Northern rolling stock changes post electrification

[158722]

Can the moderators not intervene and separate the north-south debate (pun intended) from discussion about 319s, as was intended by the OP?

 

[Tetchytyke]

Can we please stop this eternal "it is so hard up North ,and the South gets the best" - thinking of Mrs Gaskill and George Orwell here - you can find some old and worn out units in t'South .....

There are plenty of worn out units in the south- the LM 321s and the 315s for starters, as well as the FCC 319s.

The south are having their worn out trains replaced with shiny new ones, and the north are getting the hand-me-downs.

With a decent refurb the 319s will be a massive improvement on the pacers, sure, but they have largely the same bodyshell as the hated 150s.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

moved to other thread...

 

[AM9]

There are plenty of worn out units in the south- the LM 321s and the 315s for starters, as well as the FCC 319s.

The south are having their worn out trains replaced with shiny new ones, and the north are getting the hand-me-downs.

Probably not very well put in the light of the current interchanges.

However, more to the point, 319s are maintainable, AFAIK they don't have any life threatening issues like corrosion, they have MKIII bodies so are robust in collisions and as I have said before, they are soon to be Available which means that most of the capital budget goes into the infrastructure. Once the service is operating, increased patronage will create a dependency which will by CP6 probably generate a requirement for replacement up-to-date stock. There are several precedents for this, e.g. the Leeds to Skipton/Bradford and Ilkley lines were electrified and received ex GE 308s which were already 35 years old. Within 5 years their running costs rose enough to force ordering new trains which were the 333s. A similar series of events happened on the North Berwick service, they soon got 322s and now 380s.

 

[northwichcat]

This was in reply to LNW-GW Joint's moved post.

 

[Class83]

Presuming the 319s are in reasonable mechanical shape then I don't see a massive problem with northern getting cheap to lease trains. However, given that they are replacing 150s and 156s in most cases it is disappointing that they are not going to be fitted with 2+2 seating. If they were refitted internally then most passengers would probably view them as 'new' trains.

Is the lack of refurbishment simply down to the need for ~12 units by the December timetable change or has it actually been cancelled altogether? If it has just been delayed when are sufficent units expected to be released from Thameslink to allow services to be run and for a couple of units at a time to be sent for refurbishment?

 

[Manchester77]

The lack of refurbishment is down the DfT really. Northern had to push just for them to be allowed to refresh them.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Is the lack of refurbishment simply down to the need for ~12 units by the December timetable change or has it actually been cancelled altogether? If it has just been delayed when are sufficent units expected to be released from Thameslink to allow services to be run and for a couple of units at a time to be sent for refurbishment?

There is no scope in the current short franchise to do anything to the 319s.
It will be up to the bidders for the 2016 Northern franchise to propose what happens to the fleet.
The DfT has not "vetoed" anything.
It's just that the business plans do not go far enough for Northern to know how many 319s it will have and therefore what cost-effective upgrade plans to devise.
The bidding will start in earnest in December, which is when the refurb plans will be negotiated.

 

[Manchester77]

There is no scope in the current short franchise to do anything to the 319s.
It will be up to the bidders for the 2016 Northern franchise to propose what happens to the fleet.
The DfT has not "vetoed" anything.
It's just that the business plans do not go far enough for Northern to know how many 319s it will have and therefore what cost-effective upgrade plans to devise.
The bidding will start in earnest in December, which is when the refurb plans will be negotiated.

But in the GA direct award contract 12 321s are being overhauled to demonstrator standard as well as the refurbishment of the mark III coaches has been allowed and that contract finishes around the same time as the northern direct award,

 

[Class83]

There is no scope in the current short franchise to do anything to the 319s.
It will be up to the bidders for the 2016 Northern franchise to propose what happens to the fleet.
The DfT has not "vetoed" anything.
It's just that the business plans do not go far enough for Northern to know how many 319s it will have and therefore what cost-effective upgrade plans to devise.
The bidding will start in earnest in December, which is when the refurb plans will be negotiated.

1: This is no way to run a railroad.

2: Couldn't the DfT put a clause in the tender that requires 15* 319s to be used by the new northern franchise for at least 5 years on the condition that the units are refurbished ASAP?

*or whatever the number of units northern will need before 2016 is.

 

[northwichcat]

But in the GA direct award contract 12 321s are being overhauled to demonstrator standard as well as the refurbishment of the mark III coaches has been allowed and that contract finishes around the same time as the northern direct award,

I think the issue is Porterbrook will fund a total refurbishment of the 319s but they want a long term lease and long term plans first e.g. does the operator want to take up the option of having 3 car 319s with corridor connectors to run in multiple?

 

[Class83]

I think the issue is Porterbrook will fund a total refurbishment of the 319s but they want a long term lease and long term plans first e.g. does the operator want to take up the option of having 3 car 319s with corridor connectors to run in multiple?

Refurbing the 4 car units wouldn't be a problem, just redistribute one of the centre cars and scrap some unrefurbed centre cars from the next batch to come from Thameslink. Are there enough motor cars to reform to 3 car and 5 car variants?

 

[Manchester77]

I think the issue is Porterbrook will fund a total refurbishment of the 319s but they want a long term lease and long term plans first e.g. does the operator want to take up the option of having 3 car 319s with corridor connectors to run in multiple?

Good point I never thought of that there's a lot more options being offered with the 319s than the 321s.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Refurbing the 4 car units wouldn't be a problem, just redistribute one of the centre cars and scrap some unrefurbed centre cars from the next batch to come from Thameslink. Are there enough motor cars to reform to 3 car and 5 car variants?

The point he was making was that the choice needs to be made by the new franchise operator not northern. It's not as simple as you state with carriage redistribution, the electrics and motors of the 319s are every spread and so stuff needs moving, there's quite the list in the porterbrook brochure.

 

[edwin_m]

Refurbing the 4 car units wouldn't be a problem, just redistribute one of the centre cars and scrap some unrefurbed centre cars from the next batch to come from Thameslink. Are there enough motor cars to reform to 3 car and 5 car variants?

One of the centre cars is the only motor car and also has the transformer and pantograph. Reducing to 3-cars involves scrapping the other centre car, having moved various bits of kit off it that are relatively easy to put somewhere else. A 5-car would probably be a bit underpowered as it would still only have one motored car, so there isn't really scope to move centre cars between units.

 

[Marklund]

I think the issue is Porterbrook will fund a total refurbishment of the 319s but they want a long term lease and long term plans first e.g. does the operator want to take up the option of having 3 car 319s with corridor connectors to run in multiple?

I've always thought that this would be the ideal opportunity to put a Sexy Front End (© Roger Ford) on these units, not only to update and improve the environment for the drivers, but to help rid the new operator the cast off from the south tag, that they would undoubtedly end up being seen as.

MTR in Hong Kong did something similar with their Met-Cam units, so it's not as if it's impossible, just highly unlikely to happen here!

 

[deltic08]

Thee point is, all areas of the country should be treated equally when they clearly are not. A report published this week which showed transport spend per head in London at something like £1,500 compared to £5 (yes, really) in the north east.

At least there are some improvements taking place in Lancashire and Yorkshire but it will take many years and £x billions to get the whole system fit for purpose and anything like that enjoyed by people in the south east.

Anyway, back to the 319s.

Almost correct, £2700 per head in London compared to £302 per head in Yorkshire and Humber and £5 in the Northeast. Where is the justice in this? 9x more spend in London per head than Yorkshire and 540x more than the Northeast to move one person about! Is it need or greed?

 

[Starmill]

Almost correct, £2700 per head in London compared to £302 per head in Yorkshire and Humber and £5 in the Northeast. Where is the justice in this? 9x more spend in London per head than Yorkshire and 540x more than the Northeast to move one person about! Is it need or greed?

This debate will go on and on and on, no matter how loudly "stay on topic" is shouted. I haven't helped matters I'm afraid At least it shows how important this is too people, which we should be happy about because it means Public Transport is important to us as a society (it's also a generally accepted fact that it's overpriced and inconvenient outside London!).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There is no scope in the current short franchise to do anything to the 319s.
It will be up to the bidders for the 2016 Northern franchise to propose what happens to the fleet.
The DfT has not "vetoed" anything.
It's just that the business plans do not go far enough for Northern to know how many 319s it will have and therefore what cost-effective upgrade plans to devise.
The bidding will start in earnest in December, which is when the refurb plans will be negotiated.

It still stinks that the 319s will enter service without refurbishment, much like they probably will inside when they do so

 

[RichmondCommu]

It still stinks that the 319s will enter service without refurbishment, much like they probably will inside when they do so

Hopefully as more units become available they will be able to go through a refurbishment programme. But surely anything is better than a Pacer?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Almost correct, £2700 per head in London compared to £302 per head in Yorkshire and Humber and £5 in the Northeast. Where is the justice in this? 9x more spend in London per head than Yorkshire and 540x more than the Northeast to move one person about! Is it need or greed?

As a percentage, how many people in Yorkshire and the North East use public transport compared to London and the South East I wonder. I also wonder how elastic the demand for public transport in those areas would be if we were to spend £2700 per head in Yorkshire and the North East.

 

[Class83]

One of the centre cars is the only motor car and also has the transformer and pantograph. Reducing to 3-cars involves scrapping the other centre car, having moved various bits of kit off it that are relatively easy to put somewhere else. A 5-car would probably be a bit underpowered as it would still only have one motored car, so there isn't really scope to move centre cars between units.

Ok, so refurbish them as 4 car units then.

 

[cslusarc]

I was wondering if there is any scope for the 319s to stay in the Southern Region and be cascaded perhaps to South West Trains (or its successor)?

 

[ianhr]

I was wondering if there is any scope for the 319s to stay in the Southern Region and be cascaded perhaps to South West Trains (or its successor)?

Well, at least a couple of sets for the Lymington branch, rather than working it with DMUs as they disgracefully do at present. Also electrify Ore-Ashford as installation cost only (as in the NW) and use them for Brighton-Ashford rather than running DMUs over a route which is mostly electrified.

 

[The Ham]

Well, at least a couple of sets for the Lymington branch, rather than working it with DMUs as they disgracefully do at present. Also electrify Ore-Ashford as installation cost only (as in the NW) and use them for Brighton-Ashford rather than running DMUs over a route which is mostly electrified.

Whatever stock is used on the Lymington Brach needs to be able to be serviced as part of a larger fleet, otherwise the costs skyrocket to a point where it's cheaper to use a DMU over an EMU. That either means 450's or 158's/159's at present.

 

[AM9]

Whatever stock is used on the Lymington Brach needs to be able to be serviced as part of a larger fleet, otherwise the costs skyrocket to a point where it's cheaper to use a DMU over an EMU. That either means 450's or 158's/159's at present.

Or 455s.

 

[northwichcat]

I've always thought that this would be the ideal opportunity to put a Sexy Front End (© Roger Ford) on these units, not only to update and improve the environment for the drivers, but to help rid the new operator the cast off from the south tag, that they would undoubtedly end up being seen as.

MTR in Hong Kong did something similar with their Met-Cam units, so it's not as if it's impossible, just highly unlikely to happen here!

According to the class 319 brochure produced by Porterbrook, they are willing to fund the refurbishment in full. In contrast they say the 172 interior could be made more suitable for regional services but the operator would have to fund any such changes.

I do wonder why the 319s were given front/ends which look so basic and cheap compared to other EMUs.

 

[AM9]

According to the class 319 brochure produced by Porterbrook, they are willing to fund the refurbishment in full. In contrast they say the 172 interior could be made more suitable for regional services but the operator would have to fund any such changes.

I do wonder why the 319s were given front/ends which look so basic and cheap compared to other EMUs.

Because the requirement was for an emergency access end door to comply with single bore tunnel requirements. A full corridor connection would have restricted driver vision, hence the reason for a clear front in the 700s as the single bore tunnel is no longer user (City widened lines to Moorgate).

As an aside, the 319 end design looked OK in the late eighties when it was introduced. That was before the Networkers, (165,365 & 465 were released), but their design would not be suitable for the Moorgate tunnels. Design of MU front ends has changed a lot since their creation, but they don't change existing stock just because it is out of fashion.

 

[edwin_m]

Or 455s.

The're all based at Wimbledon so a lot of dead running would be involved.

 

[AM9]

The're all based at Wimbledon so a lot of dead running would be involved.

But they are overhauled at Eastleigh so surely some arrangement could be made for local support. Almost any electric train would be OK for a 5.5 mile branch. There's hardly a need to waste a mainline 450 for their 1st class seats or toilets.

 

[IanXC]

The're all based at Wimbledon so a lot of dead running would be involved.

But they are overhauled at Eastleigh so surely some arrangement could be made for local support. Almost any electric train would be OK for a 5.5 mile branch. There's hardly a need to waste a mainline 450 for their 1st class seats or toilets.

There would be a lot if dead running but it'd only be similar to the DMU stock for Bedford-Bletchley running down from Tysley surely? I recon a 456 would fill this job rather nicely.

 

[hassaanhc]

There would be a lot if dead running but it'd only be similar to the DMU stock for Bedford-Bletchley running down from Tysley surely? I recon a 456 would fill this job rather nicely.

Probably require a bit of "creative" pathing as the 455/456 max out around 50-60mph and will significantly hold up the 159/444/450s which are good for 90-100mph and cause a lot of inconvenience.

 

[Class172]

There would be a lot if dead running but it'd only be similar to the DMU stock for Bedford-Bletchley running down from Tysley surely? I recon a 456 would fill this job rather nicely.

A 456 also seemed the perfect candidate to me also, considering they are now being passed onto SWT.