Mark IV carriages: Could TPE use them?

[D6975]

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).

I thought the TP WCML order is for 12 units to replace 10 350s. (To allow for the Liverpools)

 

[Clansman]

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.

The Voyagers wouldn't have complied with the requirements for an Intercity service in terms of catering, luggage space and the ongoing issue with toilets, seat space, window alignment, general comfort etc; albeit with a bit of investment, some of it could have been eradicated. HSTs would have been a cheaper stop-gap solution for Transport Scotland to procure rolling stock as soon as possible. Why would Scotrail wait till XC and EMT have their rolling stock sorted out by the looks of it 2020s when they can obtain and refurbish stock with a proven track record and high passenger morale level, ready for service by 2018?

Now that you've mentioned it, I think using refurbished Voyagers on GSWR would be a really a great idea for utilising the Voyagers in future, whilst complying with Scotrail franchise commitments, and providing a better service on the line. Having compared the requirements of Scottish Intercity services to that of the GSWR, you could feasibly refurbish the Voyagers to meet the standards required to enhance the service on the route. Although it would involve either using standard only 220s when first class wouldn't be provided, to provide a decent capacity since the seating arrangements would have to change drastically to meet the window alignment commitment, I've worked out - 174 standard seats on a reconfigured 220 (minus first class) and 210 on a reconfigured 221 (with first class). Although Meridians on this line would prove more cost effective as opposed to Voyagers, as chances are they will be released around about the same time I'd of thought?

Either way it still won't happen.

 

[Peter Sarf]

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!)

I cannot help it. I keep thinking of extra pantograph/transformer coaches for the Meridians. Then they could stay where they are and gradually use less and less fuel as the Midland Main Line is electrified.

As for the Mk4s, which are nicer because of a lack of under-floor engines, well really all they need is a replacement locomotive. If the loco were a true Bi-Mode loco then that would trump my Meridian(/Voyager) obsession.

 

[Clansman]

I cannot help it. I keep thinking of extra pantograph/transformer coaches for the Meridians. Then they could stay where they are and gradually use less and less fuel as the Midland Main Line is electrified.

As for the Mk4s, which are nicer because of a lack of under-floor engines, well really all they need is a replacement locomotive. If the loco were a true Bi-Mode loco then that would trump my Meridian(/Voyager) obsession.

You'd be contradicting your signature though Peter

In theory, it could, but the cost of converting is another thing. Aren't you inevitably delaying electrification by running electric trains during times when you could be constructing further infrastructure as opposed to running diesel under non-active wires and closing a line at a time?

The cost of carrying out electrification as current and procuring new stock for the long term, vs, the cost of longer construction time and conversion of Meridians to bi-mode would break you even at the very least.
And using the Mk4s would be a downgrade in passenger safety also.

I feel bad now for trying to destroy your subconscious ambitions...forgive me

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I thought the TP WCML order is for 12 units to replace 10 350s. (To allow for the Liverpools)

Yes, but there are 6 priced options in the TPE EMU supply contract, for between 7 and 22 additional units of 5 to 8-car units.
They would all be CAF 125mph units (class 397).

Of course, the DfT has in the past exercised such options negotiated by one TOC, for the use of another - that's how TPE came to get its 10x350 from an order option originally negotiated by Govia for LM.

 

[Peter Sarf]

........

I feel bad now for trying to destroy your subconscious ambitions...forgive me

Doh, its that damn reality again . Yes there are plenty of options. Whatever helps and encourages electrification I suppose.

 

[lfc2014uk]

I think MK4 could be used on the TPE Middlesbrough & Hull routes. I also think it would be a good idea for some 4/5 car units to run Liverpool - Chester - Cardiff / Holyhead routes once Halton Curve is opened. This would be a stop gap until new franchise announced and new rolling stock ordered

 

[northwichcat]

Of course, the DfT has in the past exercised such options negotiated by one TOC, for the use of another - that's how TPE came to get its 10x350 from an order option originally negotiated by Govia for LM.

Wasn't there some dispute about the originally proposed 7 x 350/3s for LM and 10 x 350/4s for TPE not following a legal tendering process which was 'fixed' by adding on 3 extra 350s for LM so that 50% of the new vehicles went to LM?

 

[Prestige15]

How about MK4's along with the DVT sent to wales and hauled by 67/68.

Perhaps a 5/6 coach set used on the Manchester/Holyhead - Cardiff/Milford Haven (If platforms are long enough for them and if its possible to have a push pull with a diesel loco), Releasing a number of 158 and 175's to strengthen other service.

Same could be done for XC too

 

[Bletchleyite]

North Wales Coast is actually really not a bad idea - hauled by 68s in 5-car rakes to release DMUs for strengthening and add capacity.

Might Chiltern also be interested instead of their Mk3s?

 

[Prestige15]

North Wales Coast is actually really not a bad idea - hauled by 68s in 5-car rakes to release DMUs for strengthening and add capacity.

Might Chiltern also be interested instead of their Mk3s?

It may aswell be the 67's since threes a load of them available and the fact ATW is still using 67 despite other TOC's switched to 68's from 67's.

As for Chiltern, well anything can be possible

 

[Starmill]

I thought the TP WCML order is for 12 units to replace 10 350s. (To allow for the Liverpools)

That's the point that Ainsworth74 was making. The Liverpool - Glasgow service requires 2 diagrams. So there will be no net increase in available sets. Given 10 is insufficient to run the current service all the time, and the 6 and 8 car trains are often full, what are they going to do?

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's the point that Ainsworth74 was making. The Liverpool - Glasgow service requires 2 diagrams. So there will be no net increase in available sets. Given 10 is insufficient to run the current service all the time, and the 6 and 8 car trains are often full, what are they going to do?

Not double up? The current service involves some doubling up.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Not double up? The current service involves some doubling up.

Only by borrowing 185s to fill in for missing units.
10-car 397s aren't going to work at Oxford Road either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Only by borrowing 185s to fill in for missing units.
10-car 397s aren't going to work at Oxford Road either.

I don't believe TPE intend to work any of their new stock in multiple.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

I don't believe TPE intend to work any of their new stock in multiple.

Only the 185's are planned to be doubled up...

 

[Class83]

Only the 185's are planned to be doubled up...

I've been on double 350s, 5 carriages isn't enough for busy Edinburgh-Manchester runs, could they go hourly to Edinburgh from Manchester and offer connections for Glasgow on the Liverpool Services at Carlisle or somwhere?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've been on double 350s, 5 carriages isn't enough for busy Edinburgh-Manchester runs, could they go hourly to Edinburgh from Manchester and offer connections for Glasgow on the Liverpool Services at Carlisle or somwhere?

I can see them doing heavy yield management, i.e. making Glasgow a lot cheaper so those who aren't in a hurry will go there and go across.

 

[Starmill]

5-car will still be insufficient at peak times between Manchester and Preston I think, especially as I have my doubts that they will be able to enforce the pick up only restriction (if they decide to apply it) at Bolton. Certainly 8 car is only just about enough for the 1800 from Manchester Airport on Firdays - and its full on departure from Preston. Also, it's a bit naive to suggest people will choose to travel to Edinburgh via Glasgow as that never appears in the journey planner unless you ask for via Glasgow on purpose (and how many people are going to think of that?).

The question is will any 185s continue to be available to support the Scotland services? If the answer to that is no I think they are in for big trouble.

 

[Mordac]

5-car will still be insufficient at peak times between Manchester and Preston I think, especially as I have my doubts that they will be able to enforce the pick up only restriction (if they decide to apply it) at Bolton. Certainly 8 car is only just about enough for the 1800 from Manchester Airport on Firdays - and its full on departure from Preston. Also, it's a bit naive to suggest people will choose to travel to Edinburgh via Glasgow as that never appears in the journey planner unless you ask for via Glasgow on purpose (and how many people are going to think of that?).

The question is will any 185s continue to be available to support the Scotland services? If the answer to that is no I think they are in for big trouble.

I think Class83 was suggesting that Edinburgh passengers change at Carlisle for the VTWC service, not that they actually go to Glasgow and then to Edinburgh.

 

[Iskra]

Since TPE have already got a rolling stock solution, could the MK4 sets not find better use with XC? Even if they just worked Doncaster-Newcastle with shortened 91 sets, that would free up Voyagers for the core without any route clearance issues.

Additionally, they could then also replace (or supplement) the HST's with 67's (going cheap) and MK4 sets which would improve station dwell times and probably helps with DDA compliance too.

 

[YorkshireBear]

5-car will still be insufficient at peak times between Manchester and Preston I think, especially as I have my doubts that they will be able to enforce the pick up only restriction (if they decide to apply it) at Bolton. Certainly 8 car is only just about enough for the 1800 from Manchester Airport on Firdays - and its full on departure from Preston. Also, it's a bit naive to suggest people will choose to travel to Edinburgh via Glasgow as that never appears in the journey planner unless you ask for via Glasgow on purpose (and how many people are going to think of that?).

The question is will any 185s continue to be available to support the Scotland services? If the answer to that is no I think they are in for big trouble.

It was one of my only major concerns from the new franchise. 5 car on the North route will be fine, with 4*5 and 2*6 per hour most of the day that should be enough. But i really fear for the Scotland route.

They must think they can manage though because they have gone on about huge growth on that route for last 5 years.... So they know the situation. Maybe the follow on order might be for 8 car sets??? And they might get in a few.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Liverpool/Manchester-Edinburgh will have a (slower) hourly TPE alternative via York come 2019.
The way Glasgow/Edinburgh services alternate on WCML Birmingham and Manchester services has become unsatisfactory, as Edinburgh has the greater pull these days, at least for leisure travel and connections further north.
That and the way NR insists all 3 Anglo-Scottish services are flighted close together every hour.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You could certainly argue that it should be Euston-Glasgow, (Euston-)Birmingham-Edinburgh and Manchester-Edinburgh. That would I think closer match demand (London-Edinburgh can use the ECML and mostly will).

 

[GrimShady]

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.

I honestly like the MKIV quite a lot. I think the ride quality is superior to the VTEC Mk3s any day which I find using my laptop is very difficult due to the bouncing. MKIVs propelled at line speed on some corners can become slightly unnerving though.

 

[brompton rail]

Since TPE have already got a rolling stock solution, could the MK4 sets not find better use with XC? Even if they just worked Doncaster-Newcastle with shortened 91 sets, that would free up Voyagers for the core without any route clearance issues.

Additionally, they could then also replace (or supplement) the HST's with 67's (going cheap) and MK4 sets which would improve station dwell times and probably helps with DDA compliance too.

I'm not sure that XC would have any interest in running Doncaster to Newcastle trains. Much of the business on their Newcastle - Birmingham - Reading services originates from York (or north of) and goes to Sheffield, Derby and Birmingham.

Any trains from Newcastle that terminated at Doncaster would be unable to find paths or platforms to lay over at. Doncaster station suffers badly from congestion with Newcastle - Reading hourly, Sheffield - Hull hourly, Manchester Airport - Cleethorpes hourly, Sheffield - Adwick and Sheffield- Scunthorpe twice every hour (combined routes). That is in addition to around 5 East Coast trains from London to Yorkshire and the North /Scotland, plus an Open Access train at least every hour. Double that total to get the total number of services both ways every hour, then add in about another half to cover freight, and you will see the line is rather busy!

Any terminating service (as well as a large proportion on the trains listed above) also cross the East Coast Main Line.

 

[Jordeh]

Additionally, they could then also replace (or supplement) the HST's with 67's (going cheap) and MK4 sets which would improve station dwell times and probably helps with DDA compliance too.

This seems like a very good idea for the MK4s and 67s.

 

[The Ham]

It would probably be a reasonable option for XC to run the Manchester to South Coast services by loco and Mark 4's. Quite a lot of the route would be cleared for class 800s or 390s and 444s so shouldn't have a problem with 23m stock.

It could allow XC to run services in a self contained method and so have limited impact on other operators, whilst freeing up something like 7 Voyagers for use elsewhere.

A loco and 6 coaches would do for a while whilst not impacting on acceleration too much.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

It would probably be a reasonable option for XC to run the Manchester to South Coast services by loco and Mark 4's. Quite a lot of the route would be cleared for class 800s or 390s and 444s so shouldn't have a problem with 23m stock.

It could allow XC to run services in a self contained method and so have limited impact on other operators, whilst freeing up something like 7 Voyagers for use elsewhere.

A loco and 6 coaches would do for a while whilst not impacting on acceleration too much.

With regard to acceleration, 68s would be better than 67s other than the lower maximum top speed on some sections. Though there probably aren't enough to go around anyway.

 

[sprinterguy]

It would probably be a reasonable option for XC to run the Manchester to South Coast services by loco and Mark 4's. Quite a lot of the route would be cleared for class 800s or 390s and 444s so shouldn't have a problem with 23m stock.

Given that all of the rolling stock operated by Crosscountry are 23 metre vehicles and HSTs have worked over all current XC Intercity routes for donkeys years, then, unless there is an unlikely restriction specific to mark 4 stock, then clearance for 23 metre vehicles shouldn't be an issue in the first place!

I would gladly welcome 6 car mark 4 formations on Manchester - South Coast services, or any of the XC Intercity routes for that matter.