Mark IV carriages: Could TPE use them?

[modernrail]

Could the Mark IV carriages be used by Transpennine Express to strengthen services if, as I predict, the current order turns out to be too small. Could they use the same locomotives? I am just thinking that they will become available during the franchise and could offer a good value for money option to increase capacity further in the medium term. You could even store the power units until electrification is complete and then turn them back into there original configuration at that point, perhaps with fewer carriages.

I have found this upgrade concept from Eversholt. http://www.eversholtrail-innovations.co.uk/Projects/MKIV/

I have to say I wouldn't bother with most of it except maybe the rather nice looking premium first section! Maybe the upgrades to lighting and the seat reservation would also be useful.

 

[jopsuk]

1. Obviously, in theory, they could.
2. Internally, the trains are after all just shells. So re-configuring the interior is obviously possible.
3. They can almost certainly be converted so that the DVT has any multiple working system you choose
4. They probably won't do it. There's more likely an option in the contract to order new stock if the projections are wrong

 

[YorkshireBear]

1. Obviously, in theory, they could.
2. Internally, the trains are after all just shells. So re-configuring the interior is obviously possible.
3. They can almost certainly be converted so that the DVT has any multiple working system you choose
4. They probably won't do it. There's more likely an option in the contract to order new stock if the projections are wrong

There are options for more EMUs i think.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Could the Mark IV carriages be used by Transpennine Express to strengthen services if, as I predict, the current order turns out to be too small. Could they use the same locomotives? I am just thinking that they will become available during the franchise and could offer a good value for money option to increase capacity further in the medium term. You could even store the power units until electrification is complete and then turn them back into there original configuration at that point, perhaps with fewer carriages.

I have found this upgrade concept from Eversholt. http://www.eversholtrail-innovations.co.uk/Projects/MKIV/

I have to say I wouldn't bother with most of it except maybe the rather nice looking premium first section! Maybe the upgrades to lighting and the seat reservation would also be useful.

What makes you certain they will not be long enough?

 

[modernrail]

I am not certain, it is a prediction.

I have used TPE all my life and use it regularly for business even now I live down in London. The trains are always busy, no matter what time of day and I would say more so than any other route I use. There are many people I know who won't use TPE because the experience is very unpleasant for much of the day. The only thing that makes the M62 a more attractive option is the provision of a guaranteed seat, even a fairly stationary one. When we see improved capacity and quality, I expect to see significant modal shift. There is also the fact that some key feeder routes will be enjoying increased frequencies (for instance The Harrogate line doubling in frequency). That will make the train a much more viable option for many.

5 cars might be enough for a short while but I fully expect TPE to become a victim of it's own success again and require more capacity. I very much hope that is the case, as every new passenger on TPE is potentially a car off the regions incredibly congested road network.

 

[mickulty]

What makes you certain they will not be long enough?

185s and voyagers were both ordered to provide a new or enhanced service, and turned out woefully inadequate after these services, shockingly, attracted more passengers. TPE are providing a lot of new or enhanced services with 5 (admittedly longer) coaches, where a service exists that'll be just about enough for all the existing passengers to sit down and fails to accommodate the inevitable growth. Doubt anyone capable of doing anything about it will mind unless people are being left on the platform though.

 

[Bletchleyite]

5 (admittedly longer) coaches

Only the 800s. The WCML EMUs are 23m, same as 185s, and the LHCS is 22m so a bit shorter.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Only the 800s. The WCML EMUs are 23m, same as 185s, and the LHCS is 22m so a bit shorter.

If you mean the 350s Neil, I think they are only 20m length vehicles.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If you mean the 350s Neil, I think they are only 20m length vehicles.

No, I mean the new 5-car EMUs ordered for the WCML services from CAF.

There are three sets of new stock which have been ordered for TPE:-

LHCS = 5 x 22m (because they are a follow-on from the Caledonian Sleeper stock which has to be shorter than usual to fit the platforms due to the very long trains)
WCML EMUs = 5 x 23m (probably actually nearly 24m as is the trend)
Hitachi bi-modes = 5 x 26m

The 350s are indeed 20m but they weren't what I was referring to.

Assuming the same comfort levels this probably in practice means the LHCS will have one fewer row of seats per vehicle than the 23m EMUs, and the 800s will have two additional rows per vehicle compared with the EMUs. Though because the LHCS only has a cab on one end, that will probably make set capacity the same (ish) as the WCML EMUs.

 

[northwichcat]

There are options for more EMUs i think.

Indeed. The franchise spec allows for between 7 and 22 additional brand new EMU sets being acquired which can be in formations of 5, 6 or 8 cars (but they aren't allowed an order which will have mixed lengths.)

 

[modernrail]

The reason I think Mark IV stock may become attractive is that it will offer the opportunity to reform the Mark V stock into longer configurations, taking advantage of a little flexibility in the fleet. However, I am sure TPE will
always prefer to take on new stock if they are allowed to. I can just see the cost of a Mark IV option being quite appealing. It would mean that TPE would end up with a horribly mixed fleet though. I am already concerned about that with announcements to date.

 

[ainsworth74]

No, I mean the new 5-car EMUs ordered for the WCML services from CAF.

Which are, of course, longer (both in terms of number of vehicles and vehicle length) than the current 4-car EMUs used on the WCML. A 3-car 185 vs a 4-car 350 only has a difference in seating of around a dozen even with the extra vehicle. So I would be hopeful that the 5-car units at 22m vehicles will finally deliver a significant boost in capacity (though I must admit I'm concerned at the one for one replacement rather than there being any extra units).

 

[Ash Bridge]

No, I mean the new 5-car EMUs ordered for the WCML services from CAF.

Ahh, my apologies, I had completely overlooked the CAF EMU order.

 

[Clansman]

In theory they could however, it's unlikely.

The only advantage TPE would get out of the MK4s beside additional capacity would be the possible tilt-enabling of the train, so they can run faster services between Liverpool/Manchester and Glasgow/Edinburgh.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Indeed. The franchise spec allows for between 7 and 22 additional brand new EMU sets being acquired which can be in formations of 5, 6 or 8 cars (but they aren't allowed an order which will have mixed lengths.)

The only use for these would be on enhanced WCML services (eg more Liverpool services).
The date for Manchester-York wiring is too vague to plan their use on TP North.
The DfT has a poor record of authorising more stock mid-term.
I suspect TPE has "had its go" and will have to live with that for the rest of the franchise.

 

[1179_Clee2]

In theory they could however, it's unlikely.

The only advantage TPE would get out of the MK4s beside additional capacity would be the possible tilt-enabling of the train, so they can run faster services between Liverpool/Manchester and Glasgow/Edinburgh.

In theory any TOC could use them.
In theory they can be hauled by any ETS fitted loco (diesel or electric)
In theory any TDM fitted loco could work them push pull.
In theory MK 4 DVT's could be converted to AAR multiple like MK 3b DVT's
In theory just because it can be done does not mean it will.

 

[northwichcat]

The only use for these would be on enhanced WCML services (eg more Liverpool services).
The date for Manchester-York wiring is too vague to plan their use on TP North.
The DfT has a poor record of authorising more stock mid-term.
I suspect TPE has "had its go" and will have to live with that for the rest of the franchise.

The franchise agreement includes the option of returning more 185s once Manchester to York is wired so I imagine the thinking is most of those EMUs would be used post-North TPE electrification. As the option for returning the 12 x 5 car EMUs isn't there I doubt TPE needed the option to use 34 sets on WCML services!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I could actually see them being scrapped before the Mk3s. The build quality is terrible, comfort poorer than the Mk3, and ride quality the worst of any UK InterCity train other than the Class 180 (which curiously comes from the same stable).

 

[Clansman]

In theory any TOC could use them.
In theory they can be hauled by any ETS fitted loco (diesel or electric)
In theory any TDM fitted loco could work them push pull.
In theory MK 4 DVT's could be converted to AAR multiple like MK 3b DVT's
In theory just because it can be done does not mean it will.

Yup
Yup
Yup
Yup
True

 

[Clansman]

I could actually see them being scrapped before the Mk3s. The build quality is terrible, comfort poorer than the Mk3, and ride quality the worst of any UK InterCity train other than the Class 180 (which curiously comes from the same stable).

Considering they were trains specifically built for a certain line, like the 185s, it'll be harder for them to find anywhere that they will be suitable, and as you said, they'll see the scrapyard before the majority of Mk3s will.

What happened to the double post merger feature?

 

[modernrail]

I have spent many many hours on Mark IV's, including 6 yesterday, and don't mind them at all. They are a bit bumpy but the Mark 3's are not substantially better and have a good creak, draught and a very silly door opening mechanism. I would personally like to see another life for the MK IV's if that stacks up economically. I am hoping Rail North will push the DfT into a slightly more imaginative place if mid-franchise opportunities arise, but let's see.

The main reason to ask this question was to find out whether there are any technical issues that would prevent their use at a reasonable cost. For instance clearance issues or reasons why connecting with a diesel locomotive would be prohibitively expensive in terms of power and braking systems etc. Whilst most things are obviously possible in theory, it is rather obvious that they will not happen if it is not economic to do so.

 

[59CosG95]

As they're designed for inter-city working, would CrossCountry be a better destination for them? Obviously, if the refurb and gauging costs are prohibitive, it probably wouldn't happen, but it still seems like a valid idea nonetheless. Could, say, the 67s use them if they were all fitted (locos and stock) with AAR?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

As they're designed for inter-city working, would CrossCountry be a better destination for them? Obviously, if the refurb and gauging costs are prohibitive, it probably wouldn't happen, but it still seems like a valid idea nonetheless. Could, say, the 67s use them if they were all fitted (locos and stock) with AAR?

Mk4s are designed as 125mph (or even 140mph) cruisers.
Both TPE and XC need 125mph stock for the routes north of Birmingham/Doncaster/York, and there are no locos up to the job, diesel or electric (bar 91s).
Mk4 future will be settled in the EM/XC rebids for 2018/19.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As they're designed for inter-city working, would CrossCountry be a better destination for them? Obviously, if the refurb and gauging costs are prohibitive, it probably wouldn't happen, but it still seems like a valid idea nonetheless. Could, say, the 67s use them if they were all fitted (locos and stock) with AAR?

I think 6 or 7-car bi-mode IEP would be the best option for XC, though by then other options would no doubt be on the market.

Voyagers? Well, they were the first attempt at an InterCity DMU in the UK (HST doesn't really count), so maybe time to put them to bed as the first go, but not really a very good go? Got to start somewhere.

 

[Clansman]

I think TOCs like XC, Scotrail and EMT have the advantage when it comes to choosing rolling stock in the future. They didn't jump for the IEPs, so it'll allow them to see how the IEPs are perceived publically before they jump to orders.

I agree with Neil Williams, I think 6 or 7 car bi-modes would be the best for XC, but I'll stop short by saying they should be IEPs.

I'm much looking forward to seeing the Mk5s, as I think that they have as much potential as the IEPs should they run as punctually and are perceived as well as, or as better as the stock they are replacing. Although that being said, I think the Meridians (definitely not the Voyagers) have a potential future out with EMT by the time their replacements come after electrification, but where, is a question for a new thread.

In terms of the Mk4s, I can't see them being used anywhere other than XC or an Open Access Operator when it comes to thinking remotely realistically.

 

[quantinghome]

The only use for these would be on enhanced WCML services (eg more Liverpool services).
The date for Manchester-York wiring is too vague to plan their use on TP North.
The DfT has a poor record of authorising more stock mid-term.
I suspect TPE has "had its go" and will have to live with that for the rest of the franchise.

I thought the franchise specified limits to overcrowding, with the implication that the TOC had to increase capacity if the limit was reached?

 

[Bletchleyite]

the Meridians (definitely not the Voyagers) have a potential future

Meridians and Voyagers are basically the same thing with a different interior, nose and TMS software. But I think they are technically very poor as well - heavy, high fuel consumption, noisy and quite polluting. Definitely a case of "nice try, but not really to modern standards", and not quite as easy to upgrade as a simple power car "box" like an HST.

The only place I can think of as a sensible future is Scottish InterCity services, but even then there are better options.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I thought the franchise specified limits to overcrowding, with the implication that the TOC had to increase capacity if the limit was reached?

I don't think it quite works like that.
TOCs have to meet the capacities promised in their bid, and are then expected to optimise their stock to meet the overcrowding targets.
But extra stock is rarely approved, as it cuts the financial return to TOC/DfT.
GWR has "densified" many of its HSTs to provide more seats.
Virgin has reconfigured a 1st class coach on 9-car Pendolinos for standard class and more seats.

TPE will have the problem of most of its trains being fixed formation 5-car sets, with no doubling up.
But it does start off with a much higher base capacity than now.
It could (for instance) cut the Newcastle-Edinburgh service, which seems to me to be a luxury, and redeploy the stock in the core.

 

[Clansman]

Meridians and Voyagers are basically the same thing with a different interior, nose and TMS software. But I think they are technically very poor as well - heavy, high fuel consumption, noisy and quite polluting. Definitely a case of "nice try, but not really to modern standards", and not quite as easy to upgrade as a simple power car "box" like an HST.
The only place I can think of as a sensible future is Scottish InterCity services, but even then there are better options.

To me, the Voyagers are just dodgy prototypes of the Meridians at best, so the scrapheap will be waiting for them with open arms.

The Meridians, in my opinion, are decent enough quality to go on to further TOCs as at least a 5 year stop gap to offload older stock. I think the Meridians are decent trains which have clearly learned the lessons from the Voyager. The passenger experience is improved, as is the working conditions for both onboard catering and the driver. They accelerate faster (albeit they drink up extra fuel) and are just generally good trains.

I definitely can't see the Voyagers going to Scotland, as that was considered by Transport Scotland. But if the St. Pancras line through the Midlands was electrified earlier, I would see the Meridians as a viable and a service enhancing replacement, although as you said, they are quite polluting which would be an obstacle in itself if they were ever to head up my way. I think they would be decent assets short term for any TOC, or even be good for potential open access operators like First's one down the ECML (whenever that is gonna happen!)

 

[dk1]

The ideal solution in a perfect world would be a new fleet of bi-modes for Cross Country releasing Voyagers vice shortened HSTs for ScotRail. That way you'd get your lengthened trains on routes like SW-Scotland or South Coast-Manchester, much of which is under the wires & at the same time get 4/5 coach trains with good acceleration for internal Scottish routes & save the costly conversion of already 40yr old rolling stock.