EMR Overcrowding

[AndyMike]

You seem to be ignoring that the answer is that they fix it properly

Well, of course, but they seem less than able to achieve that.

 

[tom1649]

Wasn't the issue that 153s wouldn't meet PRM TSI requirements without significant work being done to them?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Feb 2022 ==

As long as they could be coupled to a compliant unit in service, some common sense should have been used.

 

[Qwerty133]

Obviously I don't mean LM order the trains, I mean they should have been ordered at the same time, the same as the LO and Chiltern ones were.



EMT, once they got their feet under themselves, was a breath of fresh air compared to the latter days of Central, where the long distance routes were regularly turned short, often at short notice - Liverpool - Norwich was Manchester - Ely more often than not. Plus there was no way of knowing if it was a shortform or not - the unit allocations were that random (one hour would have a 2 car 156, the next a 5 car 170). Yes, EMT were stuck with the stock shortage that continues to this day affecting the regional routes, but it's not like anything has got better in that regard, in fact it's far worse now under EMR.

Whilst it is certainly true that Liverpool to Norwich had fewer shortforms under Stagecoach it seems to be forgotten that this was largely achieved by the shortforming and cancelling of services on other lines even where this would lead to people being left behind or large gaps in service.

 

[robbeech]

I was recently reading some interesting discussion in another thread discussing level of train services in various cities in relation to the size of their population. This got me looking at the population of Mansfield and other places along the southern section of the Robin Hood Line that saw their daytime train frequency reduced by 50% with the EMR temporary timetables. Unfortunately these temporary timetables are no longer temporary on this route and the full pre covid timetable is not being restored in May or perhaps not even for the rest of this year at least.

Mansfield 106,000
Sutton in Ashfield 48,000
Kirkby in Ashfield 25,000
Hucknall 32,000
Bulwell 28,000

That’s a total population of 239,000 without counting the smaller communities along the line and anywhere north of Mansfield towards Worksop. I know people have said this before but would a line in London and the South East, with a population of that size, have its train service cut by half with no date for the full service to return.

If it were London / SE it would have a half hourly frequency throughout, if at worst some of the least used would have every other train stop. There may be extra services in the peaks. The chances are they’d be 5 carriages too.

However, passenger numbers from that sort of population would definitely be higher, partly due to the overall public transport system around being much better so it’s certainly not a massively useful comparison.

 

[yorksrob]

EMR no longer has any 153's but they couldn't be used past December anyway. I do think that the 156's need to be retained until more 170 arrive.

Will be interesting to see what happens next month for the Midlands Grand national. In previous years the Crewe route had 4 car units and 4/5 car 222's. Probably more difficult for 222's now the Crewe service goes through to Newark.

Surely locking out the toilet and fitting a public address system would solve that ?

 

[RH Liner]

I think that is what I said I was doing!
However, very sad that passengers are having to give up on the train and use the bus instead. The Robin Hood Line, especially the southern section, has been a reopening success story, with passenger numbers exceeding all expectations over the past 20-30 years. Such a shame that EMR have reduced the daytime frequency by half when passengers should be returning to the trains following Covid. Also disappointing that there are no immediate plans to restore the frequency that had run successfully for over 20 years.

Evening bus services between Nottingham and Mansfield on the direct Stagecoach Pronto route are no longer as frequent as they were. The last buses are now quite a bit earlier than the last trains

If there are still plans to open up the line from Shirebrook to Ollerton I wonder whether there would be any mileage in running a pair of 158s (so 4 carriages) from Nottingham’s as far as Shirebrook, from where one unit would go on to Worksop and the other to Ollerton

I think that is what I said I was doing!
However, very sad that passengers are having to give up on the train and use the bus instead. The Robin Hood Line, especially the southern section, has been a reopening success story, with passenger numbers exceeding all expectations over the past 20-30 years. Such a shame that EMR have reduced the daytime frequency by half when passengers should be returning to the trains following Covid. Also disappointing that there are no immediate plans to restore the frequency that had run successfully for over 20 years.

Evening bus services between Nottingham and Mansfield on the direct Stagecoach Pronto route are no longer as frequent as they were. The last buses are now quite a bit earlier than the last trains

Apologies if this now appears twice, my page jumped to something else entirely and when I got back to where I was the reply I had started had disappeared altogether. As a type I don’t know whether I inadvertently hit the post button. Edit - yes I did!

Anyway, I was about to question whether, if the line from Shirebrook to Ollerton reopens, an hourly 4-car 158 could run from Nottingham to Shirebrook, where it would split with 2 cars to Worksop and 2 to Ollerton. That would provide more space for the busy southern end of the line, which could still carry the also hourly Mansfield Woodhouse service to reinstate the half hourly Nottingham-Mansfield. If the line is so successful it would also surely be worthwhile doubling as much of the single track as possible, not just passing loops but full double track with full line speeds. I know the tram is in the way between Hucknall and Bulwell, but Kirkby to Hucknall at least should be doable.

 

[LowLevel]

If there are still plans to open up the line from Shirebrook to Ollerton I wonder whether there would be any mileage in running a pair of 158s (so 4 carriages) from Nottingham’s as far as Shirebrook, from where one unit would go on to Worksop and the other to Ollerton

Apologies if this now appears twice, my page jumped to something else entirely and when I got back to where I was the reply I had started had disappeared altogether. As a type I don’t know whether I inadvertently hit the post button.

Anyway, I was about to question whether, if the line from Shirebrook to Ollerton reopens, an hourly 4-car 158 could run from Nottingham to Shirebrook, where it would split with 2 cars to Worksop and 2 to Ollerton. That would provide more space for the busy southern end of the line, which could still carry the also hourly Mansfield Woodhouse service to reinstate the half hourly Nottingham-Mansfield. If the line is so successful it would also surely be worthwhile doubling as much of the single track as possible, not just passing loops but full double track with full line speeds. I know the tram is in the way between Hucknall and Bulwell, but Kirkby to Hucknall at least should be doable.

"If" Ollerton ever reopens I think the idea is to provide a service via Pinxton.

4 car 15x does not work well on the RHL owing to the platforms (bar Nottingham, Mansfield and Worksop) being 3 coaches so you would either have to operate local door or spend a load of money on extending the platforms. Less problematic on a 170 but you'd still need to use the selective door opening nearly everywhere.

 

[Mugby]

When I travelled on the 1048 Derby-Crewe service last Saturday, I saw about a dozen people left behind as it departed. The next train was two hours later at 1248 so I wonder if any provision was made for the unfortunate ones, taxis perhaps? Obviously race goers wouldn't want to be two hours late arriving at Uttoxeter for the event.

Similarly, the ones left behind at Tutbury were seen walking away from the platform, presumably to make their own arrangements, either bus (which passes the station} or taxi, I suspect the latter. It's a shame if people begin to realise it's so much easier to avoid the train in the first place!

 

[LowLevel]

When I travelled on the 1048 Derby-Crewe service last Saturday, I saw about a dozen people left behind as it departed. The next train was two hours later at 1248 so I wonder if any provision was made for the unfortunate ones, taxis perhaps? Obviously race goers wouldn't want to be two hours late arriving at Uttoxeter for the event.

Similarly, the ones left behind at Tutbury were seen walking away from the platform, presumably to make their own arrangements, either bus (which passes the station} or taxi, I suspect the latter. It's a shame if people begin to realise it's so much easier to avoid the train in the first place!

That route was class 153s leaving behind anywhere up to 3 figures of people on a semi regular basis for about 10 years. I have far from happy memories of turning people away from Crewe and Derby with a 153 on various occasions. You're not describing anything new, except that it's now a train twice the size doing the leaving behind and there were 2, 4, 5 and 6 car trains out on the route instead of the 2 car being the strengthening. There is only so much you can do to the detriment of elsewhere, alas.

 

[robbeech]

that it's now a train twice the size doing the leaving behind

Am I right in thinking it is a train twice the size but a service at half the frequency?

 

[LowLevel]

Am I right in thinking it is a train twice the size but a service at half the frequency?

Not half - there are some missing trains still but not 50%. It does seem a bit unfortunate to have hit the 2 hour gap though. I still don't think I've ever known that number of carriages on the route in one day however.

 

[Andy Pacer]

When I travelled on the 1048 Derby-Crewe service last Saturday, I saw about a dozen people left behind as it departed. The next train was two hours later at 1248 so I wonder if any provision was made for the unfortunate ones, taxis perhaps? Obviously race goers wouldn't want to be two hours late arriving at Uttoxeter for the event.

Similarly, the ones left behind at Tutbury were seen walking away from the platform, presumably to make their own arrangements, either bus (which passes the station} or taxi, I suspect the latter. It's a shame if people begin to realise it's so much easier to avoid the train in the first place!

And to be fair to EMR they did strengthen some journeys on Saturday, and had the 6 car additional special running but it was still insufficient. There was a 2 car 170 running on its own and that was very busy. I did attempt to catch that at Peartree but was unable to access the station (but that's another story).

 

[Ducatist4]

The only times the trains on the Robin Hood line are anything like busy is on a Saturday and even more so if there is football on in Nottingham. I often see the three car 18.11 Notts to Worksop approach Shirebrook and there are usually only five or six people on it during the week.

 

[QSK19]

For me, the main problem with the franchise split was the division of the 170s, which left EMT getting none. Now EMR are trying to pass these off as “new” trains when the reality is they’re just returning having spent over a decade working elsewhere. Not to mention they’re in a rather shoddy state…

I can foresee the same sort of thing happening in 15-20 years’ time when the time comes to exit the 170s from the East Midlands fleet - probably going to be replaced by 19x, which will be at least halfway through their serviceable lives and no doubt in an equally shoddy state. The iteration of EMR that exists at that point will again pass them off as “new” trains.

The outlook for non-IC services in the East Midlands is rather bleak. The East Midlands region has always been treated with contempt by the DfT, who don’t seem bothered in the slightest by the overcrowding situation and other EMR-related issues.

 

[43055]

When I travelled on the 1048 Derby-Crewe service last Saturday, I saw about a dozen people left behind as it departed. The next train was two hours later at 1248 so I wonder if any provision was made for the unfortunate ones, taxis perhaps? Obviously race goers wouldn't want to be two hours late arriving at Uttoxeter for the event.

Similarly, the ones left behind at Tutbury were seen walking away from the platform, presumably to make their own arrangements, either bus (which passes the station} or taxi, I suspect the latter. It's a shame if people begin to realise it's so much easier to avoid the train in the first place!

I was one of the ones left behind at Tutbury and was intending to travel to Stoke which never got to. The bus passes the station at about 10 past which would of been the same time as the train left after the extended dwell so I would imagine most got a taxi not that I noticed any while ringing the person I was going to meet in Stoke to say I couldn't get on the train.

That route was class 153s leaving behind anywhere up to 3 figures of people on a semi regular basis for about 10 years. I have far from happy memories of turning people away from Crewe and Derby with a 153 on various occasions. You're not describing anything new, except that it's now a train twice the size doing the leaving behind and there were 2, 4, 5 and 6 car trains out on the route instead of the 2 car being the strengthening. There is only so much you can do to the detriment of elsewhere, alas.

And to be fair to EMR they did strengthen some journeys on Saturday, and had the 6 car additional special running but it was still insufficient. There was a 2 car 170 running on its own and that was very busy. I did attempt to catch that at Peartree but was unable to access the station (but that's another story).

Yes they did strengthen but was it the right diagrams? The 5 car 170 heading to Nottingham at 1106 from Tutbury had a number free seats (was expecting it to be full with fotty fans) while the 2 car 156 heading to Crewe at 1102 left people behind at Derby and Tutbury with nothing for 2 hours.

Am I right in thinking it is a train twice the size but a service at half the frequency?

The North Staffs is almost at a full timetable. Only 1 diagram is missing which equals to one train every 5 hours.

 

[IceBlue]

Interesting to see 5 cars on Newark-Crewe. Never seen any more than 4 on there and thought 4 cars was likely the limit for most platforms, especially with the level crossings at Blythe Bridge, Tutbury and Hatton etc? Are the 170s fitted with SDO?

Having used the line for years, it seems to me that since 2 cars have rolled out the demand just seems to be increasing to the point that I'd be more confident at getting a seat on one of the single 153s a few years ago compared to a 2 car 156/170 now! Demand would warrant three cars on the service at least, but that plays awkwardly with the EMR fleet even if they had the units as the 3 car 170s need to go on RH line first as mentioned.

Pure dreamworld here (I doubt I'll ever see East Mids get the units it really warrants), but how difficult would the pathing be to put on some extra peak Crewe/Stoke-Derby or Nottingham services? There's capacity on the NSS given that the freight path is seldom used, and at Stoke you could either shove it straight into the siding or maybe skip Longport to get it out of the way at Kidsgrove quicker?

 

[Starmill]

As long as they could be coupled to a compliant unit in service, some common sense should have been used.

Arguably 'common sense' was made use of for two whole years with the derogations granted!

If you're permitting a derogation indefinitely however you're undermining the purpose of the regulation in the first place. Hardly fair on those who've paid up front to comply.

The TOCs and the owners of their rolling stock could have come together a decade ago to have the '153s' and Northenden '155s' reformed into three car units, or potentially just more two car units, from the selection of the best, using the reusing the redundant cab parts and removing the toilet. They didn't. Only ScotRail and TfW retained them, for somewhat niche purposes. It is very likely that all will be life expired within 5 years now.

 

[Andy Pacer]

Interesting to see 5 cars on Newark-Crewe. Never seen any more than 4 on there and thought 4 cars was likely the limit for most platforms, especially with the level crossings at Blythe Bridge, Tutbury and Hatton etc? Are the 170s fitted with SDO?

Having used the line for years, it seems to me that since 2 cars have rolled out the demand just seems to be increasing to the point that I'd be more confident at getting a seat on one of the single 153s a few years ago compared to a 2 car 156/170 now! Demand would warrant three cars on the service at least, but that plays awkwardly with the EMR fleet even if they had the units as the 3 car 170s need to go on RH line first as mentioned.

Pure dreamworld here (I doubt I'll ever see East Mids get the units it really warrants), but how difficult would the pathing be to put on some extra peak Crewe/Stoke-Derby or Nottingham services? There's capacity on the NSS given that the freight path is seldom used, and at Stoke you could either shove it straight into the siding or maybe skip Longport to get it out of the way at Kidsgrove quicker?

On the 5 car I travelled on it was "front 4 coaches only" to alight at Tutbury & Hatton.
I'd assume the same would go for the 6 car 156+158+158 formation too.

 

[ChrisC]

Having used the line for years, it seems to me that since 2 cars have rolled out the demand just seems to be increasing to the point that I'd be more confident at getting a seat on one of the single 153s a few years ago compared to a 2 car 156/170 now! Demand would warrant three cars on the service at least, but that plays awkwardly with the EMR fleet even if they had the units as the 3 car 170s need to go on RH line first as mentioned.

It’s not a route I’ve travelled on since the 153’s have gone and it has at last been extended to Nottingham like it was years ago. I’d be interested to hear if some of this increase in passenger numbers is a result of through passengers travelling from Nottingham to Crewe. Years ago it was always quite a popular route from Nottingham to the North West and Scotland but the extra change of train at Derby and poor connections didn’t help. It could also be being used by passengers from Nottingham trying to avoid the unreliability and overcrowding on the Norwich to Liverpool route for journeys to the NW.

 

[exbrel]

IceBlue, i use Longport a lot, so "maybe skip longport to get it out of the way at Kidsgrove quicker"is negative thinking, on a positive note if the Derby-Crewe route was non stop you could cut the run time to about 30-35mins... I'm sure its happened before if a service isn't/or cannot run to time cut some of the stops- simplies. Our local bus compant has done it, isolated a housing estate so there was a chance of the bus running to time.

 

[dk1]

IceBlue, i use Longport a lot, so "maybe skip longport to get it out of the way at Kidsgrove quicker"is negative thinking, on a positive note if the Derby-Crewe route was non stop you could cut the run time to about 30-35mins... I'm sure its happened before if a service isn't/or cannot run to time cut some of the stops- simplies. Our local bus compant has done it, isolated a housing estate so there was a chance of the bus running to time.

The Liverpool-Norwich route operated this way on selected Sundays in CT days. From what I recall calling only at Stoke & Derby. Trains departed Lime Street at xx:27 instead of the standard xx:52 before picking up their normal path at Nottingham & knocking 35 minutes off the end to end journey time albeit by avoiding the main income generating stations in the process

I used it once from Stoke home to Norwich & probably the only time the two have ever been connected directly by a service train.

 

[yorksrob]

Surely it would have been a case of just sealing up the bog and sticking in a new PA system for the 153's. Hardly major structural works.

 

[sd0733]

Surely it would have been a case of just sealing up the bog and sticking in a new PA system for the 153's. Hardly major structural works.

You are right that there’s no structural work but there is a little more to it than that for PRM mods. Things like grab rails, door sounders, priority seats, call for aids etc need doing too.

 

[IceBlue]

IceBlue, i use Longport a lot, so "maybe skip longport to get it out of the way at Kidsgrove quicker"is negative thinking, on a positive note if the Derby-Crewe route was non stop you could cut the run time to about 30-35mins... I'm sure its happened before if a service isn't/or cannot run to time cut some of the stops- simplies. Our local bus compant has done it, isolated a housing estate so there was a chance of the bus running to time.

A very fair point (though I was talking about an extra service, not suggesting cutting any current stops), I suggested Longport as it's the least used station on the line ignoring Peartree but more so as it's also in an awkward position to path for and not delay any expresses.

As others have mentioned, an express/semi fast service of Derby-Stoke-Crewe (though I'd be of the opinion that Uttoxeter and maybe Kidsgrove would be worth calling at well) could be a more sensible idea for extending the service

The Liverpool-Norwich route operated this way on selected Sundays in CT days. From what I recall calling only at Stoke & Derby. Trains departed Lime Street at xx:27 instead of the standard xx:52 before picking up their normal path at Nottingham & knocking 35 minutes off the end to end journey time albeit by avoiding the main income generating stations in the process

Interesting, I've always wondered whether this could be an option especially now EMR has 100mph stock (but realistically another pipe dream). Did it still go via Manchester and Stockport or straight onto the WCML via Weaver Jn?

 

[BackOnTheTrain]

How busy are the super off peak trains between Nottingham and St Pancras now on weekdays? (Via EMR obviously!)

 

[dk1]

Interesting, I've always wondered whether this could be an option especially now EMR has 100mph stock (but realistically another pipe dream). Did it still go via Manchester and Stockport or straight onto the WCML via Weaver Jn?

Via Weaver. It also called at Crewe & was actually in the GBTT. At the time CT operated the Birmingham-Liverpool route (many an extension of the Stansted-Birmingham) so crewing was not an issue either.

 

[TheBigD]

Interesting to see 5 cars on Newark-Crewe. Never seen any more than 4 on there and thought 4 cars was likely the limit for most platforms, especially with the level crossings at Blythe Bridge, Tutbury and Hatton etc? Are the 170s fitted with SDO?

It's 12 years since I signed 170's as a guard, but both the 170/5 and 170/6 had "door deselect" which deselected the doors in the vehicles behind where the doors were operated from, eg on a 5 car, if the guard operated the doors from vehicle 3 with "door deselect" the doors in vehicles 4 & 5 would not be released.
No idea what the 170/4 had though.
The 170/1 had a different but we're modified by XC around 2013 if my memory is correct.

The Liverpool-Norwich route operated this way on selected Sundays in CT days. From what I recall calling only at Stoke & Derby. Trains departed Lime Street at xx:27 instead of the standard xx:52 before picking up their normal path at Nottingham & knocking 35 minutes off the end to end journey time albeit by avoiding the main income generating stations in the process

I used it once from Stoke home to Norwich & probably the only time the two have ever been connected directly by a service train.

There was an article in Modern Railways a few years ago that suggested a Leicester-Derby-Crewe-Liverpool service.

 

[dk1]

There was an article in Modern Railways a few years ago that suggested a Leicester-Derby-Crewe-Liverpool service.

Yes I remember that too as have had MR for most of my life. I would sadly think that those plans have been well & truly kicked into the long grass for now.

 

[LowLevel]

It's 12 years since I signed 170's as a guard, but both the 170/5 and 170/6 had "door deselect" which deselected the doors in the vehicles behind where the doors were operated from, eg on a 5 car, if the guard operated the doors from vehicle 3 with "door deselect" the doors in vehicles 4 & 5 would not be released.
No idea what the 170/4 had though.
The 170/1 had a different but we're modified by XC around 2013 if my memory is correct.

There was an article in Modern Railways a few years ago that suggested a Leicester-Derby-Crewe-Liverpool service.

I think the 170s have all been standardised to have the same system - I work /2s, /4s and /5s and they all have the same door controls, the only difference being the /4 only has one door key switch on the driver's desk in the cab. I know XC modified the /1s about 10 years ago to get rid of the slightly odd MML specified system that deselected the front coach.

Various changes to the Crewe line have been proposed including a fast service but none have happened thus far with the resignalling being kicked into the long grass.

 

[londonmidland]

I can only assume the other 180s are out of service for maintenance, however, running a solo 4 car 180 isn’t ideal..

Regularly overhear passengers comment on how dirty and worn out the interior of the 180s look.

I’ve also notice this becoming more of an issue on the 180s, with the plug sockets being marked as out of use?



More EMR fun tonight with the 21:32 St. Pancras to Sheffield formed of a 4 coach 222. Full and standing. Topped off with a super quiet P.A.

A race to the bottom it seems.