Electrification & Rolling Stock Cascade Impact Review

[northwichcat]

Very Very surprised by that. I sense that maybe industry rumor rather than any actual truth... A TPE staff member has previously been on here stating that the planned diagrams for the 170s are already in the timetables... It would also stop FTPE introducing their 5th service over the Pennines which has been planned for ages....

Not only that but Northern have revised their timetables and diagramming to allow for fitting them around the Liverpool-Victoria-Newcastle service.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Not only that but Northern have revised their timetables and diagramming to allow for fitting them around the Liverpool-Victoria-Newcastle service.

Yep exactly, i will read Modern Railways for myself when i can because this has to be a rumor or maybe spring in 4 years time who knows.

 

[Manchester77]

If this is true then it makes my blood boil, while it is true that some chiltern services are overcrowded the withdrawal of TPEs 170s will almost certainly delay the much promised fifth TPH over the Pennines (the Liverpool-Victoria-Newcastle Express) and result in further over crowding. This really p***es me off too because the 170s are going to allow TPE; a TOC with services in the top ten overcrowded trains in the country; to strengthen up services with South TPE gaining 4 car services (vice 2 car) and a general increase in capacity.

Also if they're needed for chiltern's Oxford services, don't they begin in 2016 so would it not be possible to keep them up Northern and then upon electrification of the Blackpool services cascade them to Chiltern?

 

[IanXC]

Seeing as the previous rumour was that Chiltern would get 170s from ScotRail, when are SR due new stock?

Is there any possibility (trying to put an optimistic spin on things) that there might be 3 car 170s coming to TPE, with the 2 cars going onwards to Chiltern?

 

[222001]

Very Very surprised by that. I sense that maybe industry rumor rather than any actual truth... A TPE staff member has previously been on here stating that the planned diagrams for the 170s are already in the timetables... It would also stop FTPE introducing their 5th service over the Pennines which has been planned for ages....

They are definitely already in the timetables:

4 x 170s seem to be allocated to South TransPennine during the day, running in double formation running peak services from Manchester to Sheffield, with the rest running in double formation towards Hull.

You can tell which ones are 170s are they're pathed for "Class 158 (Express Sprinter) DMU" - see here: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G33727/2014/05/19/advanced

185s are pathed for just "Diesel Multiple Unit". See here: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/G33721/2014/05/19/advanced

 

[WatcherZero]

Hoping this is just a typo in the magazine or someone reading it wrong.

Its not even like TPE were asking extra subsidy to operate the services, it was a purely commercial rolling stock decision to retain them for extra capacity, TPE were funding an increase in northern rolling stock off their own back with no assistance from the Government.

 

[thealexweb]

Hoping this is just a typo in the magazine or someone reading it wrong.

Its not even like TPE were asking extra subsidy to operate the services, it was a purely commercial rolling stock decision to retain them for extra capacity, TPE were funding an increase in northern rolling stock off their own back with no assistance from the Government.

Are you sure thats correct? The £60mn First used to help procure the 350s was a grant from the government if I recall correctly.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Are you sure thats correct? The £60mn First used to help procure the 350s was a grant from the government if I recall correctly.

They fund the operation of 170s of their own back is what he means.

 

[Viscount702]

The next TPE service to go electric will be Manchester Airport-Blackpool in Dec 2016.
They could run an electric service via Parkside from May 2016 if DfT/Rail North wanted them to (to the further fury of Boltonians).
NT will also be able to run Liverpool-Blackpool from then.
Not really enough scope to lose the 170s by May 2016.
The main culprits for running under the wires are VT/XC Voyagers.

What stock will be used for this?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What stock will be used for this?

Not decided.
Not even sure if TPE will continue to run Blackpool services (depends on the new franchise spec).
It may all be NT 319s, but who knows.

 

[Viscount702]

Not decided.
Not even sure if TPE will continue to run Blackpool services (depends on the new franchise spec).
It may all be NT 319s, but who knows.

Thanks.

 

[Class377/5]

The magazine states

Chiltern will assume control of the units in spring of next year..... in time for the opening of the line from Marylebone via Bicester Town to Oxford Parkway next summer

It goes on to say

A phased released is likely, with the units being rented back to FTPE after the lease changes hands

Sounds like its a temporary situation at best from next year.

 

[tbtc]

Tsch, same old story - north of England gets brand new units (350s) and London/ South East have to make do with northern cast-offs (170s)...

 

[fgwrich]

Tsch, same old story - north of England gets brand new units (350s) and London/ South East have to make do with northern cast-offs (170s)...

We've already had those 170/3s here in the south, we don't want them back. You can keep them!

(I was also just thinking how ironic they would be if they entered service with Chiltern in Dynamic Lines - the First liveried but not so first train arriving into Oxford will be also formed of 2 Coaches)


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Thinking about cascades for a moment, with the TPE 170s set to move to Chiltern within the next few years - has anyone put their name down for any of the LM 170 fleet which should be released by the Chase Line electrification? Surely they should be the next release of DMUs, even if it is a small amount due to the need for the Hereford & Shrewsbury Services.

 

[jimm]

And if they end up being used on Chiltern's Oxford services, which were apparently meant to be being worked by 168s freed by use of 67s and Mk3s on Birmingham trains, I'm not sure a lot of coupled-up two-car dmus is exactly going to prove the biggest draw for passengers currently using GW fast services from Oxford mostly worked by HSTs and 180s, with new electric units to come.

 

[158722]

And if they end up being used on Chiltern's Oxford services, which were apparently meant to be being worked by 168s freed by use of 67s and Mk3s on Birmingham trains, I'm not sure a lot of coupled-up two-car dmus is exactly going to prove the biggest draw for passengers currently using GW fast services from Oxford mostly worked by HSTs and 180s, with new electric units to come.

The suggestion is that the 10x 4-car 168s will all loose a centre car to the 9x 170s, leaving Chiltern with a uniform fleet of 28 3-car 168/170s and 1 spare centre car.

 

[TEW]

And if they end up being used on Chiltern's Oxford services, which were apparently meant to be being worked by 168s freed by use of 67s and Mk3s on Birmingham trains, I'm not sure a lot of coupled-up two-car dmus is exactly going to prove the biggest draw for passengers currently using GW fast services from Oxford mostly worked by HSTs and 180s, with new electric units to come.

I don't think they would draw many passengers in the peak from the FGW service, but if the fares are priced lower than FGW I can see the 170s winning over more FGW passengers in the Off-Peak and at Weekends where much more of the Oxford fast service is provided by Turbos. The Off-Peak passengers will probably be less bothered about a slightly longer journey time too, if it meant a cheaper fare.

 

[RobShipway]

Would it not also depend on where in London the Oxford passenger is going too?

If Marylebone has the underground connection or is nearer to the destination than Paddington, then I can see the Chiltern service being used. However, when it comes to underground connections and with Crossrail coming to Paddington soon as well, I cannot see many passengers using the train.

 

[northwichcat]

We've already had those 170/3s here in the south, we don't want them back. You can keep them!

(I was also just thinking how ironic they would be if they entered service with Chiltern in Dynamic Lines - the First liveried but not so first train arriving into Oxford will be also formed of 2 Coaches)

Quite. I'm wondering if we've got part of the full story. One possibility I've thought of is if Northern get more 319s in early 2015 then they can switch the Liverpool to Wigan and Liverpool to Victoria services to EMUs* which will release some DMUs. Maybe Northern would be expected to use released DMUs to enhance their Barrow service so that TPE can reduce the number of Barrow services they run? Of course if that is the case then many Northern services which need extra capacity won't get that extra capacity.

* Apparently only the Liverpool to Airport services will switch to EMU this December due to an insufficient number of 319s being released and Northern failing to agree a deal for a short term lease of 317/7s. That means only 4 x DMUs will be released which will be needed for the new Manchester to Blackburn via Burnley service and strengthening on other routes.

 

[YorkshireBear]

When are the next batch of 319s released? are we likely to see dribs and drabs of them introduced on the Liverpool-Wigan/Preston/Man vic services.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

When are the next batch of 319s released? are we likely to see dribs and drabs of them introduced on the Liverpool-Wigan/Preston/Man vic services.

We only have the TSGN ITT to go on, but it specifies 29 100mph units to be cascaded out by Dec 2015.

The Modern Railways articles this month (p15/16) also suggest that FGW will not get new-build EMUs for Thames Valley services, and also that the Northern direct award is fraught because of the subsidy implications of additional stock.

Dribs and drabs indeed looks the likely outcome.

 

[TEW]

Would it not also depend on where in London the Oxford passenger is going too?

If Marylebone has the underground connection or is nearer to the destination than Paddington, then I can see the Chiltern service being used. However, when it comes to underground connections and with Crossrail coming to Paddington soon as well, I cannot see many passengers using the train.

Marylebone and Paddington are very close, so it probably makes little difference. They also have very similar tube connections, especially if you consider Marylebone's connections to include Baker Street.

 

[IanXC]

I suppose another possibility is that the Northern DMU stock released from NW electrification, not only sees some Barrow services transfer from TP to NT, but also sees the transfer of the Scarborough branch from TP to NT (using stock released by NW electrification), and sees the transfer of the Middlesbrough branch from TP to XC (stock neutral for XC, as it would be existing Newcastle terminators).

I think those 2 branches would release 4 185s, depending on the gain from Barrow we could be in the right neck of the woods in numbers terms? Particularly if we use DafT maths and count vehicles (9 170/3s = 18 vehicles = 6 185s).

 

[northwichcat]

The Modern Railways articles this month (p15/16) also suggest that FGW will not get new-build EMUs for Thames Valley services, and also that the Northern direct award is fraught because of the subsidy implications of additional stock.

There was never anything official which stated Thames Valley would get new stock from the outset. A DfT document did mention the possibility of getting either new stock or engineering existing stock to be 110mph capable in CP6 i.e. some time before April 2024 but that didn't mean the previous idea of putting 319s on Thames Valley services had been retracted.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There was never anything official which stated Thames Valley would get new stock from the outset. A DfT document did mention the possibility of getting either new stock or engineering existing stock to be 110mph capable in CP6 i.e. some time before April 2024 but that didn't mean the previous idea of putting 319s on Thames Valley services had been retracted.

from Modern Railways, March 2014, p15:
A DfT requirement in the FGW direct award franchise...to procure electric trains for the Thames Valley...has been reversed.

It goes on to say the 387s are the likely units for FGW, after initial use on Thameslink.

 

[fgwrich]

The suggestion is that the 10x 4-car 168s will all loose a centre car to the 9x 170s, leaving Chiltern with a uniform fleet of 28 3-car 168/170s and 1 spare centre car.

I did wonder whether this would be the case too, given that it would eliminate 2 car units and standardise the fleet a little more to create more 3 cars than 4s.

Does anyone have a rough estimate as to how many 170s could be freed from London Midland as a result of the chase line electrification - due around 2016/2017 but given how quickly projects like this can actually be done where resources and minds are put into things (some of the Scottish electrification projects for example) I would estimate that it could be done quicker or be completed before it's 2017 date. Could this free up LMs 6 3 car /6s? (that would still leave them with 17 2 car 170/5s and 27 172s).

 

[Class377/5]

It goes on to say the 387s are the likely units for FGW, after initial use on Thameslink.

It doesn't actually say the 387 that are the ones to be used on Thameslink but 387s. Don't forget the contract is for Bombardier to build 29 387/1 for Thameslink with another 35x 387s option already agreed. The 35 additional units can be ordered in batches of 5 units so they can always order a smaller amount for FGW as delivery would suit the FGW requirements.

The rumor are the initial 10x 387 are for Corby which are to be released by Dec 2016. The DfT refers to the 387 units as HLOS 2 Core Units. Now we are starting to see why.

 

[TEW]

There was never anything official which stated Thames Valley would get new stock from the outset. A DfT document did mention the possibility of getting either new stock or engineering existing stock to be 110mph capable in CP6 i.e. some time before April 2024 but that didn't mean the previous idea of putting 319s on Thames Valley services had been retracted.

It wouldn't necessarily have meant new stock but FGW were required to procure electric stock for the Thames Valley area as part of their current franchise. As it's now been halted it can be assumed that 387s will be used, but I suppose 319s are still a possibility.

 

[WatcherZero]

Implication of everything being more 319's available for the North rather than also being required for GW but we are going to take away your diesels from already overcrowded services in the mean time and you may not get any electrics to operate the 700 extra services Northern Hub is designed to provide.

Didnt help that another article in the magazine was basically arguing there will be no more growth in the regions, only in London so its not worth investing in the rail network outside London. Modern Rail seems to be becoming more and more London centric, screw the regions in its attitudes. Wouldnt be surprised if the magazine was based in the rural home counties or something.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Implication of everything being more 319's available for the North rather than also being required for GW but we are going to take away your diesels from already overcrowded services in the mean time and you may not get any electrics to operate the 700 extra services Northern Hub is designed to provide.

Didnt help that another article in the magazine was basically arguing there will be no more growth in the regions, only in London so its not worth investing in the rail network outside London. Modern Rail seems to be becoming more and more London centric, screw the regions in its attitudes. Wouldnt be surprised if the magazine was based in the rural home counties or something.

I think it is actually based in Kent. The major contributors don't seem London focused but the magazine certainly does.