• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Could Northern get more Civity trains?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
113,749
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
(such as 158s and 175s from EMR and TfW for example)

I forgot the 175s and the Welsh 158s (unless those go to EWR due to already having ETCS). Yes, a fleet of 158, 170, 175 and 195 only would work fine, again with 195s doing primarily local stopping routes due to their transmission being more suited to that purpose.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Andyh82

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2014
Messages
4,602
It will be 20 years before electrification can make a significant difference to our predicament.
If units are bought now there will be places to run for their entire service lives.
Exactly
Look at the satiation now in Yorkshire, Transpennine is first, then maybe Calder Valley, then maybe the likes of Harrogate or Leeds to Sheffield.

After that maybe Hope Valley, Sheffield to Doncaster, it'll be about 2045 by now...
 

221101 Voyager

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2019
Messages
1,423
Location
Milton Keynes
I think this would be a sensible approach. Furthermore, so far as possible, the 170s and 158s should work long-distance services, and the 195s local services, taking full advantage of their acceleration and fuel efficiency at low speeds. This might even allow timetables to be improved on lines with frequent stops like the CLC and the diesel commuter services around Manchester and Leeds. (They already appear to be using 195s to Rose Hill which is a great idea).

The next plan after that could potentially be to replace 158s and 170s with bionic duckweed-fuelled bi-modes, or whatever works in the many trials, plus consideration of electrification of those Manchester local routes that won't be Metrolinked.
Thank you for agreeing with me. :)

Good points you have made above.

I did indeed mean 333 on my post you quoted. I was tired last night and put the wrong number.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top