Class 221 for Grand Central

[Carlisle]

With an impressive sub half-min gain...

well obviously, it was only a short trial section supposed to be extend much further but ultimately wasn’t. away from the WCML .

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

To be fair the Avanti ones are the better ones compared to XC, but the interior is still very high density (coach D aside) so will be a big downgrade in comfort terms from 180s.

The main thing I see as bad from this is that they're an opportunity to sort out XC's capacity issues (and replace the HSTs) which AGAIN is being ignored.

As I said before, you can’t just blanket call it a downgrade as different things matter to different people. The Voyagers have thick, cushioned seats which some might appreciate over the current Coradia seats. They’ve really made the headrest an awkward shape on the last refurbishment, the seats remind me of a teddy bear that’s been overstuffed.

Ten 221s will still remain. That’s still enough to strengthen a good deal of XC’s shorter Voyager services, should they be taken up.

 

[bramling]

As I said before, you can’t just blanket call it a downgrade as different things matter to different people. The Voyagers have thick, cushioned seats which some might appreciate over the current Coradia seats. They’ve really made the headrest an awkward shape on the last refurbishment, the seats remind me of a teddy bear that’s been overstuffed.

Ten 221s will still remain. That’s still enough to strengthen a good deal of XC’s shorter Voyager services, should they be taken up.

It does seem to suggest that XC aren’t going to get much, if anything, as it would have been a better fit for XC to get the 221s and GC to hold on for the 222s. It seems a fair bet that the best XC will now get is the balance of 221s.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

It seems a fair bet that the best XC will now get is the balance of 221s.

As I said, thirty four 221s instead of twenty four can still make a good amount of 4/5 car services longer, so I’d take that over nothing.

 

[Halish Railway]

The main thing I see as bad from this is that they're an opportunity to sort out XC's capacity issues (and replace the HSTs) which AGAIN is being ignored.

Voyagers to XC is a false economy in my opinion. They’ll just drive up costs by adding even more thirsty diesels and requiring double-crewing for pairs of Voyager.

What is really needed is a fleet of bi-modes, permanently fixed with at least 450 seats each.

 

[bramling]

As I said, thirty four 221s instead of twenty four can still make a good amount of 4/5 car services longer, so I’d take that over nothing.

I still wouldn’t be surprised if it ends up being nothing.

 

[Energy]

Voyagers to XC is a false economy in my opinion. They’ll just drive up costs by adding even more thirsty diesels [...]

What is really needed is a fleet of bi-modes, permanently fixed with at least 450 seats each.

Costs can't be that bad if GC are going for 221s over bimodes...

 

[Halish Railway]

Costs can't be that bad if GC are going for 221s over bimodes...

But Grand Central don’t have the DfT hawking over them telling them to cut costs. But they might have Network Rail pressuring them to get rid of the failure-prone Adelantes.

I’d imagine that Grand Central have made the decision that it’d be less hassle to get rid of the Adelantes and get Voyagers instead given their proven track record and availability of parts and maintenance expertise given that XC’s Voyagers aren’t going anywhere (no pun intended).

Every time an Adelante sits down on the ECML or fails before it makes it out of the depot GC must take a hit in having to pay compensation.

 

[nw1]

The main thing I see as bad from this is that they're an opportunity to sort out XC's capacity issues (and replace the HSTs) which AGAIN is being ignored.

Indeed. Operators like Grand Central should surely be lower down on the priority list than core, long-standing operators such as XC whose services are surely more essential.

A bit contentious perhaps, but on the ECML you already have LNER running the core service, and the needs of other operators, such as Grand Central, on routes with an established operator should be seen as "nice to have" rather than essential. Passengers from Bradford or Sunderland to London can surely just catch very frequent local services to Leeds and Newcastle respectively, and then catch a frequent LNER to London. On the XC network you don't have anyone except XC, unless you want a slow journey with multiple changes (for example Birmingham New Street to Reading: walk to Moor Street; Chiltern to Banbury; local service from Banbury to Oxford if you're lucky; GWR service to Reading) so it's surely a big priority to ensure that XC have enough stock to run their services without overcrowding.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's quite possible the 221s were cheap if nobody else wanted them, too.

 

[RailWonderer]

But Grand Central don’t have the DfT hawking over them telling them to cut costs. But they might have Network Rail pressuring them to get rid of the failure-prone Adelantes.

I’d imagine that Grand Central have made the decision that it’d be less hassle to get rid of the Adelantes and get Voyagers instead given their proven track record and availability of parts and maintenance expertise given that XC’s Voyagers aren’t going anywhere (no pun intended).

Every time an Adelante sits down on the ECML or fails before it makes it out of the depot GC must take a hit in having to pay compensation.

The 180s are lucky to have lasted this long frankly, on GC, FGW and EMR. Quite a few TOCs thought they'd have better luck than the last so the 180s been passed around the network like a disease.
The Voyagers are far more deserving of a full service life and will be cheaper to run too.

To be fair the Avanti ones are the better ones compared to XC, but the interior is still very high density (coach D aside) so will be a big downgrade in comfort terms from 180s.

The extra legroom and larger windows on the Voyagers will be an improvement and - I know this is subjective - but the seat comfort too.

What is really needed is a fleet of bi-modes, permanently fixed with at least 450 seats each.

Leasing costs are too high at the moment, I doubt we see any new orders for a while yet.

 

[skyhigh]

Operators like Grand Central should surely be lower down on the priority list than core, long-standing operators such as XC whose services are surely more essential.

But if XC show no interest in them, why shouldn't the ROSCO let someone who actually wants to pay them money for the use of their asset have them?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 May 2023 ==

To be fair the Avanti ones are the better ones compared to XC, but the interior is still very high density (coach D aside) so will be a big downgrade in comfort terms from 180s.

Given that GC is open access, there's no reason they couldn't get their wallet out and alter the interior if they felt it would have a commercial benefit to them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The extra legroom and larger windows on the Voyagers will be an improvement and - I know this is subjective - but the seat comfort too.

Er, wha? 180s have more legroom than Voyagers, considerably so, other than the old "hybrid" Coach D.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 May 2023 ==

Given that GC is open access, there's no reason they couldn't get their wallet out and alter the interior if they felt it would have a commercial benefit to them.

Given that they're a budget operation, anything probably goes, really.

 

[RailWonderer]

Er, wha? 180s have more legroom than Voyagers, considerably so.

I was thinking of coach D on the Voyager. The airline seats seem to have more legroom on the 180s but the bay seats less so. Maybe it was just me because I've been on more rammed 180s than rammed Voyagers.

Given that they're a budget operation, anything probably goes, really.

They're not supposed to be a budget operation, I thought the same a few years ago and posted the question on the forum but apparently not.

 

[Class172]

But if XC show no interest in them, why shouldn't the ROSCO let someone who actually wants to pay them money for the use of their asset have them?

It's not so much whether XC showed any interested (I imagine they did), it's whether the DfT would authorise the additional expenditure for leasing extra units. I do completely agree with you however, if the owners of the 221s find that they are unable to lease them to XC, they should be able to lease them to another party that is willing to pay the cost.

 

[hexagon789]

well obviously, it was only a short trial section supposed to be extend much further but ultimately wasn’t. away from the WCML .

Sorry, my post sounded more flippant than I meant it!

Yes, among other upgrades VXC had wanted in order to accelerate XC services but which were not implemented.

 

[nw1]

It's not so much whether XC showed any interested (I imagine they did), it's whether the DfT would authorise the additional expenditure for leasing extra units. I do completely agree with you however, if the owners of the 221s find that they are unable to lease them to XC, they should be able to lease them to another party that is willing to pay the cost.

Seems to indicate the system is not set up to easily let the companies with the biggest need (and given the lack of other operators over many of their routes, this surely applies to XC) have the stock though. If the DfT are preventing this happening, that's not good.

 

[hexagon789]

Are all ten to enter service after Avanti has finished them, or can we expect 142/143

142/143 are indeed to head over immediately on completion of exams to allow training.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 May 2023 ==

My guess would be that the first 2 will head over earlier to allow for crew training and competence retention, until the rest can join

Yes, that's the plan

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 May 2023 ==

I was told it would be only a ‘soft touch’ refurb and rebrand so make of that what you will.

I take it much the same as the ex-LNER Mk4s to TfW.

So removal of all AWC branding and possibly external reliverying, but thar would it.

 

[Energy]

Seems to indicate the system is not set up to easily let the companies with the biggest need (and given the lack of other operators over many of their routes, this surely applies to XC) have the stock though. If the DfT are preventing this happening, it really seems like something's wrong.

The DfT have x amount of money to spend, as inflation was going up their budget was effectively decreasing so no stock which would require subsidy was authorised. Now inflation has lowered the DfT are more willing to spend (class 360 refurbishment finally got authorised).

GC might have offered a longer lease, lease extensions recently have been around 5 years (class 165/166s) with longer leases only happening on stock which is very unlikely to change (e.g Thameslink). GC could offer a 10+ year lease if it gets its track access agreement sufficiently extended which is more attractive to a ROSCO and the banks which fund it.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

So removal of all AWC branding and possibly external reliverying, but thar would it.

Seems a shame to leave the interiors with the blue walls and seats of another operator, especially when they not long ago refurbished all of the current stock, but I think the Avanti Voyagers have a very nice interior.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seems a shame to leave the interiors with the blue walls and seats of another operator, especially when they not long ago refurbished all of the current stock, but I think the Avanti Voyagers have a very nice interior.

You could paint the end walls grey instead, but dark blue and orange go quite well so they could just add their branding. The seat covers are relatively new and generic so don't need swapping.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

XC removed the tilting mechanism yonks ago - my understanding is the 221's have fixed bars in place of it, to save on maintenance costs. If memory serves correctly, Stafford to Birmingham is about the only corridor of the entire XC network that could have made use of it anyway

No, Stafford-Norton Bridge and Stone-Stoke-Cheadle Hulme is also fitted with TASS for EPS speeds (used by Pendolinos).
Stafford-Bushbury is the tilting section, nothing beyond there towards Birmingham.
125 is in any case permitted on the same stretch for non-tilt HSTs (eg Voyagers).

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

You could paint the end walls grey instead, but dark blue and orange go quite well so they could just add their branding. The seat covers are relatively new and generic so don't need swapping.

I was thinking more about the first class. I personally think its a shame to go from the classy recently refurbished cream-mauve leather in the 180’s first to the blue and grey pleather that Virgin had put in

 

[Energy]

You could paint the end walls grey instead, but dark blue and orange go quite well so they could just add their branding. The seat covers are relatively new and generic so don't need swapping.

The interior is fine for GC, though I wish they put something on the tables as they are rather ugly. Wonder if they'll use the reservation displays...

 

[Bletchleyite]

The interior is fine for GC, though I wish they put something on the tables as they are rather ugly. Wonder if they'll use the reservation displays...

They don't work half the time anyway...always been a big Voyager issue.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Indeed. Operators like Grand Central should surely be lower down on the priority list than core, long-standing operators such as XC whose services are surely more essential.

All operators are equal (or at least their money is).
Open access GC (parent Arriva) can spend their money where they like, as long as they have access rights for the trains and they/Arriva can cover the costs.
So can XC (also owned by Arriva!), but they only have the money the DfT will allow to be spent, as the DfT also owns the revenue and costs for the operation, not XC.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

They don't work half the time anyway...always been a big Voyager issue.

Really? I find that on the Pendolinos and MK4 it's quite random whether they work or not, but I always think they're quite good on the Voyagers. The XC ones always seem to work anyway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Really? I find that on the Pendolinos and MK4 it's quite random whether they work or not, but I always think they're quite good on the Voyagers. The XC ones always seem to work anyway.

The Avanti ones seem to work, from observation, about 50-75% of the time, tending towards the lower figure.

Pendolino ones pretty much always work unless they haven't downloaded the whole train. Faults with them in individual coaches are near-unknown.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The Avanti ones seem to work, from observation, about 50-75% of the time, tending towards the lower figure.

Pendolino ones pretty much always work unless they haven't downloaded the whole train. Faults with them in individual coaches are near-unknown.

The Pendolino ones tend to reset halfway through the journey, and are also harder to read.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Pendolino ones tend to reset halfway through the journey

Never, ever seen that.

and are also harder to read.

Displaying correct information is the priority.