Future of 22x Units

[sprinterguy]

As I read that, newly-built rolling stock must be capable of operating in electric mode. but I'm not sure if it requires all intercity services to be operated with new rolling stock: it seems a bit ambiguous.

It does seem open to interpretation, which is why I haven't couched my previous response in definite terms, but there are other stipulations in the ITT such as the potential fitment of ETCS, energy measurement equipment and the reduction of air pollutants that, while certainly not impossible to achieve with a 222 fleet, might be easier with an all new intercity fleet and based on recent franchise announcements it would surprise me if a half-and-half solution to the intercity fleet would score highly. Though this is the railway, so I'm always prepared to be surprised.

 

[krus_aragon]

Passive provision for ETCS is only required for new-build, but the other issues you list do side against retention of 222s. But would keeping the 222s be cheaper? This'll have to be weighed up by the bidders and the DfT (who'll probably be looking over at the incoming Cross-Country bids when they make their decision).

 

[Wolfie]

XC's solution is quite obvious.

Take HST sets up that become available from EMT, GW and LNER...

Improve train quantity and train length. Refurb the interiors and a new paint job. Simple.

You mean take on rotten, literally given the amount of corrosion-related work having to be done at Wabtec for Scotrail, old, less economic, slower trains which almost certainly wouldn't be ready for the end-2019 deadline and aren't even mechanically coherent (EMT use a different motor). Yeah right, particularly given the media stories already after the Scotrail HST fiasco... HSTs were great trains 20 years ago...

 

[Wolfie]

Scrap all the Voyagers - nasty stinky toilets on wheels, the lot of 'em

Gimme an HST or loco-hauled stock any day

An enthusiast, not a passenger, view.

 

[gingertom]

XC's solution is quite obvious.

Take HST sets up that become available from EMT, GW and LNER...

Improve train quantity and train length. Refurb the interiors and a new paint job. Simple.

unfortunately they'd also need CET toilets, power doors and other PRM-TSI modifications. Only Wabtec is tooled up to carry out this work and their ability to deliver has proved to be somewhat lacking.

 

[Wolfie]

unfortunately they'd also need CET toilets, power doors and other PRM-TSI modifications. Only Wabtec is tooled up to carry out this work and their ability to deliver has proved to be somewhat lacking.

My earlier post two above was assuming this as a given but you are absolutely right to spell it out. I would also suggest that in voluntarily taking on this stock Cross Country would have zero chance of getting a DfT deadline deferal.

 

[gingertom]

My earlier post two above was assuming this as a given but you are absolutely right to spell it out. I would also suggest that in voluntarily taking on this stock Cross Country would have zero chance of getting a DfT deadline deferal.

personally I don't think it is a bad idea per se but the timescales for obtaining suitably refurbished stock knocks it on the head.

 

[Andrew*Debbie]

On the north wales coast there is a definite pecking order of which type of train passengers prefer to turn up. It's, unsurprisingly, 221, 175, 158, 150.

Yes! I cringe at the sight of 150. I'm not a big fan of long distance travel in a 158 either.

The 221s have their downsides but they are all at least 5 coaches, have a shop and decent seat layouts.

I'm looking forward to the promised mk4s.

 

[Andrew*Debbie]

An enthusiast, not a passenger, view.

I find the Welsh Mk. 3s to be quiet, comfortable and roomy. Yes they are ancient and probalby about to fall apart.

 

[Bevan Price]

I suspect that XC (or its successors) will still be using 220s & 221s on most of their current routes until they are worn out, so possibly until at least 2035 /2040...., when they might just get some of the 2040s equivalents of Class 800 (but probably no longer than 5 coaches.)

 

[Islineclear3_1]

An enthusiast, not a passenger, view.

Ahem I have travelled on rather a lot of them...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes! I cringe at the sight of 150. I'm not a big fan of long distance travel in a 158 either.

The 221s have their downsides but they are all at least 5 coaches, have a shop and decent seat layouts.

I'd choose a double Voyager over a Pendolino due to the large windows, FWIW. The rest of the interior is basically identical.

The big problem on XC is that they're all too short, a problem which goes right back to the late 1990s and is Virgin's fault, though also DfT's for never being bothered to do anything about it. They also don't seem quite as good on the interior maintenance.

(As for 158s long distance, it depends on the interior and train length. I think they're great for a long-distance regional express like the Cambrian, and the ATW and ScotRail Inverness interiors are very nice indeed. I'd be less of a fan of a 150 showing up, but again it depends on the interior - put 2+2 well spaced (yes, you, ATW) Chapman seating in and the basic interior is quite decent - the LNR Class 319/2s are old fashioned, but very comfortable indeed in both classes - had the pleasure of one this evening - and they are a near identical bodyshell to the Class 150)

 

[whhistle]

I still don't know where this assumption that the next EM franchise will see the 222s cascaded has come from.

Looking at other recently awarded franchises, some sort of new stock seems to always be in the winning bids, whether some are told to or not is another question.
With bi-modes on the cards as far north as Kettering/Market Harborough, the mainline trains are prime candidates to replace with those sorts of trains.

However, I'd have thought looking at the sprinter family for replacement would also be high.

Abellio aren't strangers to total fleet replacement...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Abellio aren't strangers to total fleet replacement...

And if Northern are going to continue as the poor man of cascades, more spare 15x won't do them any harm either.

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Well in a Modern Railways magazine around a month to 2 months ago, I read something about the next Chiltern Railways franchise like 1 option possibly Class 222's joining which would require, with Network Rail, route clearance as they're heavier than a 168.

It wouldn't be a bad idea - still modern InterCity trains and this could enable lengthening of 168's. Wembley Stadium match days will be a big help!

 

[Andrew*Debbie]

I'd choose a double Voyager over a Pendolino due to the large windows, FWIW. The rest of the interior is basically identical.

Double Voyagers have the advantage of being the fastest train to London. BNG <---> EUS in about 3:15

I would like to see some Virgin 221s replaced with bi-modal trains so the hourly EUS<-->CTR service can be electric powered to Crewe. Crewe to Chester should be doable on battery power. Batteries could get a quick top-up at Chester. Of course a diesel would be more flexible.

 

[krus_aragon]

Double Voyagers have the advantage of being the fastest train to London. BNG <---> EUS in about 3:15

Presumably due to the lack of coupling at Chester? The fastest direct weekday Bangor-Euston I can find takes 3:12, the 14:25 departure, but several others do it in 3:15, and a 16:26 departure is timed for the same 3:12, including a change of trains at Chester.

I would like to see some Virgin 221s replaced with bi-modal trains so the hourly EUS<-->CTR service can be electric powered to Crewe. Crewe to Chester should be doable on battery power. Batteries could get a quick top-up at Chester. Of course a diesel would be more flexible.

Bi-modal electric/battery could work as far as Chester, but wouldn't do the extensions to Holyhead, Bangor and Wrexham. (Diagramming diesels for the through services and electrics/battery for the Chester terminators doesn't strike me as easy, as they currently interwork with Voyager diagrams heading elsewhere too.) Bi-modal electric/diesel would be a better approach.

 

[physics34]

The voyagers/meridians need to be downgraded to long-distance services (transpennine would be about right), while hsts could return fully to xc and emt work

 

[Andrew*Debbie]

Presumably due to the lack of coupling at Chester?

The quickest VT directs do not stop at Flint. Not coupling or splitting might save time too. I'm not sure as the trains often stand at Chester for a few minutes.

The fastest direct weekday Bangor-Euston I can find takes 3:12, the 14:25 departure, but several others do it in 3:15, and a 16:26 departure is timed for the same 3:12, including a change of trains at Chester.

I wasn't aware of the 16:26 with the change at CTR. 6 minutes to make the connection at Chester. It makes the request stops but runs from LLJ to CTR without stopping. Bizarre.


Llanfairpwll (my home) to Euston in 3:22 !! Return on the 10:10 from Euston in 3:26

With the current TfW situation, I wouldn't risk it but maybe once things return to normal.

 

[Thunderer]

I suspect that XC (or its successors) will still be using 220s & 221s on most of their current routes until they are worn out, so possibly until at least 2035 /2040...., when they might just get some of the 2040s equivalents of Class 800 (but probably no longer than 5 coaches.)

I 100% agree with you about the Voyagers. I can't see XC getting any extra trains until at least the franchise is renewed. There has been an extension to Arriva's contract due to the DFT Government and public consultation (which I participated in) and also very little interest shown by other operators in the XC operation. Remember that XC (as do Virgin) use the dedicated Central Rivers depot for major upkeep of the 220/221 fleet. The fleets builders (Bombardier) also maintain them in this dedicated and bespoke site, so shifting them to other operators away from this dedicated base in the Midlands would not be a favoured option. Voyagers are very reliable considering the milage they do and that is mainly down to the manufacturers dedicated and bespoke maintenance facilities at Central Rivers. The true enthusiast (myself included) would absolutely love to see cascaded GWR HST's on the NE/SW corridor to supplement XC's current 5 sets, but that is very unlikely to happen for many reasons:-
1) Higher track access charges for XC to use a HST instead of a Voyager.
2) Corrosion work, Toilet Tanks and new doors would have to be fitted to every MKIII coach and Wabtec is light years behind delivering to Scotrail/XC/GWR already.
3) Each MKIII coach would have to have an interior refresh plus work on it again to ensure it could travel over 3rd rail territory from Basingstoke to Bournemouth (If it was ever planned to use them down there?)
All the above mentioned work (at the current rate) would take years, by which time the franchise would have probably been renewed and the new operator would be looking at new stock to phase out the Voyagers (a bi-mode Class 802 for example, who knows?). Either way, I think we are all stuck with Voyagers on the XC franchise for the foreseeable future. However, XC HST's will be moving from Edinburgh Craigentinny to Plymouth Laira for base maintenance because Craigentinny will be gearing up for Azuma maintenance and Scotrail HST's will be looked after by Haymarket.

 

[43096]

The true enthusiast (myself included) would absolutely love to see cascaded GWR HST's on the NE/SW corridor to supplement XC's current 5 sets

They'd be better off saying extra capacity from the end of 2020 and using LNER HSTs as the basis for conversion, for three prime reasons:
- the internal spec including seat type of the LNER HSTs is closer to XC's sets
- the LNER power cars are almost identical to the XC power car fleet, including all major components (engine, cooler group) and have the upgraded Brush electronics and Knorr-Bremse WSP systems (like XC) that the GWR ones don't
- the LNER fleet is substantially more reliable

If XC is to have more capacity in the current/next Direct Award then HSTs are about the only option. 10 extra HSTs would add 70 vehicles into a franchise where there is a huge shortage of capacity and would make a big difference.

 

[Thunderer]

They'd be better off saying extra capacity from the end of 2020 and using LNER HSTs as the basis for conversion, for three prime reasons:
- the internal spec including seat type of the LNER HSTs is closer to XC's sets
- the LNER power cars are almost identical to the XC power car fleet, including all major components (engine, cooler group) and have the upgraded Brush electronics and Knorr-Bremse WSP systems (like XC) that the GWR ones don't
- the LNER fleet is substantially more reliable

If XC is to have more capacity in the current/next Direct Award then HSTs are about the only option. 10 extra HSTs would add 70 vehicles into a franchise where there is a huge shortage of capacity and would make a big difference.

Now wouldn't that be great? It is indeed the common sense solution, but unfortunately,how often does common sense prevail these days? We all live in hope, it may happen? WABTEC would have to modify the coach doors and fit retention tanks and they'd be fit to go. No more squeezing onto an overcrowded 4 car Voyager working a Glasgow to Plymouth service..Happy Days.

 

[43096]

Now wouldn't that be great? It is indeed the common sense solution, but unfortunately,how often does common sense prevail these days? We all live in hope, it may happen? WABTEC would have to modify the coach doors and fit retention tanks and they'd be fit to go. No more squeezing onto an overcrowded 4 car Voyager working a Glasgow to Plymouth service..Happy Days.

The capacity upgrade would be pretty big....
- (say) 9 HST diagrams replace 9 x 5-car 221
- 9 x 5-car 221 replace 9 x 4-car 220
- 9 x 4-car 220 available to double up another 9 x 4-car 220.
etc etc

That is a huge number of diagrams upgraded.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Ahem I have travelled on rather a lot of them...

Sorry but don't MU's accelerate faster than LHCS?

 

[43096]

Sorry but don't MU's accelerate faster than LHCS?

Depends on the load and power available. Obviously.

 

[nat67]

An enthusiast, not a passenger, view.

Saying of that my friend's Gran likes them as she travels on them to Glasgow from York in first class.

 

[mmh]

The quickest VT directs do not stop at Flint. Not coupling or splitting might save time too. I'm not sure as the trains often stand at Chester for a few minutes.

Non-coupling saves about 5-7 minutes at Chester, coupling trains usually have about 10 minutes there, but as you say even non-couplers will be there for a good few minutes.

I wasn't aware of the 16:26 with the change at CTR. 6 minutes to make the connection at Chester. It makes the request stops but runs from LLJ to CTR without stopping. Bizarre.

That is a bizarre one - there are a couple of early morning non-stoppers but I've not noticed that one before. I don't really understand why they exist, unless they go on to do something "unusal" after Chester where the timing is so rigid the extra few minutes are vital.

Llanfairpwll (my home) to Euston in 3:22 !! Return on the 10:10 from Euston in 3:26

Pretty impressive! For the couple of years that Virgin ran to Llandudno there was an early afternoon Voyager Llandudno - Euston (stopping at the usual places along the coast) which was followed by a Mk3 set Holyhead - Euston, about 30 minutes later from LLJ which only stopped Bangor, Junction, Chester, Crewe - and was usually pretty empty!

 

[mushroomchow]

The voyagers/meridians need to be downgraded to long-distance services (transpennine would be about right), while hsts could return fully to xc and emt work

As an enthusiast I'd love that, but practically speaking it's never going to happen, especially given the previously-mentioned EMT timetable change is based on the superior performance of the 222s. I'm content to just enjoy the VP185s while they're still knocking around - it feels like a swansong every time I see one now.

(It also conveniently glosses over the fact that Transpennine are getting a brand-new, state of the art fleet, some of which is already being tested for introduction. They don't need 22x units.)

 

[swt_passenger]

(It also conveniently glosses over the fact that Transpennine are getting a brand-new, state of the art fleet, some of which is already being tested for introduction. They don't need 22x units.)

Isn’t the aim of all versions of this discussion just to get HSTs onto XC? Logic doesn’t apply.

 

[The Ham]

Isn’t the aim of all versions of this discussion just to get HSTs onto XC? Logic doesn’t apply.

HST's are so great that there's no problems with using them on XC...