New TPE Train Discussion

[BurtonM]

Refurbished 185s?
Can we have some dedicated cycle storage then???

 

[D365]

... and the fleet of 24 442's has grown to 44.....

Forget 442s; it's all about the 444s now...

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Forget 442s; it's all about the 444s now...

Well, they are a siemens product, fleet compatibility and all that.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a shame TPE didn't just get a diesel version of those, very nice units.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Have spoken to one of my managers. He advises me of the following.

The procurement order for 44 5 car units are still in discussion but nothing has yet been confirmed with the winning builder. There will be 44 new 5 cars along with 29 refurbished 185's. They will have new seating, wi-fi, media servers offering on board entertainment streamed to your mobile device, improved catering. The new units will see use on LIV-SCA, MIA-NCL/MBR, LIV-EDB ECML MIA/LIV-GLC/EDB WCML with refurb 185's for MAN/LDS/HUL and MIA-CLE.

TPE will NOT be making use of any of the following rolling stock:-

Mk3 LHCS -that includes the pretendolino
HST 125's
180's - they are going to GC when GWR have their bi-modes

And absolutely no 442's being shoved by cats! Not happening! Nada!

Bi-modes have been mentioned and AT300 derivatives have been suggested, but nothing has yet been confirmed

I don't think it is quite so simple.

What is known is:

Not all of the new trains are the same.
There are different suppliers involved.
They are all new.
Siemens are not involved (inferred from 2 conversations).
At least part of the order "will raise some eyebrows".
I learned this weekend that at least part of the order is "very retro".

I also know that the first batch is required before the December 2017 timetable in order to have sufficient capacity and units for the timetable to work - signing the order off must be extremely imminent as leaving any longer than another week or so risks the train plan not being able to be resourced due to delivery times on the stock.

Unfortunately I don't know what is being ordered "to raise eyebrows" as sources are being very secretive.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

From our point of view, thats very frustrating. The company/franchise is very much up in arms at the mo and no one is saying anything. Its the not knowing that is unsettling the staff....

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I don't think it is quite so simple.

What is known is:

Not all of the new trains are the same.

I learned this weekend that at least part of the order is "very retro".

CAF mk5 day coaches with 68s/90s/88s?

 

[87015]

CAF mk5 day coaches with 68s/90s/88s?

Enough hints have been dropped now surely for them to just announce it... Unless DB are still in the game for 67s

 

[Bletchleyite]

CAF mk5 day coaches with 68s/90s/88s?

Well, some form of LHCS would certainly raise eyebrows and be quite retro (and be very welcome, I imagine).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I don't see how AT300s, not even due at GWR until May 2018, can be introduced on TPE by Dec 2017.

 

[Bringback309s]

"Very retro" might mean bogie-less units with folding doors and low back seats made by a company normally associated with bus construction... It could be called a racer or a runner or a harrier or an athlete

 

[L+Y]

It did strike me as odd that in one of the TPE presentations to (I think) TfGM, there was talk of merely "brand new carriages" in December 2017 in contrast to the "state of the art new trains" (emphasis mine) to come in December 2018.

Got to wait and see, I suppose!

 

[northwichcat]

"Very retro" might mean bogie-less units with folding doors and low back seats made by a company normally associated with bus construction... It could be called a racer or a runner or a harrier or an athlete

Bogies are mandatory on all Northern and TPE stock by 1st Jan 2020, they are already mandatory on all Scotrail stock.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

From our point of view, thats very frustrating. The company/franchise is very much up in arms at the mo and no one is saying anything. Its the not knowing that is unsettling the staff....

Note that it will be a new company with a new MD so if Liz Collins hasn't been told the plans or if she's been asked not to reveal them by the new company then there's not much she can do.

 

[swt_passenger]

It did strike me as odd that in one of the TPE presentations to (I think) TfGM, there was talk of merely "brand new carriages" ...

Announcements, whether by DfT, TOCs or manufacturers, are often given in terms of the number of 'new carriages', usually recently when referring to EMUs for Southern, e.g.: http://www.southernrailway.com/sout...rriages-for-thameslink-rolling-stock-cascade/

Nothing much to read into that wording IMHO.

 

[D6975]

I think the only thing of which we can currently be certain is that the WCML sets will be capable of taking power from the 25kV OH.

 

[Philip]

I'm more intrigued about how tight the allocation is for the number of services the new order will operate, both on the North route and for the West Coast services. Assuming different trains for WCML services; 12 units will have to cover eight Manchester-Scotland diagrams, probably two Liverpool-Glasgow diagrams and two for maintenance. So that won't leave many/any for strengthening, despite the fact that even in off peak times the 4-car 350s are currently very busy.

For North TPE services, of the 32 units allocated for this route and going off current diagrams, this would have to cover 6 x Man Airport-Middlesbrough; 7 x Man Airport-Newcastle; 7 x Liverpool-Scarborough and probably 4 x maintenance diagrams, leaving 8 for Liverpool-Edinburgh and nothing for strengthening. Would 8 units be enough to cover the new Edinburgh ECML service?

 

[northwichcat]

Announcements, whether by DfT, TOCs or manufacturers, are often given in terms of the number of 'new carriages', usually recently when referring to EMUs for Southern, e.g.: http://www.southernrailway.com/sout...rriages-for-thameslink-rolling-stock-cascade/

Nothing much to read into that wording IMHO.

Quite often DfT refer to 'vehicles' opposed to carriages, possibly to mislead passengers? I was on a Northern service which broke down the other week and the conductor announced there was a 'fault with the unit' two passengers sat opposite me were confused as to what 'the unit' meant.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

For North TPE services, of the 32 units allocated for this route and going off current diagrams, this would have to cover 6 x Man Airport-Middlesbrough; 7 x Man Airport-Newcastle; 7 x Liverpool-Scarborough and probably 4 x maintenance diagrams, leaving 8 for Liverpool-Edinburgh and nothing for strengthening. Would 8 units be enough to cover the new Edinburgh ECML service?

Will they be standalone diagrams though or will diagrams do something like Liverpool-Scarborough-Liverpool-Edinburgh-Liverpool? Could inter-working result in 1-2 diagrams less being required?

 

[Class 170101]

Have spoken to one of my managers. He advises me of the following.

The procurement order for 44 5 car units are still in discussion but nothing has yet been confirmed with the winning builder. There will be 44 new 5 cars along with 29 refurbished 185's. They will have new seating, wi-fi, media servers offering on board entertainment streamed to your mobile device, improved catering. The new units will see use on LIV-SCA, MIA-NCL/MBR, LIV-EDB ECML MIA/LIV-GLC/EDB WCML with refurb 185's for MAN/LDS/HUL and MIA-CLE.

TPE will NOT be making use of any of the following rolling stock:-

Mk3 LHCS -that includes the pretendolino
HST 125's
180's - they are going to GC when GWR have their bi-modes

And absolutely no 442's being shoved by cats! Not happening! Nada!

Bi-modes have been mentioned and AT300 derivatives have been suggested, but nothing has yet been confirmed

Nothing mentioned about the Class 350s?

 

[Greybeard33]

I don't see how AT300s, not even due at GWR until May 2018, can be introduced on TPE by Dec 2017.

Has it ever been confirmed that what the DfT interactive timeline describes as "13 new 125mph trains (65 carriages)" for the North Trans-Pennine route, to enter into service between Dec 2017 and Dec 2018, are to be bi-modes? Is it perhaps just a supposition that these will be the same type, from the same manufacturer, as the "19 new 125mph bi-mode trains (95 carriages)" for the Liverpool - Edinburgh and Manchester Airport - Newcastle services, to enter service by Dec 2020?

If the two batches are in fact to be separate orders, the final 19 trains could be AT300 bi-modes, but the initial 13 might be "very retro" new build LHCS or DMUs or DEMUs.

In between these batches, the "12 new electric trains (60 EMU carriages)" for Anglo-Scottish services, to enter service by Dec 2019 (no max speed specified), might be from yet a third manufacturer.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Has it ever been confirmed that what the DfT interactive timeline describes as "13 new 125mph trains (65 carriages)" for the North Trans-Pennine route, to enter into service between Dec 2017 and Dec 2018, are to be bi-modes? Is it perhaps just a supposition that these will be the same type, from the same manufacturer, as the "19 new 125mph bi-mode trains (95 carriages)" for the Liverpool - Edinburgh and Manchester Airport - Newcastle services, to enter service by Dec 2020?

If the two batches are in fact to be separate orders, the final 19 trains could be AT300 bi-modes, but the initial 13 might be "very retro" new build LHCS or DMUs or DEMUs.

In between these batches, the "12 new electric trains (60 EMU carriages)" for Anglo-Scottish services, to enter service by Dec 2019 (no max speed specified), might be from yet a third manufacturer.

They won't be LHCS - the track access, passenger capacity and energy consumption figures wouldn't support LHCS with any sort of locomotive, it's touch and go supporting LHCS with 9 or 10 carriage train sets, you'll bankrupt the franchise running LHCS in 5 or 6 car fixed formation sets instead of an EMU design.

It's a bit different for Chiltern (as I know the Class 68 operation will be used as an example) but as they can't run EMU stock, their LHCS operation is making the best of a bad lot, the WCML with 125mph operation with EPS (tilt) is very different.

If the new stock for TransPennine is split between two fleets or two manufacturers, it'll be tilting stock, probably from Alstom, for the Anglo-Scottish services via WCML and Hitachi for those units described as bi-mode.

The delivery/EIS dates tally with delivery slots available from Alstom and Hitachi, incidentally.

 

[Greybeard33]

If the new stock for TransPennine is split between two fleets or two manufacturers, it'll be tilting stock, probably from Alstom, for the Anglo-Scottish services via WCML and Hitachi for those units described as bi-mode.

The delivery/EIS dates tally with delivery slots available from Alstom and Hitachi, incidentally.

But what about the first 13 125mph units, which are for TPE North and so cannot be EMUs, and are not described as bi-mode, but are for delivery in 2017-18?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

But what about the first 13 125mph units, which are for TPE North and so cannot be EMUs, and are not described as bi-mode, but are for delivery in 2017-18?

TransPennine North getting anything other than bi-mode units makes absolutely no sense though, given the route is in the process of being electrified (it's at GRIP2/3 right now, with some route clearance work already done).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Pendolinos aren't "very retro", though, are they? And if they do go for 5-car Pendolinos, they will be a disaster, as they will have barely more seats than a 4-car 350, when something with the capacity of an 8-car 350 is really needed for the WCML services if whatever it is won't ever be doubling up.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

TransPennine North getting anything other than bi-mode units makes absolutely no sense though, given the route is in the process of being electrified (it's at GRIP2/3 right now, with some route clearance work already done).

LHCS, of course, could be delivered with a diesel locomotive, which could, once electrified, be replaced with an electric locomotive. That's quite retro.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Pendolinos aren't "very retro", though, are they? And if they do go for 5-car Pendolinos, they will be a disaster, as they will have barely more seats than a 4-car 350, when something with the capacity of an 8-car 350 is really needed for the WCML services if whatever it is won't ever be doubling up.

It depends what you do with the layout of a Pendolino set - no need for the Virgin WC layout to be maintained. There's no reason why a more efficient layout couldn't be developed.

Similarly, this idea of retro stock doesn't make a great deal of sense with LHCS as you're making multiple working incredibly difficult and wasting formation length on a locomotive, even if you manage to provide a greater capacity through the use of LHCS stock (though the CAF Mark 5 stock being discussed is 22m and not 23m, so immediately presents capacity issues, unless a longer variant is developed - shouldn't be unduly difficult but it all adds up in price, and the CAF sleeper stock isn't cheap).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

LHCS, of course, could be delivered with a diesel locomotive, which could, once electrified, be replaced with an electric locomotive. That's quite retro.

It's not retro, it's mental. A bo-bo electric locomotive comes in somewhere around a 5 car IEP unit in terms of track access (a Class 91 is less than a penny cheaper per mile than an entire Class 395 unit). You get less regenerative braking and you waste platform length on a locomotive.

It makes no financial sense, and it is something that has been looked into at great length already, for IEP and for the ongoing electrification RUS, and LHCS with swapping of locomotives as electrification progresses isn't making financial sense. Passenger demand and a planned withdrawal of life expired stock actually makes new build DMU the most economical option, provided enough route miles can be electrified per year to allow DMUs to be withdrawn at the right point in their life cycles, not too soon to waste investment, not too late to require lengthy and expensive life extension programs with little opportunity to recoup additional unexpected costs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It depends what you do with the layout of a Pendolino set - no need for the Virgin WC layout to be maintained. There's no reason why a more efficient layout couldn't be developed.

Not unless the rules about passengers occupying the front third of the train above 110mph are relaxed. Though that of course affects any 125mph train, not a Pendolino - and simply says that 5-car units are insufficient if they are designed for 125mph.

 

[notlob.divad]

TransPennine North getting anything other than bi-mode units makes absolutely no sense though, given the route is in the process of being electrified (it's at GRIP2/3 right now, with some route clearance work already done).

It isn't going to be complete until after the end of the new franchise though. End of 2020 TPE are getting Bi-modes specifically for Liverpool-Edinburgh (via ECML) and Manchester Airport - Newcastle routes. Once the electrification is complete those routes can be run entirely by EMUs. The bi-modes will see through between the completion of capacity enhancements and the completion of electrification and then transfer to the none electrified bits. Middlesborough and Hull. DMUs are still going to be needed for Manchester - Sheffield route for a while and can replace the refurbished stock down the line.

A limited number of Pendalinos for new EMUs might not be a bad shout. Someone is going to have to fork out an awful lot of money for HS2 units over the next 20 years. After that there isn't going to be a lot left in the pot for new EMUs on other lines. Lots of long Pendalinos will be freed up and if they are split down they can all be circa 9 carriages long as originally built planned.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

TransPennine North getting anything other than bi-mode units makes absolutely no sense though, given the route is in the process of being electrified (it's at GRIP2/3 right now, with some route clearance work already done).

It isn't going to be complete until after the end of the new franchise though. End of 2020 TPE are getting Bi-modes specifically for Liverpool-Edinburgh (via ECML) and Manchester Airport - Newcastle routes. Once the electrification is complete those routes can be run entirely by EMUs. The bi-modes will see through between the completion of capacity enhancements and the completion of electrification and then transfer to the none electrified bits. Middlesborough and Hull. DMUs are still going to be needed for Manchester - Sheffield route for a while and can replace the refurbished stock down the line.

A limited number of Pendalinos for new EMUs might not be a bad shout. Someone is going to have to fork out an awful lot of money for HS2 units over the next 20 years. After that there isn't going to be a lot left in the pot for new EMUs on other lines. Lots of long Pendalinos will be freed up and if they are split down they can all be circa 9 carriages long as originally built planned.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

(Electrification) isn't going to be complete until after the end of the new franchise though.

TransPennine North core route (Manchester to York) is provisionally booked to transfer to electric traction during the December 2022 timetable change, which takes us to pretty much the end of the 7 year TransPennine franchise (it runs to March 2023 initially), the actual planning for electrification, procurement of units/stock is to be undertaken by the incoming TransPennine franchisee, which is why they're ordering stock and introducing it into service prior to the end of the franchise.

What doesn't make any sense at all is that over the next 6 and a bit years, we're going to be electrifying the route, and with some new stock to be introduced by December 2018, just 4 years before the core route converts to electric traction, it makes no sense for that stock to be anything other than bi-mode, or to be an electric unit dragged for the first 4 years of its life.

If the order was to be for another fleet of 100mph DMUs in commuter configuration, an order of stock identical to those being ordered by the new Northern franchise, that would make sense, they can be cascaded away post 2022 with replacement EMU stock ordered to 'back fill' the fleet. 125mph DMU stock though makes absolutely no sense in any way, shape or form.

I know people are scratching their heads at Network Rail, at various TOCs and at the owning ROSCO, terrified that the Class 222 fleet will become homeless when MML electrification completes in 2023, because not even XC are entirely keen to be taking more 125mph DEMUs, long term, they'll need 140mph capable electric units to fit into some of the paths on the ECML and GWML, if 140mph operating under ETCS ever comes to fruition, and shorter term, bi-mode AT300 units better suit the franchise given the competitive purchase costs, operating costs and leasing charges.

Various people within NR are looking at what lines could be given line speed upgrades to make best use of 125mph DEMUs, ROSCO engineers are working to get running costs down if they'll only run at 100mph to 110mph, but it's fair to say there's a bit of panic going on if they can't place most of the Class 222 fleet with XC.

That leaves another 125mph DMU fleet really struggling to find a home post TransPennine North electrification, and I'd find it very difficult to believe a ROSCO has agreed to fund such a fleet knowing just how difficult it's going to be to place the stock when electrification completes.

 

[northwichcat]

TransPennine North getting anything other than bi-mode units makes absolutely no sense though, given the route is in the process of being electrified (it's at GRIP2/3 right now, with some route clearance work already done).

What if the plan is for some diesel only on TPE North to be replaced by electric only once Manchester-York is electrified with the diesel only being cascaded to South TPE? That doesn't sound illogical to me.

North TPE are going to need some bi-modes post-Manchester to York electrification given electric only won't be able to serve Scarborough/Middlesborough or cover diversions via Wakefield, Brighouse or Warrington Central.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

What if the plan is for some diesel only on TPE North to be replaced by electric only once Manchester-York is electrified with the diesel only being cascaded to South TPE? That doesn't sound illogical to me.

It would make sense if there wasn't the elephant in the room - cascading some of the existing DMU fleet away from the franchise, there's no practical benefit to be gained from releasing the Siemens Class 185 units then bringing in a different DMU design to boost capacity.

The sensible suggestion if we're doing more DMU stock, is for Northern to order more DMU stock, and in the short term, sub-lease it onto TransPennine pending electrification and delivery of electric and bi-mode stock.

The TransPennine South route suits bi-mode stock in any case, we've made some pretty coherent arguments at all levels for bi-mode stock to be procured for TransPennine North, and then replaced with an electric only unit when electrification completes between Manchester and York, or when further electrification work on the TransPennine South route starts (which would be shortly afterwards).

The Hope Valley is a major target for electrification in CP6/CP7, having some bi-mode units running along that route, on the TransPennine South route would ease the electrification, and of course Sheffield to Doncaster is likely to be a follow on scheme when MML electrification completes in 2023, so over the next 15 years, and within the first 10 or so years of TransPennine's new rolling stock, we're aiming to have most of the TransPennine South route, certainly most of the core section between Manchester and Doncaster, electrified.

It makes no sense to be saddling that route with more DMU stock either, but in the absence of the Electrification RUS and a fully fledged, coherent rolling electrification program, our pleading with TOCs, DfT and ROSCOs is pretty much whistling in the wind.

The stock won't go amiss, but it could eventually end up being used in the wrong places, at higher cost, and at the expense of further electrification in the short term.

 

[northwichcat]

It would make sense if there wasn't the elephant in the room - cascading some of the existing DMU fleet away from the franchise, there's no practical benefit to be gained from releasing the Siemens Class 185 units then bringing in a different DMU design to boost capacity.

The sensible suggestion if we're doing more DMU stock, is for Northern to order more DMU stock, and in the short term, sub-lease it onto TransPennine pending electrification and delivery of electric and bi-mode stock.

I think one big unknown at the moment is what's happening to the released 185s. While the Northern ITT mentioned not being able to take on released 185s it seems Northern are not able to take on a lot of the off-lease 170s which the ITT allowed Northern bidders to take on and TPE will have surplus 185s, so could it now be released 185s be already part of the plan to replace Pacers and provide extra Northern services by 2019? If so would it then make sense for Northern to receive the rest of the 185s post-North TPE electrification to start replacing the worse of the 150s/provide extra capacity (as appropriate)?