LNER 225 Shortening/Overnight Testing

[43 302]

Anyone know what will happen (or what the aspirations are) from Spring? Or is it too early to say?

Too early to say.

 

[D1537]

Anyone know what will happen (or what the aspirations are) from Spring? Or is it too early to say?

I would suspect that they are still looking at using the 225 on the Newcastle service, otherwise they would have ditched the Harrogate diagram completely.

 

[LondonerTravel]

Does anyone know what diagrams they will be used on from the December timetable change?

 

[yorkie]

Does anyone know what diagrams they will be used on from the December timetable change?

See post #179:

LNER 225 Shortening/Overnight Testing

There is an OHLE issue around Greensfield which has meant a trip via the bridges isn't possible. Is there? As I’ve literally just seen an 802 there with pantograph raised which would suggest that the OHLE is useable

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[D1537]

See post #179:

LNER 225 Shortening/Overnight Testing

There is an OHLE issue around Greensfield which has meant a trip via the bridges isn't possible. Is there? As I’ve literally just seen an 802 there with pantograph raised which would suggest that the OHLE is useable

www.railforums.co.uk

@LondonerTravel: Although note that the Newcastle parts of the diagrams are now 9-car 80x until at least "Spring 2026", the set used being formed from a cancelled King's Cross-Harrogate diagram (1D19/1A33 on weekdays and 1D15/1A29 on Saturday/Sunday).

 

[yorksrob]

I'm sat on a 225. Didn't look too closely when I got on as I was in a hurry, but I've a nasty feeling this may be one of the 7 car ones. Carriage is 70333 buffet car).

 

[trainswitheddy]

I'm sat on a 225. Didn't look too closely when I got on as I was in a hurry, but I've a nasty feeling this may be one of the 7 car ones. Carriage is 70333 buffet car).

Is it not worth checking LNERs journey planner?

 

[yorksrob]

Is it not worth checking LNERs journey planner?

The lady who checked my ticket said it was full 9 carriage, so must have just been busy.

 

[E27007]

Searching Realtimetrains as the source of information, sets NL06/08/12/15 are formed of 7-coaches + DVT, therefore we are already at the halfway point of the conversion, any "insiders" who may post which set is likely to be the final 9-coach formation in service and the proposed date of conversion?

 

[Yorkshire09876]

Searching Realtimetrains as the source of information, sets NL06/08/12/15 are formed of 7-coaches + DVT, therefore we are already at the halfway point of the programme, which set is likely to be the final 9-coach formation in service?

Where are the surplus coaches being stored?

 

[43074]

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P00095/2025-11-11/detailed#allox_id=0 It's interesting that the 7-cars don't seem to be making up much time on the existing 9-car timing loads. Would expect them to be making up odd 30 second increments accelerating from stations but not seeing much evidence of that so far...

The linked schedule only gained time where there were pre-existing allowances in the schedule.

 

[MrJeeves]

It's interesting that the 7-cars don't seem to be making up much time on the existing 9-car timing loads. Would expect them to be making up odd 30 second increments accelerating from stations but not seeing much evidence of that so far...

I mean the train left 3 mins behind an Azuma bound for Aberdeen, and reached Holme Junction 3 mins after the Azuma did. It certainly doesn't seem to be much slower than an Azuma, at least.

 

[E27007]

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:P00095/2025-11-11/detailed#allox_id=0 It's interesting that the 7-cars don't seem to be making up much time on the existing 9-car timing loads. Would expect them to be making up odd 30 second increments accelerating from stations but not seeing much evidence of that so far...

The linked schedule only gained time where there were pre-existing allowances in the schedule.

Perhaps the Drivers are being cautious while they learn the characteristics of the reduced formations, I believe it is correct to state the rolling stock does most of the retardation under braking control and the 91 a modest contribution, a reduced formation may require the driver to revise his braking points over the route.
Do we have any Class 91 drivers for their opinions?

 

[XCTurbostar]

Some formations from today:

NL06	82208	11306	11279		10309	12313	12422	12420		12208	91110
NL17	82205	11417	11317	11288	10324	12303	12432	12427	12444	12223	91107

 

[trainswitheddy]

Definitely notice the size difference. Guess it's a case of get them while you can...

 

[yorksrob]

I always come on to this thread hoping that this terrible idea has been consigned to the cess pool of history.

 

[Railperf]

How are lner managing the seat reservations on the shortened sets seeing that they seem to be on random trains now?

 

[Twingo37175]

How are lner managing the seat reservations on the shortened sets seeing that they seem to be on random trains now?

They have removed coach m and e from the reservation system. Means if a 9 turns up, then e and m should be unreserved.

 

[Railperf]

They have removed coach m and e from the reservation system. Means if a 9 turns up, then e and m should be unreserved.

Thanks. Do we know how soon the remaining sets will be shortened?

 

[Royston Vasey]

Perhaps the Drivers are being cautious while they learn the characteristics of the reduced formations, I believe it is correct to state the rolling stock does most of the retardation under braking control and the 91 a modest contribution, a reduced formation may require the driver to revise his braking points over the route.
Do we have any Class 91 drivers for their opinions?

Imagine if the improved acceleration turned out to be exactly cancelled out by the reduced retardation...

 

[hexagon789]

Imagine if the improved acceleration turned out to be exactly cancelled put by the reduced retardation...

Shouldn't be any reduced retardation, 91s are designed to be capable of braking themselves on the rheo brake up to 125mph. (Rheostatic brake force is restricted above 125mph to a maximum of 50kN.)

The only reason they are restricted to 75mph light engine is due to the rheostatic brake not being failsafe, so worst case scenario has to be assumed - straight air tread brakes.

90s are similarly designed, but obviously for a lower speed ceiling.

 

[Royston Vasey]

I always come on to this thread hoping that this terrible idea has been consigned to the cess pool of history.

Depressing isn't it.

Yet another example of the proliferation of 5 car and 7 car intercity trains everywhere, on the East Coast, West Coast, Western, XC and Midland Mainline, and open access. Penny pinching stock orders, poor planning, inadequate infrastructure (e.g. the four short platforms at St Pancras) and poor stock availability day to day from Hitachi.

And we claim our main lines are full and will happily invest millions in putting more short trains down them, and building an extremely expensive WCML Relief Line between Digbeth and an old railway site in Acton who nobody outside railways has ever heard of, and whose trains will now be 60m shorter than an 11-car Pendo.

The answers to our capacity woes really aren't that complicated are they.

 

[43074]

Perhaps the Drivers are being cautious while they learn the characteristics of the reduced formations, I believe it is correct to state the rolling stock does most of the retardation under braking control and the 91 a modest contribution, a reduced formation may require the driver to revise his braking points over the route.
Do we have any Class 91 drivers for their opinions?

Potentially, it is still very early days for the reduced formations.

Today's 0906 King's Cross to York is a better example where it was 11 minutes late leaving Grantham, but only recovered 2 minutes by Doncaster thanks to allowances already built into the timetable. Would've thought a 7-car set would save a minute or so over that distance at least? https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:Y23393/2025-11-12/detailed#allox_id=0

 

[Twingo37175]

Potentially, it is still very early days for the reduced formations.

Today's 0906 King's Cross to York is a better example where it was 11 minutes late leaving Grantham, but only recovered 2 minutes by Doncaster thanks to allowances already built into the timetable. Would've thought a 7-car set would save a minute or so over that distance at least? https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:Y23393/2025-11-12/detailed#allox_id=0

Looks like it may have done to a point, but lost time at both Newark and Retford as against booked times (people having to move around the platform?)

 

[yorksrob]

Depressing isn't it.

Yet another example of the proliferation of 5 car and 7 car intercity trains everywhere, on the East Coast, West Coast, Western, XC and Midland Mainline, and open access. Penny pinching stock orders, poor planning, inadequate infrastructure (e.g. the four short platforms at St Pancras) and poor stock availability day to day from Hitachi.

And we claim our main lines are full and will happily invest millions in putting more short trains down them, and building an extremely expensive WCML Relief Line between Eastern Birmingham and an old railway site in Acton who nobody outside railways has ever heard of, and whose trains will now be 60m shorter than an 11-car Pendo.

The answers to our capacity woes really aren't that complicated are they.

Yes, we need fewer short trains on the ECML, not more.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

Yes, we need fewer short trains on the ECML, not more.

This does look like a case of doing things for the convenience of the railway rather than the passengers. No doubt it's far easier to timetable if the Mk4 sets can keep to 80x timings.

 

[yorksrob]

This does look like a case of doing things for the convenience of the railway rather than the passengers. No doubt it's far easier to timetable if the Mk4 sets can keep to 80x timings.

I think trying to cram Leeds passengers on seven carriage trains at busy times will be a hiding to nowhere.

 

[hexagon789]

This does look like a case of doing things for the convenience of the railway rather than the passengers. No doubt it's far easier to timetable if the Mk4 sets can keep to 80x timings.

Even at 7+DVT, they can't quite keep the same timings - there are sections where even the E330 timings are 0.5 mins slower than the Azumas.

Consequently it appears some station times are adjusted in the Working Timetable so that the public timetable remains more consistent.

 

[Royston Vasey]

I think trying to cram Leeds passengers on seven carriage trains at busy times will be a hiding to nowhere.

That leaves them with the blunt instrument of "yield management", i.e. charging more on average per ticket. They already think they're a reservation only railway anyway so they'll just charge more for the seats they have (sound familiar?) and consider the problem solved.

 

[Silver Cobra]

They have removed coach m and e from the reservation system. Means if a 9 turns up, then e and m should be unreserved.

That was my experience when I last travelled on an IC225 from Peterborough to York back on 29th October. It was shown to be booked as a 7-car set in the reservation system, but ran as a 9-car on the day. Coach E had no reservations applied, so I duly headed to that coach. The coach stayed virtually empty throughout almost the whole journey, only filling to about 1/4 full at Doncaster.