Manchester - Scotland EMU stock

[Whistler40145]

I also thought of an EMU similar to the Stansted Express Class 379 Electrostar.

 

[MCR247]

MCR247, what in your opinion would be the best choice of EMU?

A cross between a 444/350

 

[BananaRepublic]

Sorry folks, but I am totally aghast at the idea that this route is being served and in future is proposed to be served by MU's designed for local and regional commuter services.
For goodness sake the distance involved is longer than London - Manchester, or London - Leeds and is a link between two major UK city pairs. Current journey times from Manchester to the Scottish cities is just under three and a half hours, but even with the time savings expected from electrification, this will remain roughly a 3 hour journey.
As a previous poster said, is it any surprise that current passenger numbers are so low?

Is anyone proposing that the ECML should see trains similar to Electrostars or Desiros as the future replacement IC225 or IC125 sets?
Surely more suitable rolling stock should be under consideration?

If a Desiro were to be chosen, then I would have thought a 444 style body (to current requirements) would be more appropriate; however I'd rather see proper IC stock as the best solution and as such agree with the proposal that this route should revert to be part of the ICWC franchise.

As Class 395's have been mentioned, they don't fit the bill either, being HS commuter trains designed to take advantage of running on HS1.
395's would be overkill speed wise and they have a bodyshell laid out in commuter configuration. However they're part of Hitachi's A train family and no doubt a variant suitable for this route could be created. Oops! silly me; they've already done that design; it's called the SET (electric versions of which are part of the proposed IEP order).

Whatever short term solutions may have to be adopted, the way it looks to me (shoot me down if you like) is that future requirements appear to point towards displaced Pendolinos or additional orders for Hitachi SET's.

 

[Whistler40145]

I agree that really Desiro & Electrostars are unsuitable for such a long journey with limited stops, so shortened Pendolino or Javelin sets would be more practicable.

 

[BananaRepublic]

....or Javelin sets....

No not Javelins sets (I assume you really mean Class 395's ?).
As I pointed out above, they are HS commuter trains and would not be suited to these services.
A different, slower 125 mph version of them, with longer vehicle bodies incorporating an IC door arrangement and an appropriate internal layout, may fit the bill. Hitachi already have that train design in the shape of their Super Express Train (SET), intended to fulfil the IEP requirement.

 

[rail-britain]

is it any surprise that current passenger numbers are so low?

Passenger numbers on this route have always been low, there is only just enough demand to warrant the service
As I previously posted even during the 1980s this was operated by a locomotive and 4 coaches from each of Glasgow and Edinburgh just twice per day
Quite often you could count the total number of passengers on one hand

Since the Class 185 units were introduced the numbers have increased, but more so by restricting the available service options
For example passengers between Motherwell, Lockerbie and Carlisle have no choice but to use these services now, then change at Carlisle or Preston for the traditional service they would used (example Birmingham, Midlands, Euston)

 

[northwichcat]

I don't know how many of you will agree, I think a fleet of Siemens Desiros would be suitable, whether a modified Class 350 could be produced?

Desiro design is only 100mph capable due to crumple zones. However, the line allows faster running (110/125mph.) Desiro seating is also less suitable for longer distance services but there shouldn't be an issue with fitting a different type of seating.

Also there should be capabilities to raise line speeds before the units are life expired so ordering a 110mph non-tilting one now may look very slow in 20 years times.

As I pointed out above, they are HS commuter trains and would not be suited to these services.

If this is a commuter layout: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Class_395_MSO_Interior.JPG ? It looks similar to the layout we get on long distances trains up here e.g. Manchester Airport to Scotland and Liverpool to Norwich.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As a previous poster said, is it any surprise that current passenger numbers are so low?

I'm sorry which route are your referring to? Is it the Manchester Airport to Scotland route then can have almost every seat reserved and at peak times doubled up units that have a lot of people standing?

 

[danfitz123]

It should really be a new order of tilting trains to operate the route at Pendolino/Voyager speeds.

In that case why didnt LM buy tilting stock to works the south WCML?

 

[northwichcat]

In that case why didnt LM buy tilting stock to works the south WCML?

1. LM operate slower stopping services.
2. The 350/1s were ordered by SWT as 450s and then converted because SWT ordered too many units. These were then put in a shared CT/Silverlink pool which LM took over.
3. The 350/2s were ordered as 321 replacement and additional stock. Using the 350/1 basis made sense to not have too many different types of train.

 

[BananaRepublic]

In that case why didnt LM buy tilting stock to works the south WCML?

My understanding is that Tilt is little used on the southern section of the WCML.
IIRC most if not all the tilting sections are north of Birmingham.

In addition, Tilt only works at the higher speeds and in most cases LM stock wouldn't operate at those higher speeds on a stopping service pattern.

 

[Whistler40145]

Would there be any surplus units in the SouthEast which could be refurbished for interim use?

 

[northwichcat]

Would there be any surplus units in the SouthEast which could be refurbished for interim use?

Not unless LM release their 321s. The electrification should be ready by 2014 and the Thameslink cascade is expected in 2015 at the earliest.

 

[BananaRepublic]

As I pointed out above, they are HS commuter trains and would not be suited to these services.

If this is a commuter layout: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Class_395_MSO_Interior.JPG ? It looks similar to the layout we get on long distances trains up here e.g. Manchester Airport to Scotland and Liverpool to Norwich.

That's a commuter layout used for journey times from London ranging from approx. 20 minutes (Ebbsfleet) and 30 minutes (Ashford), up to between one and one & a half hours to the deepest parts of north and east Kent.

Manchester - Scotland is currently 3 and a half hours (i.e. up to 7 times longer), using totally inappropriate local and regional trains. By inappropriate I would include the one third, two third door arrangements that are designed for the fast loading and unloading of large numbers of passengers on frequently stopping short commuter routes. These not only waste valuable seating space, but may be considered detrimental to the passenger environment on longer journeys.

Liverpool - Norwich is a different case, as very few passengers are making the full journey. Similar to many "Cross Country" routes, it's more of a series of local services. If anything, it's a worst example of using inappropriate stock.

As a previous poster said, is it any surprise that current passenger numbers are so low?

I'm sorry which route are your referring to? Is it the Manchester Airport to Scotland route then can have almost every seat reserved and at peak times doubled up units that have a lot of people standing?

In which case it deserves rolling stock suited to the length of journey and of suitable capacity. The proposed 4 car EMU's used singly or in pairs is not much better than the current poor arrangements.
For many of those passengers, air travel would be more appropriate especially if connected to/from flights at Manchester Airport. Booked in advance the fares can be lower than for rail, or even a free or low cost add-on to a long-haul ticket. Why they should subject themselves to the sort of rail travel on offer, is beyond my comprehension?

Would there be any surplus units in the SouthEast which could be refurbished for interim use?

With something like 70% of all UK rail travel wholly contained within London and the South East, there is precious little in the way of spare units.
The ex-Gatwick Express Class 460's would be ideal if they could be converted to AC (apparently that's not as easy as with other modern DC units) and subjected to a complete internal refit. Unfortunately they also have the one third, two thirds door arrangement; but even more of a problem is that there are only 8 sets in existence.

 

[northwichcat]

The ex-Gatwick Express Class 460's would be ideal if they could be converted to AC (apparently that's not as easy as with other modern DC units)

Aren't the 460s effectively a redesigned 450?

but even more of a problem is that there are only 8 sets in existence.

Huh?

NXEA have 21. There's 5 for Heathrow services and 9 in use in Thailand.

 

[sprinterguy]

Aren't the 460s effectively a redesigned 450?

Huh?

NXEA have 21. There's 5 for Heathrow services and 9 in use in Thailand.

You're thinking of the class 360 Desiros. What is being referred to here is the class 460 Junipers built for the Gatwick Express service.

Actually, moving the 460s to the Manchester to Scotland operation, if they could be converted to AC power, wouldn't be a bad idea if a "more Intercity" operation is what is desired: Eight carriages long and with plenty of luggage space. The downside of this would be that it would remove any opportunity to split trains going to different destinations, and with a journey time of three and a half hours then a clockface hourly timetable (as is desired) would leave nothing in reserve as a maintenance contingent out of a fleet of eight trains. Shame that there's not a couple more 460s.

 

[northwichcat]

You're thinking of the class 360 Desiros. What is being referred to here is the class 460 Junipers built for the Gatwick Express service.

Whoops!

 

[YorkshireBear]

Liverpool - Norwich is a different case, as very few passengers are making the full journey. Similar to many "Cross Country" routes, it's more of a series of local services. If anything, it's a worst example of using inappropriate stock.



In which case it deserves rolling stock suited to the length of journey and of suitable capacity. The proposed 4 car EMU's used singly or in pairs is not much better than the current poor arrangements.
For many of those passengers, air travel would be more appropriate especially if connected to/from flights at Manchester Airport. Booked in advance the fares can be lower than for rail, or even a free or low cost add-on to a long-haul ticket. Why they should subject themselves to the sort of rail travel on offer, is beyond my comprehension?

I have to diagree with this. I think when in 4 car form the 158s do a really good job on norwich liverpool you say people dont make full journeys but i regularly see manchester norwich and nottingham liverpool on there which are quite long journeys.

Also im sorry but how can you say a 4 car EMU is no better than a 3 car DMU.....

 

[sprinterguy]

My understanding is that Tilt is little used on the southern section of the WCML.
IIRC most if not all the tilting sections are north of Birmingham.

In addition, Tilt only works at the higher speeds and in most cases LM stock wouldn't operate at those higher speeds on a stopping service pattern.

There is plenty of tilting activity on the WCML south of Crewe, notably on the Trent Valley and around Weedon, and as far as I am aware it is the southern section of the WCML that sees the longest periods of sustained 125mph running.

The main benefit of tilt on the northern section of the WCML north of Preston is to increase maximum speeds traversing the sinuous alignment through the Lake District and the Scottish borders which have always witnessed a number of speed restrictions in the past, rather than long sections of running flat out at 125. As such, a 100mph EMU capable of acclerating out of the speed restrictions extremely rapidly shouldn't lose more than a few minutes on a comparable schedule using 125mph tilting stock on a regular stop service.

 

[BananaRepublic]

There is plenty of tilting activity on the WCML south of Crewe, notably on the Trent Valley and around Weedon, and as far as I am aware it is the southern section of the WCML that sees the longest periods of sustained 125mph running.

Indeed, when I said north of Birmingham, it was the Trent Valley and Lake District etc, that I had in mind.
As you say, the southern WCML sees the longest periods of sustained 125mph running, but my understanding is that this is all on relatively unconstrained track profiles where tilt is normally not required.

.....a 100mph EMU capable of acclerating out of the speed restrictions extremely rapidly shouldn't lose more than a few minutes on a comparable schedule using 125mph tilting stock on a regular stop service.

While it's probably true that significant time savings would accrue from time savings gained over a long distance journey, the difference over shorter sections of track wouldn't matter as much. However, when you start to compare 100 mph with frequent stops against 125 mph capability with limited or no stops, over the full length Manchester - Scotland route, then surely there must be a sizeable difference?

 

[northwichcat]

While it's probably true that significant time savings would accrue from time savings gained over a long distance journey, the difference over shorter sections of track wouldn't matter as much. However, when you start to compare 100 mph with frequent stops against 125 mph capability with limited or no stops, over the full length Manchester - Scotland route, then surely there must be a sizeable difference?

If you compare the old Virgin timetable for Manchester-Scotland (timings based on 220 running) with the TPE one (timings based on 185 running) then a few extra minutes have been added in but they have mainly been absorbed by TPE scheduling their services to hang about at stations a lot less than Virgin. If Virgin had timetabled tilting 221 operation then the difference would have been greater.

 

[Pumbaa]

Indeed, when I said north of Birmingham, it was the Trent Valley and Lake District etc, that I had in mind.
As you say, the southern WCML sees the longest periods of sustained 125mph running, but my understanding is that this is all on relatively unconstrained track profiles where tilt is normally not required.

Tilt is *required* to run at full 125mph, even on the southern section of the WCML. Without the tilt equipment being active, you're restrained to 110mph maximum. Notable areas of tilt on the southern WCML include Bushey, Apsley, Berkhamsted station, Tring, Weedon.

 

[sprinterguy]

Indeed, when I said north of Birmingham, it was the Trent Valley and Lake District etc, that I had in mind.
As you say, the southern WCML sees the longest periods of sustained 125mph running, but my understanding is that this is all on relatively unconstrained track profiles where tilt is normally not required.

I draw your attention once again to the section around Weedon. I tend to break the WCML into "South of Crewe" and "North of Crewe" automatically. I don't know, there must be a little bit of 'North Western in me.

While it's probably true that significant time savings would accrue from time savings gained over a long distance journey, the difference over shorter sections of track wouldn't matter as much. However, when you start to compare 100 mph with frequent stops against 125 mph capability with limited or no stops, over the full length Manchester - Scotland route, then surely there must be a sizeable difference?

On paper, there is no doubt that a 125mph limited stop service would pull a considerable lead over a 100mph regular stop train over the same section of route. However, in practice on the WCML between Preston and Carlisle there isn't much in it at all between the 100mph, diesel 185s operated by TPE and Virgins' 125mph Pendos: The fastest Pendolino time I can find between Preston and Carlisle is 1hr 3mins (The 17:57 from Euston), with one intermediate stop at Lancaster, while the TPE services typically take around 1hr 12mins with a greater number of stops. Many of Virgins' other services average around 1hr 8mins.

And if you were to remove the stops from the Manchester to Scotland service, where would they be relocated to? There's not much scope for introducing an additional "stopper" on the northern section of the WCML without compromising pathing.

 

[tbtc]

if you were to remove the stops from the Manchester to Scotland service, where would they be relocated to? There's not much scope for introducing an additional "stopper" on the northern section of the WCML without compromising pathing

This is the problem with these threads. People want to speed long distance services up by no longer stopping at places like Lockerbie/ Dunbar/ Chester le Street, but there's no "local" service which could fill the gaps (any new local service for places like Lockerbie would have to be pretty fast - to fit around the fast existing service - and relatively long distance too) - its sometimes easier to get "long distance" services to stop at Lockerbie/ Dunbar/ Chester le Street rather than set up whole new services just to save a couple of minutes on long distance services (which would likely be turned into padding anyway)

 

[Whistler40145]

So, what is the best option short-term & long-term?

Are tilting trains the best option or does this not really matter north of Preston?

 

[northwichcat]

Are tilting trains the best option or does this not really matter north of Preston?[/QUOTE]

The new service will go via Newton-le-Willows and join the WCML just north of warrington with a replacement service operating via Bolton to plug the gap left there.

 

[Nym]

Well, TBH. I've been thinking about this a fair bit, and it depends IMO on what is happening with HS2...

If HS2 isn't happening we need to be ordering more 390s for the route for the foreseeable future, as eventually demand will need 8 or 9 car units on this route.

If HS2 is happening, and is predicted to have services running by what was it, 2025. Then some more decent quality, 4 car, end gangway EMUs would be fine for the next 10 years (Remember rolling stock has a lifespan of 40+ years).

If demand skyrockets over the next 3 - 4 years, then this strock can run in multiple (Being 4 car units it can run doubled up with SDO at short platforms, such as Manchester OR, but theres ways to sort out that station, burried in one of my old threads). Then it will be 8 car units running Manchester - Scotland. It would also still be possible, if the units where 20m carrages, to join on a portion of 4 cars from Liverpool still as I belive that a 240m unit will be able to fit in the WCML's platforms.

In 2025 when HS2 opens, more lines (I hope) will be electrified, giving a home for the Manchester - Scotland EMU stock as it is, a fleet of so many EMUs, residing with either ICWC or TPE. That can be cascaded to inter-reigonal electrified routes of the time. Such as, Manchester - Sheffeild, Manchester - Leeds - Etc., Crewe - Preston stopper (currently possible anyway).

So yeah, if HS2 isn't happening, 390s. If it is happening, a 4 car EMU, 20 or 23m coaches, preferably 23m to be honest, end gangways, and of a type that is ALREADY IN PRODUCTION!

Theres no need to re-write the rule book each frekkin time!

Just order 380s or 379s for christ's sake!

 

[Holly]

So, what is the best option short-term & long-term?

Class 90s.
Available and allow coaches to easily be added to form longer rakes as demand grows.
The distances are too far for comfort using the available EMUs.

 

[sprinterguy]

Class 90s.
Available and allow coaches to easily be added to form longer rakes as demand grows.

Only if there are sufficient carriages available in the first place. The slam doors would also have a negative effect on station dwell times.

 

[northwichcat]

Only if there are sufficient carriages available in the first place. The slam doors would also have a negative effect on station dwell times.

Even more of a negative effect now that the only slam door operation in the North West is the occasional Pretendolino operation and the sleepers, so passengers aren't used to slam door, unlike 10 or so years ago when all Virgin services were slam door and some of the FNW services were 101 and mk2.

 

[Whistler40145]

I agree, the use of slam door stock would be a backwards step, so Pendolino stock would be a better option, unless in the future, East Coast were to get new trains & Mk 4 stock was cascaded to the WCML or Mk 3 stock had modifications to install sliding doors or those similar to Voyager/Pendolino stock.