Merseyrail new stock

[59CosG95]

No idea what Liverpool will get to replace the 507/508s, but maybe we could get a 3-coach 378 variant, the 388 RingoStarr?

 

[185]

Gerry and the Pacers morelike :P

Think the process has stalled, but Merseyrail did appoint a 'new trains procurement manager' on a considerable wage 18 months ago, not sure how far he's progressed with invitation to tenders etc.

 

[CP165]

the 388 RingoStarr?

That's brilliant

I think maybe a 6 car Aventra would be good, I'm sure that's what a Bombardier bid would entail

 

[transmanche]

I think maybe a 6 car Aventra would be good, I'm sure that's what a Bombardier bid would entail

Bearing in mind the nature of the network, they might also offer something from their Movia range. (LU's S Stock is a Movia product.)

 

[Monty]

I would of thought a 3-4 car unit with the option to run the units in multiple during the peak would be a more likely option as it increases operational flexibility.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Amusing pun-names aside, I would guess that more, shorter vehicles might be an idea due to the tight turns on the city centre loop and the stock transfer line. IIRC there was a derailment a few years back and the investigation found that the running rails had suffered above-average wear on curves in part due to the length of the cars. The vehicles of the class 503 sets that ran on the Wirral line when the loop first opened were 17m rather than the 20m of the 507/508s (and admittedly the similar 502s). Something based on the S-stock (though built to mainline standards) would be a better idea IMHO...

 

[transmanche]

The vehicles of the class 503 sets that ran on the Wirral line when the loop first opened were 17m rather than the 20m of the 507/508s (and admittedly the similar 502s). Something based on the S-stock (though built to mainline standards) would be a better idea IMHO...

S Stock cars are 15.5m long (17.5m for cars with driving cabs), so similar Movia trains would seem to be perfect for Merseyrail. I'm not sure about the need for them to be "built to mainline standards" though... what do you have in mind?

 

[Aictos]

If anything the DfT should only permit such a order to be undertaken on the grounds that the Class 313 fleet should be replaced first followed by a addon order to replace the Class 507/508 fleets this being due to the Class 313s being the oldest EMUs indeed oldest Multiple Units in passenger service.

 

[KX03HZY]

If anything the DfT should only permit such a order to be undertaken on the grounds that the Class 313 fleet should be replaced first followed by a addon order to replace the Class 507/508 fleets this being due to the Class 313s being the oldest EMUs indeed oldest Multiple Units in passenger service.

The 313's are in a good condition, ten times better than South Eastern's 465/466 fleet

 

[Wavertreelad]

S Stock cars are 15.5m long (17.5m for cars with driving cabs), so similar Movia trains would seem to be perfect for Merseyrail. I'm not sure about the need for them to be "built to mainline standards" though... what do you have in mind?

If Merseyrail network is extended it might require dual voltage capability as well as little more speed as well.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

S Stock cars are 15.5m long (17.5m for cars with driving cabs), so similar Movia trains would seem to be perfect for Merseyrail. I'm not sure about the need for them to be "built to mainline standards" though... what do you have in mind?

Well, by "mainline standards" I was mostly meaning that they might need better crash resistance than is required on LUL, along with things like OTMR. A higher top speed for the Southport & Chester runs would probably be welcome too. Oh, and yeah dual voltage capability as stated above.

 

[transmanche]

Well, by "mainline standards" I was mostly meaning that they might need better crash resistance than is required on LUL, along with things like OTMR. A higher top speed for the Southport & Chester runs would probably be welcome too. Oh, and yeah dual voltage capability as stated above.

Well, that might depend on a signalling upgrade: T&W Metro and heavy rail (including freight) happily (and safely) co-exist sharing tracks and there are a few proposals for tram-train operation on NR.

I'm sure Bombardier would be able to include things like OTMR and dual-voltage capability. As for top speed, S-Stock is 100km/h (62mph) - but I don't know what is the maximum speed that the platform can deliver.

Just thinking that it might cheaper to go for a Movia-type product rather than an Aventra-type one. And being that Merseyrail is an isolated network, it's probably one of the few parts of NR where this could work easily work.

 

[jopsuk]

Well, by "mainline standards" I was mostly meaning that they might need better crash resistance than is required on LUL, along with things like OTMR. A higher top speed for the Southport & Chester runs would probably be welcome too. Oh, and yeah dual voltage capability as stated above.

Won't S-Stock run on Network Rail infra anyway, to Richmond?

 

[WestCountry]

Won't S-Stock run on Network Rail infra anyway, to Richmond?

They already share (LUL) tracks with Chiltern from Harrow to Amersham.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I was more meaning that as 'National Rail' stock there may be certain regulations and standards that the S-stock doesn't currently meet. It's not my area of expertise though, and as stated above, S-stock currently runs on NR lines anyway.

 

[samuelmorris]

The 313's are in a good condition, ten times better than South Eastern's 465/466 fleet

I can't profess to having been on one for a couple of years, but they certainly don't look it on the outside... Are the 465s really that bad?

 

[3141]

I was more meaning that as 'National Rail' stock there may be certain regulations and standards that the S-stock doesn't currently meet. It's not my area of expertise though, and as stated above, S-stock currently runs on NR lines anyway.

I think it's the other way round - between Harrow-on-the Hill and Amersham, NR stock runs on LUL lines.

 

[Bevan Price]

Well, by "mainline standards" I was mostly meaning that they might need better crash resistance than is required on LUL, along with things like OTMR. A higher top speed for the Southport & Chester runs would probably be welcome too. Oh, and yeah dual voltage capability as stated above.

Apart from Hooton to Bache, the distances between stations are mostly too short for higher speed to be worthwhile - better acceleration capabilities would be more useful.

 

[KX03HZY]

I can't profess to having been on one for a couple of years, but they certainly don't look it on the outside... Are the 465s really that bad?

Really dirty inside, and the 313's have extremely good reliability, hence why they've stayed so long

 

[Wavertreelad]

Apart from Hooton to Bache, the distances between stations are mostly too short for higher speed to be worthwhile - better acceleration capabilities would be more useful.

Agree up to a point, but it will also depend if and where the Merseyrail network is extended and if as a result the new trains will travel beyond the Merseytravel boundary. Extensions to Preston, Wigan, Warrington or Wrexham would increase the distances to be travelled making a higher turn of speed desirable especially on sections also used by "mainline" stock.

 

[Bevan Price]

Agree up to a point, but it will also depend if and where the Merseyrail network is extended and if as a result the new trains will travel beyond the Merseytravel boundary. Extensions to Preston, Wigan, Warrington or Wrexham would increase the distances to be travelled making a higher turn of speed desirable especially on sections also used by "mainline" stock.

Wouldn't be my own choice, but I wouldn't be totally surprised if they chose some kind of tram-train, with trams bigger than those on Metrolink, capable of "main line" running, and aiming for higher frequencies than at present. Unless Mr Osborne (or successor) suddenly becomes very generous, I doubt that we will see Merseyrail electrified extensions beyond Burscough or Neston in the next 30 to 50 years.

 

[Stonesourscotty]

I know alot of people on The Kirkby - Wigan section would be very passionately opposed to Connection to the merseyrail network if this ever happened myself included and more actively looking for faster (Electric??) trains to Manchester maybe even a later service on the line. Only solution id accept is Dual voltage through trains to Liverpool.

The loadings headings towards Kirkby are pathetic in comparison to Wigan/Manchester bound sometimes can be 15/20x the volume.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I know alot of people on The Kirkby - Wigan section would be very passionately opposed to Connection to the merseyrail network if this ever happened myself included and more actively looking for faster (Electric??) trains to Manchester maybe even a later service on the line. Only solution id accept is Dual voltage through trains to Liverpool.

The loadings headings towards Kirkby are pathetic in comparison to Wigan/Manchester bound sometimes can be 15/20x the volume.

If Merseyrail was ever extended to Wallgate, two benefits would be a likely increase in frequency (with 4tph Liverpool-Kirkby, I'd expect at least 2tph to be extended through to Wigan), and almost certainly later trains, not to mention a Sunday service! Ok, you might have to change at Wigan for Manchester but it'd be a cross-platform interchange from the bay. I'd certainly rather have 2tph with a change than 1tph direct that picks up local calls all the way to Manchester!

 

[Wavertreelad]

I know alot of people on The Kirkby - Wigan section would be very passionately opposed to Connection to the merseyrail network if this ever happened myself included and more actively looking for faster (Electric??) trains to Manchester maybe even a later service on the line. Only solution id accept is Dual voltage through trains to Liverpool.

The loadings headings towards Kirkby are pathetic in comparison to Wigan/Manchester bound sometimes can be 15/20x the volume.

Through electric trains from Manchester to Liverpool via Wigan (and perhaps Skelmersdale) seems a good idea as it would best use of resources all round especially if the respective local authorities along the line could jointly back the scheme.

 

[Class 92]

How about something like a class 377 and a class 378 combined? Both dual-voltage, good acceleration, maybe seating like a class 377?

 

[59CosG95]

How about something like a class 377 and a class 378 combined? Both dual-voltage, good acceleration, maybe seating like a class 377?

Sounds good to me; though, if it is an Electrostar derivative (3 or 4 cars per unit) it should be a RingoStarr; if it is an Aventra, it should be the Yellow Submarine. Can't think of anything else Beatle-centric at the moment...at this time, I should be sleeping, like a log!

 

[snowball]

None of these puns have yet made use of the fact that there's such a thing as a Bombadier Beatle (or at least Beetle).

 

[HSTEd]

Even if Merseyrail were extended to Preston and so on and was using S-stock, aren't all those various Northern Rail routes timed for Pacers?

How long would it take for the Pacer's higher speed to allow it to make good its slow start compared to the S-stock's?

I am not sure there are many station distances like that on the various candidate extension lines.

 

[transmanche]

How long would it take for the Pacer's higher speed to allow it to make good its slow start compared to the S-stock's?

And how much of the route do they actually run at 75mph?

(And of course there's still the possibility that a Movia train might be able to reach more than 62mph anyway.)

 

[northwichcat]

S Stock cars are 15.5m long (17.5m for cars with driving cabs), so similar Movia trains would seem to be perfect for Merseyrail. I'm not sure about the need for them to be "built to mainline standards" though... what do you have in mind?

S Stock is wider and shorter than standard carriages which is why using ex-LU stock on the Harrogate line isn't as simple as just electrifying the line.

Given the Merseyrail infrastructure allows for 120m formations, using 17.5m and 15.5m carriages it would mean 3 and 4 car formations would be needed (to allow up to 7 cars) rather than one standard 3 car formation.