Northern rolling stock changes post electrification

[swt_passenger]

How does this affect the proposed timetable for the Class 319 EMU to provide a full daily service on the Liverpool Lime Street to Manchester Airport line?

I don't think anything that has been discussed actually affects the already announced flow of 319s to Northern. What was it, 14 altogether by Dec 15 or so?

 

[Class83]

I don't think anything that has been discussed actually affects the already announced flow of 319s to Northern. What was it, 14 altogether by Dec 15 or so?

I think the 14 319s are by May '15, to cover Liverpool to Wigan, Man Vic, Man Airport and Warrington BQ. Northern won't have any more electric diagrams until Bolton-Preston-Blackpool is wired in (I think) Dec '16.

 

[47802]

Some people seem to be confusing what's going to be freed up in the immediate future with the 387's and what will be freed up at a later date with the 700's, as far the immediate future goes i.e. by May 15 with the 387's it is presumably 14 319's for Northern freed up that leaves around 15 other units which could either be 319's, 377's or a combination of both.

Clearly some 321 are required for Scotland which appear to be coming from GN and some 377's are going to GN at some point so that would suggest at least 7 377's to GN.

 

[Class 170101]

Northern won't have any more electric diagrams until Bolton-Preston-Blackpool is wired in (I think) Dec '16.

Preston to Blackpool North now delayed until May 2017 as I recall.

 

[thealexweb]

Preston to Blackpool North now delayed until May 2017 as I recall.

Hazel Grove to Preston services could go over to EMU from December 2016. Also a handful of Crewe to Manchester services (and beyond) are still worked with DMUs, e.g. the daily Crewe to Bolton service, these should go over to EMU in the same timetable change.

 

[northwichcat]

Preston to Blackpool North now delayed until May 2017 as I recall.

Preston-Blackpool is to be closed for something like 8 weeks from December 2016 and when it re-opens the wires should be live, so they might be able to introduce electric services before May 2017, even though Blackpool won't see any electric trains in 2016.

 

[Class 170101]

Hopefully it will be done in the eight weeks but I dread to think the chances are of an overrun given the success of current wiring schemes finishing on time so far.

 

[Whistler40145]

I began to wonder if it will overrun as NR are remodelling the station layout at Blackpool North along with re signalling the line at the same time, so we'll have to see!

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Hazel Grove to Preston services could go over to EMU from December 2016. Also a handful of Crewe to Manchester services (and beyond) are still worked with DMUs, e.g. the daily Crewe to Bolton service, these should go over to EMU in the same timetable change.

What would the 14 Class 319 units be sufficient for, besides the Liverpool to Manchester services?

 

[northwichcat]

Hazel Grove to Preston services could go over to EMU from December 2016.

A through Hazel Grove-Preston service isn't a franchise requirement. Stockport-Preston is a franchise requirement though and starting/terminating Preston bound services at Stockport is not possible. Northern chose Hazel Grove as the origin after their previous Buxton-Blackpool service had too much late running. Longer term if we see enhanced Buxton and Sheffield services, standard pattern services starting/terminating at Hazel Grove would likely become a thing of the past.

 

[HSTEd]

Northern are desperately short of DMUs and are not short of EMUs.
I would think there will be more trains terminating at Hazel Grove in the future, not less.

 

[northwichcat]

What would the 14 Class 319 units be sufficient for, besides the Liverpool to Manchester services?

The Northern Rail franchise ends in February 2016 (before Bolton, Stalybridge or Blackpool will be electrified.) When Alex Hynes was questioned on 319s he said the 14 Northern have agreed for are all for Chat Moss services and EMUs for Preston and Blackpool services would be something the winner of the next franchise will have to agree a deal for.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would think there will be more trains terminating at Hazel Grove in the future, not less.

Hazel Grove is only 20-25 minutes from Manchester and there's only an hourly service starting/terminating there. Buxton gets a lot of Manchester passengers so any talk of cutting that service at Hazel Grove would be as popular as SWT terminating Waterloo bound 158/159s at Clapham Junction to free up DMUs. The way people talk about Hazel Grove is like you could free up numerous DMUs by changing the service pattern.

If Buxton-Manchester goes to 2tph (as proposed as part of the Northern Hub) and Manchester-Stockport-Sheffield goes to 3tph (as proposed in the TPE franchise consultation) then they'll be 5 trains an hour going through Hazel Grove. The second Buxton-Manchester service stopping at Woodsmoor, Davenport and Hazel Grove, together with the additional Sheffield service stopping at Hazel Grove would be more than adequate given the current loadings.

The Alderley Edge service could easily run through to Preston post-electrification.

Northern are desperately short of DMUs and are not short of EMUs.

Well actually they could do with a couple of extra 323s.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What would the 14 Class 319 units be sufficient for, besides the Liverpool to Manchester services?

If the timetable stays the same, Northern will need 12 electric diagrams for the existing Manchester/Warrington/Wigan services.
I doubt they would want to diagram the other 2 units while fleet experience is building.
Some of the services could be sped up by 5 minutes or so, and maybe the Victoria service could manage with one unit fewer, with a fast turnround.
But whether that sort of change is envisaged this side of the Bolton electrification I don't know.
There are a few peak Liverpool-Preston workings which could go electric, but they are currently linked to the Blackpool services.

 

[Class 170101]

Don't forget as well that December 2016 is still two years away. Whilst in planning terms not that far, in terms of 319s becoming available I would say sufficiently far enough away for more 319s to be looking for a new home by then.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A through Hazel Grove-Preston service isn't a franchise requirement. Stockport-Preston is a franchise requirement though

What an utterly bizarre requirement. Is there a significant through usage between those two stations that couldn't be accommodated by a change at Piccadilly? Is it perhaps an almost-Parliamentary response to the withdrawal of the old infrequent XC service across Manchester to Scotland?

I reckon the franchise agreement needs changing there. Though of course once the line via Bolton is wired you could just use a 319 on that service.

Neil

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Northern are desperately short of DMUs

That does not seem to stop them running trains composed of two conjoined units on certain services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That does not seem to stop them running trains composed of two conjoined units on certain services.

"Short of DMUs" means "do not have enough DMUs to provide the amount of capacity required on diesel services", of course, not "do not have enough DMUs for one per diagram", which they clearly do.

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

What an utterly bizarre requirement. Is there a significant through usage between those two stations that couldn't be accommodated by a change at Piccadilly? Is it perhaps an almost-Parliamentary response to the withdrawal of the old infrequent XC service across Manchester to Scotland?

There are significant flows between Stockport and Manchester Oxford Rd/Salford/Bolton.

Also as the connection time for Stockport is 5 minutes compared to 10 minutes for Piccadilly you can make official connections at Stockport which can't be made at Piccadilly e.g. southbound to the xx:35 Piccadilly-Euston via Stoke and northbound from the xx:40 Euston-Piccadilly via Crewe.

To me there's a lot more logic to Stockport-Preston that a through service from Milton Keynes to South Croydon!

 

[Bletchleyite]

To me there's a lot more logic to Stockport-Preston that a through service from Milton Keynes to South Croydon!

The large number of passengers I see on it at Bletchley of a morning (it's now 8-car peak) disagree. The key to it is Clapham Junction and the connectional opportunities that provides without the faff of going via London (and the extra cost to pay TfL for the cross London transfer) - South Croydon (or Selhurst at certain times of day) is just a convenient place to reverse it out of the way of other services, and provides a few people a connection to East Croydon. If you see it between East and South Croydon, the only people you'll see on it are those who realise that a sly double-back (ticket inspection completely unknown as it's DOO on that section, if I recall) is a good way to ensure a seat without a fight.

But back on topic...once the route via Bolton is electrified (when's that due?) there's no reason Hazel Grove to Preston should not continue to operate, this time not wasting DMUs by running them under the wires.

Neil

 

[northwichcat]

But back on topic...once the route via Bolton is electrified (when's that due?) there's no reason Hazel Grove to Preston should not continue to operate, this time not wasting DMUs by running them under the wires.

Yes there is, as I've already detailed.

Hazel Grove is only 20-25 minutes from Manchester and there's only an hourly service starting/terminating there.

....

If Buxton-Manchester goes to 2tph (as proposed as part of the Northern Hub) and Manchester-Stockport-Sheffield goes to 3tph (as proposed in the TPE franchise consultation) then they'll be 5 trains an hour going through Hazel Grove. The second Buxton-Manchester service stopping at Woodsmoor, Davenport and Hazel Grove, together with the additional Sheffield service stopping at Hazel Grove would be more than adequate given the current loadings.

The Alderley Edge service could easily run through to Preston post-electrification.

And to add to that stopping a Sheffield service at Hazel Grove would improve connectivity, running an EMU to Hazel Grove on top of 2tph to Buxton would just see an EMU leaving Stockport every hour with 250 or more empty seats in the weekday off-peak - a complete waste.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And to add to that stopping a Sheffield service at Hazel Grove would improve connectivity

At the expense of causing serious overcrowding on that service, particularly if it is something like a 3-car 185. Though I am unconvinced about the idea of an additional Manchester-Sheffield service - instead they would be better strengthening all the existing ones to 6x23m.

Neil

 

[martynbristow]

Is it possible to predict with any degree of precision the passenger flows beyond the 2 year period. With the major shake up of Liverpool via Chat Moss and Liverpool-Wigan who knows where the passengers might want to travel. If journey times and potentially costs and ticket prices (dare I consider) will there not be an even bigger surge in passenger flows. With the M62 already a farse and getting more farcical won't the new units just saturate during peak times.

 

[Olaf]

Is it possible to predict with any degree of precision the passenger flows beyond the 2 year period. ...

Not really.

It's not possible to predict exact numbers, but the capacity provision is being based on the LTPP market studies. These will be getting updated on a regular basis, and will take into account the changes in patronage due to factors such as economic activity and change in usage patterns. Given the extent of changes being proposed around the NoEP over an extended period it is hard to see how any realistically reliable projections can be made.

 

[swt_passenger]

...South Croydon (or Selhurst at certain times of day) is just a convenient place to reverse it out of the way of other services, and provides a few people a connection to East Croydon.

A minor detail in the draft TSGN December 2015 timetable stuff (posted in another thread) suggests the move to South Croydon is solely to get the unit out the way, but will be removed because the overall timetable changes allow thiis service to occupy a platform at East Croydon before heading back north.

 

[edwin_m]

Is it possible to predict with any degree of precision the passenger flows beyond the 2 year period. With the major shake up of Liverpool via Chat Moss and Liverpool-Wigan who knows where the passengers might want to travel. If journey times and potentially costs and ticket prices (dare I consider) will there not be an even bigger surge in passenger flows. With the M62 already a farse and getting more farcical won't the new units just saturate during peak times.

To some extent the passenger flows will adjust to fit the services that are provided. Particularly for a commuter flow, the regulars will get to know which trains are rammed and probably enough of them will be able to change their route/hours or in the longer term job/house to balance things out.

 

[47802]

At the expense of causing serious overcrowding on that service, particularly if it is something like a 3-car 185. Though I am unconvinced about the idea of an additional Manchester-Sheffield service - instead they would be better strengthening all the existing ones to 6x23m.

Neil

Indeed last time I used a Sheffield Manchester service which a peak morning service, much to my surprise it stopped at Hazel Grove, then about a 4 min wait while another30 plus people tried to squeeze aboard an already rammed full train.

 

[physics34]

A minor detail in the draft TSGN December 2015 timetable stuff (posted in another thread) suggests the move to South Croydon is solely to get the unit out the way, but will be removed because the overall timetable changes allow thiis service to occupy a platform at East Croydon before heading back north.

Makes alot more sense

 

[martynbristow]

To some extent the passenger flows will adjust to fit the services that are provided. Particularly for a commuter flow, the regulars will get to know which trains are rammed and probably enough of them will be able to change their route/hours or in the longer term job/house to balance things out.

In the short term your passenger flows can be modelled, but over a 2 year period making anything more than wild guesses isn't advisable.
If you provide more services the demand will soak it up, potentially the demand you never even thought of.

The capacity on the Liverpool routes could be maxed out before the rest of the network goes electric.
It will be interesting to see how the 319's are received by the lay traveler

 

[Greybeard33]

And to add to that stopping a Sheffield service at Hazel Grove would improve connectivity, running an EMU to Hazel Grove on top of 2tph to Buxton would just see an EMU leaving Stockport every hour with 250 or more empty seats in the weekday off-peak - a complete waste.

Is not the lack of west-facing bays at Piccadilly a possible reason for terminating EMUs at Hazel Grove in the future? Alderley Edge is less suitable as a terminus because of the pathing constraints on the double track bottleneck between Adswood Road Junction and Cheadle Hulme Junction.

Manchester Airport is the other possible terminus for EMUs from the west/north west, but, even with Platform 4 available, platform capacity will be at a premium when more trains are too long for double occupancy.

 

[SF-02]

So I'm guessing 10 319's to southeastern asap to deal with L Bridge upheavel? Replacing some 465/9s on long distance which then lengthen metro routes to 12 car as metro seeing substantial peak service cuts from Jan