LNER 225 Shortening/Overnight Testing

[Railperf]

Comparing the timings from December the shorter 225 sets are allowed an additional 2.5 mins running time over the 80x on a northbound Leeds service stopping at Stevenage, Newark, Doncaster and Wakefield.

 

[Royston Vasey]

Comparing the timings from December the shorter 225 sets are allowed an additional 2.5 mins running time over the 80x on a northbound Leeds service stopping at Stevenage, Newark, Doncaster and Wakefield.

Which is not the end of the world. If they can achieve it in practice.

They've tested all this many many times. I'm sure they have it all worked out.

Don't get me wrong, I am sure they know what they are doing, that it's been modelled and tested and they have all they need to know.

But this timetable was agreed and published in December 2024. The shortened sets were tested in summer 2025 (mainly for platform testing rather than acceleration, IIRC).

I'm not assuming anything, but let me ask a hypothetical question...

What if the tests showed they can't keep close enough to Azuma time after all? What would LNER and DfT be doing now? Ploughing on or making changes?

I strongly suspect they'd just be ploughing on. They can hardly cancel it all now, and they can hardly acquire an alternative fleet.

We won't truly know until December.

 

[David Bullock]

Without having had the time or willpower to analyse everything in detail, I’m a bit unclear why, even with the current timetable, there’s so many short trains floating around.

When the IETs came along, the general view was that the 9-car 800s were the HST replacements, enough 9-car 801s were ordered to replace the IC225s, and the 5-cars were essentially over and above. Then on top of that there’s the IC225s. So in theory the only 5-cars should be a handful of services at the extremes of the day when there’s genuinely low demand. What we have in practice is a completely different picture, and all the more so from December. Is the IET availability really so bad?

I guess you’ve had Lincoln, Bradford and Harrogate services introduced since azumas were introduced, and while they were extensions to existing services it will still probably require extra units here and there. The introduction of a new service every hour to Newcastle probably eats up remaining capacity.

I think the criticism is fair that the rolling stock order should have been better integrated with timetable aspirations. 10 additional 9 car bi modes would have meant that none of these compromises would need to be made.

Just got to hope that the 897 can get in service before ECTS rollout otherwise it will be fun and games between Yorks and London.

 

[Railperf]

Which is not the end of the world. If they can achieve it in practice.


Don't get me wrong, I am sure they know what they are doing, that it's been modelled and tested and they have all they need to know.

But this timetable was agreed and published in December 2024. The shortened sets were tested in summer 2025 (mainly for platform testing rather than acceleration, IIRC).

I'm not assuming anything, but let me ask a hypothetical question...

What if the tests showed they can't keep close enough to Azuma time after all? What would LNER and DfT be doing now? Ploughing on or making changes?

I strongly suspect they'd just be ploughing on. They can hardly cancel it all now, and they can hardly acquire an alternative fleet.

We won't truly know until December.

There are around 5 minutes of additional engineering allowances in the timetable. So provided that there are not enough temporary speed restrictions to consume those 5 minutes, then whatever is left can be used up to absorb late running.

 

[D1537]

Without having had the time or willpower to analyse everything in detail, I’m a bit unclear why, even with the current timetable, there’s so many short trains floating around.

When the IETs came along, the general view was that the 9-car 800s were the HST replacements, enough 9-car 801s were ordered to replace the IC225s, and the 5-cars were essentially over and above. Then on top of that there’s the IC225s. So in theory the only 5-cars should be a handful of services at the extremes of the day when there’s genuinely low demand. What we have in practice is a completely different picture, and all the more so from December. Is the IET availability really so bad?

There are 156 trains in the current timetable booked for Azumas of any type (and that includes 13 trains on the York-Newcastle shuttles).
There are 179 trains booked for Azumas in the December timetable. Hence the increase in 5-cars.

 

[bramling]

They've tested all this many many times. I'm sure they have it all worked out.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Nov 2025 ==


Nothing to do with availability, it's due to the many more services operating than previous.

I can get that from December, but the current timetable doesn’t offer much more than the original Eureka timetable that was delivered with HSTs and IC225s, with every service being a full-length train.

It may be the case that Lincoln only justifies 5 cars, but this doesn’t explain 5 cars on Leeds services, which has been ongoing for some while now.

 

[43 302]

I can get that from December, but the current timetable doesn’t offer much more than the original Eureka timetable that was delivered with HSTs and IC225s, with every service being a full-length train.

It may be the case that Lincoln only justifies 5 cars, but this doesn’t explain 5 cars on Leeds services, which has been ongoing for some while now.

What is the relevance of any of what you've just said? The Mk4s are being shortened for the new timetable. The five cars on Leeds trains is because LNER has five car trains, whilst the 9 cars are utilised elsewhere. What else do you suggest they do?

 

[bramling]

What is the relevance of any of what you've just said? The Mk4s are being shortened for the new timetable. The five cars on Leeds trains is because LNER has five car trains, whilst the 9 cars are utilised elsewhere. What else do you suggest they do?

Perhaps the time isn’t right to be introducing the new timetable when the resources aren’t really there for it. The Leeds route is an important artery, and a significant number of shorter trains (both Mk4s and IETs) is clearly highly undesirable.

 

[XCTurbostar]

Realtime Trains | 5Q26 1031 Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D to Worksop Up Receptions | 13/11/2025

Real-time train running information for 5Q26 1031 departure from Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D to Worksop Up Receptions on 13/11/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

37608 + 82225 + 8Mk4s + 37884

Return working:

Realtime Trains | 5Q17 1401 Worksop Up Receptions to Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D | 13/11/2025

Real-time train running information for 5Q17 1401 departure from Worksop Up Receptions to Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D on 13/11/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[D1537]

What is the relevance of any of what you've just said? The Mk4s are being shortened for the new timetable. The five cars on Leeds trains is because LNER has five car trains, whilst the 9 cars are utilised elsewhere. What else do you suggest they do?

The increase in 5-car services on the West Yorkshire route in December (four trains more) is not really because 9-cars are being used elsewhere; it is the current pairs of 801/1s that are being replaced by single units, so that others can be used on (a) the Newcastle services and (b) the York stoppers, which are all changing from 9-car to 5-car.

Currently, there are 14 x 10-car services and 9 x 5-car services per day on the West Yorkshire route. In December this will be 6 x 10-car services and 13 x 5-car. Some of the "lost" 10-car trains will be 9-cars, so no capacity lost there (a 9-car actually has a few more seats than two 5-cars).

More of an issue is that the current 5-car services, bar one, are all off-peak, whereas some of the ones from December aren't.

 

[43 302]

Realtime Trains | 5Q26 1031 Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D to Worksop Up Receptions | 13/11/2025

Real-time train running information for 5Q26 1031 departure from Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D to Worksop Up Receptions on 13/11/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

37608 + 82225 + 8Mk4s + 37884

Return working:

Realtime Trains | 5Q17 1401 Worksop Up Receptions to Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D | 13/11/2025

Real-time train running information for 5Q17 1401 departure from Worksop Up Receptions to Neville Hill T&R.S.M.D on 13/11/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

82225 & 12214 are returning and are being used as barrier vehicles.

 

[50002Superb]

This is the full list according to Richard Clinnick on Twitter:

10 former @LNER Mk 4s are on move to Worksop for store. 4xOpen Firsts (11406/408/412/415), 1xOpen Standard End (12214), 5xOpen Standards (12406/431/485/515) and 1xDVT (82225).

https://x.com/clinnick1/status/1988923953885086081?s=46&t=BM205xSI_a2WpM7mwwwJ7Q

 

[43074]

Comparing the timings from December the shorter 225 sets are allowed an additional 2.5 mins running time over the 80x on a northbound Leeds service stopping at Stevenage, Newark, Doncaster and Wakefield.

For comparison, 225 running times with a 9 Mk4+DVT set making the same stops would be another 2.5 mins slower than a 7 car 225 set, based on the running times alone.

 

[rmHawk765]

I think that was the idea back then, but they’re no longer being primarily used on that route, and I believe that they’re not going north of Newcastle now.

Is this just to do with their age? They're not exactly unreliable and I think we can all agree it is short-sighted to not use them for longer services.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is this just to do with their age? They're not exactly unreliable and I think we can all agree it is short-sighted to not use them for longer services.

I think it was explained in a previous thread it’s about some traincrew not maintaining traction knowledge. Someone might confirm if that’s the case.

 

[35B]

I travelled on last night’s 1D30. The loss of a carriage, and presence of reservations in coach C, made a busy train uncomfortable and unpleasant.

I’ll bide my time before assessing the new timetable, but I'll be complaining to LNER about the 15% reduction in train capacity on the old timetable.

 

[gabrielhj07]

I travelled on last night’s 1D30. The loss of a carriage, and presence of reservations in coach C, made a busy train uncomfortable and unpleasant.

I’ll bide my time before assessing the new timetable, but I'll be complaining to LNER about the 15% reduction in train capacity on the old timetable.

Is there an unreserved coach at all now?

 

[35B]

Is there an unreserved coach at all now?

Officially C is fully unreserved, but it was clear that this hadn’t been implemented until after well into the reservation period

 

[gabrielhj07]

Officially C is fully unreserved, but it was clear that this hadn’t been implemented until after well into the reservation period

Thanks

 

[Railperf]

The December TT change still sees a 91 booked for the 1433 Kings Cross to Newcastle. Running times for the 91 are 3.5 mins slower than an 80x - absorbed by slightly longer station dwells in places by 1/2 minute here and there to maintain the public book times. Interestingly the London to Stevenage section demands a net time of 18.5 minutes. Our archives show a fastest 19 in 17 sec for a 91 with full load, so the timings are every tight indeed. Fastest recorded time for an 80x is a full minute faster.

Ironically on the Stevenage to Grantham section - which demands 41.5 minutes for a Class 91, and 40.5 mins for a Class 800, our fastest time archives show a 91 with full ten car load can achieve the timing and is only a few seconds slower than our fastest Class 80x recorded run.
So far we don't have a Class 80x run recorded faster than 41 min 20 seconds borthbound. In fact the record holder over the section is a 222 in 40 min 46 seconds. Laughable is that we even have Class 180 runs that were faster than our fastest Class 80x or 91 times.

The most interesting section wil be Grantham to York. It demands a net running time of 44min for an 80x and 1/2 minute more for the shortened Class 91. In fact our archives don't show a run in the last 20 years by either class faster than 46 mins 20 seconds. So it will take new levels of operational performance to achieve those times without eating into the 3 minutes of engineering allowances.
The 3 hour schedule for both trains is equalised by an additional 3 mins dwell time over the six station stops - 14.5 mins for the 80x compared to only 11.5 for the 91's. I wonder if platform staff have been briefed on how to get the 91's away a bit faster.

 

[dodecahedron67]

The December TT change still sees a 91 booked for the 1433 Kings Cross to Newcastle. Running times for the 91 are 3.5 mins slower than an 80x - absorbed by slightly longer station dwells in places by 1/2 minute here and there to maintain the public book times. Interestingly the London to Stevenage section demands a net time of 18.5 minutes. Our archives show a fastest 19 in 17 sec for a 91 with full load, so the timings are every tight indeed. Fastest recorded time for an 80x is a full minute faster.

Ironically on the Stevenage to Grantham section - which demands 41.5 minutes for a Class 91, and 40.5 mins for a Class 800, our fastest time archives show a 91 with full ten car load can achieve the timing and is only a few seconds slower than our fastest Class 80x recorded run.
So far we don't have a Class 80x run recorded faster than 41 min 20 seconds borthbound. In fact the record holder over the section is a 222 in 40 min 46 seconds. Laughable is that we even have Class 180 runs that were faster than our fastest Class 80x or 91 times.

The most interesting section wil be Grantham to York. It demands a net running time of 44min for an 80x and 1/2 minute more for the shortened Class 91. In fact our archives don't show a run in the last 20 years by either class faster than 46 mins 20 seconds. So it will take new levels of operational performance to achieve those times without eating into the 3 minutes of engineering allowances.
The 3 hour schedule for both trains is equalised by an additional 3 mins dwell time over the six station stops - 14.5 mins for the 80x compared to only 11.5 for the 91's. I wonder if platform staff have been briefed on how to get the 91's away a bit faster.

As had been covered to death, this will be ran by an Azuma off the Harrogate departure at the same(ish) time, with the Harrogate & back cancelled to provide the stock. No 91s to Newcastle for now

 

[Railperf]

As had been covered to death, this will be ran by an Azuma off the Harrogate departure at the same(ish) time, with the Harrogate & back cancelled to provide the stock. No 91s to Newcastle for now

Oh. what a pity. RTT shows the timing load as electric loco with 330 ton. Anyway. Interesting to compare the timings even if the diagram will now be covered by an 80x anyway.

 

[DarloRich]

You are incredibly perplexed as to why trying to fit 9 carriages' worth of passengers into 7 might be a problem?

Yet a week ago I was on the 1703 Kings Cross > Leeds ( as I am quite often) and it was far from full with 9 carriages. I expected it to be rammed. It was not.

My biggest concern is the Sunday services out of Leeds which can be VERY busy and the reductions in vehicles across other services on the wider route.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yet a week ago I was on the 1703 Kings Cross > Leeds ( as I am quite often) and it was far from full with 9 carriages. I expected it to be rammed. It was not.

I assume that as that's a train on which Super Off Peaks aren't valid that they just cranked the Advance prices up a bit and priced people off? Easy to do on peak timed trains even without the fare increase trial that makes that applicable all day.

 

[DarloRich]

I assume that as that's a train on which Super Off Peaks aren't valid that they just cranked the Advance prices up a bit and priced people off? Easy to do on peak timed trains even without the fare increase trial that makes that applicable all day.

completely anecdotal but recently I have found the 91 hauled trains to be quieter than the Azuma trains at all times of the day. It used to be the other way around imo.

Sunday is the exception - ALL trains are rammed!

 

[Railperf]

That is one advantage of an EMU over a locomotive. You're not trying to put thousands of horsepower into just 4 axels.

Aren,t the Cardan shafts connecting motors and wheel sets a weak point for all that horsepower?

 

[FrontSideBus]

Aren,t the Cardan shafts connecting motors and wheel sets a weak point for all that horsepower?

I'd imagine the quill shafts in the final drives take quite a bit of stick.

 

[driverd]

I'd like to time a 2+3 HST but they are limited to 75mph.

I'm not too sure where you've got that from but can assure you that is not the case. Just as a pair of power cars can do 125, so can 2+3.

 

[35B]

I'm not too sure where you've got that from but can assure you that is not the case. Just as a pair of power cars can do 125, so can 2+3.

Are you sure they’re allowed to? I thought very short formations were speed restricted because of the limits on braking.

 

[hexagon789]

Are you sure they’re allowed to? I thought very short formations were speed restricted because of the limits on braking.

This came up before and post-1985 (brake mods being completed) that no longer applied, certainly not under BR.

67s and 68s are similarly disc braked and permitted 100mph (sometimes even more for 67s) light engine.