More Class 170s/171s for Southern??

[physics34]

The new TSGN franchise states that there will be a 50% increase in coaches for the Uckfield line.

I know this may have been partially covered in the TSGN thread, but does anyone know where these are likely to come from.

All Uckfield line platforms are also to be extended to hold 10 car 171s, according to the next round of Network rail investment announcements (Sussex RUS)...

 

[northwichcat]

This seems to be what you're referring to:

* The requirements at London Bridge increase to the higher figures shown in parentheses with effect from the Passenger Change Date in December 2016. From that date, the stated requirements include a minimum of three ten-car trains arriving in London Bridge from Uckfield between 0700 and 0959, with two of those trains arriving between 0800 and 0859, and a minimum of 40 vehicles arriving in London Bridge from Uckfield must be provided between 0700 and 0959.

** The requirements at London Bridge increase to the higher figures shown in parentheses with effect from the Passenger Change Date in December 2016.
From that date, the stated requirements include a minimum of two ten-car trains departing London Bridge for Uckfield between 1600 and 1859, with one of those trains departing between 1730 and 1829, and a minimum of 34 vehicles must depart from London Bridge to Uckfield between 1600 and 1859.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ment_data/file/245044/tsr-capacity-tables.pdf

How do those numbers compare to the current allocation and how many more units would be required?

 

[swt_passenger]

No-one has come up with a solution yet (unless some last minute info comes up from an insider).

This has been discussed numerous times in a few different threads, and I don't think there's been any realistic clues where any extra units will come from.

The Sussex RUS is an old reference now, but the latest March 2014 CP5 enhancement plans does still refer to the train and platform lengthening going ahead, with completion hoped for by Dec 16, as does the TSGN ITT that there above post refers to.

 

[physics34]

This seems to be what you're referring to:



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ment_data/file/245044/tsr-capacity-tables.pdf

How do those numbers compare to the current allocation and how many more units would be required?

ah, thats a good article. Well southern have a total 44 x 171 coaches.. and of course a few two cars are needed for ashford to hastings... i think 4x 2 car units are used daily.

Currently there are 26 coaches booked to arrive from uckfield between 07.00 and 09.59.

On the TSGN interative map on the DfT website states 50% coach increase, so this makes sense. BUt where are 14 coaches gonna come from?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No-one has come up with a solution yet (unless some last minute info comes up from an insider).

This has been discussed numerous times in a few different threads, and I don't think there's been any realistic clues where any extra units will come from.

The Sussex RUS is an old reference now, but the latest March 2014 CP5 enhancement plans does still refer to the train and platform lengthening going ahead, with completion hoped for by Dec 16, as does the TSGN ITT that there above post refers to.

We know that the LOROL 172s should be available by 2017 after electrification, but the dates and the complete interior refubishment required wouldnt make this likely.

Rumours going around on the forums about the movements of chiltern and TPE 170s.

 

[northwichcat]

We know that the LOROL 172s should be available by 2017 after electrification, but the dates and the complete interior refubishment required wouldnt make this likely.

Rumours going around on the forums about the movements of chiltern and TPE 170s.

The 170s and 172s can't be attached to the 171s without first undergoing a conversion to use a different type of coupler.

Chiltern have signed a deal to take on the 170/3s from 2015 until 2021 so DfT will have to offer them something in exchange if they want Chiltern to sub-lease them to another operator. Chiltern have spoken to Porterbrook about converting the 170/3s in to 168s and putting centre cars from the 4 car 168s in to the 170/3s, so if they start undertaking that work then they'd be useless for Southern/Thameslink.

 

[TheWalrus]

Unless LO 172s go to Ashford-Hastings and the 171s go on Uckfield-London Bridge?

 

[joeykins82]

Even if the LO 172s were used on Marshlink they'd undergo conversion to 171 (or more likely 173) so that they could be recovered in case of breakdown; the only difference between 170 and 171 is the coupler (at least that's what Wikipedia says)

 

[158722]

The correct answer is, of course, no more 170/171s to Southern. As suggested countless times, the solution is to electrify both Marshlink (overhead) and Uckfield (3rd rail) to eliminate these diesel islands.

Given the news reports today, I continue to be shocked this has still not been proposed given it's another example of investment in the south east with the north and west having to make do with cast-offs.

In all seriousness, no idea where the extra stock for these services is going to come from. Some franchise operators looking nervously at their ROSCO agreements to see when their leases expire, ala TPE and their 170s?

 

[GatwickDepress]

Regardless, the current interior configuration of 172s would be suitable for Ashford - Brighton services. Quite a few go end to end, and 1 hour 47 minutes on a route without toilets or table seating seems a little... excessive.

 

[samogers]

Do any of you know how many class 172s LO have? As far as I know the Marshlink peak diagrams require 5 units (one of which is spare for the rest of the day) so really, you would need at least five, probably six for cover.

Btw, please correct me if I'm wrong as this is just something I have read and it may not be accurate!

 

[dk1]

MR magazine have suggested in the latest issue that the Marshlink Line could be electrified & upgraded to 90mph thus allowing a further extension of HS1 domestic 395s through to Hastings.

 

[GatwickDepress]

I get the feeling London Overground have 8 172s, which isn't big enough for much.

Wire up the Marshlink, changeover from AC to DC just before the Ore turnback siding as not to interfere with Ore terminators (and the daily 375s!), dual-voltage up some 377s... Bob's your uncle - as long as the 377s have SDO. :P

 

[samogers]

MR magazine have suggested in the latest issue that the Marshlink Line could be electrified & upgraded to 90mph thus allowing a further extension of HS1 domestic 395s through to Hastings.

Possible, but very unlikely I'm afraid.

 

[physics34]

The 170s and 172s can't be attached to the 171s without first undergoing a conversion to use a different type of coupler.

Chiltern have signed a deal to take on the 170/3s from 2015 until 2021 so DfT will have to offer them something in exchange if they want Chiltern to sub-lease them to another operator. Chiltern have spoken to Porterbrook about converting the 170/3s in to 168s and putting centre cars from the 4 car 168s in to the 170/3s, so if they start undertaking that work then they'd be useless for Southern/Thameslink.

Yeh the dellner conversion shouldnt be too difficult.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even if the LO 172s were used on Marshlink they'd undergo conversion to 171 (or more likely 173) so that they could be recovered in case of breakdown; the only difference between 170 and 171 is the coupler (at least that's what Wikipedia says)

correct. And dont the LO 172s have different engines and transmission? (they certainly sound different).

 

[158722]

I get the feeling London Overground have 8 172s, which isn't big enough for much.

Wire up the Marshlink, changeover from AC to DC just before the Ore turnback siding as not to interfere with Ore terminators (and the daily 375s!), dual-voltage up some 377s... Bob's your uncle - as long as the 377s have SDO. :P

Marshlink requires 5 units with one spare, as mentioned above.

TSGN are due to pass 25 377/1s to Southeastern as a result of 700 deliveries, so why not up this number to 31, allowing 6 375/6s (which I believe are prepared for dual voltage, but which has not been used) to move to TSGN for Marshlink. Should Uckfield get the overhead treatment, then swap another 10 units... As if all was so simple!

 

[David Goddard]

I get the feeling London Overground have 8 172s, which isn't big enough for much.

Wire up the Marshlink, changeover from AC to DC just before the Ore turnback siding as not to interfere with Ore terminators (and the daily 375s!), dual-voltage up some 377s... Bob's your uncle - as long as the 377s have SDO. :P

Simplest solution all round!
By the time the Marshlink is electrified Southern will have the fifteen 377/2s released from their present duties so will be ideally placed to run this service.

They could also be used for the Ore portion of the xx47 from Victoria and extend through to Ashford.

 

[nomis1066]

Possible, but very unlikely I'm afraid.

Hastings MP was full of herself recently after luring McLoughlin away from his HS2 department of spin to have a look at the problems between Hastings and Ashford. The "outcome" of it all was NR and McLoughlin sounding very positive about juicing Marshlink in CP6 and running Javelins through to Bexhill which in effect gives East Sussex what Kent has had from day one when HS1 opened. I haven't gone into the TSGN proposals - do they mention Marshlink overcrowding issues at all?

The obvious solution as mooted elsewhere on this thread is electrify the two pockets of diesel operation (and may I add - do it properly and also reopen Lewes Uckfield). The overcrowding on the Uckfield line is duplicated on the pitifully inadequate 2 cars that operate the Brighton Ashford service. The Uckfield London Bridge overcrowding problem would never have been predicted just a few years ago - but give people a direct service and modern trains - they'll use it!

So far as Marshlink issues are concerned - the overcrowding is a daily problem now NOW and the recent proposals we have heard, at very best, might see a significant improvement with electrification and 6 car Javelins in SIX years - TEN at the worst, if CP6 sees work commence.

An interim solution may be to just use the two cars on a Hastings Ashford service with a cross platform connection at Hastings off a 4 car 377. But then Southern/TSGN will always sail close to the wind with their rolling stock and not have enough 377s to take up the Brighton Hastings part.

Another solution is to sub let Hastings Ashford to an operator with experience of packing them in.......

 

[physics34]

Marshlink requires 5 units with one spare, as mentioned above.

TSGN are due to pass 25 377/1s to Southeastern as a result of 700 deliveries, so why not up this number to 31, allowing 6 375/6s (which I believe are prepared for dual voltage, but which has not been used) to move to TSGN for Marshlink. Should Uckfield get the overhead treatment, then swap another 10 units... As if all was so simple!

Tee hee, although i agree electrification should happen as soon as, i guess we'll be still discussing this in decades!

 

[northwichcat]

In all seriousness, no idea where the extra stock for these services is going to come from. Some franchise operators looking nervously at their ROSCO agreements to see when their leases expire, ala TPE and their 170s?

LM are of highest risk of having their units leased by New franchises before the ITT goes out for a new LM franchise. They also have 170s!

 

[158722]

LM are of highest risk of having their units leased by New franchises before the ITT goes out for a new LM franchise. They also have 170s!

Indeed, well spotted, I do think you have found the 'solution' which will be imposed! Some nice 3-car 170s for Marshlink with the 2-car 171s shuffled off to Uckfield, whilst meanwhile several hundred angry punters get left behind in the West Midlands...

 

[physics34]

Indeed, well spotted, I do think you have found the 'solution' which will be imposed! Some nice 3-car 170s for Marshlink with the 2-car 171s shuffled off to Uckfield, whilst meanwhile several hundred angry punters get left behind in the West Midlands...

will be nice to drive some different 170s (171s).... I know 171801-806 too well. 171804 was causing me grief this morning!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Yeh the dellner conversion shouldnt be too difficult.

Well, IIRC the early 377s were delivered as 375s, with Scharfenberg couplers. The SE 375s have all been converted to Dellners now anyway, haven't they? So I'd assume it's a fairly simple job in the grand scheme of things.

correct. And dont the LO 172s have different engines and transmission? (they certainly sound different).

When they were built, it was widely reported that the LO 172s were geared for 75mph. Discussion on here lead me to believe that was a red herring though.

 

[physics34]

Well, IIRC the early 377s were delivered as 375s, with Scharfenberg couplers. The SE 375s have all been converted to Dellners now anyway, haven't they? So I'd assume it's a fairly simple job in the grand scheme of things.




When they were built, it was widely reported that the LO 172s were geared for 75mph. Discussion on here lead me to believe that was a red herring though.

Yep i believe all 375s have been converted.

 

[Bald Rick]

The 'obvious' solution, as had been said before, is to raise ticket prices on the Uckfield line to a level comparable to adjacent routes, such that customers who drive to Buxted / Eridge etc from these lines to save over £1000 a year go back to commuting on the lines they should be. That generates more empty seats on the Uckfield line in the peak than 10 car trains, and leaves the diesel trains where they are needed.

Not very popular with passengers or politicians though.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

By the time the Marshlink is electrified Southern will have the fifteen 377/2s released from their present duties so will be ideally placed to run this service.

By the time Marshlink is electrified, the only thing fit to use it will be coastal shipping.

 

[samogers]

Bald Rick said:
The 'obvious' solution, as had been said before, is to raise ticket prices on the Uckfield line to a level comparable to adjacent routes, such that customers who drive to Buxted / Eridge etc from these lines to save over £1000 a year go back to commuting on the lines they should be. That generates more empty seats on the Uckfield line in the peak than 10 car trains, and leaves the diesel trains where they are needed.

Not very popular with passengers or politicians though

And creates less chance of BML2 being built
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

By the time Marshlink is electrified, the only thing fit to use it will be coastal shipping.

,,,

 

[dk1]

Possible, but very unlikely I'm afraid.

Affluent part of the Country & possibly some extra Javelin's to order, why not just do it?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Even if the LO 172s were used on Marshlink they'd undergo conversion to 171 (or more likely 173) so that they could be recovered in case of breakdown; the only difference between 170 and 171 is the coupler (at least that's what Wikipedia says)

If the only difference is the coupler, could all the 170s or all the 171s (whichever there is the smaller number off around the country) have their couplers replaced so that all use the same coupling type?

The correct answer is, of course, no more 170/171s to Southern. As suggested countless times, the solution is to electrify both Marshlink (overhead) and Uckfield (3rd rail) to eliminate these diesel islands.

Given the news reports today, I continue to be shocked this has still not been proposed given it's another example of investment in the south east with the north and west having to make do with cast-offs.

In all seriousness, no idea where the extra stock for these services is going to come from. Some franchise operators looking nervously at their ROSCO agreements to see when their leases expire, ala TPE and their 170s?

They amy as well to Uckfield with overhead, afaik all Electrostars have all the necessary internals in place for dual-voltage

 

[Grumpy]

Not sure if this is helpful but there should be a few Pacers becoming available in the next couple of years after the NW electrification.

 

[Bald Rick]

Affluent part of the Country & possibly some extra Javelin's to order, why not just do it?

It is, potentially, an awful lot of cash just to get to Hastings 20 mins or so quicker from London, and run longer trains on a branch line that sees 2 carriages an hour.

Especially when much the same result could be got running an hourly fast Hastings - London Bridge service (with some clever timetabling) and doing something clever to get a couple of extra carriages on the Marshlink.

 

[physics34]

Not sure if this is helpful but there should be a few Pacers becoming available in the next couple of years after the NW electrification.

If they arnt scrapped, i'll personally burn them all myself!