New TPE Train Discussion

[northwichcat]

which would mean that the DMU to form the 1758 Stockport to Chester would probably have to come ECS from Newton Heath, Vic or Picc instead of Hazel Grove.

The unit for the 16:58 service to Hazel Grove does come from Newton Heath currently, along with the unit for the 17:09 to Chester and the 2 units for the 17:23 to Chinley.

You may recall the 16:58 Stockport-Chester used to be booked as a 150 which came from Newton Heath via Denton. John Oates suggested to Northern they could switch the ECS movements so the quieter 16:58 Stockport-Chester got a 142 and the busier 17:09 Piccadilly-Chester got a 150 instead of a 142. Northern obliged with the former but the 150 usually finishes up at the front of the ECS from Newton Heath to Piccadilly so usually finishes up on the 17:23 to Chinley but sometimes finishes up on the rear so the 16:58 to Hazel Grove gets a 150.

 

[darloscott]

The unit for the 16:58 service to Hazel Grove does come from Newton Heath currently, along with the unit for the 17:09 to Chester and the 2 units for the 17:23 to Chinley.

You may recall the 16:58 Stockport-Chester used to be booked as a 150 which came from Newton Heath via Denton. John Oates suggested to Northern they could switch the ECS movements so the quieter 16:58 Stockport-Chester got a 142 and the busier 17:09 Piccadilly-Chester got a 150 instead of a 142. Northern obliged with the former but the 150 usually finishes up at the front of the ECS from Newton Heath to Piccadilly so usually finishes up on the 17:23 to Chinley but sometimes finishes up on the rear so the 16:58 to Hazel Grove gets a 150.

Looks to me like 3H02 brings in the unit for 1705 Marple rather than the 1709 Chester (which appears to work off 1623 Rose Hill - Picc?)

 

[Greybeard33]

Looks to me like 3H02 brings in the unit for 1705 Marple rather than the 1709 Chester (which appears to work off 1623 Rose Hill - Picc?)

Yes, the 1709 Chester is normally from Platform 4, while the 3H02 ECS convoy goes into Platform 3. I think the Rose Hill - Picc diagrams are usually 142s, so the 1709 Chester gets the 142 too.

In my experience the 1758 Stockport to Chester, which is formed from the unit off the 1658 Picc to Hazel Grove, is usually a 142, as is the 1658 Stockport to Chester, which comes direct from Newton Heath. However the 1658 Picc to HG would have to be a Sprinter if it were extended to Buxton as I suggested, since Pacers are not cleared for the Buxton line.

 

[northwichcat]

Looks to me like 3H02 brings in the unit for 1705 Marple rather than the 1709 Chester (which appears to work off 1623 Rose Hill - Picc?)

Yes, the 1709 Chester is normally from Platform 4, while the 3H02 ECS convoy goes into Platform 3. I think the Rose Hill - Picc diagrams are usually 142s, so the 1709 Chester gets the 142 too.

They've changed it a couple of times but if the Sprinter (that was previously used on the 16:58 Stockport-Chester a couple of years ago) is on the front of the ECS formation, meaning it's closest to the buffers it can't be used on a Chester service unless the times are redone so that Chester departs after Chinley.

 

[northwichcat]

Regarding new stock and Northern using more 319s we have the following information from Tony Miles:

Arriva are looking at whether using 17 x 319 diagrams from a pool of 20 is viable and apparently it's up to them to go back to DfT and say whether it's a viable option. Having more than 17 x 319 in use on any given day has already been dismissed.

First TPE will be getting AT300s as part of an add-on to the GWR order for North TPE but are still finalising a contract for the new EMUs and until that is done they won't be formally announcing their plans for new rolling stock.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Regarding new stock and Northern using more 319s we have the following information from Tony Miles:

Arriva are looking at whether using 17 x 319 diagrams from a pool of 20 is viable and apparently it's up to them to go back to DfT and say whether it's a viable option. Having more than 17 x 319 in use on any given day has already been dismissed.

First TPE will be getting AT300s as part of an add-on to the GWR order for North TPE but are still finalising a contract for the new EMUs and until that is done they won't be formally announcing their plans for new rolling stock.

Will it be a total replacement for all TP North and North West services with AT300s then (apart from Manchester-Hull)?

 

[northwichcat]

Will it be a total replacement for all TP North and North West services with AT300s then?

No.

North West services will be transferring to Arriva and getting new CAF DMUs.

Manchester-Hull and Manchester-Leeds only services will be getting refurbished 185s, alongside South TPE.

Liverpool/Manchester Airport to Edinburgh (via York), Newcastle, Scarborough and Middlesbrough will be getting the new AT300s.

 

[TheKnightWho]

No.

North West services will be transferring to Arriva and getting new CAF DMUs.

Manchester-Hull and Manchester-Leeds only services will be getting refurbished 185s, alongside South TPE.

Liverpool/Manchester Airport to Edinburgh (via York), Newcastle, Scarborough and Middlesbrough will be getting the new AT300s.

And Manchester-Scotland?

 

[northwichcat]

And Manchester-Scotland?

Those (and also the occasional Liverpool-Scotland via Preston services) will be the new electric trains that apparently haven't been finalised yet.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Those (and also the occasional Liverpool-Scotland via Preston services) will be the new electric trains that apparently haven't been finalised yet.

I wonder what could be special about those, and why they haven't been lumped in as more AT300s

 

[northwichcat]

I wonder what could be special about those, and why they haven't been lumped in as more AT300s

Possibly they might be able to run at over 110mph on the WCML, something the AT300s won't be able to do?

Also there's likely a limit to the number of add-on trains which can be done as part of an existing deal without going through a full tendering process.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Possibly they might be able to run at over 110mph on the WCML, something the AT300s won't be able to do?

Also there's likely a limit to the number of add-on trains which can be done as part of an existing deal without going through a full tendering process.

Yes, that's what I was hinting at. There has just been much wailing and gnashing of teeth at the fact that there'll be no need for that since they're stopping services etc.

But you're right - they could be more AT300s that require their own order, although that would cause me to wonder why they wouldn't do the entirely lot in their own order if that was the case.

 

[hibtastic]

Yes, that's what I was hinting at. There has just been much wailing and gnashing of teeth at the fact that there'll be no need for that since they're stopping services etc.

But you're right - they could be more AT300s that require their own order, although that would cause me to wonder why they wouldn't do the entirely lot in their own order if that was the case.

Sorry if I am naive here but does that mean they have to be of the tilting variety?

 

[northwichcat]

Yes, that's what I was hinting at. There has just been much wailing and gnashing of teeth at the fact that there'll be no need for that since they're stopping services etc.

They're not stopping services anymore than some of the Virgin Pendolino/Voyager Scottish services are.

But you're right - they could be more AT300s that require their own order, although that would cause me to wonder why they wouldn't do the entirely lot in their own order if that was the case.

Maybe for speed if an add-on can be delivered quicker or even jump to the front of the existing queue if there's delays to GW electrification?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Sorry if I am naive here but does that mean they have to be of the tilting variety?

If they're going to run over 110mph they'll have to be.

However, it's entirely possible it's a technicality that requires a separate order, and tilting won't come into it at all.

 

[northwichcat]

Sorry if I am naive here but does that mean they have to be of the tilting variety?

There's been suggestions when First Group were preparing their WC franchise bid they looked at running new build non-tilting stock on Birmingham-Scotland services at up to 115mph, subject to Network Rail giving clearance.

 

[CAF397]

I thought the First Group proposal for the WC franchise included 'baby-Pendolino's' - 6-car tilting EMUs to replace single Class 221 operated services between Birmingham and Scotland?

 

[Haydn1971]

Also there's likely a limit to the number of add-on trains which can be done as part of an existing deal without going through a full tendering process.

Is that a contractural limit between First and Hitachi rather than a Government financial limit ?

 

[northwichcat]

I thought the First Group proposal for the WC franchise included 'baby-Pendolino's' - 6-car tilting EMUs to replace single Class 221 operated services between Birmingham and Scotland?

No that was Virgin's failed bid with Virgin wanting an all-Pendolino fleet with DEMU locos for serving the non-electrified destinations.

First proposed new trains from CAF alongside Pendolinos and Voyagers (for a much larger and more expensive to lease fleet.)

 

[edwin_m]

If they're going to run over 110mph they'll have to be.

There's no reason why parts of the WCML shouldn't be upgraded for 125mph non-tilting trains - only that nobody has needed to do it enough to incur the cost and hassle. Obviously journey times won't match a Pendolino but on the other hand the trains would be cheaper, so it's up to First to decide which way to go.

 

[WatcherZero]

I thought Virgins proposal was to do some speed improvements through Lancashire/Cumbria trying to get 125 without tilt in places, and in the Trent valley increase speed limit from 125 to 135 because research showed that while 140 wasn't safe with trackside signals/signs 135 was.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I thought Virgins proposal was to do some speed improvements through Lancashire/Cumbria trying to get 125 without tilt in places, and in the Trent valley increase speed limit from 125 to 135 because research showed that while 140 wasn't safe with trackside signals/signs 135 was.

I think they were looking at 135 with tilt (may still be) but I don't know about the other stuff.

 

[Class 170101]

I think they were looking at 135 with tilt (may still be) but I don't know about the other stuff.

I thought NR had already said no.

In any event the Trent Valley is used for most overspeed tests so Pendolinos have run on the Trent Valley at over 125mph under test anyway.

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought Virgins proposal was to do some speed improvements through Lancashire/Cumbria trying to get 125 without tilt in places, and in the Trent valley increase speed limit from 125 to 135 because research showed that while 140 wasn't safe with trackside signals/signs 135 was.

I don't believe there was any research. They allegedly just made a proposal that if cab signalling was 'needed at 140' then it must not be needed below 140.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

This article from the MEN says, amongst other things, that TPE "will also get 125mph renovated cast-offs from elsewhere in the country".

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/game-thrones-streamed-your-phone-10897127

 

[Steve14]

This article from the MEN says, amongst other things, that TPE "will also get 125mph renovated cast-offs from elsewhere in the country".

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/game-thrones-streamed-your-phone-10897127

I suspect the cast offs which are indeed capable of 125mph could be class 180s from GWR, a few HSTs or even IC225s.

 

[northwichcat]

I thought Virgins proposal was to do some speed improvements through Lancashire/Cumbria trying to get 125 without tilt in places, and in the Trent valley increase speed limit from 125 to 135 because research showed that while 140 wasn't safe with trackside signals/signs 135 was.

Virgin took the unusual step of releasing to the press what was in their failed bid and they did mention Pendolinos running at 135mph. Had IEP commuter been dismissed when WC bidding was underway? I recall the original IEP proposals had commuter IEP replacing some of the 350s.

I think the official First press release only mention new build 6 car EMUs which some insiders said would be supplied by CAF but others presumed Alstom would be building mini-Pendolinos.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I suspect the cast offs which are indeed capable of 125mph could be class 180s from GWR, a few HSTs or even IC225s.

The GWR 180s have already been secured by Grand Central. I think the HT ones are up for grabs though with HT also getting brand new bi-modes.

 

[sprinterguy]

I suspect the cast offs which are indeed capable of 125mph could be class 180s from GWR, a few HSTs or even IC225s.

As jcollins says, four of the five Great Western 180s are already earmarked for Grand Central. I think it more likely that the MEN have got their wires crossed somewhere along the line, as an inward cascade of stock to the TPE franchise doesn't seem to tally with what's been announced to date.

With new trains being ordered for all TPE North fast services to and from Edinburgh, Newcastle, Middlesbrough and Scarborough, and twenty nine class 185s being retained and refurbished for the TPE north semi-fast services and South TPE, what use would Transpennine have for HSTs or 225s?

 

[northwichcat]

Another article also published yesterday

Mr Goodwin was in Scotland to discuss details of First's plans for the new nine-year TPE franchise, which begins on April 1.

The group is investing £500 million over the next four years, including buying 220 brand new train carriages and spending £37 million revamping 87 existing carriages.
..
First Group is poised to sign a deal for the purchase of new rolling stock "within the next few weeks"

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...chise__will_help_cement_Northern_Powerhouse_/

220/5 = 44
87/3 = 29

So the numbers add up with 29 x 185s, 32 x 5 car bi-modes and 12 x 5 car electrics being in the fleet at the December 2019 timetable change.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it more likely that the MEN have got their wires crossed somewhere along the line, as an inward cascade of stock to the TPE franchise doesn't seem to tally with what's been announced to date.

Although, it's possible they've stumbled on the plan for temporary replacements for the 170s and got it mixed up with permanent plan. The remaining 170s are expected to leave TPE in July now. A loco-hauled working on Friday/Saturday Scottish services could eliminate the 6 car 185 Friday/Saturday working.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Article in the MEN

Firstgroup which runs Transpennine services from Manchester to Newcastle, Leeds, Sheffield, Manchester, Hull, Liverpool, Edinburgh and Glasgow, as well as Manchester Airport:

BRAND NEW FASTER TRAINS

They will provide 44 new intercity trains with 220 new carriages by 2019, some capable of reaching 125mph.

AND A FACELIFT FOR OLDER TRAINS

Their existing ‘class 185’ trains will get a £27 million revamp to restore them to as-new standards. We will also get 125mph renovated cast-offs from elsewhere in the country.

Not heared anything internally yet but Im on leave so wont until Friday.