy because they'd be getting 20 year old 323s as opposed to 30 year old 319s

And here's yet another twist. When the Thameslink connection finally happens in 2018, presumably the new Thameslink sets will replace the 365s. That releases a further 40 4-car units for somewhere, units that would be pretty much middle-aged by then. Usefully, they are fully capable of running on both major electrification systems, but I don't think it's likely that they would head south. Merseyrail is a possibility, but there is a good chance they would replace/supplement the 323s.

Just a thought.

 

[sprinterguy]

With the 319s going to the Cross-City line, there would be greater capacity: 4 cars compared to a 3 car 323. This will help when the Bromsgrove electrification is complete. It would also mean all 323s would be with northern if the Walsall/Wolverhampton 323s were replaced by larger 319s.

As tbtc rightly makes a note of, it is possible that you would lose the ability to double up services, as occurs often enough on the Cross City line with the 323s, if they were replaced by 319s, without having to undertake any platform extension works. A six carriage 323 formation (With 23m carriages) on the busiest Cross City services is a sigificant increase in capacity over a single four carriage 319, with shorter 20m carriages.

When I suggested this before (allowing all 323s to go to Lancashire) there was some negative reaction because it would mean an end to the doubled up service on some trips.

But then this is the problem with talk of cascades, someone always comes up with one example of one rush hour doubled-up DMU that would end up being replaced by a smaller EMU (or whatever). Got to go with the greater good.

Indeed: And on the other hand, I have stated in the past that the difference in overall train length between a doubled up 323 formation (138 metres) is not so much less than that of a doubled up 319 formation (160 metres: Basically, one coach length extra), so platform extensions may not be required. Overall, replacing the LM 323s with thoroughly refurbished 319s is a very good idea that will reap benefits on the many busy services that do not benefit from pairs of 323s, but I would be very sad to see West Midlands' purpose built fleet of perfectly suited 323s moved away from the area.

 

[ChrisCooper]

When I suggested this before (allowing all 323s to go to Lancashire) there was some negative reaction because it would mean an end to the doubled up service on some trips.

But then this is the problem with talk of cascades, someone always comes up with one example of one rush hour doubled-up DMU that would end up being replaced by a smaller EMU (or whatever). Got to go with the greater good.

What is the greater good though if off peak trains end up being replaced by longer trains that are then half empty, and the already packed rush hour trains are shortened? Especially in this case it would be mad. A 6 car 323 can seat 568 wheras the highest density 319s can seat 319, only 35 more than a single 323! The problem is though a pair of 319s are 160m long wheras a pair of 323s are only 140m, so although there is not much in it, if you can't double up the 319s you are loosing a lot of length and capacity (323s are 23m coaches).

 

[sprinterguy]

And the Snow Hill lines will be likely to need at least 9 car services soon. I'd like to see it quadrupled from Smethwick Galton Bridge to Stourbridge

Four tracking over this section would be unnecessary, not to mention probably impossible from an engineering point of view, as all the trains over the route run to very similar stopping patterns and performance characteristics, due to the standard nature of the suburban services that operate and the type of rolling stock used.

From the train loading data I have examined in my day job, there is only a very select number of peak hour services that see, at this point, sufficiently heavy use to warrant six carriages or more, let alone nine. Additionally, the number of new class 172 vehicles ordered only matches the number of 150 vehicles, so the number of bolstered diagrams of four and five carriages should remain similar, although approval of an order for an additional 26 class 172 vehicles or retention of some 150s would probably allow for the extension of some diagrams. I for one would certainly like to see a couple of diagrams for pairs of three carriage 172s operating over the Snow Hill lines for a start.

 

[tbtc]

What is the greater good though if off peak trains end up being replaced by longer trains that are then half empty, and the already packed rush hour trains are shortened?

Its a tricky balance. Do you base the service provision for the sake of a handful of peak services? These services are important, but where do you draw the line?

I've had this argument about Lancashire electrification too, since there are some doubled up peak services that are longer than a single EMU.

The trouble is that on a lot of lines you'll never match the peak demand (especially in a big city like Birmingham/ Manchester), even with ten coach trains. Is it cost effective to have all these units spare for most of the day (only used on a couple of trips a day)?

Its probably a topic for another thread entirely, how you balance the peak/ off-peak demands... just my thoughts

 

[Class172]

From the train loading data I have examined in my day job, there is only a very select number of peak hour services that see, at this point, sufficiently heavy use to warrant six carriages or more, let alone nine. Additionally, the number of new class 172 vehicles ordered only matches the number of 150 vehicles, so the number of bolstered diagrams of four and five carriages should remain similar, although approval of an order for an additional 26 class 172 vehicles or retention of some 150s would probably allow for the extension of some diagrams. I for one would certainly like to see a couple of diagrams for pairs of three carriage 172s operating over the Snow Hill lines for a start.

I would like to see some 6 car services When I said 9 car, I was being a bit vague as this would be in the next 10 years.

You say that you look at the passenger loadings on trains: I'm suprised that the 07:47 Droitwich Spa-Worcester Fgt St service (sorry I don't know where it starts) hasn't been extended. Even with 3 carriages, seats are hard to come by, with well over 50 people boarding the train at Droitwich, when it is alrady full of commuters and school children (being one myself ) - does this service show up as one of the busier ones. Last week, there was a shortage of carriages and it came as a 2 car set - as soon as I saw it approaching Droitwich from the platform, I instantly though OH NO! Even though it was very quiet (luckily) for its standards, some people couldn't get on the train.

Also the 15:40 Hereford-New St is very busy - does this also show up as a busy loading? It only has 2 carriages, ideally it needs 3, especially on Mondays and Fridays, where I usually have to sit in the luggage rack (if it isn't full of course) on these days. Last month, on one day the service turned up as 3 car (153+170/5), boy did this make a difference!

What is the greater good though if off peak trains end up being replaced by longer trains that are then half empty, and the already packed rush hour trains are shortened? Especially in this case it would be mad. A 6 car 323 can seat 568 wheras the highest density 319s can seat 319, only 35 more than a single 323! The problem is though a pair of 319s are 160m long wheras a pair of 323s are only 140m, so although there is not much in it, if you can't double up the 319s you are loosing a lot of length and capacity (323s are 23m coaches).

I forgot Class 323s had 23m coaches

 

[OxtedL]

...where I usually have to sit in the luggage rack (if it isn't full of course) on these days.

Sorry, being very much like a broken record, I can't resist the opportunity to suggest to you that having the luggage rack all to yourself is a luxury that we don't get on the Uckfield line. With 8-car trains.

 

[Class172]

Sorry, being very much like a broken record, I can't resist the opportunity to suggest to you that having the luggage rack all to yourself is a luxury that we don't get on the Uckfield line. With 8-car trains.

Well when I mean empty, its sitting with another friend with a pile of luggage behind and below you!

 

[sprinterguy]

I would like to see some 6 car services When I said 9 car, I was being a bit vague as this would be in the next 10 years.

You say that you look at the passenger loadings on trains: I'm suprised that the 07:47 Droitwich Spa-Worcester Fgt St service (sorry I don't know where it starts) hasn't been extended. Even with 3 carriages, seats are hard to come by, with well over 50 people boarding the train at Droitwich, when it is alrady full of commuters and school children (being one myself ) - does this service show up as one of the busier ones. Last week, there was a shortage of carriages and it came as a 2 car set - as soon as I saw it approaching Droitwich from the platform, I instantly though OH NO! Even though it was very quiet (luckily) for its standards, some people couldn't get on the train.

Also the 15:40 Hereford-New St is very busy - does this also show up as a busy loading? It only has 2 carriages, ideally it needs 3, especially on Mondays and Fridays, where I usually have to sit in the luggage rack (if it isn't full of course) on these days. Last month, on one day the service turned up as 3 car (153+170/5), boy did this make a difference!

I may have to unearth the figures when I'm next in the office. I'm certainly familiar with having to sit in the luggage rack on certain of the Hereford runs (even those formed of a couple of 170/5s), they're very popular services!

The 06:28 Worcester to New Street is also surprisingly well loaded, when you consider how early in the day it operates.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I may have to unearth the figures when I'm next in the office. I'm certainly familiar with having to sit in the luggage rack on certain of the Hereford runs (even those formed of a couple of 170/5s), they're very popular services!

The 06:28 Worcester to New Street is also surprisingly well loaded, when you consider how early in the day it operates.

I am familiar with First Class ticketing, but is there a special ticket for First Class Luggage Rack issued on the Uckfield Line?

National Rail Enquiries...another missed opportunity on your web site:roll:

 

[OxtedL]

I am familiar with First Class ticketing, but is there a special ticket for First Class Luggage Rack issued on the Uckfield Line?

I believe it is termed the "first class section" :roll:

Honestly not worth it on a 171 (or a 377 either) for a tops 35 minute journey for me. Uckfield passengers may feel differently

 

[Class172]

I may have to unearth the figures when I'm next in the office. I'm certainly familiar with having to sit in the luggage rack on certain of the Hereford runs (even those formed of a couple of 170/5s), they're very popular services!

On the Snow Hill services, there isn't the luxury of a luggage rack (while the 150s are still around), so when I get on the 07:46 service to Worcester Fgt St, I use a different tac-tic: as long as it isn't 150001 or 150002, me and my friend will try to go in the 'lobby area' by the disused cab - people rarely go in there because there are no seats, but I'm only standing for 11mins, so it isn't that bad.

When this train is late, it has to wait at Worcs Tunnel Junc for the service to B'ham to come through the tunnel. This is formed of a 170/5+170/6; looking through the windows, even this size train is packed (no-one standing but all seats are taken) and it's still got 40 mins and 3 other busy stations before it reaches it's destination - about 100 then get on this train at Droitwich.

The 06:28 Worcester to New Street is also surprisingly well loaded, when you consider how early in the day it operates.

Suprising

The 07:32 Droitwich Spa-Birmingham (from Hereford?) New St is also well loaded from what I have seen, about 60 people get on at Droitwich