Cumbrian Coast Loco Hauled Stock

[37038]

The single track section between Parton and Harrington was a solution to reinstating the line when the sea wall was breached in a storm around 1970. There are 3 geological threats to this part of the route:-

• The sea
• the cliffs falling onto the line
• subsidence from the workings of William Pit below.

It would of course be nice to see improvements to the route but this seems unlikely in the foreseeable future.

The first two have caused major issues with the infrastructure within the last 12 months

 

[47802]

Yes but they don't. Pacer/Sprinter and infrastructure failures are just as common as LHCS failure. And yet, as mentioned by a previous poster, there's never any mention when a 142 sits down somewhere?

With delay in GWRM and the general cascades being delayed, there's a distinct possibility LHCS is here for slightly longer than the current contract

But are they I have seen comments elsewhere that the LHCS were significantly below typical Northern 156 reliability, possibly the recent alleged improvement may make them roughly similar now, plus the high cost of operating these trains is potentially money which could be used elsewhere.

Why should they be used beyond 2019, even with the present delays Northern should be able to get all its cascaded stock by then, and I very much doubt DRS will want to spend significant money making the MK2's 2020 compliant.

 

[yorksrob]

Some of the mk2's appeared to have had CET's fitted when I used the service in September.

 

[47802]

Some of the mk2's appeared to have had CET's fitted when I used the service in September.

They would still need to modify the doors and even if they went for the internal door handle option instead of power doors I believe still requires significant modification to the door locking system.

In any case even if they still short of stock in 2019 I'm sure they would look at other options in preference to keeping the museum pieces.

 

[sprinterguy]

But are they I have seen comments elsewhere that the LHCS were significantly below typical Northern 156 reliability, possibly the recent alleged improvement may make them roughly similar now

It's not the be all and end all of assessing reliability, but the annual average Miles per Technical Incident as of October 2016 for the class 37s was 3,315, while for Northern's class 156s it was 10,106, so the 156s are still streets ahead by that measure.

 

[47802]

It's not the be all and end all of assessing reliability, but the annual average Miles per Technical Incident as of October 2016 for the class 37s was 3,315, while for Northern's class 156s it was 10,106, so the 156s are still streets ahead by that measure.

Ok thanks for that, it brings some clarity to the situation.

Yes as Rail enthusiast I enjoy travelling on and photographing them, and no doubt it has brought some enthusiasts to the line, but if it drives regular customers away through poor reliability then its no good.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They would still need to modify the doors and even if they went for the internal door handle option instead of power doors I believe still requires significant modification to the door locking system.

Why? Would surely just be the case of designing a suitable internal handle and fixing the droplights shut. That type of lock had them years ago.

 

[47802]

Why? Would surely just be the case of designing a suitable internal handle and fixing the droplights shut. That type of lock had them years ago.

I imagine that the single bolt at the top of the door is regarded as inadequate, as it is you sometimes see people trying to open the door before the bolt is released and you get considerable flex on the door with opening quite a bit at the bottom.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I imagine that the single bolt at the top of the door is regarded as inadequate, as it is you sometimes see people trying to open the door before the bolt is released and you get considerable flex on the door with opening quite a bit at the bottom.

Fair point. To keep cost down, could the internal handle be done something like UIC door blocking, i.e. a solenoid disconnects the handle mechanism when the door is locked (with a spring putting the mechanism back to engaged in the event of power failure, and a small break glass box with a non-defeatable mechanical release in it on the door itself?)

That would keep the changes essentially within the handle plus a small piece of wiring to link the handle to the existing locking power supply.

 

[70014IronDuke]

I do find myself surprised that some posters on this thread seem determined to concentrate on issues posed by loco hauled services whilst barely paying lip service to the other issues affecting the route.

I suspect I am guilty as charged.

But the sad reality is that i started monitoring the first three workings of the day in order to see if the criticism of their records was justified (I thought it wasn't). I would love to see the LHCS doing a great job and Cumbrian punters demanding they keep 'their stock' when it comes time to change.

Fact is, since I've been following it closely (from about August-Spetember) the record of these trains has not been good. It did seem to improve in December, until this week, when it slumped again.

And this thread is titled Cumbrian Coast LHCS. If anyone wants to start a "Cumbrian Cost - just positives and no criticism thread" - it's a free board. But if the Cl 37 turns keep failing (for whatever reason) unless the mods complain (and I can't see how they would be able to do so) I shall keep on posting.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes but they don't. Pacer/Sprinter and infrastructure failures are just as common as LHCS failure. And yet, as mentioned by a previous poster, there's never any mention when a 142 sits down somewhere?

With delay in GWRM and the general cascades being delayed, there's a distinct possibility LHCS is here for slightly longer than the current contract

This is an LHCS thread: posts about Cl 37 failures (and successes) are on topic, about 156s are off topic. Of course, I'd be happy for you to come up with figures to back your assertion. Because, fact is, from my perusals of the Cumbrian coast workings, I'd challenge you to prove that the DMUs are more failure prone than the 37s - because from what I see, they most clearly are not.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I'd challenge you to prove that the DMUs are more failure prone than the 37s - because from what I see, they most clearly are not.

sprinterguy's post (quote coming up) is pretty clear proof that, sadly, the LHCS is performing worse than the 156s. Sadly, because when they work the 4-coach mrk2 formation is probably more appropriate than a 2-car 156 on most of the services diagramed for LHCS. As for Pacers, when I went to sample the Cumbrian Coast LHCS the Pacer ride (vice one of the two LHCS diagrams) was rather unpleasant; I'm not sure which would put off passengers more, the unreliable 37s or the uncomfortable Pacers.

It's not the be all and end all of assessing reliability, but the annual average Miles per Technical Incident as of October 2016 for the class 37s was 3,315, while for Northern's class 156s it was 10,106, so the 156s are still streets ahead by that measure.

I can't remember what the figure for Pacers was, though I think it was worse than the 156s. Could another silver-spanner performance from DRS with the LHCS bring them close to Pacer reliablity?

 

[yorksrob]

They would still need to modify the doors and even if they went for the internal door handle option instead of power doors I believe still requires significant modification to the door locking system.

In any case even if they still short of stock in 2019 I'm sure they would look at other options in preference to keeping the museum pieces.

It means they're still part of the way there, and makes the option of retaining a little more likely.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I suspect I am guilty as charged.

But the sad reality is that i started monitoring the first three workings of the day in order to see if the criticism of their records was justified (I thought it wasn't). I would love to see the LHCS doing a great job and Cumbrian punters demanding they keep 'their stock' when it comes time to change.

Fact is, since I've been following it closely (from about August-Spetember) the record of these trains has not been good. It did seem to improve in December, until this week, when it slumped again.

And this thread is titled Cumbrian Coast LHCS. If anyone wants to start a "Cumbrian Cost - just positives and no criticism thread" - it's a free board. But if the Cl 37 turns keep failing (for whatever reason) unless the mods complain (and I can't see how they would be able to do so) I shall keep on posting.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


This is an LHCS thread: posts about Cl 37 failures (and successes) are on topic, about 156s are off topic. Of course, I'd be happy for you to come up with figures to back your assertion. Because, fact is, from my perusals of the Cumbrian coast workings, I'd challenge you to prove that the DMUs are more failure prone than the 37s - because from what I see, they most clearly are not.

Perhaps I should start monitoring the 16:34 Whitehaven - Carnforth since this is the service which has regularly been my bane.

As for the thread title, since this has turned into a thread about route reliability, I see little value in discussing one aspect of that reliability in isolation, particularly since one will inevitably touch on other aspects of reliability as a matter of comparison anyway, regardless of the title. A title such as "Cumbrian Coast reliability and class 37 haulage" would be preferable.

 

[badger1badger]

I do find myself surprised that some posters on this thread seem determined to concentrate on issues posed by loco hauled services whilst barely paying lip service to the other issues affecting the route.

I agree -

 

[causton]

I agree -

I don't. As a line that not many members will be local to, the only thing that makes this line stand out to many members will be the loco hauled service, and therefore that is probably all they are interested in!

 

[sprinterguy]

I can't remember what the figure for Pacers was, though I think it was worse than the 156s. Could another silver-spanner performance from DRS with the LHCS bring them close to Pacer reliablity?

Northern's class 142s were top of the pile in the Pacer leagues in this year's "Golden Spanner" awards, achieving a Miles per Technical Incident (MTIN) figure of 7,615 (So not as good as their 156s, but pretty impressive for a Pacer, and Northern's 156s are fairly high performers in the Ex-BR DMU group).

The 37s actually demonstrated a MTIN of 6,170 for Period 7 2015/16 (4 weeks during September/October 2016) itself, which might suggest further sustained improvement ahead, or could just be a statistical blip. Either way, they would have to realise an improvement in MTIN of over 100% (from the moving annual average figure of 3,315) during the course of 2017 to match the Pacers in next year's awards.

 

[Roose]

The Furness Line Action Group published punctuality and cancellation statistics, compiled by their secretary, for the lines north and south of Barrow over a number of months:

From the beginning of June to mid-November cancellations averaged 2.3% for the Furness line and 3.9% for the Cumbrian Coast line with the loco-hauled component (averaging) 6.9%

Punctuality tells a similar story as the Public Performance Measure averaged 87.7% for the Furness Line, 86.3% for the Cumbrian Coast line with the loco-hauled component only 79.6%

For comparison purposes, performance statistics for 18th September to 15th October (period 7) and, for further comparison, the period of the FLAG survey included the following:

Cancellations
All Northern Rail: 1.3% (MAA 1.9%)
Northern Rail Lancashire and Cumbria: 2.9% (MAA 3.3%)
All services into Barrow: 2.96% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 3.1%)
Loco-hauled services in to Barrow: 7.4% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 6.9%)

PPM
All Northern Rail: 93% (MAA 90.8%)
Northern Rail Lancashire and Cumbria: 89.1% (MAA 87%)
All services into Barrow: 89.3% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 87%)
Loco-hauled services in to Barrow: 79.6% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 79.6%)


It should be possible to advance a hypothesis about the reliability of the loco-hauled services from these figures.


Further to the above it is also true to say that there are other issues in play with the Furness and Cumbria Coast lines. As a result passenger dissatisfaction is high and constituents have sought the intervention of the MP for both Westmorland Barrow & Furness. The latter has attempted to arrange contact with the Northern MD, Alex Hynes, to seek explanations.

Speaking at an event in Kendal over eighteen months ago, Alex Hynes was well aware of difficulties in Furness and on the coast. He was hoping that the then new LHCS would be a positive and said that then Northern were pressing for the creation of mini-support at Barrow for stock (train wash and refuelling, perhaps).

His reaction on Twitter in December to the award of a Silver Spanner ('most improved...') in the Inter-City category for the DRS/Northern fleet on the Furness and Cumbrian Coast lines was amusing. This was for a 36.79% improvement in Miles Per Technical Incident and looking at the FLAG figures above you would have to wonder firstly whether northern or DRS proudly display the trophy and secondly whether they might be able to hold on to it next year if the rules stay the same while still providing a below-standard product.

 

[CosherB]

Speaking at an event in Kendal over eighteen months ago, Alex Hynes was well aware of difficulties in Furness and on the coast. He was hoping that the then new LHCS would be a positive and said that then Northern were pressing for the creation of mini-support at Barrow for stock (train wash and refuelling, perhaps).

His reaction on Twitter in December to the award of a Silver Spanner ('most improved...') in the Inter-City category for the DRS/Northern fleet on the Furness and Cumbrian Coast lines was amusing. This was for a 36.79% improvement in Miles Per Technical Incident and looking at the FLAG figures above you would have to wonder firstly whether northern or DRS proudly display the trophy and secondly whether they might be able to hold on to it next year if the rules stay the same while still providing a below-standard product.

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"

 

[Roose]

An update on the Barrow MP's conversation with the Northern MD is included in today's North West Evening Mail

 

[70014IronDuke]

The Furness Line Action Group published punctuality and cancellation statistics, compiled by their secretary, for the lines north and south of Barrow over a number of months:

From the beginning of June to mid-Novembe.....

You obviously haven't read and taken on board earlier posts from this week. We are only supposed to discuss positive news about the LHCS trains due to the sensitive nature of some in here.

Criticising is bad enough - backing such claims with statistics is liable to cause apoplexy among some.

Indeed, if I've interpreted the data correctly, it means about one in 13 loco-hauled train fails - which is actually slightly worse than I posited.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

An update on the Barrow MP's conversation with the Northern MD is included in today's North West Evening Mail

It gets worse: the Rt Hon John Woodcock MP has labelled Cl 37s 'prehistoric' - this could earn him enemies for life.

the good news is, however, that they still build submarines in Barrow. (I didn't know that)

 

[sprinterguy]

the good news is, however, that they still build submarines in Barrow. (I didn't know that)

What did you think they did in those massive sheds down by the docks? Or why anyone still chose to live there (excluding Kimberley Clark as the other major employer, admittedly)? :P

 

[70014IronDuke]

What did you think they did in those massive sheds down by the docks? Or why anyone still chose to live there (excluding Kimberley Clark as the other major employer, admittedly)? :P

Dear Sprinterguy - the last time i visited Barrow they had only just stopped building ships.
Airships, that is.

OK, I exaggerate (slightly). But they did have genuine pre-historic locos on the shed, in the form of Metro-Vicks.

 

[sprinterguy]

Dear Sprinterguy - the last time i visited Barrow they had only just stopped building ships.
Airships, that is.
.

You should reacquaint yourself with the place; you can get there by class 37 these days, don't you know.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

OK, I exaggerate (slightly). But they did have genuine pre-historic locos on the shed, in the form of Metro-Vicks.

Blimey, put one of those (and there is only one left these days, currently going nowhere though a concerted attempt is being made to return it to service) on the Cumbrian Coast turns and the local MP would really have a fit, given their (un)reliability record!

 

[yorksrob]

The Furness Line Action Group published punctuality and cancellation statistics, compiled by their secretary, for the lines north and south of Barrow over a number of months:

From the beginning of June to mid-November cancellations averaged 2.3% for the Furness line and 3.9% for the Cumbrian Coast line with the loco-hauled component (averaging) 6.9%

Punctuality tells a similar story as the Public Performance Measure averaged 87.7% for the Furness Line, 86.3% for the Cumbrian Coast line with the loco-hauled component only 79.6%

For comparison purposes, performance statistics for 18th September to 15th October (period 7) and, for further comparison, the period of the FLAG survey included the following:

Cancellations
All Northern Rail: 1.3% (MAA 1.9%)
Northern Rail Lancashire and Cumbria: 2.9% (MAA 3.3%)
All services into Barrow: 2.96% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 3.1%)
Loco-hauled services in to Barrow: 7.4% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 6.9%)

PPM
All Northern Rail: 93% (MAA 90.8%)
Northern Rail Lancashire and Cumbria: 89.1% (MAA 87%)
All services into Barrow: 89.3% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 87%)
Loco-hauled services in to Barrow: 79.6% (Over 24 weeks of FLAG survey 79.6%)


It should be possible to advance a hypothesis about the reliability of the loco-hauled services from these figures.


Further to the above it is also true to say that there are other issues in play with the Furness and Cumbria Coast lines. As a result passenger dissatisfaction is high and constituents have sought the intervention of the MP for both Westmorland Barrow & Furness. The latter has attempted to arrange contact with the Northern MD, Alex Hynes, to seek explanations.

Speaking at an event in Kendal over eighteen months ago, Alex Hynes was well aware of difficulties in Furness and on the coast. He was hoping that the then new LHCS would be a positive and said that then Northern were pressing for the creation of mini-support at Barrow for stock (train wash and refuelling, perhaps).

His reaction on Twitter in December to the award of a Silver Spanner ('most improved...') in the Inter-City category for the DRS/Northern fleet on the Furness and Cumbrian Coast lines was amusing. This was for a 36.79% improvement in Miles Per Technical Incident and looking at the FLAG figures above you would have to wonder firstly whether northern or DRS proudly display the trophy and secondly whether they might be able to hold on to it next year if the rules stay the same while still providing a below-standard product.

Some very interesting statistics. Lets hope the MP gets to grips with all the issues of the route, rather than just one aspect of its problems.

Attractive though the 37's are, its a shame there aren't some more modern, reliable locos that could run the route. I would sorely miss the IC standard rolling stock were it to go though.

 

[Roose]

What did you think they did in those massive sheds down by the docks? Or why anyone still chose to live there (excluding Kimberley Clark as the other major employer, admittedly)? :P

Oh, how we laughed! And what great metropolis do you promote?

In addition to the thousands employed in arguably one of country's most advanced manufacturing projects and a few hundred making toilet rolls in pretty colours, Barrow has a range of high-tech industries - including sub-sea technologies plus chemicals, electronics, gas terminals, offshore energy...

Ah but what can people possibly enjoy in the borough outside working hours? Fabulous beaches and seascapes, of course, the islands of Furness, Furness Abbey, the Dock Museum, great walking, boating and sailing, excellent Victorian architecture, good sporting facilities including three great golf courses, good cultural offerings...

 

[sprinterguy]

Oh, how we laughed! And what great metropolis do you promote?

Depends on my inclination at the time: It could be Sunderland, which lost it's shipbuilding industry long before Barrow (which perseveres), or Macclesfield, which never had one.

In addition to the thousands employed in arguably one of country's most advanced manufacturing projects and a few hundred making toilet rolls in pretty colours, Barrow has a range of high-tech industries - including sub-sea technologies plus chemicals, electronics, gas terminals, offshore energy...

Don't take it too personally, I did make note of your massive boatsheds - Something Sunderland can only dream about in this century!

Ah but what can people possibly enjoy in the borough outside working hours? Fabulous beaches and seascapes, of course, the islands of Furness, Furness Abbey, the Dock Museum, great walking, boating and sailing, excellent Victorian architecture, good sporting facilities including three great golf courses, good cultural offerings...

I don't care for golf, and although I am aware of much "great walking" around the Lakes I wasn't aware that there was a great deal to be done within the Barrow district, though admittedly I mainly frequent the area in order to drink with local friends, behind class 37 locos, or both.

That's an excellent set of statistics that you've posted at the top of the page, by the way; it's interesting to get a detailed look at performance on the route beyond basic reliability figures across the Northern fleet.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

There was a good, stormy photo in yesterdays metro of a loco hauled train on that line, not sure if it was goods or passenger though.

 

[themiller]

Today there's one 4-coach rake and one 3-coach rake.

 

[The_Rail_WAy]

Sorry to interupt but is the current timetable similar to the one on this link, been meaning to do a 'trip' for months, from Preston (Lancs)....

http://www.railtourinfo.co.uk/locohauled17.html

Thanks,

TRW

 

[PHILIPE]

Sorry to interupt but is the current timetable similar to the one on this link, been meaning to do a 'trip' for months, from Preston (Lancs)....

http://www.railtourinfo.co.uk/locohauled17.html

Thanks,

TRW

Here is the current:-

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1478940

 

[CC 72100]

Can confirm that the Saturday diagrams are correct - beautiful weather for Tractors & winter sun!

I was on 2C45 BIF 1138 - CAR 1424 which was running 3 vice 4. At Workington around 60 people got on and it was then full and standing to Carlisle. Many of these 60 were women in their 30s going for a day out on the booze in Carlisle just like the good folk of Teeside do in York, making for a rather unenjoyable journey with highlights such as playing 'dodge the vodka-infused sweets that are being thrown around the carriage'. Fair play to the Conductor who continued to collect revenue all the way to Carlisle (was not going to let lots of exciteable women or a full and standing train stop him), even if some rather disparaging remarks were made about his command of English by our ladies on the lash. :roll:

Is this common for Workington to attract a crowd of people going to Carlisle to get plastered and for them to catch this train ~13:30 from Workington?

I also meant to ask - how is driver/guard communication carried out? I think on my trip out we had 2 conductors, one of whom had a radio? I can't imagine that 37/4 + mark 2s are D/G buzzer enabled?