London Midland/Northern EMU changes speculation

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I've looked at it in an unbiased way taking into consideration of comfort for all TOCs and cost (especially for training which costs more than you think). All you've shown interest in so far is LM having a standardised fleet of 323s and 350s with TPE and Northern having to mess about altering their fleets and services to suit LM. You've not minimised the number of services receiving inferior stock as you've just downgraded an hour core route from Manchester to Scotland from air conditioned 2+2 trains to 3+2 commuter trains.

Indeed, that posting was certainly giving LM the best options in the mindset of that poster, without due consideration for the realities of the Northern-style future franchise.

 

[Cletus]

Perhaps the 319's transferring to LM could be renamed 350/5?

 

[causton]

Perhaps the 319's transferring to LM could be renamed 350/5?

No way. That would be like renumbering 220s and 221s Class 43/9 because CrossCountry operate them. The class number identifies the differences between the classes, and 319s and 350s are like chalk and cheese!

 

[Cletus]

I wasn't being entirely serious I'm afraid.

 

[causton]

I wasn't being entirely serious I'm afraid.

I've seen worse on this forum. It's hard to tell what's real from what's not

 

[childwallblues]

The 100mph diagrams are self-contained, so I'd say yes. Indeed, as a LM user I'd rather have 30 319s than 22 350s; it would for instance allow all peak slow and semifast departures from Euston to be 12-car and additionally make some of the overcrowded shoulder-peak services 8-car. So no problems there, though I would prefer 2+2 seating in whatever we get (i.e. the ex-Cityflyer or Brighton Express units).



There is a very strong case for this, it's such an outpost of LM that it is poorly resourced, unpunctual and unreliable.

Who says that LIV-BHM is unreliable. Having done over 20000 miles on the 350s since they were introduced to the route I would challenge that. They do I admit quite often lose a few minutes between BHM and CRE but this is made up by slack timings between RUN and LIV. The use of 350/2 is normal on five out of the eight diagrams. The service used to have a trolley service but this was stopped after the 350/2 appeared due to problems getting the trolleys through and passengers having no tables to put hot drinks on.

 

[Class 170101]

Would have thought wiring Coventry to Nuneaton would be betetr if Northern 323s go to LM rather than using DMUs.

Can't believe this route would need a new feeder station given its short length and the fact it is in some respects a diesel island.

 

[thealexweb]

I for one would support the cascading of the Class 350/4s to London Midland on the condition of suitable alternatives being presented.

For example, some of the Class 225 sets will soon need a new home, with VTWC using Class 390s on most of its Scottish services, overlapping between Edinburgh / Glasgow and Wigan North Western, is it really that radical of an idea?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Would the 225s be any good on the route that TPE use their 350s on?

 

[childwallblues]

If 323s remain in Manchester there is no increase in training costs as the relevant depot signs them.

TPE on the other hand just spent a few thousand introducing 350 in training costs, even had a dedicated project manager and I believe a simulator built for them. Replacing it with 319 units just so LM can have them all seems very wasteful and costly for the new TPE franchise. Not to mention this refurbishment to get it up to any decent standard. ££££.

The simulator at Ardwick was built for 185 training.

As far as I am aware north of Carlisle the 350s are manned by Freightliner drivers.

 

[childwallblues]

I don't see why LM need the LO 172s, unless significant growth needs to be covered on the Snow Hill lines.

The Snow Hill lines already have one 170/153 diagram and there is a 150 diagram on New Street to Hereford.

 

[158722]

The Snow Hill lines already have one 170/153 diagram and there is a 150 diagram on New Street to Hereford.

As my earlier post stated. Both of these can be replaced when the Chase line gets wired, a 170/6 taking over the 170/153 combo, releasing the 170/5 to replace the 150. Chase wiring should release two 170/6s and two 153&170/5 combos.

 

[Old Hill Bank]

As my earlier post stated. Both of these can be replaced when the Chase line gets wired, a 170/6 taking over the 170/153 combo, releasing the 170/5 to replace the 150. Chase wiring should release two 170/6s and two 153&170/5 combos.

The Snow Hill lines 170-153 combo is a 4-car working 170/6+153 this works an afternoon diagram, there is also the 0735 Worcester-Dorridge that operates with 2 x 170/6.

The problem with the 150s and Marston Vale is quite complex. Firstly there is the platform lengths meaning that 2-car working has to be 20 metre stock, then you have traction and route knowledge. Bletchley drivers sign 150s/153s and the route to Birmingham New Street but not to Tyseley depot so Worcester drivers do the ecs moves from New Street to Tyseley, therefore there is a m-f Birmingham-Hereford 150 job and some 153 workings so that Worcester staff maintain traction knowledge.

 

[northwichcat]

They do I admit quite often lose a few minutes between BHM and CRE but this is made up by slack timings between RUN and LIV.

Surely if it's often late at Crewe that can affect a number of passengers trying to make onward connections there.

The use of 350/2 is normal on five out of the eight diagrams. The service used to have a trolley service but this was stopped after the 350/2 appeared due to problems getting the trolleys through and passengers having no tables to put hot drinks on.

I thought it continued for a while but with trolley staff told only passengers sat down at seats with tables could be served hot drinks, which meant hot drinks were only served to FC passengers on 350/2s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Would the 225s be any good on the route that TPE use their 350s on?

TPE reportedly looked at operating a class 86 hauled set on Fridays and Saturdays only but decided it would cause problems in Cumbria due to slower acceleration and likely result in 125mph capable 221s and 390s catching them up. Possibly that's also why the Pretendolino working stopped at so few stations, I seem to recall it did Euston to Preston non-stop.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I for one would support the cascading of the Class 350/4s to London Midland on the condition of suitable alternatives being presented.

I take it that the "suitable alternatives" will be of the same relatively new age as the Class 350/4?

Incidentally, this thread concerns Northern, not First TPE.

 

[sprinterguy]

I wonder when it's envisaged the 323s will leave Northern, given the franchise ends on 31st March, significant crews will have to be trained on the replacement stock and the replacement stock may require timetabling changes depending on it's top speed and acceleration (which would ideally be done in December or May.)

December 2017 is the date that London Midland expect to need additional electric stock in the West Midlands for the likes of the Chase line.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In the north, anything with the Desiro name on it would go to Siemens at Ardwick.

Does Ardwick depot have the capacity for an additional 17, or perhaps even 37, 4-car units, though? Would Siemens be willing to fund an expansion of depot capacity if not (Both genuine questions that I don't know the answer to, rather than rhetorical)?

Of course, if Northern were to take on all the 350/2s in the North West, presumably replacing some or all of their recently received 319s, wouldn't that leave the recently converted and reopened Allerton depot somewhat short of work if they were to be maintained elsewhere (and Ardwick does make sense from a maintenance and staff familiarity perspective)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Oh and as you've been told before no one travels end to end on the TPE service...

I rather think that to be a false claim. Having travelled on the service several times (from Glasgow to Manchester, by the way), quite a lot of people travel the full length of the route (well, nearly, at any rate: From Edinburgh/Glasgow as far as Manchester Piccadilly, if not as far as Manchester Airport). I don't think that the 350s are suitable for the route but I still value a direct train over the faff of having to change at Preston or wherever: I suspect that many passengers are the same.

 

[northwichcat]

Does Ardwick depot have the capacity for an additional 17, or perhaps even 37, 4-car units, though? Would Siemens be willing to fund an expansion of depot capacity if not (Both genuine questions that I don't know the answer to, rather than rhetorical)?

Siemens have facilities in York as well where a small number of 185s are dealt with. I asked earlier if expanding their facility there so that more 185s could be dealt with there, leaving more space at Ardwick and no-one has responded. There is also the Siemens facility in Leeds where they handle the Siemens/CAF 333s, so another option is to service 185s there?

Of course, if Northern were to take on all the 350/2s in the North West, presumably replacing some or all of their recently received 319s, wouldn't that leave the recently converted and reopened Allerton depot somewhat short of work if they were to be maintained elsewhere (and Ardwick does make sense from a maintenance and staff familiarity perspective)?

Not necessarily. Allerton currently handles all the 319s and the 156 fleet is split between Allerton and Heaton. Allerton started handling 156s when the ex-LM 150s arrived and the 156s had to be moved out of Newton Heath to make room for the ex-LM 150s.

Northern currently have 37 west side EMUs - exactly the same number as the 319s and 323s. However, by 2017 Northern will require additional EMUs as Blackpool, Bolton, Windermere and Stalybridge should be wired, so something would be needed alongside the 350/2s. Some of the services have to run by trains with a 'Regional Express' interior, it was originally suggested the 350/4s would be transferred to Northern for those services but then came the suggestion that as Northern won't need EMUs with 110mph capability it would be better giving those to LM with Northern receiving 350/2s instead.

 

[158722]

Does Ardwick depot have the capacity for an additional 17, or perhaps even 37, 4-car units, though? Would Siemens be willing to fund an expansion of depot capacity if not (Both genuine questions that I don't know the answer to, rather than rhetorical)?

Of course, if Northern were to take on all the 350/2s in the North West, presumably replacing some or all of their recently received 319s, wouldn't that leave the recently converted and reopened Allerton depot somewhat short of work if they were to be maintained elsewhere (and Ardwick does make sense from a maintenance and staff familiarity perspective)?.

Northern will have a requirement for around another 16-18 EMUs when the Blackpool/Bolton/Wigan axis goes live, this being my best guesstimate for just Northern stopping services. They will also need EMU stock for the current TPE fast services to Blackpool and Windermere and we don't know for sure which other services will get grouped in to the Regional Express category - perhaps the Liverpool-Blackpools? With 17 350/2s nominally to replace the 323s, another 8 to 10 would seem likely to RE Manchester-Blackpool/Windermere, another pair on the extra Stoke services, leaving 6 or so Liverpool-Blackpools. Any transfer of 350s to Northern may reduce the number of extra 319s they need on top of the 20 already allocated, but it certainly won't release any of those current ones and I'd still expect another 10-15 319s to be heading to Allerton in 2017 onwards.

 

[158722]

The Snow Hill lines 170-153 combo is a 4-car working 170/6+153 this works an afternoon diagram, there is also the 0735 Worcester-Dorridge that operates with 2 x 170/6.

The problem with the 150s and Marston Vale is quite complex. Firstly there is the platform lengths meaning that 2-car working has to be 20 metre stock, then you have traction and route knowledge. Bletchley drivers sign 150s/153s and the route to Birmingham New Street but not to Tyseley depot so Worcester drivers do the ecs moves from New Street to Tyseley, therefore there is a m-f Birmingham-Hereford 150 job and some 153 workings so that Worcester staff maintain traction knowledge.

Thanks for that, diagrams have evolved since I last looked. I'd still expect LM to dispense with their 153s once the Chase is wired, but it does leave the issue of 150s on the Bedfords. Some combination of traction or route training to resolve the issue of the ECS moves?

 

[Philip C]

As far as I am aware north of Carlisle the 350s are manned by Freightliner drivers.

My understanding is that "freight drivers" operate some or all of the workings into Glasgow, but TPEx (Preston based) drivers certainly work into Edinburgh. Perhaps someone else could give a fuller picture?

 

[AM9]

I take it that the "suitable alternatives" will be of the same relatively new age as the Class 350/4?

Incidentally, this thread concerns Northern, not First TPE.

Maybe replaced with stock with a similar 'suitable' amenity. Providing that the 350/4 replacements are adequately maintained, (including in passenger areas), any age difference to the existing stock is irrelevant.

 

[DarloRich]

Chase line electrification will see 4 DMU diagrams replaced, namely 2 diagrams of 153/170 combos & 2x 170/6 in peak (only 3 diagrams off-peak). Cascade within LM with 2x 170/6 replacing 1x 153+170/5 Hereford & 1x 153+170/5 Snow Hill, then 2x 170/5 replace 2x 150 (one on Bedford-Bletchley & one Hereford). Other 2x 170/5 replace 2x 153 diagrams, one Bedford-Bletchley & one Coventry-Nuneaton. Result, in theory, is that LM release 3x 150s and 8x 153s, the only issue being platform lengths on Bedford-Bletchley for the 170s...

I don't see why LM need the LO 172s, unless significant growth needs to be covered on the Snow Hill lines.

a 153 will go on the Kenilworth shuttles and a 170/172 wont fit on in the platforms in the Marston Vale line

Would it be possible to base the fleet at Bletchley or would they still need to go to Tyseley for maintenance?

I doubt LM would reopen a depot simply to house 3 units - it seems like an extravagant expense

Would it be possible to base the fleet at Bletchley or would they still need to go to Tyseley for maintenance?

We only get a 150 on the Marston Vale as, it is alleged, that the local councils underwrite the use of these units to cope with schools traffic, which is heavy at the appropriate times of the day.

 

[DarloRich]

Siemens have facilities in York as well where a small number of 185s are dealt with. I asked earlier if expanding their facility there so that more 185s could be dealt with there, leaving more space at Ardwick and no-one has responded. There is also the Siemens facility in Leeds where they handle the Siemens/CAF 333s, so another option is to service 185s there?

Doubtful - the York depot is a light service facility. It is hard up against the main line, has the NRM and car park at one end, a road which goes under the line and then houses at the other and industrial units behind. Little or no room to expand.

Where do Siemans have a facility on Leeds? Aren't the 333's maintained at Neville Hill?

 

[trains2064]

The Coventry to Nuneaton Shuttle would have more than a 153 if LM had more units/coaches. The Kenilworth will probably be a 153 but might be a 172 as that's what Leamingtons LM train crew depot use.
150's released by Great Western maybe will fit the bill for Kenilworths. Some traction training would be required somewhere and though I'm sure that LM are looking at eliminating all use of single cars and I'm sure the people between Bedford and Bletchley and Coventry and Nuneaton would love more than 70 seats on there trains.

 

[Stats]

Siemens have facilities in York as well where a small number of 185s are dealt with. I asked earlier if expanding their facility there so that more 185s could be dealt with there, leaving more space at Ardwick and no-one has responded.

I believe there is land safeguarded for an expanded and/or relocated transpennine depot in York. Although this is with an expanded fleet on electrification in mind.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Bletchley CS can be and is still used to stable units. No reason a couple of 150s couldn't be out based there.

 

[DarloRich]

Bletchley CS can be and is still used to stable units. No reason a couple of 150s couldn't be out based there.

apart form the complete lack of any engineering or fueling facilities

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not insurmountable. A mobile fitter is already semi based at Bletchley, and you could truck fuel in.

 

[DarloRich]

Not insurmountable. A mobile fitter is already semi based at Bletchley, and you could truck fuel in.

there is no road access to the carriage sidings and they are rail locked - there is a fuel point on the depot

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's operated a few services including the 1843 to New St which has a few stops. Only lost 2 mins Euston to MKC.