Northern Future fleet updates

[Peter Mugridge]

I believe they were intended to be Class 341.

That is correct; they even built a wooden mock up numbered 341 001.

The amazing thing is that had it gone ahead at the time, these would now be getting replaced with something presumably very similar to the 345s we actually have... such were the political delays to the project!

To sum up, I would agree with those saying "don't rely on the indicated classes for the new Northern order"; until it gets confirmed by the Rolling Stock Library or whatever that is called these days any indicative class number will always be speculative.


Edited: typo

 

[tfw756rider]

Class 345 was reserved for Crossrail before Bombardier won the contract.

Ah OK, thanks.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2025 ==

To sum up, I would agree with those saying "don't rely on the indicated classes for the new Northern order"; until it gets confirmed by the Rolling Stock Library or whatever that is called these days and indicative class number will always be speculative.

Thanks (and to anyone else who said words to similar effect).

 

[gc4946]

I'm assuming level access is stipulated in their tenders so ordering 3- and 4-car units means at least 1 carriage (3-car) and 2 carriages (4-car) in each unit will have such access

 

[Snow1964]

I'm assuming level access is stipulated in their tenders so ordering 3- and 4-car units means at least 1 carriage (3-car) and 2 carriages (4-car) in each unit will have such access

For the new units yes, although more likely to all be level access in centre of each carriage and at doors, with raised floor sections over the bogies.

The other DfT procurement for replacing oldest 15x would appear to be existing units surplus and cascaded as interim fleet (it's all bit vague) so these would be existing boarding height

 

[GWVillager]

Well hold on, 23m carriages and level boarding? Is that even possible given platform curvature etc.? It would mean an entirely new bodyshell design at the very least.

 

[Snow1964]

Well hold on, 23m carriages and level boarding? Is that even possible given platform curvature etc.? It would mean an entirely new bodyshell design at the very least.

I don't think vehicle length has ever been confirmed, it could be an articulated unit sharing bogies on shorter intermediate vehicles.

Thus a 3car unit might be nearer length of 2.5 conventional vehicles.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well hold on, 23m carriages and level boarding? Is that even possible given platform curvature etc.?

Can't see any reason it wouldn't be. You just need to narrow it a bit at that level.

It would mean an entirely new bodyshell design at the very least.

With the Aventra now at end of production or near it, Alstom are doing exactly that, so it's a good opportunity.

 

[jonnyfan]

Based on the interview with Northern's Strategic Development Director Rob Warnes in October's Modern Railways magazine, the following has been specified and is known so far:

• 3-car sets will be 69-metres long and 4-car sets will be 92-metres long
• 3-car sets will have 191 seats and 4-car sets 265 seats
• Level boarding is not a requirement, ramps are allowed - although all units "will have some form of sliding step gap filler".
• An interesting fact is that there are only 52 level boarding compliant platforms on Northern's network, out of 1,259

Looks like level boarding on a universal scale will be difficult to achieve, perhaps a hybrid solution as previously mentioned, of some carriages with lower, level boarding and others without. We shall see what the manufacturers can come up with next year!

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's surprising that they're saying 23m when most newer stock (including 195/331) is 24. Are there platforms where that extra 3-4m in a unit would actually be a problem? In modern terms, 23m would be a custom length pushing the price up, 20 and 24 are usually what is on offer, Stadler aside.

As for level boarding, you've got to start somewhere. It's not as simple as Merseyrail, but Greater Anglia seem to have it right in starting with the units and working with Network Rail on a programme of adapting stations over the medium to long term.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Are there platforms where that extra 3-4m in a unit would actually be a problem?

Given a Class 195s end carriages are 24m (mid carriages 23.35), probably not, but if I'm wrong someone will surely be along soon to correct me.

 

[norbitonflyer]

For the new units yes, although more likely to all be level access in centre of each carriage and at doors, with raised floor sections over the bogies.

The article talks about sliding gap fillers. It also says that 915mm floors will be specified for level boarding in at least one carriage in each unit, but space for underfloor fuel tanks and / or batteries may make it necessary to have higher floor levels in others.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The article talks about sliding gap fillers. It also says that 915mm floors will be specified for level boarding in at least one carriage in each unit, but space for underfloor fuel tanks and / or batteries may make it necessary to have higher floor levels in others.

Given that the affordable way to convert most stations to level boarding would be the addition of "Harrington humps", a drop between the bogies of the middle coach (or both middle coaches in the case of a 4-car*) would seem a good way of doing it. The wheelchair space, accessible toilet and perhaps a pram dock could be in this area.

It's not an unusual approach for conversion of existing stock on the mainland, particularly Switzerland where it was commonly done, e.g. on the Domino units and quite a lot of tramcars and narrow gauge EMUs, by inserting new-build or converted low floor trailers (between the bogies) into existing high floor EMUs.

* If it was only one it would matter which way round it was; I suspect this would therefore be a non starter.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The article talks about sliding gap fillers. It also says that 915mm floors will be specified for level boarding in at least one carriage in each unit, but space for underfloor fuel tanks and / or batteries may make it necessary to have higher floor levels in others.

Some of this reads like a Stadler FLIRT spec (eg TfW's class 756).
The other bidders have yet to offer this kind of spec in the UK (multi-mode, variable height floors etc).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some of this reads like a Stadler FLIRT spec (eg TfW's class 756).

Apart from the vehicle lengths (though Stadler could of course bid shorter ones with more of them). Though they can do non-articulated units as noted above.

The other bidders have yet to offer this kind of spec in the UK (multi-mode, variable height floors etc).

I think it's more or less a given that the new Alstom product replacing the Aventra (I forget what it's called) will have at least a partial 960mm floor option.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Apart from the vehicle lengths (though Stadler could of course bid shorter ones with more of them). Though they can do non-articulated units as noted above.
I think it's more or less a given that the new Alstom product replacing the Aventra (I forget what it's called) will have at least a partial 960mm floor option.

Adessia...

 

[Snow1964]

• An interesting fact is that there are only 52 level boarding compliant platforms on Northern's network, out of 1,259

Given that the affordable way to convert most stations to level boarding would be the addition of "Harrington humps", a drop between the bogies of the middle coach (or both middle coaches in the case of a 4-car*) would seem a good way of doing it. The wheelchair space, accessible toilet and perhaps a pram dock could be in this area.

Might only be 52 compliant platforms, but that might be 100% compliant.

From memory anything more than 20mm variation from 915mm is technically not fully compliant. Of course don't want platforms that are say 100mm or more too low, but some might be close, but not in the 52 compliant ones.

Northern (with Network Rail) really need to look at a program of getting the worst platforms compliant, at least for the length in everyday use. Harrington humps should really be seen as a short term cheap temporary fix, pending proper upgrade, not as a proper solution to serve a train that might be around until about year 2070

 

[GWVillager]

Based on the interview with Northern's Strategic Development Director Rob Warnes in October's Modern Railways magazine, the following has been specified and is known so far:

• 3-car sets will be 69-metres long and 4-car sets will be 92-metres long
• 3-car sets will have 191 seats and 4-car sets 265 seats
• Level boarding is not a requirement, ramps are allowed - although all units "will have some form of sliding step gap filler".
• An interesting fact is that there are only 52 level boarding compliant platforms on Northern's network, out of 1,259

Looks like level boarding on a universal scale will be difficult to achieve, perhaps a hybrid solution as previously mentioned, of some carriages with lower, level boarding and others without. We shall see what the manufacturers can come up with next year!

Very interesting, though I wonder what the 52 station figure is (915mm tall platforms?), and a "sliding step gap filler" suggests low floor, presumably.

But what's most notable is how that seat count is really quite low - a 3 car 195 seats 204 and a 158 has 207. This is more akin to the very low density Class 197s or 170s.

 

[D365]

Well hold on, 23m carriages and level boarding? Is that even possible given platform curvature etc.? It would mean an entirely new bodyshell design at the very least.

This is a given. Especially with the packaging requirements for the desired multi-modal (battery + diesel) capability.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Very interesting, though I wonder what the 52 station figure is (915mm tall platforms?), and a "sliding step gap filler" suggests low floor, presumably.

But what's most notable is how that seat count is really quite low - a 3 car 195 seats 204 and a 158 has 207. This is more akin to the very low density Class 197s or 170s.

That's only a reduction of 12 from the 3-car 195. I reckon you'd get close to that by just taking the tip-up seats out of the stand backs (which really negate the point of stand backs), and ideally out of the bicycle area too.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

That's only a reduction of 12 from the 3-car 195. I reckon you'd get close to that by just taking the tip-up seats out of the stand backs (which really negate the point of stand backs), and ideally out of the bicycle area too.

I think there's 1 fold down seat per door, remove all 12 of those from a 3 car and there's your 12 seat loss

 

[Mollman]

That's only a reduction of 12 from the 3-car 195. I reckon you'd get close to that by just taking the tip-up seats out of the stand backs (which really negate the point of stand backs), and ideally out of the bicycle area too.

Or having a second toilet!

 

[js1000]

Stadler hopefully, although they will probably have to split across two manufacturers to meet those timescales.

As much as I appreciate what the 195/331s have done to modernise and open the conversation on further new rolling stock for Northern the ride quality is awful.

I knew it was bad but was watching that Michael Portillo interview where he was doing an interview with someone on a 195 the camera was bouncing everywhere.

 

[bigmanaiq]

To me the wording (replacement) suggests not a heavy overhaul and life extension or renewed lease of the 15x fleet, but some sort of alternative existing fleet, which suggests some sort of cascade

What would a suitable stop gap be to take over the entire 150/155/156 fleet even be? Cannot think of anything else going off lease in the near future save for 165s and 166s but there isn’t nearly enough of those to cover practically every stopping service in three regions of the country

 

[Snow1964]

What would a suitable stop gap be to take over the entire 150/155/156 fleet even be? Cannot think of anything else going off lease in the near future save for 165s and 166s but there isn’t nearly enough of those to cover practically every stopping service in three regions of the country

I think you misread it, doesn't say all of them, says the oldest.

But DfT description is so vague, could cover using anything from TfW 158s, some Scotrail DMUs displaced by electrification, to some BEMUs converted from spare EMUs, or even something like 159s released by a 450 /350 BEMU conversion.

If it is an interim solution could even be bodge of various short term solutions pending new stock.

 

[bigmanaiq]

I think you misread it, doesn't say all of them, says the oldest.

But DfT description is so vague, could cover using anything from TfW 158s, some Scotrail DMUs displaced by electrification, to some BEMUs converted from spare EMUs, or even something like 159s released by a 450 /350 BEMU conversion.

If it is an interim solution could even be bodge of various short term solutions pending new stock.

Completely forgot about TfW 158s and I would say they are probably the most likely, if it’s just the oldest units then I can imagine the 3 carriage 150s would stick around for a while longer (and moved off of Penistone line services potentially too)

 

[lrbvoyager]

Is this true?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

The "382" EMU covers the requirement for Northern to operate some stoppers on the TRU route now being electrified (some of them transferring from TPE).
Among other things that will cascade some 185 DMUs.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Is this true?

Don't know whether it's true, (it's on X after all) but it was what was reported in the article in Modern Railways I quoted in post #4. The first units would be used on the York-Leeds route, as an electric's superior acceleration will be needed to keep out of the way of other EMUs that will, hopefully, be operating on that route by then.

 

[D365]

Is this true?

Yes, this has been established for some time now.

 

[BurtonM]

Glad to see that 2-car units aren't in the spec. I'd say 'why not all 4-car', but the potential for 6 car formations is useful.
Five more years to get rid of the 150s is way too long IMO, I can see them being particularly unpleasant in time.